Blog
COP 20: And what about the effective use of climate finance?
The amount of money required to confront the effects of extreme climate changes is much larger than currently sought in global negotiations. Clearly more resources are needed, but it is also important to track the effective use of climate finance now being mobipzed. "We must recognize the funding gap for adaptation programming," said Annaka Peterson Carvalho of Oxfam America. She was a panel member Wednesday at a COP20 event entitled, A fair and accountable cpmate finance regime: Confronting the contentious issues. In her opinion, we must determine, on the basis of science, the real costs that countries must rightfully bear, and we need a responsible finance system to determine how much money each country needs and where it will come from. Sandra Guzmán, General Coordinator of the Cpmate Finance Group of Latin America and the Caribbean (GFLAC), agreed that while it is necessary to have more resources for the fight, it’s also necessary to use them effectively. "It’s not just about asking for more money," she said. "We must change priorities at a national level to distribute funding by reassigning it to activities that allow for reduced emissions." Guzmán explained that the Climate Finance Group has developed a methodology to know how much money each country receives, and how much they spend in deapng with climate change. Their analysis encompasses many activities, including some that are not traditionally labeled as relating to cpmate change. She identified five challenges in the task of tracking the use of cpmate finance: Transparency and access to information; Definition of the criteria of climate finance; Institutional structure and communication between different institutions; Public participation in the evaluation of projects; and Better methodology for monitoring, reporting, and verification to analyze the effective use of the money. The experience of the Institute for Climate and Sustainable Cities (iCSC) in the Philippines demonstrates that accountability on climate finance is “everybody’s business,” according its Executive Director, Red Constantino. The Institute tracks not only committed funding for adaptation, but also how it is channeled locally. The work that Constantino has done has enabled him to identify difficulties in apgning funding with the real needs and priorities of vulnerable communities; provide limited opportunities to involve communities in decision-making about adaptation; and understand that while money flows, it is not necessarily used efficiently or completely. Andrea Rodríguez, senior lawyer at AIDA, also referred to the importance of ensuring that climate change programs and projects meet the requirements of individual countries and are directed by them. To be effective, she said, the new climate regime must find ways for countries to monitor climate finance, learn from the experiences of other institutions, and reallocate their resources to be effective. "Climate finance responds to a specific need, it is not general assistance for development," Rodríguez added. "Public participation is central to the process, and if we know how much money we need and how to use it, we will know how much to ask for in global negotiations. In this sense, Constantino highlighted coordination between local and national levels, between governments and civil society. For more information from COP20 and to post comments, visit our interactive blog at aida-cop.org
Read more
COP20: Protecting human rights in all climate actions
By Víctor Quintanilla, AIDA Communications Coordinator, @vico_qs All countries have an obligation to fight climate change. But they must also protect the human rights of their people. The fact that officially recognized clean development projects aimed at combating climate change often cause grave human rights violations was discussed Tuesday at a side event at the COP in Lima. Co-hosted by AIDA, the p for International Environmental Law (CIEL), and Carbon Market Watch, the side event asked the question, "How can the lessons learned from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) influence the design of climate finance mechanisms?" Máximo Ba Tiul stood before the room and spoke of the grave impacts of the Santa Rita hydroelectric project, which was registered under the CDMof the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. A representative of the Tezulutlán Indigenous Council of Guatemala, Ba Tiul explained that the so-called clean development project has caused human rights violations, including the death of children, in at least 20 surrounding communities. Implementation of hydroelectric projects, Ba Tiul explained, often imply human rights violations: Shirking international standards, Santa Rita was approved without consulting or obtaining the free, prior, and informed consent of affected populations. Hugh Sealy, President of the Board of the CDM, replied that he was "disturbed" to hear that a CDM-registered project had allegedly violated human rights. While hydroelectric projects such as Santa Rita are promoted as clean energy solutions to climate change, scientific evidence has shown that large dams, particularly those in the tropics, release large quantities of methane, a greenhouse gas 20 to 40 times more potent than carbon dioxide. "All countries must respect human rights," Niranjali Amerasinghe, director of CIEL’s Climate & Energy Program, said during the event. He explained that the connection between climate change and human rights, or, more precisely, the impact of one on the other, has been recognized in previous climate agreements, such as those drafted at COP16 in Cancun, Mexico. Amerasinghe advocated for consistency within the Convention in terms of applying social and environmental safeguards. Andrea Rodriguez, an AIDA senior attorney, spoke of the importance of implementing such safeguards, particularly with respect to the Green Climate Fund. The Fund must adopt the strictest standards in the design of their social and environmental safeguards, she said. Only in this way can they ensure that projects financed won’t cause harm to the environment or violate human rights. Rodriguez said that the best international standards must be applied to projects at every phase of development, along with ongoing evaluation to learn from mistakes and to guide the choice of tools that have proved most effective. During its first three years of operation, the Green Climate Fund will use the standards of the International Finance Corporation (IFC), which Rodriguez considers "insufficient for preventing harm." Ba Tiul noted that the challenge is for all United Nations entities to honor differences and respect human rights. Amerasinghe added that projects registered with mechanisms like the CDM should be monitored throughout implementation, not just during the initial consultation and approval phases. And, faced with allegations of human rights abuses, he said, authorities must not hesitate to undertake an investigation. At the conclusion of the event, Sealy thanked the participants for the information provided and promised to do everything possible to strengthen the Clean Development Mechanism consultation process. For more information from COP20 and to post comments, visit our interactive blog at aida-cop.org
Read more
COP20: It’s All On Our Shoulders Now
ECO/Climate Action Network We are very happy to be in Lima, and ECO is ready to get right to it. COP20 needs to deliver on enough confidence building measures to ensure climate action and a successful outcome from next year’s COP in Paris. The wheels have already started turning: The Peruvian COP presidency has shown commitment and substantial effort to guide the negotiations onto the right track. The US-China climate announcement, on the heels of similar action by the EU, has injected positive impetus into the political aspect of the negotiations – and is pressuring significant laggards and defaulters, who can no longer claim inaction by the G2 to wiggle out of doing their part. The IPCC is shining clear light on the latest science, pointing urgently to deeper climate action as well as the fast-rising costs of delay. The GCF is seeing some light at the dim end of the climate finance tunnel with pledges at $9.7 billion for initial capitalization – though that’s welcome, it must not distract from the pressing need to scale up finance within the new agreement. Are these announcements and developments enough to create the right confidence building measures across countries, cement the foundation for greater political will and achieve success in Paris? ECO surely hopes so – but let’s be clear, this opening round of mitigation announcements must not be a resting place but rather a starting point that Parties will broaden and expand. The agreement in Paris is going to rest on three key decisions here in Lima: the elements of the 2015 agreement, the iNDC upfront information requirements, and ways to ramp up pre-2020 ambition. These outcomes are going to define the contours of the new global agreement. So let’s look a bit closer. The elements text must include a long-term goal of phasing out all fossil fuel emissions and phasing in 100% renewable energy as early as possible, but not later than 2050. We also expect to see goals for public finance along with a robust and honest MRV regime for them; a global adaptation goal that enables adaptation to be mainstreamed; and a strengthened two-year work plan to immediately operationalize the Warsaw loss and damage mechanism and to ensure that loss and damage has its appropriate place within the 2015 agreement. Not so easy, right? Well, don’t worry, as always, ECO is here to help. And with that in mind, we also look forward to seeing the inclusion of an enhanced role for civil society in the text. To be clear, we have high hopes for the iNDC text. The iNDCs should include mitigation with regular 5-year cycles of contributions, starting with countries putting forward their contributions for the 2020-2025 cycle, provision and mobilization of finance as part of countries’ fair share of the global effort, and voluntary adaptation contributions. Not only that, all current and future contributions must undergo a sound, robust equity and adequacy assessment phase to help drive up ambition and ensure that low ambition is not locked in by any country. The first round of iNDCs will set the tone for the future. We’ve really got to get it right on this one – it is no exaggeration to say the future of human civilization is weighing on all our shoulders. And every step counts. The effectiveness of the post-2020 agreement to be reached in Paris next year depends on the progress we make between now and 2020. On pre-2020 finance it’s simple: developed countries have to present a credible roadmap on how they are going to meet their $100 billion promise, deliver additional pledges to the GCF (this means you, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Iceland and Ireland) and also not let the Adaptation Fund dry up. We need finance and a full set of means of implementation and support to unlock untapped potential in countries and sectors that can deliver greater ambition for reducing emissions, as well as assisting vulnerable communities that are already facing impacts from climate change. On mitigation, what has the latest IPCC report taught us? All countries need to increase their pre-2020 mitigation commitments, and deliver on them through real mitigation actions. As session after session has shown, climate impacts do not stick to UNFCCC timelines; the atmosphere sees what we do, not what we think. The pressure is on but ECO is confident we can respond. We’ve got a lot of work to do, and there is no time to lose. Archivado en: English
Read moreWelcome!
Each year, representatives of a variety of nations unite with one purpose: to spur international action to combat climate change. However, in the 20 years that these meetings have been taking place, the international community has yet to reach a definitive agreement. The topics covered are many, but the most important demands are that the nations commit to reducing their greenhouse gas emissions, and that they assist in the creation of a joint economic fund that will help to mitigate the impacts of climate change in developing countries. With the purpose of informing and representing civil society, AIDA‘s team will be present in Lima to take part in the activities of the COP20 and the People’s Summit. We will be closely following the themes of climate finance, the Green Climate Fund, human rights and climate change, dams and fracking. Thank you for following along with us! Archivado en: English, Noticias
Read more
Revealing the Impact of Development on Human Rights and the Environment
"There we were – men and women, boys and girls, elders and community leaders – who dared to reject the burning of our homes on the river’s edge, the theft and loss of our things, the mistreatment, the insults, the humiliation from the police, the Army and public companies of Medellín, who forcibly emptied the river banks to make way for development." With these words, Isabel Cristina Zuleta gave testimony before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights last month, describing the situation that she and thousands of Colombians have been suffering through. Zuleta, the leader of Movimiento Rios Vivos (Living Rivers Movement), is a victim of forced displacement – caused by the Hidroituango hydroelectric project in Colombia – and she is not alone. AIDA’s Co-Executive Director Astrid Puentes participated in the hearing alongside Rios Vivos, Tierra Digna, Asoquimbo, Comisión Intereclesial de Justicia y Paz, Corporación Jurídica Libertad, and other partner organizations from Colombia. She argued before the Commission that, in Colombia, forced displacement caused by development projects, such as mines and dams, is not recognized as a human rights violation by the State, which leaves affected communities unprotected. During the hearing Puentes introduced the three primary causes of forced displacement from these projects: the close relationship between armed conflict and major development projects; the flexibility and violation of rules in their authorization and implementation; and the direct impacts of their operation. She asked the Commission to urge the Colombian State to guarantee rights to the victims, repair damages, and take appropriate measures to prevent displacement in the future. Puentes described human rights violations caused by specific projects, such as El Quimbo dam, which displaced hundreds of families in Huila Department, and coal mines in La Jagua de Ibirico, in Cesar Department, where air pollution displaced entire communities. The inadequate implementation of development projects in Colombia, and in the region, also violates Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ESCR), especially the right to a healthy environment. In this regard, AIDA and organizations from the region participated in a hearing called by the Commission to analyze the situation of ESCR on the continent. In it, Maria José Veramendi Villa, a senior AIDA attorney, noted that States mainly fail to protect the right to a healthy environment by implementing mining, energy, and infrastructure projects. The problem has only worsened in recent years. "The Commission has found different manifestations of this problem over the course of at least 40 hearings, conducted over the last decade, which have illustrated the serious territorial, cultural, and environmental conflicts created by the violations of ESCR," said Veramendi during the hearing. We need an Inter-American Human Rights Commission that is firm and decided in its position towards development projects that violate human rights and that brings justice to those who cannot find it in their countries.
Read moreSeeking Solutions at the UN Climate Conference
The most important global meeting on climate change is nearing, and expectations are high. The United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP20), in Lima December 1-12, is expected to conclude with a draft of a new global agreement on climate change, which will be signed in 2015. The conference also provides a key opportunity to hold nations to the financial commitments they made at prior conferences. AIDA is attending the conference with two main objectives. First, we will advocate full funding of the Green Climate Fund. Second, we will contribute to the conversation to ensure that the new climate agreement takes into account the impact of climate change on human rights. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change established the Green Climate Fund to finance programs and projects for climate change adaptation and mitigation. Countries most vulnerable to climate change will be given investment priority. “We want specific commitments to be made, with clarity about the road map that develop countries should follow so that their fight against climate change has sustainable financial assistance,” said Andrea Rodriguez, senior attorney at AIDA. To date, the Green Climate Fund has received $9.6 billion in pledges. At the Lima conference, we aim to generate additional commitments that raise the total to $15 billion. We will also work with governments to ensure that they live up to their commitment to contribute $100 billion a year, starting in 2020, to ensure that resources are predictable and sustainable. AIDA will work with global networks like Climate Action Network International (CAN-I) to monitor financial contributions. AIDA, together with partner organizations is organizing a Latin America and the Caribbean Climate Finance Day on Saturday the 6th of December. This event will convene stakeholders from various sectors to facilitate dialogue and build capacity on key climate finance issues affecting the region. One of the sessions will address the role of the Green Climate fund in contributing to transformational change in Latin America. “Leveraging the context of climate talks, we would like to remind the decision makers that methods of mitigating climate change must be truly sustainable and efficient,” Rodriguez stated. “Mitigation efforts should not promote projects like large dams, which have been considered a source of clean energy, despite the fact that they emit large amounts of climate-forcing methane, especially in the tropics.” The conference will provide an opportunity for AIDA to work with negotiators to ensure that human rights considerations, which were recognized in previous climate agreements, make it into the next agreement. Alongside COP20, we will participate in the People’s Summit on Climate Change, a major alternative gathering of civil society organizations. In this meeting, AIDA will discuss hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, and its implications for the environment of Latin America and for global climate. We will be posting updates throughout the conference on our website, Facebook and Twitter. Follow along!! #RoadToCOP20
Read more
Mexico has an opportunity to protect its environment
By Sandra Moguel, AIDA attorney, @sandra_moguel The pirinola is a traditional Mexican die with six flat sides, each of which carries an instruction, used in various countries in Latin America to play games and make bets. After being spun, the pirinola stops on one of its sides and shows the player what he must do with the chips he has: GIVE 1, GIVE 2, TAKE 1, TAKE 2, GIVE ALL, TAKE ALL. As a country, Mexico goes through moments of collective despondency, when all seems lost. But it isn't. As in a game with the pirinola, there is always hope with another spin. In terms of the protection of its environment, Mexico still has an opportunity to correctly decide the fate of their natural heritage and to pursue sustainable development. GIVE ALL: The Uncomfortable Story of Paraíso del Mar Paraíso del Mar is a tourism project on the barrier sand bar known as El Mogote, in the Bay of La Paz, Baja California Sur. Project developers have proposed construction of a major resort with 2,050 hotel rooms, 4,000 homes, golf courses, and a marina. In early 2013, a Mexican court ruled definitively that the environmental permit the Secretariat of Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT) had authorized for the project was illegal. The ruling held that SEMARNAT did not enforce environmental laws requiring evaluation of the environmental impact of Paraíso del Mar. However, before the ruling, some parts of the project had already been constructed. As a result, mangroves in the area have disappeared almost entirely, and the scenery and coastline have been modified. With an authorization of environmental impact that is both irresponsible and illegal, everyone loses: Just think of the destruction that happened when Hurricane Odile hit Los Cabos last year. Aspects of climate change and extreme weather events should also be considered when evaluating tourism projects in this region. In this case, they were not. Who will compensate the businesses that have invested in the project? Who will repair the damages? Who will restore the landscape? Society as a whole has been affected. An Environmental Impact Assessment reviews the effects of human activities on the environment. Its objective is to identify whether the effects on ecosystems can be mitigated or compensated for. Unfortunately, the laws that regulate the manner in which the environmental authority performs these assessments seem like a pretense, and assessment becomes a mere formality, which ends up harming both society and the biodiversity zones. TAKE 1: Contributing to a Solution The Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) and our partner organization Earthjustice, representing organizations from civil society, have presented a citizen submission to the Commission on Environmental Cooperation (CEC). The Commission is an international organization created under the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation, formed between Mexico, Canada, and the United States. Our petition asks the Commission to open an investigation into the authorizations of Paraíso del Mar and other similar projects in the Gulf of California. The petition states that the Mexican government failed to enforce its environmental laws when it didn’t assess the environmental impact of projects in coastal wetlands of the Gulf. The CEC Secretariat recommended the development of a factual record (a detailed investigation) last September. GIVE 2: The Decision Depends on at Least Two Governments In the coming days, at least two of the three environment ministers of the United States, Canada, and Mexico must vote in favor of carrying out such an investigation. This vote is an opportunity to promote transparency and public participation in environmental issues. It’s the perfect occasion for the Mexican government to establish credibility, trust, and the opportunity for dialogue that citizens are clamoring for. A factual record does not contain a rating on the arguments of the petitioners, nor does it contain recommendations from the Commission to resolve the problem. It is, rather, a detailed examination that becomes a source of feedback for SEMARNAT about the concerns of civil society. It is noteworthy that of the 41 citizen petitions that have been filed against Mexico with the Commission, 19 have to do with the Environmental Impact Assessment. This means that citizens are questioning the discretion with which this tool is used, and how the environmental impacts of these projects are being determined. TAKE ALL: What Can We Conclude? Echoing the observation of Paola Zavala, social movements must be accompanied by an agenda of specific needs that are shared by members of civil society. More than a chance to scream and let off steam in the streets, such movements are forums for constructive citizen participation. In the case of the Gulf of California, the petitioners, supported by civil society organizations and academics, demand that SEMARNAT implement environmental laws. It should approve projects based on the best available descriptions of work to be completed, which outline the total cumulative and residual impacts of the project. Such projects should in no way violate international treaties or norms on threatened species or on the protection of the mangroves. The factual record is not a panacea for Mexico’s environmental woes. But if it generates awareness and an agenda for dialogue between public officials, business people, and civil society about the importance of the Environmental Impact Assessment, it will be a major step on the road to decision-making that guarantees sustainable development in Mexico.
Read more
CONSISTENCY: The Most Urgent Action Against Climate Change
By Astrid Puentes Riaño, Co-Executive Director, AIDA, @astridpuentes This post is also pubpshed at IntLawGrrls During the first two weeks of December, world leaders will lay the foundation for a new global agreement on cpmate change at the 20th Conference of the Parties (COP20) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Cpmate Change in pma, Peru. Its focus will be creating a draft agreement that, at next year’s COP in Paris, will replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. This time, as stated by Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, Peru’s Environment Minister and next President of the Conference, "the world will not accept another failure." Not without reason. Each year we are both witnesses to and victims of the worsening impacts of cpmate change. And our role in the problem is conspicuous: "Human influence on the cpmate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history," the Intergovernmental Panel on Cpmate Change concluded in their fifth report. With COP20 nearing and recognition of the problem growing, world leaders are increasingly giving speeches, promising action and making hopeful commitments. One recent example is the unprecedented agreement between China and the United States, which estabpshed pmits and objectives for the reduction of emissions. In Latin America we, too, have taken effective steps to confront the greatest threat to the human race. Despite this progress, however, there remain in practice many popcies that both created the problem and make it worse. In particular, the repance of our economies on fossil fuels, which generate 57 percent of the global emissions of carbon dioxide. In the search for alternatives, we have boosted hydroelectric power from large dams. But dams are not clean energy. They generate significant amounts of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane, particularly in tropical regions. These and the other negative impacts of dams are often ignored, resulting in rudimentary solutions to cpmate change. Consistency, then, becomes critical. What follows are examples of the lack of it in our own countries. Let’s take them into account as an effort to make adjustments, apgn objectives, and not erase with one hand what was written by the other: Brazil is a key player in the region, and has demonstrated its will to achieve positive results on cpmate change. Proof of this is the historic decpne of deforestation in the country, 79 percent in the last decade, as announced by Brazil’s President at the Cpmate Summit. However, Brazil continues to focus its development on fossil fuels, mining and large dams, particularly in the Amazon Basin. Under the influence of Brazil, 254 new dams are either under construction or in planning phases in the Amazon Basin, including the massive Belo Monte Dam on the Xingú River. Chile has made positive signs by deciding, for example, that it would not allow the HidroAysén dams in Patagonia. The country recently presented its Mitigation Action Plans & Scenarios (MAPS Chile) to combat cpmate change, with an emphasis on energy efficiency in high-emitter sectors such as mining. However, it also estabpshed as a priority the implementation of large dams, actually the same dams in Aysen, and the import or exploitation of shale gas in the Magallanes basin. The extraction of shale gas is done by fracking, a major source of CO2 and methane. Ecuador recognized the Rights of Nature in its Constitution in 2008 and created the Ministry of Good pving in 2013, promoting the “respect of all beings of Nature” and sustainable development. At the same time, the country continued to base its economy on the exploitation of fossil fuels without considering low-carbon alternatives, in the short or long term. The decision to start extracting oil in Yasuni National Park, where indigenous communities pve in voluntary isolation, is inconsistent with the Constitution, and with cpmate change required actions. Mexico has been a leader in global negotiations on cpmate change. The country has shown a wilpngness to implement adequate popcy measures, legal frameworks and financial instruments. Earper this year Mexico was a pioneer in committing financial contributions to the Green Cpmate Fund, setting an example for the many countries with greater cpmate responsibipties that have not yet announced their commitments. However, Mexico is also pushing energy reform that prioritizes hydrocarbon extraction, undermining progress on cpmate popcy. This "reform" is locking the country into continued dependence on fossil fuels. Peru, host of COP20, also must resolve huge popcy inconsistencies. The country’s leadership in cpmate negotiations has been remarkable, as have its internal efforts to promote adaptation to cpmate change by incorporating traditional knowledge. But still, lack of consistency between talk and action has resulted in widespread promotion of mining and hydroelectric activities. These decisions have been made without considering environmental impacts or clean alternatives. Bopvia, Colombia, Guatemala, Panama, Argentina and the rest of the countries of the region are not exempt from the massive inconsistencies that compromise the effectiveness of the cpmate actions they champion. It’s worth noting that the development of mining, hydropower and fracking on the continent contribute gravely to the effects of cpmate change. The need for development in the region, and a single country’s relatively smaller contribution to global emissions, are not excuses. There exist opportunities for economic development and energy production that could be more efficient than continued dependence on fossil fuels. Cpmate change is a global issue that can’t be solved with patches here and there. Cpmate change affects the planet, and Latin America is one of the most vulnerable regions. But as long as the popcies and actions of the States do not consider cpmate change a central issue, we will continue moving forward one step and backwards three. It is our responsibipty and in our interest to act consistently. We must apgn our talk with our actions to accomppsh quick and effective steps to combat cpmate change. The time is NOW!
Read more
Thousands rally in Colombia's capital for Global Climate Action
By Seble Gameda, geographer The sounds of brass instruments, drumming, bike bells, and chants filled the streets of Bogota, Colombia on Sunday, September 21, as over three thousand people bearing banners, posters, flags and face paint, rallied for urgent climate action, as part of the International People's Climate March. "We are making a global petition to the heads of state to make a binding treaty that responds to the climate crisis, and we need national and local governments to commit as well," said Ana Sofía Suarez, Campaign Coordinator with the international citizen’s movement, Avaaz, and Event Coordinator for the People’s Climate March in Bogotá. Over 100 world leaders met in New York City to discuss the climate crisis and carbon emissions reductions, just months prior to the Conference of the Parties (COP) 20 that will take place in Lima, Peru as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. A binding agreement is planned to be signed at COP 21 in Paris in December 2015. The United Nations Climate Summit in New York City also focused on the Green Climate Fund, in which developed countries aim to raise $100 billion per year by 2020 in climate finance, in order to assist developing countries towards "low-carbon, climate resilient development." Hector Herrera, Coordinator of the Colombian Environmental Justice Network, spoke to the importance of developing countries participating in the climate marches, stating that "although the global north is primarily responsible for climate change, we in the global south are most affected, and less prepared to adapt to a changing climate." Demonstrations were organized worldwide to show the power of the people’s climate movement. "We are the first generation that is really aware of climate change, but we are the last that can do something about it," stated Juan David García, an organizer with the grassroots environmental organization 350.org. Bogotá’s Climate March was filled with diversity; artists, professors, youth, bankers, cyclists, the elderly. As Suarez commented, "in these spaces when everyone comes together, you begin to realize that you are not alone, that we are among many who are dreaming of something different, and if we begin to demand changes, then we can make this dream happen." Climate change is no longer just an isolated issue of scientists and environmentalists, we are reaching a critical mass, showing once again that protest is powerful; it is the movement of people that makes change: anti-war, civil rights, healthcare, education, and … climate justice.
Read moreBrazil secures Belo Monte site, but not human rights of affected people
Time doesn’t stop and, unfortunately, nor does the construction of the Belo Monte Dam. Work is advancing at an impressive rate on the Xingu River, in the Brazilian Amazon; 65% of the dam is complete. As it grows, the ecosystem—and the lives of people living in the area—deteriorates. Construction of the gigantic dam has opened an enormous gash through the thick Amazonian vegetation. Seeing it from the air creates a feeling of helplessness. And on land, it’s frustrating to see that the situation of indigenous peoples, coastal communities, and residents of the city of Altamira worsens. Recently, AIDA lawyers, María José Veramendi Villa and Alexandre Andrade Sampaio, visited the Arara indigenous community, nestled in the Big Bend of the Xingu River. Once Belo Monte dams the river, it will reduce the river’s flow so drastically that fishing, the livelihood of the Arara, will no longer be possible. Furthermore, the Arara will lose the track that leads to their sacred sites. They await the arrival of vehicles and construction of a road and a suitable well, because the quality of drinking water is not the best. In Altamira, the deteriorating situation is similar. Veramendi and Sampaio went there too. Once dam construction began, the population of the city grew massively. This boom has overwhelmed health services and the sanitation system and, worse, led to an increase in cases of sexual violence and human trafficking. Norte Energia, the consortium of government and private enterprises building the dam, has caused pisions among the affected population by paying more for some lands than for others. Many people were forced to sell their homes at a minimum price before they were evicted. And the small cinderblock cubes built for the relocation of displaced families do not qualify as adequate housing. Relocation also involves a change in lifestyle: from fishing to farming or hauling bags of cement. "This frays the social fabric,” explained Veramendi. “We work daily, along with our colleagues in Brazil, to make clear in the country and internationally that what is happening in Belo Monte constitutes human rights violations. We are constantly working to compel the government of Brazil to comply with the precautionary measures issued by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights." On April 1, 2011, the Commission issued precautionary measures that Brazil should take to protect the life, health, and personal and cultural integrity of indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation; the health of other indigenous communities affected by the project; and demarcation of the ancestral lands of indigenous peoples. Our work, like the work of the human rights and environmental defenders we support in Brazil, is not easy. State security forces guard the construction site and Altamira. "We are surrounded, intimidated and harassed; there is no guarantee for our work," said Sampaio. With your help, we will continue fighting to see that the Belo Monte case progresses with the Commission, and that the Government of Brazil complies with its international human rights obligations rather than use the dam to bolster its electoral campaign at the cost of the environment and human welfare. Follow us on Twitter: @AIDAorg "Like" our page on Facebook: www.facebook.com/AIDAorg
Read more