Brazil

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  

Read more
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.  

Read more
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  

Read more
Mining, Toxic Pollution

Mine tailings dams: a history of failures

Once again, tragedy looms over Brazil. Last Friday, for the second time in less than four years, a tailings dam broke in the State of Minas Gerais—this time in the municipality of Brumadinho—leaving catastrophic human and environmental damage in its wake. Once again, the losses are incalculable. We’re faced with disappearances and death. We see the same, disconcerting images: survivors evacuated by helicopter; trees, animals, and homes covered in toxic sludge; a swollen river carrying mining waste downstream. Once again, nature and society have been damaged, torn apart. As if in an endless loop, the tragedy has repeated in Minas Gerais. Five similar incidents, at least of which there is evidence, occurred in 1986, 2001, 2007, 2014, and 2015. The tragedy in November 2015 in the city of Mariana is considered the worst environmental disaster in the history of Brazil. It destroyed the town of Bento Rodrigues and contaminated the Doce River basin, carrying toxic sludge all the way to the Atlantic Ocean. A tragic cycle Far from isolated events, the failures of mine tailings dams have become a common occurrence, and statistics suggest we can expect many more in the future. Like any infrastructure work, a dam has a certain useful life—a period of operation with a firm beginning and end. That period is based on the dam having adequate design, execution, and maintenance, something that often does not occur. Thanks to the World Information Service on Energy’s Uranium Project, we know that over the last 30 years there have been 73 accidents or incidents involving mine tailings dams worldwide. The United States (17), China (8) and the Philippines (7) lead the list of affected countries. The project’s database offers an account of the main accidents and indicators including breakdowns, overshoots, collapses, partial failures, and lining ruptures. These figures should lead us to reflect on large-scale mining, particularly metal mining, which requires these types of dams and impoundments. Instead of continuing to build mines, wouldn’t it be better to concentrate our efforts on recovering and reusing the metal we discard? When will we transition to a circular economy that avoids such catastrophes? How many more disasters can our ecosystems and our human populations endure? Quite often, affected communities do not have objective or sufficient information about the benefits and harms of the mining projects proposed near their homes. Breaking that information gap is urgent. At AIDA we contribute to this task by providing useful information about the potential harms of mining, and using it to strengthen legal actions undertaken to protect people and the environment. It’s urgent that the governmental, non-governmental and private sectors do whatever is necessary to avoid more tragedies like those we’ve seen in Brazil. They must make a conscious decision to put the value of people and nature above profit. For more information, consult the database of major tailings dam failures: http://www.wise-uranium.org/mdaf.html   73 tailings dams have failed over the last 30 years, wreaking havoc on the environment and affected communities: https://t.co/G6xZibNIAk How many more avoidable disasters can we endure? #MinasGerais #BrumadinhoSOS #ValeAssassina #mining pic.twitter.com/ceuNTUUpkL — AIDA Americas (@AIDAorg) January 28, 2019

Read more
Large Dams, Indigenous Rights

Inter-American Commission urges Brazil to address damages to indigenous peoples caused by Belo Monte Dam

Following its visit to Brazil, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights called the attention of authorities and civil society to the urgent need to address repeated violations of the rights of indigenous communities. The Commission highlighted the case of the Mïratu de Paquiçamba community, which has been affected by the construction of the Belo Monte Dam. Rio de Janiero, Brazil. Concluding its visit to the country, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) urged Brazilian authorities and society in general to recognize, address, and quickly resolve repeated violations of the human rights of indigenous communities. The Commission emphasized the case of the Mïratu indigenous community, affected by the environmental damages caused by the construction of the Belo Monte Dam. In Brazil, indigenous communities “suffer from frequent incidents of violence and lack of attention from public services, in addition to increased difficulties and obstacles surrounding claims to their lands,” said Commissioner Antonia Urrejola Noguera, IACHR Rapporteur for Brazil, while presenting the Commission’s preliminary conclusions. “Brazil has been one of the largest violators of the human rights of indigenous communities. In their meeting with the Commission, the Brazilian Indigenous Communities Organization (APIB) presented these cases and expressed its concern over the current political landscape, in which a discourse of hatred and racism has been growing, even among government institutions,” said Luiz Eloy Terena, APIB’s legal advisor. On November 7, the Commission’s delegation visited Mïratu Village, located in the Paquiçamba indigenous region in the state of Pará. Mïratu is one of the indigenous communities affected by the Belo Monte Dam. It was the first time the Commission visited that area. There, the Commission heard testimonies from indigenous people and fishermen, who are fighting to maintain their traditional way of life despite damages including: the death of thousands of fish; the pollution of the Xingú river; forced displacement from their lands without adequate relocation; and the development of culturally inappropriate projects. Village leaders reported that those damages have disproportionately affected women and children. The Commission also heard from representatives of Altamira, the city nearest the dam. “We’d like to highlight the importance of the Commission’s historic visit to Mïratu Village, and recognize the negative impacts that the Belo Monte Dam has had on the human rights of the people of the Xingu River basin,” said Astrid Puentes Riaño, co-director of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). “It is now up to the government of Brazil to adopt the decisions and recommendations of the Commission, complying with the rule of law and protecting the people of their country.” During the visit, those affected by the dam were especially concerned over next year’s scheduled implementation of a plan to manage the flow of the Xingú River. Known as a consensus hydrogram, it would divert the water that indigenous and riverine communities, as well as plants and animals, rely on to survive. “The commissioners had the opportunity to confirm the severity of the impacts and the understand the urgent need to revise the criteria used to define the residual flow that the Xingu must maintain in order to guarantee the subsistence and culture of indigenous and riverine communities in the Vuelta Grande region,” said Bivany Rojas from the Socio-environmental Institute (ISA). In 2011, communities along the Xingu—represented by AIDA, the Paranese Society for the Defense of Human Rights (SDDH), and Justiça Global—filed a complaint against Brazil, bringing the case in front of the Commission. That same year, the Commission granted precautionary measures to affected indigenous communities. The case formally began in December 2015, and participating organizations presented final arguments in May of this year. Based on those and the arguments put forward by the the Brazilian State, the Commission will publish a report concluding whether human rights violations occurred from the construction of the Belo Monte Dam. They may then decide to issue recommendations for Brazil to remedy those damages. Demonstrating progress and a respect for the rights of indigenous communities—in cases like the Xucuru, the Xingu, and Guyraroka peoples—represents an important opportunity to strengthen rule of law and embrace progress in Brazil. press contacts: Victor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107 Isabel Harari (Brazil), ISA, [email protected], +5561998261213  

Read more
Large Dams, Indigenous Rights, Freshwater Sources

In Xingu management plan, Brazil leaves communities without water

The proposed Xingu River management plan puts at risk the people, plants and animals of the Amazon region. AIDA requested that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights urge Brazil to stop the plan and establish a socially and environmentally appropriate alternative. Washington, D.C. and Altamira, Brazil. By authorizing the construction of the Belo Monte Dam in the heart of the Amazon, the Brazilian government endorsed a management plan for the flow of the Xingu River that would leave the indigenous and riverine communities of the area without the water they need to survive. The plan is in a testing phase but is expected to be implemented next year, once all the turbines of the hydroelectric plant are installed. The Interamerican Association of Environment Defense (AIDA) sent a report to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights detailing the serious socio-environmental risks of the plan. In it, we requested that the Commission urge Brazil to stop the plan’s implementation and create an alternative plan that guarantees biodiversity and protects the communities’ ways of life. “The authorized plan for the management of the river’s flow threatens the existence of indigenous and riverine communities, and places at risk of extinction the fish and the forests—natural resources on which the physical and cultural lives of the communities depend,” said Liliana Ávila, Senior AIDA Attorney. The plan, called a consensual hydrogram, establishes the volume of water that will pass through a specific part of the river, called the Vuelta Grande, and the part that will be diverted for energy production. It is intended to artificially reproduce the natural flow of the river in times of flood and drought. Norte Energía, the consortium in charge of the dam, proposes an average minimum flow rate of 4,000 cubic meters per second over the course of a year, and 8,000 cubic meters per second for the following year, beginning in 2019. It proposes a minimum flow rate of 700 cubic meters per second for the dry season. The report sent to the Commission, however, details scientific and social evidence that demonstrates that these water levels are significantly lower than the historical river flow and do not guarantee that fish and alluvial forests can survive the proposed reduction in the short- and medium-term. The evidence—which includes information from both the Brazilian Institute of the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources and community monitoring—also shows that some aquatic species, such as chelonians, can only feed and reproduce with minimum flows of 13,000 cubic meters per second in times of flooding, and that the volume proposed for the dry season could make the river unnavigable. “The management plan did not take into account the monitoring done by the Juruna people in collaboration with the Federal University of the State of Pará and the Socio-environmental Institute (ISA),” said AIDA attorney Marcella Ribeiro. “In 2016, with water levels higher than those proposed, communities were already reporting the mass die-off of fish.” AIDA sent the report to the Commission as part of a formal complaint against the Brazilian State for the human rights violations caused by the dam’s construction. In May, together with partner organizations, we presented our final arguments in the case, evidencing damages already caused, including the forced displacement of indigenous and riverine communities, the massive death of fish, differentiated damages to men and women, and threats to the survival of the communities. Find more information on the case here. press contacts Victor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107 Isabel Harari (Brazil), ISA, [email protected], +5561998261213  

Read more
Human Rights, Indigenous Rights, Large Dams

Why Brazil must respond for Belo Monte's human rights violations

We did it! We’re proud to say we recently submitted the final arguments in our case against Brazil before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. In them, we demonstrate the damages Belo Monte has caused to indigenous and traditional communities, and residents of Altamira, the city closest to the dam. We’re working for them—to bring the government of Brazil to justice. “Human rights violations are a daily occurrence for those of us affected by the dam,” explained Antônia Melo, coordinator of the Movimento Xingu Vivo para Sempre, a citizens’ collective formed in the face of the dam’s implementation. “It’s urgent that our petition before the Commission advance to sanction the government and guarantee our rights.” We argue that the damages to local communities resulted from a severe lack of foresight and inadequate evaluation, as well as from failure to comply with the conditions for operation established by the government. The many risks denounced prior to the dam’s construction have since become long-term damages—many of which have affected men and women, and youth and the elderly, in different ways. Our report documents the displacement of indigenous and traditional communities forced to leave their territories without adequate alternatives, placing their cultural survival at risk. Among the affected populations are communities dedicated to fishing, who have not yet been compensated for the loss of livelihood. The dam has caused mass die-offs of fish and, although authorities have imposed millions in fines, the report demonstrates that the underlying problem has not been resolved. Local communities now have limited use of the Xingu River as a source of food, sustenance, transportation and entertainment. We have also noted—among other serious harms—the disappearance of traditional trades, such as brickmakers and cart drivers, and of traditional cultural practices. Women, for example, have stopped giving birth in their homes and must now go to a hospital, a reality that has drastically worsened due to the oversaturation of health and education services in Altamira caused by the recent population surge. Our case is now in the hands of the Commission. They will prepare their own report, concluding whether or not human rights violations occurred as a result of the Belo Monte Dam. If violations did occur, they may issue recommendations for remediation. If Brazil fails to respond, the case may be referred to the Inter-American Court on Human Rights, which has the power to issue a ruling condemning Brazil. The completion of this report brings us—and, more importantly, the communities we represent—one big step closer to achieving justice for the many wrongs committed in the name of the Belo Monte Dam, and energy development in the Amazon.  

Read more
Human Rights, Indigenous Rights, Large Dams

Brazil must respond to human rights violations caused by the Belo Monte Dam

In representation of communities affected by the Belo Monte Dam, we have submitted final arguments in the case against Brazil before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The report presents scientific evidence of the forced displacement of indigenous and traditional communities, the mass die-off of fish, differentiated harms to men and women, and threats to the survival of local communities in the Brazilian Amazon. Washington, DC, United States and Altamira, Brazil. Furthering the formal complaint against the State of Brazil for human rights violations caused by the construction of the Belo Monte Dam, organizations representing affected communities presented their final arguments before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. They demonstrate the damages Belo Monte has caused to indigenous and traditional communities, and residents of Altamira, the city closest to the dam. “Human rights violations are a daily occurence for those affected by the dam, so it’s urgent that our petition before the Commission advance to sanction the government and guarantee our rights,” proclaimed Antônia Melo, coordinator of the Movimiento Xingu Vivo para Siempre, a citizens’ collective formed in the face of the dam’s implementation. The report presented before the Commission shows that the damages resulted from a severe lack of foresight and inadequate evaluation, as well as from failure to comply with the conditions for operation established by the government. The many risks denounced prior to the dam’s construction have since become long-term damages—many of which have affected men and women, and youth and the elderly, in different ways. “This report is a vital step forward for the people of the Xingu River basin, who are now closer than ever to achieving justice, forcing Brazil to respond to the violations committed, and ensuring that what happened on the Xingu never happens again,” said Astrid Puentes Riaño, co-director of the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). Together with the Paraense Society for Human Rights (SDDH) and Justiça Global, AIDA represents the affected communities before the Commission. The report also documents the displacement of indigenous and traditional communities forced to leave their territories without adequate alternatives, placing their cultural survival at risk. Among the affected populations are communities dedicated to fishing, who have not yet been compensated for the loss of livelihood. The dam has caused mass die-offs of fish and, although authorities have imposed millions in fines, the report demonstrates that the underlying problem has not been resolved. Local communities now have limited use of the Xingu River as a source of food, sustenance, transportation and entertainment. The report also documents—among other serious harms—the disappearance of traditional trades, such as brickmakers and cart drivers, and of traditional cultural practices. Women, for example, have stopped giving birth in their homes and must now go to a hospital, a reality that has drastically worsened due to the oversaturation of health and education services in Altamira caused by the recent population surge. The complaint against Brazil was presented before the Commission in 2011, the year the international organism granted protective measures to indigenous people affected by the dam’s construction. The case against Brazil officially opened in December 2015. Then, last October, in a rare move designed to speed up the processing of the case, the Commission decided to unite two stages that, as a rule, are normally processed separately. Under this framework, the organizations and the State are required to present their final arguments, after which the Commission will make a decision. “We hope the Commission refers the case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights as soon as possible, and that it recommends Brazil adopt the measures necessary to protect the life, integrity, and right to property of the indigenous and traditional communities affected by the dam,” said Raphaela Lopes, attorney at Justiça Global. “After being subject to all forms of rights violations, starting from the very beginning of this project, these communities need integral reparation; their right to free, prior and informed consent was not honored.” The Commission must now prepare a report to conclude whether or not human rights violations occurred as a result of the Belo Monte Dam, in which it may issue recommendations for remediation. If those recommendations are unfulfilled, the case may be referred to the Inter-American Court on Human Rights, which has the power to issue a ruling condemning Brazil. Belo Monte has been in operation since early 2015, though a series of judicial suspensions resulting from non-compliance with its permits means that construction has yet to be completed. Although Belo Monte has caused great harm to the people of the Xingu, Brazil now has an opportunity to avoid inflicting more damage and begin making efforts to better their quality of life. For that to happen, a prompt decision by the Commission is vital. Find more information about the case here. Press contacts: Víctor Quintanilla (México), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107 Raphaela Lopes (Brasil), Justiça Global, [email protected], + 55 21 99592-7017  

Read more
Large Dams, Indigenous Rights, Human Rights

Brazil and the example that should be followed

In an apparent turnaround, the Brazilian government has signaled an end to the construction of large dams in the Amazon. If materialized, it will be a step worthy of imitation. Then the region, and the world, can move towards truly sustainable energy generation that respects the environment and human rights.  2018 began with encouraging news for the energy sector, and for rivers and human rights in Latin America. A senior official with the Brazilian government signaled, in an interview with the newspaper O Globo, the beginning of the end of large dams in the Amazon nation. That statement is backed up by the notable absence of several of these projects in Brazil’s new Ten-Year Plan for Energy Expansion. The about-face is particularly significant since Brazil is a world leader in the construction of large hydroelectric projects, which until a few months ago were relied on to meet the nation’s rising energy demands. Between corruption and lack of financing The decision is a response to various factors, including the social conflicts and environmental impacts that large dams have caused in the Amazon, and major opposition from indigenous communities and civil society organizations. In addition, these projects have involved high costs from the start and, as Edvaldo Santana, former director of the National Electric Energy Agency (ANEEL) told O Globo, they “end up costing much more, despite the licenses.” Large dams have also been at the center of the largest corruption scandal in the history of Brazil, uncovered by the Lava Jato investigation, which went beyond borders to involve politicians and businessmen from 11 Latin American nations. The evidence gathered then prompted the initiation of Leviathan, a special investigation into the Belo Monte Dam due to the signs of high payments of bribes related to its construction. All of the above is in addition to the requirements for environment licenses with which several projects have failed to comply. This is the case of Belo Monte, whose license has been suspended for months, and of the Tapajós Dam, who license was denied last year. On the other hand, the Brazilian government announced the privatization of Electrobras, a public company with a fundamental role in the construction of these large infrastructure projects. With this and the economic crisis that has affected the ability of the Brazilian National Bank for Economic Development (BNDES) to support these mega-projects, the large dams have lost their primary sources of funding. Therefore—and in the face of technological advances and clean energy alternatives—Brazil is beginning to leave behind large dams and take and important step towards truly sustainable energy, and development that respects human rights. This advance could have an important impact on the entire American continent. It could begin a wave of change toward a more modern energy matrix, further removed from the increasingly obsolete large dams. A necessary change In the Amazon basin alone, more than 275 new large dams are planned, the majority in the Andean region. And hundreds more are lined up in Central America and Mexico. To echo Brazil’s announcement, these initiatives could incorporate adequate and comprehensive energy planning with serious cost and risk assessments. In these terms, Pablo Pedrosa, Executive Secretary of Brazil’s Ministry of Mines and Energy, told O Globo, “We are not willing to make moves to disguise the costs and the risks.” Even global entities such as the International Finance Corporation (IFC), part of the World Bank Group, have experienced first-hand the financial, reputational and socio-environmental costs of inadequately evaluating large dam projects. In 2012, the IFC, through the Latin American Fund for Renewable Infrastructure, provided $15 million USD to fund the Santa Rita Dam, which was to be built on the Ictobay River in Alta Verapaz, Guatemala. At the end of last year, the entity’s accountability mechanism concluded that the investment had breached the IFC’s operational policies.  The project had failed to comply with the affected community’s right to free, prior and informed consent. Although IFC management denied the findings of its accountability mechanism, the project has been suspended since 2013 and the indigenous communities of the area maintain their opposition to it. Brazil’s recent decision reinforces the global trend of moving away from large dams. Over the last several years in the United States, large dams have been removed to rescue rivers and the benefits they provide, like wild salmon runs on the Snake River in Washington State. Given this good start to the year, it will be essential to ensure the effective implementation of Brazil’s decision. And, following that example, perhaps other Andean-Amazonian countries will also move towards modernity, consider the real costs of large dams, and begin to promote better, cheaper energy alternatives that don’t sacrifice natural ecosystems and the communities that depend on them.

Read more
El Cacique Raoni, líder indígena brasileño, denuncia las amenazas a los derechos humanos del proyecto Belo Monte
Large Dams, Indigenous Rights, Human Rights

Why I’m joining the fight for justice for Belo Monte’s victims

On April 1, 2011, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights granted protective measures to the indigenous communities affected by a large dam in the heart of the Brazilian Amazon. It was then I first heard of Belo Monte. I was working as a human rights defender in my native country of Colombia. The Commission ordered the suspension of all permits and work related to the dam until the protection of indigenous rights was guaranteed. I remember clearly the excitement generated by the decision, followed swiftly by Brazil’s rejection of it and the imposition of their diplomatic power. Other governments of the region supported Brazil’s position with unusual solidarity, questioning the competence of the international organization to grant such measures in relation to “development” projects. Due to the overwhelming pressure, the Commission, for the first time in its history, modified its decision: it said Brazil must guarantee the life and integrity of affected populations, but that construction could continue. I’ve never understood the governments’ reaction in this case. The Commission had simply fulfilled its mandate: to avoid irreparable harm to the rights of a group of people. The project had not consulted affected indigenous communities, and lacked adequate social and environmental impact studies. It has gone on, as predicted, to cause serious damage to both the environment and human health and wellbeing. The indigenous and riverside communities, which have for generations cared for the Xingu River, have been left to deal with the impacts of a project that interrupted the flow of the river, irreversibly altering their way of life and means of subsistence.  The hope continues More than six years have passed since the case was taken before the Commission, which, as an organ of the Organization of American States, is called to protect human rights on the continent. Over this time, Belo Monte has progressed as planned and the threats of social and ecological harm have become a reality. The dam has: caused the forced displacement of more than 40 thousand people, aggravating poverty and social conflict in the area; saturated the health, education, and public safety systems in Altamira, the nearest city; violated the right to adequate housing for thousands of families; and increased violence against human rights defenders. It caused and continues to cause damage to the Amazon rainforest, worsening climate change and its impacts. Despite the setbacks, the hope of achieving justice for affected people has grown over time as well. In September, I became the Senior Attorney for AIDA’s Human Rights and Environment Program. As such, I’m involved with our case before the Commission.  I’m honored to have joined an organization that, in alliance with local organizations, has dedicated years to ensuring that the people of the Xingu get reparation for the damages they’ve suffered, and is working to create new standards for environmental and human rights protections in the region. In 2010, AIDA and our allies requested precautionary measures from the Commission. One year later, we filed a formal complaint against Brazil regarding the human rights violations related to Belo Monte. In December 2015, the Commission opened the case for processing. On October 31 of this year, the Commission gave new impetus to the litigation process against Brazil: it decided to unite two stages that, as a rule, are processed separately. In the first, the necessary aspects regarding admissibility of the case are verified. In the second, a fundamental decision is made that analyzes whether a State failed to comply with the international obligations it undertook when signing the American Convention on Human Rights. The petitioners must present the allegations of human rights violations, and the State their responses to them. The Commission will then issue a decision on the case’s admissibility as well as its merit. Their recent exception will expedite the process of reaching that decision. We’re working for the Commission to issue recommendations to Brazil to repair the violations committed. If those recommendations are unfulfilled, the case may be referred to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which has the power to issue a ruling condemning Brazil and recommending reparation measures. Valuable lessons Belo Monte is, without a doubt, a lesson for the continent. The case shows that projects of this type are environmentally unviable and generate irreparable damage to human rights. Belo Monte also shows that States must rethink their energy models and turn their efforts toward promoting truly clean and sustainable energy. It’s a warning sign for financial institutions to avoid investing in projects with negative socio-environmental impacts. Finally, it’s an opportunity for the Inter-American Human Rights System to establish a valuable precedent that will hopefully help avoid a similar situation from happening again.  On behalf of AIDA, I’m proud to be contributing to the fight for a healthy environment in this and many other cases. Our journey is just beginning.   

Read more