Brazil

February 02 2022 Indigenous Rights, Freshwater Sources, Climate Change

In-danger designation requested for Pantanal wetlands in Brazil, Bolivia and Paraguay

On World Wetlands Day, advocates urged the Ramsar Convention Secretariat to conduct an advisory visit to wetlands severely affected by fires, and for the governments of the three countries to inscribe the sites on the global list of wetlands at risk of disappearing. Gland, Switzerland -- Civil society organizations sent an urgent alert to the Ramsar Convention today requesting a full assessment of damage caused by recent fires in the Pantanal, the world’s largest tropical wetland, a natural area shared between Brazil, Bolivia and Paraguay. The groups requested that the Secretariat conduct an advisory mission to analyze the state of six wetlands, which the Convention has recognized as being sites of international importance, and for the wetlands to be included on the Montreux Record, a list of the world’s most at-risk wetlands. The Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the Center for Biological Diversity and Ecologia e Ação (ECOA) sent the alert on World Wetlands Day. They also urged the three governments to urgently implement measures to preserve the Pantanal as a transboundary ecosystem. The Ramsar sites addressed in the request are the Bolivian Pantanal; the Reserva Particular do Patrimonio Natural SESC Pantanal, the Reserva Particular do Patrimonio Natural Fazenda Rio Negro, the Pantanal Matogrosense National Park and the Taiamã Ecological Station in Brazil; as well as the Rio Negro National Park in Paraguay. "A Ramsar in-danger designation is crucial to combating the Pantanal’s huge and unprecedented fires, which now threaten Bolivia, Brazil and Paraguay," said Alejandro Olivera, a senior scientist with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Public policies that promote agriculture and livestock expansion and allow burning within the Pantanal have combined with limited cross-border collaboration to create a tinderbox. Ecosystem-damaging fires will continue without stronger commitments to protect these critical wetland habitats." In 2020, fires devastated 4.3 million hectares of the Pantanal region, the highest number since monitoring began in 1998; the number of fires burning in the area was 508% more than average. That same year, fires burned 100 percent of the Pantanal National Park Matogrossense. At least 10 million animals died in just three months. Unusually large fires continued in July 2021. "We are asking the States to comply with the obligations acquired before the Convention, generating coherent mechanisms and implementing policies and norms to protect the Pantanal," explained AIDA attorney Claudia Velarde. "An advisory mission to the six Ramsar sites could provide specialized assistance to the Brazilian, Bolivian and Paraguayan governments to overcome the conditions that pose risks to the conservation and wise use of this key wetland.” Likewise, the inscription of the sites on the Montreux Record can result in economic aid, support and technical advice, for the recovery of the Pantanal in the three countries. "We sent an urgent alert for Bolivia, Brazil and Paraguay to focus on the Pantanal as the world's largest transboundary freshwater wetland," said Andre Siqueira, President Director of ECOA. "The Ramsar Convention cannot achieve its objectives if the ecosystems it protects are significantly damaged by the continued use of fire, agribusiness and the lack of adequate resources to fight fires." The biodiversity and ecological richness of the Pantanal is incalculable. At least 3,500 species of plants, about 600 birds, 150 mammals, 175 reptiles, 40 amphibians and 300 freshwater fish inhabit the biome. Many are in danger of extinction in other regions, such as the tuyuyú and the jaguar, the marsh deer, the giant otter and the macaw, all emblematic species of the biome. The Pantanal is home to the highest concentration of species such as the jaguar and the caiman. press contacts: Alejandro Olivera (Mexico), Center for Biological Diversity, +52 612 1040604, [email protected] Victor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, +521 5570522107, [email protected] André Luiz Siqueira (Brazil), ECOA, +55 67 33243230, [email protected]

July 29 2021 Accountability and Transparency, Indigenous Rights, Mining

Investor Alert: Belo Sun discloses misleading information to investors regarding controversial gold mining project in the Brazilian Amazon

In a complaint to the Ontario Securities Commission, an international coalition of civil society organizations calls attention to the repeated dissemination of misleading information by Belo Sun Mining Corp (TSXV:BSX), including statements by CEO Peter Tagliamonte, downplaying socio-environmental, legal, and financial risks of the company’s “Volta Grande” project along the Xingu River. Canadian-based mining company Belo Sun Corp.(TSXV:BSX) is disseminating misleading and incomplete information to investors about the mining project it is trying to develop on the Xingu river (Volta Grande do Xingu), Pará State, Brazil. This is the central message of a warning letter sent to the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC) on July 29rd by an international coalition of civil society organizations and networks including Amazon Watch, Earthworks, Instituto Socioambiental (ISA), Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), International Rivers, MiningWatch Canada, Movimento Xingu Vivo para Sempre and Rede Xingu+. The OSC is an independent Canadian Crown corporation responsible for protecting shareholders and investors from unfair, improper and fraudulent practices from companies and industries. Drafted by a legal team and supported by independent technical and scientific analysis, the complaint letter challenges recent statements by Belo Sun’s CEO Peter Tagliamonte. In a speech at the Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada (PDAC) event in March 2021, the largest mining convention in the world, Tagliamonte cited the Covid-19 pandemic as the justification for repeated delays in the environmental licencing of the Volta Grande mine, claiming that the mining project was "fully authorized" and that construction was expected to begin at the end of 2021. Similar comments have been made in recent company statements, and by Tagliamonte himself in other occasions. According to the complaint, such declarations are patently false. There are seven public civil actions active in Brazilian courts asking for the suspension of permits and of the licencing process, filed by Federal and State public prosecutors’ and defenders’ offices. These lawsuits focus specifically on irregularities in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), and the lack of free, prior and informed consultation and consent with Indigenous peoples and other traditional communities. The coalition argues that there is overwhelming evidence that Belo Sun breached the Securities Act disclosure requirements, which requires companies to disclose material changes “forthwith” (without delay). Companies must disclose factual and updated data to keep investors well informed. Misleading information disclosed by Belo Sun Mining Corp. According to the complaint, while the company acknowledges the generic risks associated with the licensing process, it fails to disclose the concrete details of the legal actions and suspensions in play regarding its project, relying on investors' lack of knowledge concerning licensing legislation in Brazil. One example refers specifically to the suspension of its construction licence (LI), due to the lack of "free and informed consultation" of Indigenous peoples. In its more recent Corporate Update, Belo Sun states that "it continues to advance financial discussions with various groups in preparation for the commencement of construction following the lifting of the suspension of the construction license (LI)". "The company has not even started a consultation process, - which is now delayed by COVID-19 - and it is already advertising the lifting of the suspension, as if it was just a matter of time", says Marcella Ribeiro, attorney from AIDA's Human Rights and the Environment Program. "The company is not in a position to guarantee the results of the consultation process, as negotiations around consent are time-consuming and will invariably result in major material changes to the project. None of that is being disclosed properly to investors", she adds. Among the risks associated with investments in Belo Sun, the complaint highlights the history of judicial proceedings; conflict around the project; the flaws and gaps in the environmental impact assessment; and the violation of the Indigenous Peoples’ right to prior consultation. The downplaying of environmental and social risks by the company’s studies and impact assessments has sounded the alarm among communities in the Volta Grande region, already affected by the Belo Monte dam. A series of independent technical studies challenge Belo Sun’s statements regarding impacts to water resources, to fauna and flora, and regarding dam safety. The company’s refusal to acknowledge impacts in Indigenous territories along the Xingu river has led to the court decision that suspended the installation licence of the Volta Grande project in 2017 until "free and informed consultation" was carried out. There are also increasing accounts of intimidation and harassment against project opponents, which demonstrate a much more complex and contentious situation as a result of the project than what has been disclosed by the company, the complaint stresses. The coalition concludes that "Belo Sun has failed to fully communicate to current and potential investors about the complex nature of its project" which has a "direct implication for delays, and raises fundamental questions about the project’s viability". The letter delivered to the OSC aims to increase visibility to the many irregularities of the project and to raise awareness among current and potential investors about the major reputational and legal risks attached to the project, at a moment when heightened attention is focused on the Amazon rainforest and its capacity to provide environmental services and mitigate climate change. About Belo Sun’s Volta Grande Project Proposed for development along the Volta Grande (Big Bend), a stretch of the Xingu River (a major tributary of the Amazon) that is one of the most biodiverse locations on the planet, Belo Sun’s project would be the largest open pit gold mine in Brazil. The region is home to indigenous people such as Juruna (Yudjá), Arara, and Xikrin, along other isolated Indigenous and riverside communities. From the outset, Belo Sun has faced numerous lawsuits regarding the Volta Grande Project filed by the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office, the State Public Prosecutor's Office, the State Public Defender's Office, and the Union Public Defender's Office. All of these lawsuits refer to the multiple flaws in its licensing process and in the project’s technical studies. Among other things, the lawsuits seek the cancellation of the company's licences and the suspension of the project's licensing process. One of them resulted in a court decision, still valid, to suspend Belo Sun’s construction licence. press contacts Viviana Herrera, MiningWatch Canada, [email protected] Camila Rossi, Amazon Watch, [email protected] Cecilia Garcia, International Rivers, [email protected] Victor Quintanilla, AIDA, [email protected]

September 07 2020 Indigenous Rights, Human Rights

Environmental racism and the differentiated harm of the pandemic

By Tayná Lemos and Marcella Ribeiro Brazil’s major cities are reopening—with packed bars in Rio de Janeiro and restaurants serving up crowds in São Paulo—despite the lethality of COVID-19, which had caused more than 112 thousand deaths as of August 20. The reopening of bars and restaurants during the height of the pandemic demonstrates how the virus differentially affects people of different races and socioeconomic levels. A study by the Health Operations and Intelligence Center (NOIS), an initiative involving several Brazilian universities, found that a Black person without schooling is four times more likely to die from the novel coronavirus in Brazil than a white person with a higher level of education. Based on cases through May, the study also shows that the overall mortality rate of 38 percent for the white population climbs to nearly 55 percent for the Brazil’s Black population. "The mortality rate in Brazil is influenced by inequalities in access to treatment," Silvio Hamacher, NOIS coordinator and one of the study's authors, told EFE. Painfully, this trend is repeated in countries like the United States and the United Kingdom. This demonstrates that one of the factors behind the high mortality rate of COVID-19 is environmental racism—a phenomenon in which the negative and unintended consequences of economic activities are unevenly distributed. Unequal Distribution of Damages The term environmental racism was coined in the United States by researcher Benjamin Chavis, after he observed that chemical pollution from industries was dumped only in Black neighborhoods. "Environmental racism is racial discrimination in environmental policy-making and enforcement of regulations and laws, the deliberate targeting of communities of color for toxic waste facilities, the official sanctioning of the presence of life threatening poisons and pollutants in communities of color, and the history of excluding people of color from leadership of the environmental movement,” Chavis wrote. While all activity generates some environmental impact, the territories chosen to carry it out are usually regions located on the outskirts of the city, inhabited by traditional or outlying communities. In Brazil, environmental racism affects both outlying urban communities and traditional rural communities. And, as in the United States, one of its characteristics is the disproportionate pollution suffered by these minority groups in comparison with the white middle class. This includes the contamination of air and water with toxic agents, heavy metals, pesticides, chemicals, plastics, and so on. In his 2019 report, Bashkut Tuncak, then-UN Special Rapporteur on the implications for human rights of the environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes, warned that there is a silent pandemic of disease and disability resulting from the accumulation of toxic substances in our bodies. In 2020, following a country-visit to Brazil, he noted that there is a connection between environmental pollution and mortality from the novel coronavirus and that fewer people would die in Brazil if stricter environmental and public health policies were in place. "There are synergies between exposure to pollution and exposure to COVID-19. Toxic substances in the environment contribute to the Brazil’s elevated mortality rate," Tuncak affirmed. The underlying health conditions that exacerbate the pandemic are not "bad luck," but largely "the impacts of toxic substances in the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat, the toys we give to our children, and the places where we work.” An Increase in Vulnerability Tuncak confirmed that those most vulnerable to the pandemic are the urban poor as well as traditional and indigenous communities, because they are also the most affected by environmental and public health problems. This leads to hyper-vulnerability. An example of this situation is that of the 17 quilombos (Afro-descendant settlements) in the municipality of Salvaterra, in the state of Pará, home to around 7,000 people. Twenty years ago, an open dump was installed without consulting the families living there. Children, adults and the elderly were forced to live with domestic garbage and toxic and hospital waste, among other refuse. Their vulnerability increased with the pandemic. Despite the size of the country, there are no territorial gaps in Brazil. When an industry, a landfill, a monoculture, a hydroelectric project, a mine, or a nuclear plant is installed, a historically forgotten community is impacted. The invisible damage of pollution caused by these activities is difficult to prove, but it profoundly affects the health and quality of life of people who live nearby and are already extremely vulnerable. Another example is that of the indigenous community of Tey Jusu, which in April 2015 received a rain of toxic agro-chemicals spilled by an airplane over a corn monoculture. The fumigation intoxicated people in the community, damaging their health. Unfortunately, the direct ingestion of pesticides by members of communities living near monoculture plantations is a recurring reality. What’s worse is that the current government authorized 118 new agrochemicals during the pandemic, adding to the 474 approved in 2019 and another 32 launched in the first months of 2020. These pesticides cause several diseases but it is not yet possible to determine their exact consequences on the human body, much less their interaction with other toxic substances or with diseases like COVID-19. According to an analysis by the Coordination of Indigenous Organizations of the Brazilian Amazon and the Amazon Research Institute, the death rate from the pandemic among indigenous people in the legal Amazon is 150 percent higher than the national average. The rate of COVID-19 infection among this population is also 84 percent higher than the national average. This is due to historical factors such as the lack of health posts, distance from hospitals, absence of any kind of assistance from the federal government, land invasion, and environmental degradation. In fact, one of the greatest threats to indigenous communities in Brazil is the invasion of their lands by illegal miners, which causes, among other human rights violations, mercury contamination in water sources. Last year, a study by the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation found that 56 percent of the Yanomami Indians had mercury concentrations above the limits set by the World Health Organization, which implies serious damage to public health. In this sense, environmental racism is a term that exposes a historical separation between those who reap the fruits of economic growth and those who become ill and die due to the environmental consequences of that same economic growth. The array of systemic damage to the health of these vulnerable communities makes them especially susceptible to the worst effects of COVID-19. Therefore, in discussing and addressing the pandemic, it is essential to know that it does not reach all people in the same way, that it puts traditional communities at risk of extinction, and that environmental issues are also public health issues. To overcome the global health crisis, we must bring this racism to the center of the debate.

June 30 2020 Indigenous Rights, Mining

Belo Sun project puts Amazon at serious risk of contamination

The Canadian company developing Belo Sun is failing to take sufficient measures to prevent a planned gold mine from contaminating groundwater and surface water sources. The company also plans to use large quantities of cyanide, a substance highly dangerous to the health of people and ecosystems. Altamira, Brazil. A technical evaluation concluded that a gold mine planned for the Volta Grande of the Xingu River, deep in the Brazilian Amazon, risks contaminating water sources and harming the area’s indigenous and riverine communities. A project of the Canadian company Belo Sun Mining Corp., the mine could leech contaminating fluids, and would employ high quantities of cyanide, as well as other chemical processes that could, unless properly implemented, cause acidic waste to reach aquifers and rivers. The analysis prepared by Andrés Ángel, geologist and scientific advisor to the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), found inconsistencies in the information the company has published in the environmental licensing process. In the 2015 feasibility report presented to the project's investors, Ángel found that the company stated that the area’s soil and shallow rocks are impermeable, that is, contaminants cannot seep through them. However, in 2012 and 2016 environmental impact studies, Belo Sun shows the regulatory authorities data, descriptions and analyses that contradict what was said in 2015, going so far as to say that the aforementioned soils and rocks behave like porous or fractured aquifers. In recent studies, the general design of the project and the management measures proposed by the company, which do not even include installing liners to prevent leaching under certain structures, are insufficient to reduce the risk of surface and groundwater contamination, the expert explained. The evaluation also warns of the use of large quantities of cyanide as the method of choice for the separation of gold. It’s expected that between 330 and 390 grams per ton of processed material will be used, out of an estimated total of 116 million tons of ore. "Less polluting and dangerous alternatives exist, including the export of polymetallic concentrates where the separation of material of economic interest occurs later. In the Amazon rainforest, it would be essential to consider this option" says Ángel. The report also highlights that cyanide can be lethal even in very low doses for both aquatic fauna and people, and points out the risks of transporting this substance through low quality road and fluvial infrastructure. Another serious risk highlighted by the study is the generation of acid drainage as a result of the chemical process planned by the company to eliminate the cyanide used, and as a cumulative impact after the project's lifetime, taking into account that some units were classified as having moderate acid generation potential. Although an active treatment (the addition of lime to effluents) is proposed for this purpose, such a measure implies greater demand for reagents and, therefore, greater total environmental impacts. Finally, Ángel highlighted the lack of information on the synergistic impacts between the Belo Monte Dam—which already affects the area—and the downstream mining project in the reduced flow section of the Xingu River, which in turn will determine the type and extent of the mine's risks in the event of serious failures. The Brazilian justice system suspended Belo Sun’s installation license in 2017 because the company did not conduct studies on the mine's impact on indigenous communities or comply with the requirement for a free, prior and informed consultation process. Belo Sun submitted the studies of the indigenous component to the National Indian Foundation (FUNAI) in early 2020 and is awaiting an assessment and response from the entity. Ángel's assessment was presented to FUNAI and the Secretary of State for the Environment (SEMAS) of Pará, the entities responsible for granting licenses for the project. The expert opinion joins two others presented as part of a joint effort by independent researchers whose work explicitly demonstrates the unfeasibility of the Belo Sun project as it is currently conceived. The previous opinions focused on the negative impacts of the project on the ichthyofauna, and on the fragility of the environmental impact studies submitted by Belo Sun from a geological point of view. In addition to the independent researchers, several organizations have denounced the social and environmental unfeasibility of the project, including the Xingu+ Network, the Xingu Alive Forever Movement, Amazon Watch, the Socio-Environmental Institute (ISA), International Rivers, Above Ground and AIDA. Contacts Marina Terra (Brazil), ISA, [email protected] Victor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +5215570522107

June 17 2020 Indigenous Rights, Mining

Expert report: proposed gold mine in Brazilian Amazon presents unacceptable risk

Altamira, Brazil. An expert study released today reveals serious deficiencies in the environmental impact assessment submitted to Brazilian authorities by Canadian mining company Belo Sun. The analysis exposes an unacceptable degree of risk that the tailings dam at the proposed Volta Grande gold mine will fail, contaminating the Xingu River and harming nearby indigenous and other communities. The report’s author, Dr. Steven Emerman, explains that despite the presence of geological faults at the mine site, the company has not produced any seismicity studies. Nor has the dam been designed with seismic safety in mind, in violation of Brazilian tailings dam regulations. Dr. Emerman also raises concern about the company’s use of its tailings reservoir to capture water. Industry best practice is to prevent the flow of surface runoff into tailings ponds in order to minimize the risk of dam failure. Moreover, the report reveals that Belo Sun has provided contradictory information regarding its tailings storage plan to investors and Brazilian regulatory authorities. Dr. Emerman recommends that the project’s licence be revoked. Brazilian courts suspended Belo Sun’s installation licence in 2017 because the company failed to study the project’s impact on indigenous and other traditional communities, or to consult these populations. Belo Sun has been criticized for publishing misleading statements to bolster sagging interest in the project among potential investors, amidst growing evidence of social, environmental, financial and reputational risks. Last week local movements Rede Xingu+ and Xingo Vivo para Sempre submitted Dr. Emerman’s report to government agencies responsible for project licensing. These organizations demand that additional studies be undertaken, which they argue are “indispensable to assess the social and environmental viability of Belo Sun’s mining project considering the grave risk to indigenous and other river-dwelling communities located next to the project and its tailings dam.” FAILURES, INSECURITY AND CONFLICTING INFORMATION From conflicting information to the absence of seismic safety criteria, Dr. Emerman's opinion highlights eight main points that support the recommendation to reject the Volta Grande project: The tailings dam was not designed under any seismic safety criteria, violating Brazilian regulations in this regard. Any tailings dam should be designed to withstand events such as floods and earthquakes. Contrary to the Brazilian standard, the company did not include in its studies an analysis of local seismicity nor did it simulate the response of the structure to a hypothetical seismic acceleration. Although geological faults have been mapped at the tailings dam site, no local seismicity studies have been done, which also violates Brazilian tailings dam regulations. Seismic activity is responsible for causing the dissolution of saturated debris into water, one of the most common causes of tailings dam failures. In Brazil, in 2019 alone, there were three dam failures, including the rupture of the Vale dam in Brumadinho (Minas Gerais), which caused at least 250 deaths. Cases like these demonstrate the need for and importance of local seismicity studies and are indispensable for the proper assessment of the risk of failure of a tailings dam. No risk analysis has been made of the geological faults mapped in the vicinity of the project site. Three of these faults, which are structures present in rocks and which can promote seismic movements, intersect at the exact site of the proposed tailings dam. The official simulation of the rupture assumes, without justification, that the flow of the waste would be interrupted when it reaches the Xingu River, ignoring the capacity of the toxic elements to travel tens of kilometers along the Volta Grande. The conclusions of the EIA also support the hypothesis that the tailings flow would take 97 minutes to reach the Xingu, but without mentioning the details of the calculation used. According to the modelling presented in the opinion, considering the volume of tailings stored on the order of 35 million cubic metres and assuming a spill of approximately 25%, under a conservative scenario the flood would cover an initial distance of up to 41 kilometres along the river. At a speed of 20 km/h, the flooding of Belo Sun's dam would reach the Xingu in only seven minutes, covering the distance of 41 km in only two hours, reaching the Volta Grande Indigenous Land. After the rupture of the Vale Dam in Brumadinho, the tailings flow reached 120 km/hr, 100 km/hr more than the more conservative scenario proposed in the report. In the worst case, with the release of 100% of the stored tailings, the initial flow would cover 98 kilometers along the Xingu River and could reach the Amazon River and the Atlantic Ocean. There is a high risk of toxic water spillage into the Xingu. The project provides for the recycling of cyanide leachate, a substance used to separate gold, which can result in waste water that is highly enriched with toxic elements such as arsenic and mercury. The result, whose analysis is absent from official documents, could be the spillage of a waste-water mixture that is highly toxic to aquatic organisms into the Xingu River in the event of a dam failure or spill. There is no plan in the EIA to close the mine or tailings dam, a key issue for the social and environmental viability of the mining project. The document contains a promise by the business group to find out, after the event, how to permanently stabilize the tailings dam. The waste storage system adopted at the time is not viable and runs counter to good mining practice. Part of the solution to reduce the probability of tailings dam failure is to reduce the water content in the tailings tank. But the Belo Sun project envisages that all the waste will be saturated and under seven metres of free water, above the surface of the solid waste. Aware of the issue raised in the previous point, the company seems to have decided that the current plan to flood the waste is not feasible. The Chief Executive Officer of Belo Sun Mining stated o MiningWatch Canada that he would abandon the current plan for a filtered tailings storage facility, which should have a significantly lower water content. However, the company provided conflicting information to Brazilian organizations and regulatory authorities: in a presentation to FUNAI in October 2019, the company described the same wet waste storage plan as the EIA. "The provision of contradictory information to different audiences by Belo Sun Mining and its Brazilian subsidiary is very serious in terms of the reliability of the information provided in the administrative processes," the opinion reiterates. Rede Xingu+ is an articulation of indigenous, riverine and partner organizations that work in the Xingu River basin. Movimento Xingu Vivo para Sempre is a collective formed in 2008 by local, national and international civil society organizations; threatened indigenous and non-indigenous communities; and social, human rights and environmental movements that oppose the construction of hydroelectric dams on the Xingu River and that fight in defence of the rights of local people. Contacts Dr. Steven Emerman, Malach Consulting, +1-801-921-1228 (Utah, USA) Brent Milikan, Amazon Program Director, International Rivers, +55-61-98153-7009 (Brasilia, Brazil). Mr. Milikan can connect journalists to representatives of Rede Xingu+ and Movimento Xingu Vivo para Sempre. Karyn Keenan, Director, Above Ground, +1-613-791-7532 (Ottawa, Canada)

May 15 2020 Large Dams, Indigenous Rights, Accountability and Transparency

Applauding the exclusion of Eletrobras from Norwegian oil fund

The Council on Ethics, which governs the world's largest sovereign wealth fund, recommended the exclusion due to the participation of the Brazilian state-owned company in the Belo Monte hydroelectric project, which is associated with serious human rights violations against indigenous peoples. On May 13, the Norwegian oil fund, considered the world's largest sovereign wealth fund, excluded twelve companies from its investment portfolio for ethical reasons, including Brazil's Eletrobras for its participation in the Belo Monte hydroelectric project. The fund is managed by the public bank Norges Bank Investment Management, which follows the recommendations made each year by the Ethics Council to ensure that investments meet certain criteria. The Council noted that the Belo Monte project, run by the Norte Energia consortium - of which Eletrobras is a part - caused "greater pressure on indigenous lands, the disintegration of the social structures of indigenous peoples and the deterioration of their ways of life" with the forced displacement of some 20,000 people. AIDA - as part of a joint civil society effort - informed the Council of the situation of the indigenous and riverine populations affected by the project, its social and environmental impacts, the operational situation of the dam, and the current status of national and international legal actions brought against the project. We believe the Council's decision should be applauded because it discourages the continuation of unsustainable and ill-named development projects that threaten the survival of indigenous and traditional peoples, as is the case with Belo Monte. It is essential that banks, international financial institutions and monetary funds take into account the likely impacts of the projects they finance. Supporting socially and environmentally sustainable projects instead of initiatives that prioritize economic benefit over the protection of human rights and the environment demonstrates responsible and ethical investment. PRESS CONTACT Victor Quintanilla, [email protected], +5215570522107

November 18 2019 Coral reefs, Oceans, Toxic Pollution

The oil spill devouring life on Brazil’s beaches

Photos: Marcela Cintra / Text: Laura Yaniz Since late August, oil has been registered at more than 500 points along 2,500 kilometers of coastline in northeastern Brazil. What began with the appearance of small black spots on some beaches quickly became huge stains that changed the color of the sand itself. The spill’s origin remains unknown, as local organizations and communities organize to clean up their beaches. Far from being resolved, the problem is getting worse every day. The oil’s advance is threatening the marine life in mangroves and coral reefs, both key ecosystems for the survival of species. In addition, residents of the affected communities, who depend on tourism and fishing, have seen their lifestyles and economies threatened. Their health is also at risk due to the consumption of contaminated seafood and direct exposure to the spill. Faced with the inaction of government authorities, the people have been cleaning the beaches and sea with their own hands. The spill itself, coupled with state neglect, violates the human rights of the inhabitants of the hundreds of affected beaches. AIDA—together with the Projeto Publico Institute, Salve Maracaipe, Projeto Caribessa and Rede Minha Jampa—denounced these violations before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in an effort to urge the Brazilian government to respond to this social and environmental crisis. Soledad García Muñoz, the Commission's Special Rapporteur on Economic, Social, Cultural and Environmental Rights expressed her solidarity with the Brazilian people and authorities in the face of the tragedy and called on the State to "take the necessary measures to avoid a bigger deterioration of the affected ecosystems, considering that the time, the resources and the way of acting focused on human rights are the key factors for the effectiveness of a contingency plan that the present situation deserves.” She added: “the slower and partial are the measures adopted, more irreparable will be the damages for the Brazilian coast and its biodiversity, as well as for the quality of life of the people that live in these affected regions. It is necessary an urgent and sensible response in face of these serious events generated by the contamination, because that could also accelerate the effects of the climate change in the coast, mangroves, swamps and other ecologically vulnerable habitats.”

May 07 2019 Indigenous Rights, Accountability and Transparency, Human Rights

Inter-American Commission to examine rollback of indigenous rights in Brazil

In a hearing before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, civil society organizations will demonstrate how measures adopted by the administration of Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro are undoing decades of human rights protections in the country. Rio De Janiero, Brazil. On May 9, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) will hear how measures adopted by the government of President Jair Bolsonaro have rolled back protections for human rights in the country, creating a dangerous situation for indigenous communities and violating Brazil’s international obligations to protect human rights. The hearing was requested by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense, International Rivers, Conectas, Teles Pires Forum, Operation Native Amazon and Brazil Indigenous People Articulation (APIB) in an effort to halt further rollbacks, and to demand a reversal of the government’s actions that are currently threatening indigenous communities. The hearing will form part of the Commission’s 172 Period of Sessions, which is taking place in Kingston, Jamaica from May 3 to 10, 2019. During the hearing, organizations will detail how reforms made by the Bolsonaro government in matters of law, public policy, foreign policy, and other areas, violate the preservation of indigenous communities’ way of life in the country. The case will also show how those reforms violate communities’ rights to life, culture, food, a healthy environment, clean water, and the delimitation of their ancestral homelands, among others. The government has diminished legal and administrative protections for indigenous communities through the following actions: The transfer of key functions from the Ministry of Environment to the Ministry of Agriculture. Increased precarity for employees at the Brazilian Institute for the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources. Weakening of the Chico Mendes Institute for the Conservation of Biodiversity and of the process for granting environmental permits. The threat of exposing indigenous lands to the dangers of mining. Measures adopted by the Ministry of Environment that fragment the legal order that guarantees minimum conditions for the protection of the environment and indigenous rights. The transfer of authority for the demarcation of indigenous lands from the National Indian Foundation to the Ministry of Agriculture. The threat of withdrawing Brazil from international treaties like the Paris Agreement and others valuable agreements to protect the environment and human rights. In addition to these rollbacks, the above organizations assert that the situation has been aggravated by increased deforestation, encroachment on indigenous lands, and violence against environmental and human rights defenders. press contacts Victor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107 Eloy Terena (Brazil), Brazil Indigenous People Articulation (APIB), [email protected], +55 61 9695-1377

April 10 2019 Indigenous Rights, Mining, Human Rights

How Brazil is threatening indigenous and environmental rights

With the new presidency, Brazil has entered an unfortunate period of changes—to legislation, governmental structure, and foreign and public policy—that will set the nation back decades on the issues of climate, the environment and human rights. The new administration has made a host of extremely questionable decisions that signal the weakening of guarantees for indigenous peoples in Brazil, the Amazon, and the environment as a whole. Some of the reforms that most stand out include: The transfer of the Ministry of the Environment’s most important functions to the Ministry of Agriculture. The weakening of governmental entities responsible for monitoring cases of environmental crimes. The transfer of responsibility for demarcating indigenous lands from the National Indian Foundation (FUNAI) to the Ministry of Agriculture. The suspension of contracts signed between state entities and civil society organizations. The weakening of the process for granting environmental permits. Continuous threats to withdraw Brazil from international agreements on the protection of the environment and indigenous peoples, including the recent threat to leave ILO Convention 169. These changes seem to be just the beginning, and the outlook could worsen at any moment. The latest move to undermine environmental protection in Brazil is the apparent opening of indigenous lands to large-scale mining projects. In March, Brazil’s Minister of Mines and Energy announced to attendees of one of the largest global mining events (the annual convention of the Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada) that he would seek authorization for mining activities in indigenous and border areas. He stated that indigenous peoples would not have the autonomy to prevent the installation of mines in their territory. The State’s priority, this move implies, will be to promote irresponsible development over the protection of human rights. How mining threatens indigenous lands Last year, a government decree (Decree 9406) established drastic changes and new flexibility for mining activities, including successive extensions for permits in the event of lack of access, lack of consent or permission of the environmental agency, and the consideration that mining's foundations are the national interest and public utility. But mining itself is not in the national interest, since it implies great environmental damage and throws ecosystems out of balance. It must instead be recognized as a high-risk activity that causes destruction and contamination. Brazil has been incapable of safely regulating mining activities. We need only think of the rupture of two dams of mining waste in less than four years in the state of Minas Gerais. The first case in Mariana is considered the greatest environmental tragedy in Brazil’s history, and the second, earlier this year in Brumadinho, resulted in 197 deaths and 111 missing persons. If the government’s need for mining is undeniable, so is the need for stricter controls, the use of safer techniques, and a serious national assessment of the viability of each and every mine. Given the serious environmental damage associated with mining, its implementation on indigenous lands implies transferring those damages to a minority and vulnerable population that depends directly on the health of the environment for its physical and cultural survival. Indigenous communities have the constitutional right to be heard on projects that may affect them; some communities have even created protocols on how they want to be consulted. To build a mine against the will of a community is to violate their rights to life, to self-determination, to autonomy, to culture, to not being forcibly displaced, to benefit from their native territories, and to a healthy environment, among many others. The statements of the Minister of Mines and Energy represent a complete lack of commitment to the fundamental rights established in the Brazilian Constitution, as well as to internationally recognized human rights. They reveal a singular intention to appease investors, particularly the Canadian company behind the Belo Sun mining project, which seeks to mine indigenous lands already impacted by the construction of the Belo Monte Dam. In defense of indigenous peoples Mining on indigenous lands is not yet adequately regulated in Brazil. What the country needs is for Congress to approve a law that respects the fundamental rights of indigenous communities and protects their lands, while including communities in the process. The setbacks posed by the current administration have only strengthened the resistance of indigenous communities, and those of us who support them. Civil society organizations like AIDA are committed to defending human rights, safeguarding indigenous territory, and holding governments and corporations accountable whenever they pose a threat.

April 08 2019 Large Dams, Indigenous Rights, Human Rights

Statement on the Assassination of Dilma Ferreira Silva, leader of Brazil’s Movement of Dam-Affected Peoples

In the face of the brutal crime committed on March 22nd against a coordinator of the Movement of Dam-Affected Peoples in Brazil, the undersigned human rights and environmental organizations call on Brazilian authorities and multilateral organizations to ensure that the country’s obligations regarding the protection of human rights and environmental defenders are enforced. With deep sadness and indignation, we received the news that Dilma Ferreira Silva, a regional coordinator of Brazil’s Movement of Dam-Affected Peoples (MAB), together with her husband Claudionor Costa da Silva and Hilton Lopes, a friend of the family, were assassinated on Friday, March 22nd in the Amazonian state of Pará. The bodies of the three victims were found in her residence with signs of torture. Dilma Ferreira Silva was a prominent activist and recognized leader who, for more than three decades, fought for the rights of the people affected by the Tucuruí mega-hydroelectric dam project on the Tocantins River of the Brazilian Amazon, built during the country’s military dictatorship 1964-1985), provoking the displacement of an estimated 32,000 people, along with serious environmental damage. This is not the first case of a brutal murder perpetrated against a human rights defender in the region of the Tucurui dam. In April 2009, Raimundo Nonato do Carmo, a union leader who fought on behalf of those whose lives were ruined by the Tucuruí dam was shot seven times by two men on a motorcycle as he walked out of a supermarket on the street in which he lived in the town of Tucuruí. Dilma dedicated her life to promoting national policies that would effectively take into account the rights of dam-affected peoples, with due attention to gender issues that particularly affect the rights of women. Dilma Ferreira lived in the rural settlement of Salvador Allende, where land titles were issued for family farmers by the federal government in 2012, as a result of a popular mobilization of the Movement of the Landless Workers (MST), with support from MAB. However, the area continued to be coveted by land grabbers (grileiros) that invade and seize control of public and community lands. One such example is Fernando Ferreira Rosa Filho (aka ‘Fernandinho’) arrested by the civil police force of the state of Pará as the principal suspect in the triple homicide of Dilma Ferreira, Claudionor Costa da Silva and Hilton Lopes. The assassination of Dilma Ferreira Silva is evidence of the grave situation faced by human rights and environmental defenders in Brazil, a country that tops the global ranking in violence practiced against defenders, with one person murdered every six days in 2017. The incoming administration of President Jair Bolsonaro has intensified recent attempts to undermine Brazil’s progressive legislation on environmental protection and human rights - especially those of indigenous peoples, quilombolas (descendants of African slaves), family farmers and other traditional populations. Such attempts have often clashed with Brazil’s progressive Federal Constitution, approved in 1988 during a period of redemocratization that followed military rule. Backsliding on public policies, together with public statements that incite violence in conflictive areas, are seriously increasing the risks faced by human rights and environmental defenders such as Dilma Ferreira Silva. The undersigned human rights and environmental organizations express our solidarity with the family of Dilma and the Movement of Dam-Affected Peoples (MAB). Without a doubt, her assassination is a huge loss for the defense of the environment and human rights in the Amazon. We stand with the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights in demanding a complete, independent and imparcial investigation of the assassination of Dilma Ferreira Silva, as well as the exemplary punishment of those that carried out and ordered this horrendous crime. Moreover, we call on Brazilian authorities to ensure that the country’s domestic legislation and international obligations regarding the protection of human rights and environmental defenders are fully implemented, including preventative action to avoid further acts of violence. Signed, 1. 350.org 2. Aborigen-Forum 3. AMAR - Associação de Defesa do Meio Ambiente de Araucária 4. Amazon Watch 5. APREC Ecossistemas Costeiros 6. Arctic Consult 7. Articulação Antinuclear Brasileira 8. Asociación Interamericana para la Defensa del Ambiente - AIDA 9. Associação Mineira de Defesa do Ambiente – Amda 10. Association green alternative Georgia 11. Association of Journalists-Environmentalists of the Russian Union of Journalists 12. BAI Indigenous Women's Network in the Philippines 13. Bank Information Center (BIC) USA 14. Biodiversity Conservation Center 15. Both ENDS 16. Bretton Woods Project 17. Buryat Regional Association for Baikal 18. Business & Human Rights Center 19. Center for International Environmental Law - CIEL 20. CIDSE - International family of Catholic social justice organizations 21. Coalition for Human Rights in Development 22. Colegiado Mar RBMA/Reserva da Biosfera da Mata Atlântica - Grupo Conexão Abrolhos -Trindade 23. Coletivo de Mulheres do Xingu 24. Coletivo de Mulheres Negras de Altamira 25. Comisión Ecumenica de Derechos Humanos 26. Comité Ambiental en Defensa de la Vida 27. Conectas Direitos Humanos 28. Conseil Régional des Organisations Non Gouvernementales de Développement en RDC 29. Conselho Indigenista Missionário - CIMI 30. Corporación SOS Ambiental 31. Crescente Fértil 32. Derecho Ambiente y Recursos Naturales - DAR 33. Derechos Humanos y Medio Ambiente - DHUMA 34. Derechos Humanos y Medio Ambiente de Puno - Perú 35. DKA Austria 36. ECOA - Ecologia e Ação 37. Ecological Center DRONT 38. Ecolur Information NGO 39. Environmental Investigation Agency 40. Fastenopfer Switzerland 41. Focsiv - Federation of Italian Christian NGOs 42. Fórum em Defesa de Altamira 43. Foundation Sami Heritage and Development 44. Frente por uma Nova Política Energética para o Brasil 45. Front Line Defenders 46. Fundação Avina 47. Fundação Grupo ESQUEL 48. Future for Everyone 49. Global Witness 50. Green Dubna 51. Green Peace Brasil 52. ONG Guajiru 53. In Difesa Di - per i Diritti Umani e chi li difende 54. Indigenous Peoples Movement for Self-determination and Liberation (IPMSDL) 55. Instituto Igarapé 56. Instituto Terramar 57. Institutos Ethos 58. International Indigenous Fund for Development and Solidarity "Batani" dos EUA 59. International Land Coalition Secretariat 60. International Rivers 61. Katribu Kalipunan ng Katutubong Mamamayan ng Pilipinas (Katribu national alliance of indigenous peoples in the Philippines) 62. Kazan Federal University 63. Latin America Working Group 64. London Mining Network 65. Lumiere Synergie pour le Developpement 66. MAB - Movimento dos Atingidos por Barragens 67. Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns 68. MISEREOR 69. Movimento Nacional de Luta pela Moradia (MNLM) 70. Movimento Negro 71. Movimento Paulo Jackson - Ética, Justiça, Cidadania 72. Movimento Tapajós Vivo 73. Movimento Xingu Vivo para Sempre 74. Movimiento de Afectados por Represas de America Latina - MAR 75. O Movimento Nacional das Cidadãs Posithivas (MNCP) 76. Oyu Tolgoi Watch 77. Pax Christi - Comisión Solidaridad Un Mundo Alemania 78. Pax Christi Internacional 79. Pax Christi Toronto 80. Projeto Saúde e Alegria 81. Protection International 82. Public Interest law Center (PILC/CHAD) 83. Red de Comités Ambientales del Tolima 84. Red de Género y Medio Ambiente de México 85. REDE GTA 86. Resource Rights Africa da Uganda 87. Rivers without Boundaries International Coalition 88. Rivers without Boundaries - Mongolia 89. SAPÊ - Sociedade Agrense de Proteção Ecológica 90. SCIAF - Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund 91. Serpaj Chile 92. Siberian Environmental Organization 93. Socio-ecological Union International 94. Tatarstan Organization of the All-Russian Society for the Conservation of Nature 95. Terra 1530 96. The Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace/Caritas 97. The Society for Threatened Peoples International STPI - Gesellschaft für bedrohte Völker-International, GfbV-International 98. The Volunteer Movement Save Utrish 99. Toxisphera - Associação de Saúde Ambiental 100. Tutela Legal Maria Julia Hernández 101. Uma Gota no Oceano 102. Uniafro Brasil 103. Washington Office on Latin America - Wola 104. WoMin African Alliance 105. World Wide Fund for Nature – WWF/Brasil