Mining

Panoramic view of the Metallurgical Complex of La Orota, Peru, in 2024.
Toxic Pollution, Human Rights, Mining

La Oroya v. Peru: Historic precedent on human rights and the environment

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights set an important precedent for state oversight of industrial pollution. By Rosa Peña and Jacob Kopas*This past March, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the human rights tribunal for the Americas, released an historic ruling condemning Peru for failing to control toxic industrial pollution. The ruling set an important precedent for the right to a healthy environment and state oversight of corporate activities across the Americas.This victory began as a petition that the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) and Earthjustice, together with partner organizations, presented in 2006 on behalf of families and environmental defenders in La Oroya, a small town in the heart of the Peruvian Andes. For more than 100 years, an industrial smelter has exposed La Oroya to extreme levels of toxic pollution, leading to nearly all the town’s children having dangerously high levels of lead and other heavy metals in their blood.The court’s binding judgment is a powerful condemnation that the families of La Oroya are today using to demand concrete action from the Peruvian government. In addition to financial compensation, the court ordered Peru to halt further harmful pollution from the smelter, clean up the toxic metals in the soil and water, and provide specialized health care for the victims and inhabitants of La Oroya. The court's judgment itself also constitutes a form of reparations for the victims, by acknowledging the legitimacy of their work as environmental defenders.The significance of the ruling goes far beyond the immediate benefits for people in La Oroya and Peru. Ensuring the environmental quality of water and air in Latin America remains a major challenge across the Americas. This is the first time that the Inter-American Court has held that industrial pollution can harm human rights, opening a path to justice for communities in so-called “Sacrifice Zones” overburdened with industrial pollution.The court’s landmark ruling establishes several key precedents with significance for both international and domestic jurisprudence. Innovative new measures for collective reparations.This case went beyond previous cases by ordering not only individual reparations, but also collective reparations that benefit all inhabitants of La Oroya. These include environmental remediation of the surrounding ecosystem (para. 351), comprehensive and specialized health care for any inhabitant who presents symptoms (para. 348), and support for relocating inhabitants who wish to do so (para. 355). In addition, the court ordered differentiated measures for women, children, and elderly victims. The judgment also ordered environmental and public health measures that will improve the lives of all Peruvians impacted by the mining industry, including bringing air quality standards in line with international standards (para. 346), guaranteeing that mining companies adhere to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (para. 352), and creating an information system that proactively provides updated air and water quality data in mining areas (para. 354). Showing causality: Exposure to a significant health risk is enough to prove a human rights violation.One major obstacle to access to justice for communities exposed to dangerous pollution is showing causality, that is, proving that pollution caused a specific health condition. Showing causality is often difficult because many communities lack access to proper health care and diagnostic tests, because some conditions such as cancer can be latent and lie undetected for years, and because many different factors contribute to poor health. To account for this reality, the court held that it is sufficient to show that an exposure to pollution created a significant health risk, without having to prove that the exposure caused a concrete condition or disease (para. 204). The court also went a step further, and noted that under the precautionary principle, the lack of scientific certainty regarding those risks cannot be an excuse for failing to adopt measures to protect public health (para. 207). The right to clean air and water as substantive elements of the right to a healthy environment.In the judgment, the Court established that the right to a healthy environment includes the rights to air and water that are free of pollution which could constitute a significant risk to health and rights. These rights also entail specific obligations for states. These include:Setting environmental quality standards that do not constitute a risk to health and that are based on the best available scienceMonitoring air and water quality and providing access to information on pollution that endangers healthCreating plans to maintain air and water qualityEffectively enforcing environmental quality standards and ensuring the proper management of water resources (paras. 120-121) Access to public participation in environmental decisions.This ruling is also the first time that the Inter-American Court has condemned a state for failing to guarantee effective public participation in environmental decision-making affecting the general public (para. 256). In prior cases, the court examined the right to public participation only in the context of consultation with Indigenous Peoples, who have special protections under international law. In addition, the court held that the mere existence of formal procedures for public participation may not be sufficient for states to satisfy their obligations under the American Convention. Authorities must also ensure that these procedures provide an effective opportunity to be heard and participate in decision making (para. 260). The judgment also consolidated advances in other important issues for environmental justice in the region:Business and human rights obligations. The court emphasized states’ obligations to protect human rights and their duties to supervise and control companies (paras. 109-110). It also held that companies themselves have responsibilities to respect human rights and act with due diligence, regardless of their size, sector, operational context, ownership, or structure (para. 111).Environmental pollution violates the right to a dignified life. Because pollution impacted many different areas of the lives of families in La Oroya, it also violated their right to a dignified life. These impacts included not being able to carry out a life project under normal circumstances, which affected their personal, family, psychological, and professional development (paras. 220-230).The effects of environmental contamination fall disproportionately on individuals, groups, and communities that already bear the burden of poverty, discrimination, and systemic marginalization. The court recognized that pregnant women, children, teenagers and the elderly, who, given their condition, are frequently exposed to a greater risk of harm from pollution (para. 134). Given the principle of intergenerational equity, states have particular obligations to protect children’s health from environmental pollution and provide specialized care for those that acquired illnesses as a result of exposure (para. 141).The right to a healthy environment as jus cogens. The ruling noted that guaranteeing the interest of both present and future generations from serious, extensive, long-lasting, and irreversible damage to the environment is fundamental for the survival of humanity. The court thereby called on the international community to recognize such environmental harm as violating a preemptory norm (jus cogens) of international law (para. 129).Weakening air quality standards violates international law. The court found that when Peru rolled back national air quality standards for sulfur dioxide, it violated its duty against retrogressive measures inherent in the right to a healthy environment (paras. 182-186). The court held that any such rollbacks must be justified in light of the state’s maximum available resources for guaranteeing human rights and be consistent with the precautionary principle (para. 186).Obligation of active transparency when guaranteeing access to information. This case is the first time the court has found a state responsible for failing its obligation of “active transparency,” which requires states to not only respond to requests for accessing environmental information, but also to actively distribute and publicize environmental information (para. 247). This information must be complete, comprehensible, and in an accessible language (para. 255). The ruling is poised to a significant legal precedent for the many communities affected by industrial pollution. Its ultimate impact will depend on how it is implemented by courts in Peru and throughout Latin America. In Peru alone, the Peruvian Human Rights Ombudsman estimated that over 10 million people (31% of the population) are at risk of exposure to heavy metal pollutants and other chemicals related to the mining industry. With this new ruling as a powerful legal tool, hopefully other communities will not have to wait 100 years to finally breath clean air. Learn more about the legal contributions of the ruling of the Inter-American Court in the La Oroya case *Rosa Peña is a senior attorney with AIDA's Human Rights and Environment Program; Jacob Kopas is a senior attorney with Earthjustice's International Program. 

Read more
Vista panorámica de La Oroya, Perú, en 2024.
Toxic Pollution, Human Rights, Mining

Warning of increased contamination in La Oroya and slow progress by the State to comply with the Inter-American Court ruling

The State's progress in implementing the international court's ruling has been slow and insufficient. Meanwhile, a high level of sulphur dioxide has recently been registered in the Andean city due to the partial reactivation of the metallurgical complex and the lack of prevention, warning, monitoring and control measures by the state. Two months after the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued its ruling in the case "La Oroya Community vs. Peru," the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) and the Pro Human Rights Association (APRODEH), organizations that legally represent the victims, warned at a press conference that the Peru is making slow and insufficient progress in effectively complying with the ruling.The ruling, issued on March 22 and considered a landmark in international law, established Peru’s responsibility for violating the rights of La Oroya residents affected by decades of toxic contamination.The international tribunal ordered comprehensive remedial measures, including environmental cleanup, reduction and mitigation of polluting emissions, air quality monitoring, free and specialized medical care, compensation, and a resettlement plan for the affected people. Increased pollution in La OroyaThe organizations also denounced that the government’s slow action is occurring in the midst of an increase in the presence of toxic contamination in the area due to the partial reactivation of the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex and the lack of prevention, warning, monitoring and control measures by the state.According to the Environmental Monitoring System of the Environmental Evaluation and Control Agency, a high presence of sulfur dioxide has recently been recorded in La Oroya, which makes it imperative that Peru take urgent action based on its international responsibility.One of the measures ordered by the Inter-American Court is to ensure that the operations of the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex comply with international environmental standards, preventing and mitigating damage to the environment and human health. Challenges in implementing the rulingDuring the press conference, Rosa Peña, Senior Attorney for AIDA's Human Rights and Environment Program, said: "The ruling is a great opportunity for the State of Peru to prevent and better manage the environmental impacts of mining and metallurgical activities, as well as to improve health care for people exposed to contamination. The Court has already identified the key aspects, now it is up to the State as a whole to ensure a good implementation that will serve as an example for other cases at national and international levels."Christian Huaylinos, coordinator of the legal sector of APRODEH, emphasized the need for an articulated multisectoral work: "A coordinated effort of the three levels of the state—local, regional and national—is needed to advance in the effective compliance of the sentence. In addition, clear mechanisms must be put in place to ensure the effective participation of victims in the implementation of the orders issued by the Court." Community demandsYolanda Zurita, a petitioner in the case, emphasized the community's frustration with the lack of prompt and effective action: "We, as a population, need to feel and see that there is compliance. It is not possible that after 20 years of litigation, and after the Court's ruling has been made public, there are officials who claim to be ignoring the ruling."The Inter-American Court's ruling not only focuses on reparations for direct victims, but also includes restitution measures and guarantees of non-repetition for the entire population of La Oroya and the country. It defines parameters for the proper conduct of mining and metallurgical operations in Peru, in defense of the environment and health.The ruling is an important precedent for the protection of the right to a healthy environment in Latin America and for adequate state oversight of corporate activities.AIDA and APRODEH urge the Peruvian government to comply with the measures ordered by the Inter-American Court and to take immediate action to protect the environment and health of the community of La Oroya.Press contactVíctor Quintanilla-Sangüeza (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 5570522107 

Read more
Bandera indígena en una carretera de Jujuy, Argentina
Indigenous Rights, Mining

Argentina: the scramble for lithium threatens the rights of Indigenous Peoples in Jujuy

International civil society organisations with extensive experience in the defence of the environment and human rights present the conclusions of an observation mission to the Argentinian province of Jujuy in August 2023 following the constitutional reform approved in June of the same year, which facilitates lithium extraction. Paris and San Salvador de Jujuy. In a report published today, ten international civil society organisations with extensive experience in human rights and environmental issues warn that the lack of prior consultation of the 11 Indigenous Peoples of Jujuy in the approval process for the reform of the provincial constitution is incompatible with international human rights and environmental standards.The report also denounces that the new Jujuy Constitution authorises productive activities on public lands, which opens the door to the implementation of extractive projects in Indigenous ancestral territories, without guaranteeing prior, free and informed consultation with the communities. It also approves the large-scale use of water, which facilitates the use of an essential resource for the survival of Indigenous Peoples for the exploitation of lithium, an activity with a high water footprint.The constitutional reform process is framed in a context of mining deployment in the high Andean wetlands of Jujuy, whose watersheds are located in the area known by the mining industry as the "lithium triangle", located on the borders of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile. This area is so named because it is the largest, most easily extractable and economically profitable lithium reserve in the world."We denounce the permanent and disproportionate restriction of the right to social protest introduced by the Jujuy constitution - in particular the general prohibition of road and street blockades, which are not only a legitimate form of peaceful demonstration, but are also protected by international law," the organisations point out.The report also highlights the testimonies of victims of police repression, who suffered arbitrary detentions and serious physical injuries caused by the excessive and unjustified use of force. It also documents the cases of protesters who are currently facing arbitrary and disproportionate criminal proceedings for participating in and promoting public demonstrations against the constitutional reform.In light of the findings presented in the report, the organisations:Request compliance with the international obligations of the Argentinian State to guarantee the protection of the collective property of Indigenous communities over their ancestral territories, as well as to guarantee the right to water intended for human consumption and the reproduction of life.Urge the authorities to refrain from promoting regulations that restrict the ways, places or times in which citizens can exercise their right to demonstrate publicly.Make an urgent call to the judiciary to assess, based on a rigorous examination of international human rights standards, the probable unconstitutionality of the approval process for the reform and its contents. Relationship between the events in Jujuy and the reforms promoted by Javier Milei’s governmentThe analysis offered in the report on what happened in Jujuy is especially relevant in the current national context because President Javier Milei’s national government has followed a similar line to the trend observed in Jujuy of promoting reforms that deepen an extractivist model in protected ecosystems of the country. This occurs while eliminating frameworks for the protection of human and environmental rights and facilitating the repression and criminalisation of legitimate protests, as detailed in the report.Through Decree of Necessity and Urgency No. 70/2023, President Milei repealed the Land Law (26.737) on 20th December 2023, eliminating restrictions aimed at preventing land grabbing by foreign investment projects. In addition, the "omnibus" bill proposes to repeal environmental protection laws to facilitate economic activities in ecosystems such as native forests and glaciers.These measures, similar to those implemented in Jujuy, were accompanied by disproportionate restrictions on the exercise of the right to protest. For example, on 14th December 2023, the executive approved the "protocol of anti-picketing action", which considers any demonstration that interrupts or decreases the movement of people a flagrant offence, requiring police intervention. Read the report 

Read more
Salinas Grandes, Argentina
Indigenous Rights, Mining

Lithium Fever: Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Under Attack in Jujuy, Argentina

International Fact-finding Mission Report (21-25 August 2023) Jujuy is one of the 23 autonomous provinces making up the federal state of the Argentine Republic. It is located in the north west of the country, bordering the Plurinational State of Bolivia and the Republic of Chile. According to the official census, it is one of the provinces with the highest percentage of indigenous population in the country.On 20 June 2023, the Jujuy Province approved the modification of 193 of the 212 articles of its Provincial Constitution,1 through a Constitutional Convention that was in session for less than a month.The constitutional reform was the subject of numerous and prolonged citizen protests. During and after its approval, different social sectors in Jujuy criticised the lack of citizen participation and the exclusion of indigenous peoples’ voices in the constitutional process. They also denounced provisions in the new Constitution, which severely restrict the right to protest and undermine the rights of indigenous peoples over their ancestral territories and water sources.Eight international civil society organisations with extensive experience in human rights and environmental rights carried out an international fact-finding mission to Jujuy from 21 to 25 August 2023. Members of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH),2 the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), Brot für die Welt/Bread for the World, the Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Project (ProDESC), the Human Rights Law Centre (HRLC), the Centre for the Study of Law, Justice and Society (Dejusticia), Movement Law Lab (MLL) and the Global Network of Movement Lawyers (GNML) participated in this initiative.The objective of the international fact-finding mission was to document, through fieldwork and access to direct sources, potential violations of human and environmental rights that occurred in the context of the constitutional reform, including the repression and criminalisation of people who participated in and promoted protests against it. To this end, the mission interviewed civil society actors, representatives of indigenous peoples and provincial and national authorities. Meetings took place both in San Salvador de Jujuy, the provincial capital, and in rural communities located in the towns of La Quiaca, Salinas Grandes, Susques, Humahuaca, San Roque and Purmamarca.The international fact-finding mission acknowledges that the Provincial Government of Jujuy, as well as the National Government of the Argentine Republic, offered the necessary guarantees for the visit to take place and provided information on the human rights context, respecting the right to defend human rights. It is also grateful for the trust of the representatives and members of indigenous and rural communities and human rights and environmental defenders, who shared their testimonies with the mission. To all of them, we express our recognition and solidarity with their struggle for human rights.This report contains the main findings of the international mission, based on the field visit, the review of primary and secondary documentary sources and the processing of the information gathered during and after the visit to Jujuy, through interviews with more than one hundred people.   Read and download the report 

Read more
Vista panorámica de La Oorya, Perú, en 2016
Mining, Toxic Pollution, Human Rights

Community of La Oroya wins landmark ruling to stop environmental damage in Latin America

After more than 20 years, the residents of the town of La Oroya in the Peruvian Andes have found justice, opening a major new avenue for protecting a healthy environment throughout the continent. In an unprecedented decision, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights found Peru guilty of violating their human rights by failing to act in a timely and effective manner to protect them from extreme levels of pollution from a metallurgical complex that has operated in their community for nearly 90 years. "Twenty years ago, when this struggle began, I carried my banner saying that children's health is worth more than gold," recalls Don Pablo, a resident of La Oroya. "We never gave up, and now I am very happy with the Court's decision.” La Oroya is located in the central mountain range of Peru, in the department of Junín, approximately 176 km from Lima. In 1992, the US company Cerro de Pasco Cooper Corporation installed the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex to process ore concentrates. The complex was nationalized in 1974 and operated by the state until 1997, when it was taken over by Doe Run Peru, which operated it until 2009.     For generations, the inhabitants of La Oroya have inhaled toxic substances that pose serious risks to human health. Heavy metal contamination has invaded their respiratory system, traveled through their bloodstream, and been imperceptibly deposited in several of their vital organs. Most of those affected had lead levels above those recommended by the World Health Organization, and in some cases higher levels of arsenic and cadmium, in addition to stress, anxiety, skin disorders, stomach problems, chronic headaches, and respiratory or cardiac problems. In 1997, AIDA became involved in defending the rights of the La Oroya community. Our publication La Oroya No Espera (La Oroya Cannot Wait), published in 2002, helped bring the gravity of the situation to international attention. In 2006, in the absence of effective responses in Peru, we joined an international coalition of organizations in filing a complaint against Peru before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. In 2021, the Commission established the responsibility of the Peruvian government in the case and referred it to the Inter-American Court. In October 2022, more than 16 years after the complaint was filed, the victims presented the case to the Court in a public hearing, represented by AIDA and the Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos (APRODEH), with the support of Earthjustice. Since 2009, when the metallurgical complex ceased operations due to Doe Run Peru's financial crisis, the levels of heavy metal contamination have not been reduced to acceptable levels. Nor has the situation of those affected improved significantly in recent years. Although the Peruvian government has known since 2009 that all children living near the complex are suffering from lead poisoning, it has not provided them with adequate medical care. But there is no deadline that will not be met. On March 22, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights gave a powerful response to more than two decades of seeking justice. The Court found that Peru was guilty of violating the rights to a healthy environment, health, personal integrity, life with dignity, access to information, political participation, judicial guarantees, and judicial protection of the 80 people involved in the case; of violating the rights of the children of 57 victims; and of violating the right to life of two others. "This is the first judgment that recognizes the international responsibility of a state for violating the right to a healthy environment and other related rights," says Rosa Peña, AIDA Senior Attorney.           Ver esta publicación en Instagram                           In addition, the Court ordered the State to adopt measures of integral reparation for the damage caused to the people of La Oroya. These include the prosecution and punishment of those who harassed the residents for their environmental defense work; the preparation of a remediation plan for air, soil, and water contamination; the provision of free and specialized medical care to the victims, as well as to other residents with symptoms and illnesses related to mining and metallurgical activities; the updating of air quality regulations to ensure the protection of the environment and human health; the provision of monetary compensation to the victims; and the creation of an air, water, and soil quality monitoring system. It also ordered that the operations of the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex—which was transferred to the workers of Doe Run Peru as part of the company's liquidation—comply with international environmental standards and prevent and mitigate damage to the environment and human health. The Court's decision is not only a unique opportunity to restore the dignity and rights of the people of La Oroya. Its scope extends beyond the Peruvian context, making it an important precedent in Latin America for the protection of the right to a healthy environment and for adequate state oversight of corporate activities. Among other things, the Court established the obligations of states to regulate, monitor and control air and water quality, to identify sources of pollution, and to implement plans to enforce air and water quality standards. The Court held that in order to establish state liability for environmental damage, it is sufficient to show that the state, despite being aware of the existence of high levels of pollution, failed to take adequate measures and thus allowed the pollution to continue, thereby posing a significant risk to human health. In light of the judgment, states must prevent human rights abuses by public and private enterprises. Businesses, for their part, must prevent their activities from causing or contributing to human rights abuses and take steps to remedy such abuses. Defending the right to a healthy environment has been part of AIDA's history since our inception and has always been a collective effort. We celebrate and recognize all the people who, from different sectors, roles and capacities, made possible the historic result of the La Oroya case. With renewed vigor, we will work for the proper implementation of the judgment and for the establishment of new important precedents that will guarantee in practice the universal right to a healthy environment in the region.  

Read more
Paisaje de Antofagasta de la Sierra, Argentina.
Human Rights, Indigenous Rights, Freshwater Sources

Court decision stops new lithium mining projects in Argentine salt flat, sets regional precedent

On March 13, the Supreme Court of Argentina’s Catamarca province ordered a halt on authorizing new lithium mining projects around the Salar del Hombre Muerto, in the department of Antofagasta de la Sierra. The high provincial court established that all projects must comply with the free, prior, and informed consultation of affected communities, thus granting the injunction filed by Román Guitián, Cacique of the Atacameños del Altiplano Indigenous Community.It is one of the most important rulings of recent times regarding care for nature and the protection of the rights of traditional communities.The court ordered the providence’s Ministry of Mining and the Ministry of Water, Energy and Environment to "refrain from granting new authorizations or environmental impact statements with respect to any work or activity" in the area until an environmental impact report with two fundamental characteristics is completed. The first is that it must be "cumulative and integral," covering the entire salt flat and especially the Los Patos River, which is in the same salt flat. The second is that it must consider the total impact of the companies that have applied for water use and extraction permits, and their potential to transform the environment in the same geographical area.Lithium mining in Antofagasta de la Sierra began in 1997 by the multinational company FMC, currently operating as Livent. The local communities denounced that the river and the Trapiche Valley were drying up because of the mining activity.The Alliance for Andean Wetlands (Alianza por los Humedales Andinos) celebrates this achievement of the Atacameños del Altiplano Indigenous Community and the Asamblea PUCARA (Pueblos Catamarqueños en Resistencia y Autodeterminación).The same model of lithium mega-mining that the Catamarca Supreme Court's ruling points to is being reproduced in the Puna region of Chile and Bolivia. In this sense, the sentence is an important precedent for the protection of the environment and affected communities, which should be replicated in all the regions of the continent affected by this extractive model.Governments must take measures to provide the necessary security guarantees for the territorial defense of local communities demanding the fulfillment of their human and environmental rights, both in Argentina and in other countries. Quotes from Alliance membersClaudia Velarde, co-coordinator of the Ecosystems Program of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA)"What happened in Catamarca is a historic milestone for the protection of water, territory and life in Latin America. The Court's decision confirms that the concept of the cumulative impact of an extractive activity is fully valid and a transcendental aspect of environmental management. It also clarifies that any damage to the environment that may result in a violation of the right to life or personal integrity must be considered significant damage. It is a relevant precedent in every sense and a strong message: national and international environmental regulations must be respected, environmental impact assessments must be strategic and cumulative, the right to environmental participation must be guaranteed, and the energy transition must be just." Ramón Balcázar, executive director of Fundación Tantí and co-coordinator of the Plurinational Observatory of Andean Salt Flats (OPSAL)"This ruling is the result of years of work and shows the importance of articulating knowledge and legal strategies for the defense of territories from a wetland perspective, setting a precedent that should be extended to the entire region for a cumulative assessment of projects, not only lithium, but also metallic mining and the impacts of climate change. Unfortunately, our colleague Román Guitián was the target of death threats after learning of the ruling, in a country like Chile that has ratified the Escazú Agreement.  In this sense, we must categorically reject any form of violence against the defenders of the Andean salt flats, as well as the political advantage that institutions linked to the greenwashing of mining have tried to take from such a complex situation." Cristian Fernández, coordinator of the Legal Affairs area of Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN)"The recent ruling of the Court of Justice of Catamarca, ordering the preparation of a "cumulative and integral" environmental impact study for all lithium projects being developed in the Los Patos River basin, and requiring the local government to refrain from issuing any new permits or authorizations for the activity, represents a milestone in the environmental jurisprudence of our country. It consolidates the path started almost 15 years ago by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation when, in the "Salas Dino" case, it demanded a cumulative impact study against the deforestation of native forests in Salta. In doing so, the Catamarca Court set a precedent that could be applied to the ecosystem damage suffered by the provinces of Salta and Jujuy due to the cumulative impact of numerous lithium projects in Salinas Grandes and Guayatayoc Lagoon." 

Read more
La chimenea del Complejo Metalúrgico de La Oroya, en Perú, vista desde un campo deportivo
Mining, Toxic Pollution, Human Rights

5 milestones in the "Inhabitants of La Oroya v. Peru" case ruling

Our long-fought victory before the Inter-American Court sets important precedents for all communities seeking environmental justice in the Americas.   The story of the community of La Oroya, Peru, in its quest for justice and reparations spans decades. The perseverance of the residents of this Andean town has borne fruit for the entire region, as they achieved a victory that sets important precedents for all communities seeking environmental justice on the continent. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruled in favor of the community of La Oroya, holding the Peruvian state responsible for violating the right to a healthy environment and other related rights, such as health and life, of its inhabitants by failing to take timely and effective measures to protect them from extreme levels of pollution from a metallurgical complex. AIDA has led the case from its inception, bringing La Oroya's struggle to the Inter-American Human Rights System and providing legal representation to the victims before the Court. Why is the international court’s ruling in "Community of La Oroya vs. Peru" such a joy and a door opener for us? We explain below, how the ruling:   1. Responds to the first case of its kind before the Inter-American Court. This is the first time the Inter-American Court has ruled on a case of toxic air and environmental pollution in an urban community. In its ruling, the Court recognized the disparate impact on women, children, and other vulnerable populations. It also addressed the importance of the rights of access to information and participation.   2. Recognizes and values the importance of a healthy environment as a human right. The Court recognized this right as a jus cogens (mandatory) norm and clarified the obligations of states to ensure a healthy environment for all people. A key point of the judgment is that states must avoid, prevent, and control environmental damage and its effects on human health by using all the means at their disposal.   3. Opens the door to accountability. The ruling sets precedents to hold states and companies accountable for taking the necessary measures to avoid lifelong impacts on people's health and the environment. The Peruvian state must provide financial compensation to the affected people of La Oroya, provide free and specialized medical care, adopt non-recurrence measures, and monitor air and water quality in places where mining activities are taking place.   4. Establishes the responsibility of the State in a case of contamination. In addition to stating that companies must act with due diligence and respect for human rights, the Court concluded in its ruling that the Peruvian state should have acted to protect and guarantee the rights of the people exposed to the contamination, using, among other tools, the precautionary principle.   5. Sets precedents for the entire region. The ruling goes beyond the Peruvian context, as it is binding on States Parties to the American Convention on Human Rights and sets an important precedent in Latin America for the protection of the right to a healthy environment and for the adequate supervision by States of corporate activities.  

Read more
Vista panorámica de la ciudad de La Oroya, Perú.
Toxic Pollution, Human Rights, Mining

Inter-American Court ruling on La Oroya case sets key precedent for the protection of a healthy environment

The Court found Peru responsible for violating the rights of residents of La Oroya, who have been exposed to unsafe levels of toxic contamination for generations. San José, Costa Rica. The ruling of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the case "Community of La Oroya vs. Peru" sets an important precedent for the protection of the right to a healthy environment across the Americas and for adequate state oversight of corporate activities. The first-of-its-kind decision holds Peru accountable for its failure to protect the inhabitants of the Andean city of La Oroya who were exposed to toxic pollution from a smelter complex that operated without adequate pollution controls for a century.The Inter-American Court heard the case in a public hearing against Peru. In the absence of effective responses at the national level and on behalf of the victims, an international coalition of organizations filed a complaint against Peru before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in 2006. In October 2021, the Commission established the Peruvian government's responsibility in the case and referred it to the Inter-American Court. In October 2022, more than 16 years after the filing of the complaint, the victims presented the case before the Court in a public hearing,  represented by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) and the Pro Human Rights Association (APRODEH), with the support of Earthjustice."This ruling is a very important step forward and a key precedent for environmental justice in Latin America, as it is the first case in which the Court recognizes a state’s responsibility for violating the right to a healthy environment and the impact this has on the guarantee of several other rights," said Liliana Avila, coordinator of AIDA's Human Rights and Environment Program. "The Court also referred to the collective and individual dimensions of this right, acknowledging the differential impact of its violation on children, women and the elderly, and the important role of environmental defenders."In its judgment, published on March 22, 2024, the international court established the Peru’s responsibility for the violation of the rights to a healthy environment, health, personal integrity, life with dignity, access to information, political participation, judicial guarantees and judicial protection of the 80 people involved in the case; for the violation of the rights of the children of 57 victims; and for the violation of the right to life of two victims. The Court also concluded that the State was responsible for violating the obligation of progressive development by adopting regressive measures in environmental protection."The decision is a fundamental precedent in international law that establishes the parameters of the State's obligation to regulate, control and remediate the effects of environmental pollution, as well as the obligations derived from the right to a healthy environment as an autonomous right and its interdependence and indivisibility with other fundamental rights of human existence, such as health, life and personal integrity," said Christian Huaylinos, Legal Coordinator of APRODEH. "It is also a great satisfaction for the victim’s two decades long struggle.”For more than 20 years, the residents of La Oroya have been seeking justice and redress for the widespread contamination caused by the La Oroya smelter complex, which was operated by Doe Run Peru from 1997 to 2009. The town has been recognized as one of the most polluted places on the planet."Twenty years ago, when this fight started, I was carrying my banner saying that the health of the children is worth more than gold," recalls Don Pablo, a resident of La Oroya. "We never gave up, and now I am very happy with the Court's decision."In the judgment, the Court ordered the State of Peru to adopt comprehensive reparation measures for the damage caused to the population of La Oroya, including identifying, prosecuting and, where appropriate, punishing those responsible for the harassment of the victims; determining the state of contamination of the air, water and soil and preparing an environmental remediation plan; providing free medical care to the victims and guaranteeing specialized care to residents with symptoms and illnesses related to contamination from mining and metallurgical activities; ensuring the effectiveness of the city's warning system and developing a system for monitoring the quality of air, water, and soil; ensuring that the operations of the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex comply with international environmental standards, preventing and mitigating damage to the environment and human health; providing monetary compensation to victims for material and non-material damages."What we expect now is that the ruling will be implemented, that for the first time the State will fulfill its obligations and guarantee our rights as environmental defenders," said Yolanda Zurita, a resident of La Oroya and a petitioner in the case. "Compliance with this ruling is the least we expect from a state that is committed to guaranteeing the rights of its citizens."Since 1999, the government of Peru has known that almost all the children living near the complex suffer from lead poisoning yet failed to offer proper medical care and remediation. For decades, the population of La Oroya was exposed to extreme levels of lead and other harmful contaminants, including arsenic, cadmium, and sulfur dioxide. Nearly all the children in the case have had lead and other heavy metals in their blood at concentrations many times higher than the guidelines established by the World Health Organization. And many residents suffer from chronic respiratory illness, in addition to stress, anxiety, skin problems, stomach problems, chronic headaches, and heart problems, among others."This ruling issues a warning to governments across the Americas that they cannot sit idly by while multinational corporations poison local communities. Corporations will now be on notice that exposing families to unhealthy levels of industrial pollution is a violation of international law and governments must hold polluters accountable,” said Jacob Kopas, Earthjustice senior attorney. ResourcesCourt's press release on the judgment, available here (in Spanish).Official summary of the judgment, available here (in Spanish).Full text of the judgment, available here (in Spanish).Background information on the case, available here.Folder with photographs, available here.Press contactVíctor Quintanilla-Sangüeza (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 70522107 

Read more
Large Dams, Indigenous Rights, Mining

Defending the Volta Grande do Xingu in the Brazilian Amazon

"Certain lives exist only in the Xingu River, mine is one of them. And also that of the indigenous and riverine peoples. Can these lives be destroyed?” The question posed by Sara Rodrigues Lima - a local river dweller, fisherman and researcher - highlights the paradox that one of the most biodiverse, ecologically, climatically and culturally important regions in the world is also one of the most affected by socio-environmental impacts. The Volta Grande (or "Big Bend") of the Xingu River, located in the heart of the Brazilian Amazon, is home to a unique ecosystem and is a key region for the conservation of global biodiversity. For centuries, it has been home to indigenous and riverine peoples who have shared ownership of the river and the Amazonian rainforest, providing sources of food, water, identity, culture and mobility, among other things. This link has translated into livelihood systems based on caring for and defending the territory and their own existence, which are now severely threatened. Since 2015, this region has been the target of large extractive projects that threaten the livelihoods and physical and cultural survival of traditional peoples and communities. This has been accompanied by violence against people defending this Amazonian territory. In order to deal with this situation, the affected peoples and civil society have created a network that unites and strengthens their efforts. The Alliance for the Volta Grande do Xingu, formed by social movements and organizations, including AIDA, supports and coordinates actions to defend the region as a living and healthy territory. The coalition has taken the case to the United Nations.   The cumulative impact of two megaprojects One of these projects is the Belo Monte dam, whose construction has caused irreparable environmental damage and human rights violations for several generations. The drought caused by the diversion of the river to generate electricity, as well as the ineffectiveness of the mitigation measures implemented, have led to an ecological and humanitarian collapse in the Volta Grande. Currently, thousands of traditional families are suffering from the death of fish, extinction of fishing, lack of food security, impoverishment, physical and mental illnesses. Another major threat to the region and its traditional inhabitants is the Volta Grande project, where the Canadian company Belo Sun intends to build the largest open-pit gold mine in Brazil. The coexistence of the two projects poses the risk of overlapping areas of direct impact. In this scenario, the potential damage to the environment and to indigenous and riverine peoples will be irreversible. The Belo Sun project is proposed to be built less than 10 kilometers from the Belo Monte dam, on the banks of the Xingu River, in the midst of indigenous lands, protected areas and traditional communities. The magnitude of the synergistic and cumulative impacts of the mine and hydroelectric dam has not been assessed. Also ignored were technical analyses that pointed to the serious impacts of the use of cyanide, the contamination of the river, and the risks of a dam breach that, if it were to occur, would flood 41 kilometers along the river and reach nearby indigenous lands. In addition, the state excluded indigenous peoples, riverine and peasant communities from the environmental licensing process for the mining project. Because they live outside the demarcated indigenous lands or more than 10 kilometers from the project, some indigenous peoples were not considered affected or consulted about the implementation of the project. The lack of consultation and public participation of indigenous and riverine peoples led Brazilian courts to order the suspension of the mining company's operating license.   Violence and threats against human rights defenders The arrival of Belo Sun in the area is a serious intervention in the socio-cultural environment of the Volta Grande do Xingu. The overlapping of the mining project in a territorial polygon inhabited by traditional peoples, rural groups benefiting from the agrarian reform, and artisanal miners has led to community divisions and violence against those who oppose the mine. In the context of the project's development, there have been reports of illegal land purchase and sale contracts to evict rural families, threats to the area's inhabitants by private security companies, and violence against peasants claiming agrarian reform lands acquired by the mining company, which are the subject of legal proceedings. Threats of violence against environmental and human rights defenders have also increased in intensity and severity. Some of them have had to leave the area to protect their lives, and those who remain in the area face constant risks and threats.   Defending the Volta Grande and its people before the United Nations One of the most important actions of the Alliance for the Volta Grande do Xingu has to do with advocacy in the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), a special process of periodic review of the human rights record of the 193 member states of the United Nations. At Canada's fourth UPR cycle in Geneva in August 2023, more than 50 civil society organizations and communities affected by Canadian business activities presented a report highlighting human rights abuses from 37 projects in nine countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, including Belo Sun's Volta Grande project. The document includes recommendations to ensure that states exercise effective environmental oversight that requires human rights due diligence on the part of companies operating in their territories. One of the defenders of the Volta Grande was part of the delegation in Geneva. In addition to denouncing the abuses suffered, he reported on the risks posed by the socio-environmental impact of the Belo Sun project. More than 20 countries and 13 permanent missions and UN agencies took note of the situation in the region. The results of Canada's fourth UPR cycle, released last month, include 34 recommendations directly related to the Alliance's report. Canada has not yet accepted these recommendations, but may do so at the next session of the UN Human Rights Council, which concludes on April 5. As a follow-up to the UPR advocacy, the Alliance submitted reports on the impact of the Belo Sun project to UN Special Rapporteurs. One of them, sent to the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, focuses on the situation of vulnerability and criminalization of human rights defenders. Similarly, the Alliance submitted a report to the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights highlighting the human rights violations committed by Brazil in the Belo Monte and Belo Sun cases, as well as the lack of effective measures to require human rights due diligence by the companies responsible for these projects. Networking in these international spaces to expose the pattern of environmental impacts and human rights violations of extractive economic projects in Amazonian territories has been one of the alliance's strategies of resistance and denunciation. The conservation of the Amazon and the protection of its peoples are incompatible with the large-scale mining planned by Belo Sun.   States have an obligation to prevent serious and irreversible damage to the environment and the population. In the case of Belo Sun, Brazil has the opportunity to avoid repeating the environmental tragedy of Belo Monte and to declare definitively that the mining project is unsustainable from a socio-environmental point of view. The road to these demands and the achievement of these goals will be full of challenges and struggles. But courage and resisting are inherent to those who live in and defend the Amazon. The defense of the Xingu River Basin as a free, vibrant, healthy and safe territory for its peoples and its defenders is an urgent call for social mobilization for the social-ecological protection of one of the world's most important ecosystems.  

Read more
Montones de sal en el salar de Uyuni, Bolivia
Indigenous Rights, Mining, Freshwater Sources

Lithium unveiled: Origins, extraction and environmental implications

One of the paradoxes of the energy transition is that it replaces the use of fossil fuels with mineral resources whose extraction and refining can have negative impacts on ecosystems, species and communities. This is happening with lithium, a mineral that has traditionally been used in glass and ceramics to provide greater adhesion and hardness, but is now being used primarily to make the batteries required by technologies that eliminate or reduce the use of fossil fuels. This has led to an increase in its demand. The serious social and environmental impacts of its extraction have been hidden or minimized.   What makes lithium special? Lithium is a mineral in high demand due to its unique properties: It is the lightest metal with the highest electrochemical potential. It has a high energy storage capacity. It is malleable, so it can be adapted to different sizes, shapes and designs.   These qualities make it a key material in the manufacture of batteries for cell phones, computers and, most importantly, electric vehicles. Lithium is considered key to the energy transition because it can be used to store non-conventional renewable energy, such as wind and photovoltaic power.   Where it is: The so-called "lithium triangle"? The primary sources of lithium are salt flats, which are wetlands covered with a saline crust that contain brines, bodies of water in which many salts and elements, including lithium, are dissolved. Salt flats are attractive to the mining industry because of the relative technical ease of exploitation, low operating costs and low energy requirements to extract lithium from them compared to other sources. Worldwide, the salt flats of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile account for 54 percent of lithium resources (potentially mineable material). In addition, Argentina and Chile hold 46 percent of the world's lithium reserves (the portion of known resources with a high level of confidence and proven economic viability). The mining industry has dubbed the region where the mineral is concentrated the "Lithium Triangle" - because that is all they see there - which includes northeastern Argentina, northern Chile and southern Bolivia. But there is much more than lithium in this region. There are also communities, ecosystems and species that depend on these salt flats. The region's inhabitants are engaged in small-scale ranching and subsistence agriculture, activities that require water, an already scarce resource in these latitudes.   How is lithium mined from the salt flats? The procedure is as follows: The salt flat is drilled. The brine is poured into large pools or basins. Wait for the water to evaporate so that the lithium concentration increases. When the concentration is sufficient, the brine is sent to an industrial plant. The brine is chemically treated to produce lithium carbonate, which is marketed for battery production.   Lithium extraction, especially by this method, involves huge consumption and loss of water because: Water is lost in pumping brine. Evaporation in ponds requires two million liters of water for every ton of lithium produced. Water is also needed in the final processes to obtain lithium carbonate and separate it from the rest of the compound.   Lithium mining is threatening South America's salt flats, which are Andean wetlands, affecting local water availability and threatening the survival of communities and species living around these fragile ecosystems. The energy transition is urgent, but it must be equitable and not at the expense of other natural resource extraction that endangers people and the environment. sources -Maritza Tapia, “Claves del litio: el metal más liviano y con mayor potencial electroquímico”, Universidad de Chile. -Heinrich Böll Stiftung Colombia, “Litio: los costos sociales y ambientales de la transición energética global”. -Florencia Ballarino, “¿Qué es el litio, para qué sirve y de dónde se extrae en la Argentina?”, Chequeado. -Wetlands International, “El impacto de la minería de litio en los Humedales Altoandinos”. -Rodolfo Chisleanchi, “‘Triángulo de litio’: la amenaza a los salares de Bolivia, Chile y Argentina”, Mongabay Latam. -U.S. Geological Survey, Mineral Commodity Summaries, January 2023, “Lithium”.  

Read more