Blog

November 27 2014

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.

November 27 2014 Climate Change, Human Rights

Seeking 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

November 25 2014

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.

November 24 2014

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!

September 30 2014

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.

September 22 2014 Freshwater Sources, Human Rights, Indigenous Rights, Large Dams

Brazil 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

September 22 2014

"We want the Green Climate Fund to follow the rules of procedure it has adopted"

AIDA attended the Latin American Carbon Forum 2014 in Bogotá, Colombia. There, our lawyer Andrea Rodríguez participated as a representative of civil society in a panel on the Green Climate Fund (GCF), a mechanism that will mobilize large amounts of resources to support adaptation and mitigation of climate change. Andrea answers a series of questions about the current situation and prospects of the GCF. - What are civil society’s expectations for the Fund? - We have the same expectations as the Fund. We want it to be a transparent, inclusive institution that is constant learning, as stated in Article 3 of its governing instrument. Its focus has to be driven by each country’s determination of what priorities should be funded. It must balance funding for adaptation and mitigation of climate change. We expect the Fund to promote social, environmental, economic, and development co-benefits and taking a gender sensitive approach; men and women are affected to the same degree by climate change. In short, we want the Green Climate Fund to follow the rules of procedure it has adopted. - How can a balance in funding for mitigation and adaptation be ensured? - Financing is given mostly for mitigation projects, despite the great need to fund projects for adaptation to climate change. In Bali, Indonesia, during the penultimate meeting of the Fund’s Board, it was decided that 50% of the funding will go to mitigation and 50% for adaptation. That decision was made and we must ensure that it is followed. Furthermore, in Latin America, development plans and climate change strategies that have been advanced have set adaptation financing as a priority. - How should civil society involve itself in the Fund? - We must go beyond design to implementation. The Fund's governing instrument provides in Article 71 that the Board needs to develop mechanisms to promote the participation of all stakeholders (vulnerable groups, women, civil society and indigenous groups) in the design, development and implementation of projects and programs financed by the Green Climate Fund. There is a mandate for civil society in all stages. The issue is relevant because the Fund will become operational soon and will have to create these participatory mechanisms at the national level, particularly when countries begin to name their national designated authorities (those that collateralize the projects or activities financed by the Fund). It needs to institutionalize these participatory processes. - How can one measure the effectiveness of a project to be funded? - The definition of indicators will be among the topics discussed at the next meeting of the GCF Board, but some are particularly important. In adaptation, we need to consider whether a project can help reduce the vulnerability of a community to climate change. As for mitigation, you have to measure the amount of emissions reduced. But the most important aspect is to measure co-benefits that a project or activity can generate: if it creates jobs, improves people’s quality of life, etc. This is because the Green Climate Fund aims to contribute to a paradigm shift that promotes sustainable development. Helping to improve quality of life is a change of this nature. Many times, projects that have positive climate benefits generate social, environmental, and economic problems. So it is essential that additional benefits are evident in social, environmental, and economic terms.

August 19 2014

Pilcomayo: El río de los pájaros herido por la minería

By Ariel Pérez Castellón, lawyer AIDA For hundreds of years, the Pilcomayo has been essential to the life of at least twenty indigenous peoples living in the river basin, which covers the territories of Bopvia, Argentina and Paraguay. Among these people are the Guarani, Weenhayek, Toba and Wichi. It is estimated that in the basin and a half million people live between rural and urban population. The river is present in the founding myths and traditions of many peoples of the Great American Chaco. It is also essential for agriculture, fisheries, water access and recreation of coastal communities. However, in recent decades, with the increase in mining activity near its headwaters in highlands bopvianas, the river flow has also been carrying poison, disease and death. Dozens of mills and mining operations in the Department of Potosi, south of Bopvia, dumping their toxic waste without treatment in the Pilcomayo tributary rivers. Few mills that have tailings impoundments, and in general, these dikes do not meet the minimum specifications that ensure safety and proper operation. For decades there have been several incidents related to the operation of such facilities. One of the most disastrous was the break in 1996 tailings dam of the Porco mine , owned by former President Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada. On that occasion, 235,000 tons of toxic sludge and residues of lead, arsenic and sodium cyanide were discharged to a tributary of the Pilcomayo and reached the main channel of the same. The incident caused enormous damage to coastal communities and the aquatic ecosystem. Last Jupo, another tailings dam, this time the company Santiago Apostol, poured thousands of cubic meters of mine waste to another tributary of the Pilcomayo, generating alarm and movipzación of indigenous peoples and communities. According to the official report of the Government bopviano, they waste not reached the course of the Pilcomayo. However, no such declaration tranquipza anyone because history would have been different if the incident occurred in the rainy season. In those circumstances, toxic waste no doubt would have been dragged into the main river. In fact, the capdad of the waters of the Pilcomayo is an environmental and púbpca first order Bopvia health problem. Several academics and organizations studies of civil society have shown that especially the middle and upper basin and the river has high levels of metals heavy and arsenic in several cases exceed the standards set by the World Health Organization. This essentially threatens the life, health and livelihoods of indigenous peoples, river communities and bopviana population as a whole. Then there are the negative impacts that may arise in Paraguay and Argentina. Against the grain of the seriousness of this situation, levels of state control, national and sub-national levels on environmental management of mining operators are minimal or nonexistent. This was recently admitted the Minister of bopviano Mining itself: "We must recognize that we make the mistake of not following up the many tailings dams, the concentrates are trying mills, the queues are discharged and the ability of tailings impoundments ... ". Another revealing statistic of the crisis of environmental management in the country is that 80% of mining operators in Potosi lack of an environmental pcencia for operation. Given this bleak picture and severe damage to the health of thousands of bopvianos affected by pollution of the Pilcomayo for decades, it is imperative that the State, at all relevant levels, effectively ensure the most fundamental right to water. This is a right recognized by the Constitution of the State of Bopvia, that being a human right has a higher púbpca utipdad of mining activities recognized by the new Law of Mining and Metallurgy and the Constitution hierarchy. The state will redirect the integrated management of the Pilcomayo basin should demonstrate, inter alia, the following: púbpcos priority allocation of the functions of control and environmental monitoring of mining activities by the competent authorities púbpcas resources. Generation regular, timely and sufficient information on the capdad of the waters of the Pilcomayo River and state management actions of its basin púbpca information. Restoration of environmental liabilities generated by mining in the basin of the Pilcomayo; assigning environmental, civil and criminal in its mining operators involved in acts of pollution responsabipdades case. strict control of mining operators to prevent and / or adequately mitigate environmental and social impacts to the river Pilcomayo, by incorporating appropriate procedures and technology, cumppmiento of the current Constitution. Pilcomayo word comes from the Quechua words phisqu (bird) and mayu (river). It is the river of birds. It's in our hands and our responsabipdad that their songs do not die and re-listen to the strength of yesteryear.

July 28 2014

Raising people's needs in tackling climate change

Every day we hear a new story about a family affected by extreme changes in climate. Some suffer from severe droughts, others from serious rainfall and flooding, and still others from intense heat waves and forest fires. Local realities must be considered at the international level as governmental institutions decide how to provide finance for climate adaptation and mitigation. AIDA brings the concerns of communities most affected by this global issue to the attention of governments and financial institutions. We have the technical capacity to support governments’ decision making processes on climate change "They can rely on us to provide effective solutions based on our technical knowledge, research, work experience, and relationships with local communities. International decisions about project funding have direct impact on the national and local levels. Bad decisions will result in bad projects," explains Andrea Rodríguez, an AIDA attorney. Our commitment to protecting the interests of the most vulnerable communities has led us to follow closely development of the Green Climate Fund (GCF). This new institution is expected to channel most financial resources for climate change projects and programs in developing countries. We have participated in GCF board meetings around the world and have made local needs heard in consultations with the Secretariat. Last month we attended the annual meeting of the Climate Investment Funds (CIF) in Montego Bay, Jamaica. The CIF are multilateral climate finance funds that provide resources to 48 developing countries. We shared our experience in GCF discussions with participants and civil society observers. "It's important to share experiences of what works and what does not to ensure that civil society replicates successes and corrects failures. Civil society shares the common goal of achieving a paradigm shift in decisions that impact climate," says Rodriguez. In the first session of the CIF Stakeholder Day, Reaching into the Roots of Partnership: Experience from the Ground, panelists discussed lessons learned and next steps on effective stakeholder engagement in the CIF and other global funds. Panelist Andrea Rodriguez, Legal Advisor for the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense-Americas, reflects on the session.

July 23 2014 Human Rights, Large Dams

Giving People a Voice on Hydropower Projects

Hydropower projects are on the rise in Latin America as governments seek to feed growing economies. But at what cost? The plants may harness the energy capacity of running water, a renewable resource. But poorly planned and implemented dams, especially large ones, can bring myriad harms to the environment and communities. They affect fish and water quality, and they increase emissions of methane, a gas that contributes to global warming. Flooding displaces people from their homes and communities. This costs them their jobs as farmers, fishermen and hunters – and for ethnic and peasant communities, even their cultures and traditions. AIDA works with individuals and communities to protect them from poorly conceived and developed projects by using the law to defend their right to a healthy environment. This month AIDA and other organizations submitted a brief (in Portuguese) to Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court. The information demonstrates that congressional approval of the Belo Monte Dam in 2005 is illegal because the government didn’t guarantee the affected communities in the Amazon their right to consultation and free, prior and informed consent. Some meetings were held after approval of the project, and then with just scant and incomprehensible information in foreign languages for the communities. There was also little forewarning to attend. It was like telling you that your front yard is to become a street after the diggers have already started removing the lawn. The dam – which is to be the world’s third largest – is under construction and already displacing people without anyone giving them a chance to say no to the project in their own front yard. This is the first time that our combined efforts have reached the Supreme Court for a final decision on Belo Monte, said AIDA attorney María José Veramendi Villa. If the court rules against the legality of the project, then construction will have to stop and the harms righted for failing to consult the communities beforehand. If the opposite happens, the project will continue – and so will we. We will continue to provide assistance to the Brazilian Prosecutor’s Office as it pursues more than a dozen other cases against Belo Monte. These are cases that can also advance to the highest court with the goal of protecting communities from this and other dams in the Amazon. Our efforts to help communities fight dam projects are gaining attention. The Personería of San Carlos (the municipal ombudsperson), a town in northwestern Colombia, contacted AIDA to provide expertise in international environmental and human rights law. They want help in preventing the granting of a license for construction of the El Porvenir II Dam on the Samaná Norte, the last undammed river in the area. AIDA attorney and human rights and the environment fellow, Ana María Mondragón, went there to speak at a public environmental hearing for the project. The good news is that the dam has yet to be approved, meaning that there is still time for the communities to find out what could happen and voice their concerns. The government will have to take the community input into consideration before approving the project, with the possibility that the developer may have to amend construction plans – or abandon them altogether. El Porvenir II will affect fishing, a main source of work and food for the largely poor people in San Carlos. It will also flood an area where many Colombians are seeking to recover the lands that they were forcibly displaced from as result of an internal armed conflict that started more than five decades ago. “We have entered at an early stage, before the project has been approved,” said Mondragón. “We intervened in the hearing to show the inconsistencies in the environmental impact assessment made by the company and the harms that the Porvenir II dam would have in the community. We hope this will help the authorities in their decision-making process to not grant the license.” With your help, we can keep assisting Latin American communities free of charge to exercise their right to say what happens on their land and defend themselves with the law.