Colombia


Inter-American Development Bank to investigate Ituango hydroelectric project

Washington D.C. In a historic decision, the Board of Executive Directors of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) approved an international investigation of the Bank’s private lending arm, IDB Invest, for its investment in the Ituango hydroelectric project. Located in the department of Antioquia, the Ituango dam has had a devastating impact on thousands of people across four departments and 27 municipalities in Colombia. The investigation’s main objective will be to determine whether—when financing this megaproject in a region of Colombia that continues to be affected by high levels of violence and resurgent armed conflict—the Bank complied with the social and environmental standards that it is obligated to uphold. The investigation will also examine whether any non-compliance by the Bank is connected to the serious harm that has been sustained by affected communities. “As those who have been affected by the Ituango dam, we demand that the investigation be rigorous and independent,” declared Isabel Zuleta, spokesperson for Movimiento Ríos Vivos in Colombia, which represents the affected communities. “For more than a decade, our communities have denounced the serious problems that the project has caused. These problems have been further exacerbated by the multiple emergencies that have occurred since 2018 and that continue to this day. We hope that, with this international investigation, the voices of victims and opponents of the project will finally be heard.” The investigation originated in a complaint filed by 477 people affected by the Ituango dam project. In the complaint, the affected communities—which are represented by Movimiento Ríos Vivos—emphasize that the Bank’s own policies require that the projects it finances must be sustainable, participatory, and in conformity with national legislation. In the case of the Ituango dam, none of this has happened. In the complaint, the communities indicate that the project lacked an adequate environmental impact assessment and that it did not allow for the participation of communities or provide access to information. They emphasize that the project has been advanced in a context marked by human rights violations, the disproportionate use of force, and increasing violence against people who defend their land and water. They also point out the pattern of discrimination faced by communities for deciding to oppose the project, as well as by women affected by the project. As the complaint lays out, all of this contradicts the social and environmental standards that the IDB must apply to its investments. Further, the complaint was filed in the wake of a humanitarian crisis that endangered the lives of thousands of people in the area surrounding the dam’s construction site. The crisis began after two of the dam’s diversion tunnels were blocked with cement, when a third tunnel became obstructed and the river’s flow increased dramatically. The resulting landslides and flooding forced thousands of people to be evacuated from their homes in a poorly planned, ad hoc manner, and many remain displaced to this day. No other development project in Colombia has caused a humanitarian crisis of this magnitude. This crisis reveals the inadequacy of both the impact assessment and the environmental regulation of the project, which—despite these deficiencies—was nevertheless approved. The state of emergency in the area affected by the crisis has yet to be lifted, and neither the government nor the regulatory agencies in Colombia have ruled out the possibility that the dam could collapse altogether. Even in this critical context, the affected communities sought to engage in a process of dialogue and dispute resolution with the company behind the dam project, which would have been facilitated by the IDB’s accountability mechanism. However, the company refused to participate in such a dialogue. For this reason, as the next step in the process following from the complaint, the accountability mechanism recommended this investigation. The communities affected by the Ituango dam, who live in the river basin of the Cauca River and its tributaries, are accompanied in the complaint process by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), and International Accountability Project (IAP). The Ituango dam is expected to be the largest hydropower plant in Colombia, capable of generating 2,400 MW of electricity. Although the dam’s 79-kilometer-long reservoir was filled nearly two years ago, however, the dam has yet to generate any electricity. Moreover, the project has flooded 4,500 hectares without first removing the area’s vegetation, which is now generating large quantities of methane, a greenhouse gas. This flooding was undertaken even before the dam structure itself was completed and without informing, relocating, or compensating communities in the impacted area. IDB Invest has invested millions of dollars in the project and facilitated an additional billion-dollar investment in the project by other international banks. These investments have been maintained despite the grave crisis caused by the project. press contacts: Isabel Zuleta, Movimiento Ríos Vivos, [email protected] (Spanish only) Carla García Zendejas, Center for International Environmental Law, [email protected]                   Victor Quintanilla, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense, [email protected]   Alexandre Sampaio, International Accountability Project, [email protected]   Note for editors: The investigation will be conducted by the Independent Consultation and Investigation Mechanism (MICI) of the Inter-American Development Bank. As an international accountability mechanism, the MICI addresses complaints from people and communities affected by IDB-funded development projects.  The investigation will be carried out within a maximum period of nine months, in light of the high complexity of the case. Among the aspects of the project that will be investigated are the following: Whether the area of influence was adequately assessed and the affected population properly identified; The heightened levels of conflict and insecurity in the area surrounding the dam, and its differentiated impacts on women; The participation of communities, which—in the opinion of the communities themselves—has been seriously lacking; The relationship between the project and the damage caused; The deficiencies in the project’s resettlement plans and supposed compensation; The assessment of the risk of disasters, and access to information about these risks.  

Read more

Empowering fishermen to protect coral reefs, and their guardians

When he thinks of his childhood, Mario Smith remembers the abundance of fish, crabs and lobsters he and his father used to find while fishing, an activity now in decline on his island. "There used to be such abundance and today we are forbidden to fish for many things because of our irresponsibility in taking care of our resources," said Mario, who is now the leader of the San Luis Fishermen's Committee, whose members work on San Andres Island, Colombia. San Luis is a hamlet located on the east coast of San Andres with white sandy beaches and calm waters. I was there in August to support the dissemination of a very important resolution for the conservation of the coral ecosystems of the Colombian Caribbean. The law prohibits the capture and sale of several species of herbivorous and omnivorous fish that cleanse the corals of the algae that take away their light and space, thus supporting their survival. In recent years, a decrease in commercial species has led fishing communities have to go after herbivorous fish. This, in turn, has caused a reduction in populations of these species, particularly in the Caribbean. The resolution was issued on July 15 by the Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina (CORALINA), the environmental authority in that region. Disseminating and socializing these type of norms in local communities is very important so that residents, understanding the importance of these fish for the health of both the reefs and their economies, support actions aimed at their conservation. Along with CORALINA's education team, I visited several fishermen's committees, as well as schools and restaurants. I participated in a meeting of the Inter-Institutional Committee on Environmental Education, which was also attended by representatives of the government, the police, and the tourism and education sectors. The visits were very enriching, full of questions and emotions. In each of them I highlighted the benefits of taking care of our corals and the fish that help them thrive. Coral reefs are one of the most important ecosystems on the planet. They are home to more than 25% of our marine species and protect our coasts from hurricanes, storms and other weather events.  At Cajasai School, the active participation of one student surprised me. He told me of his concern about garbage on his beaches and about catching parrotfish, one of the most important species of herbivorous fish. "I'm very concerned about my resources and that's why I made a foundation to take care of the beaches that are close to my home," he told me passionately. His empathy and desire to fight for his beaches and sea inspired me. The beautiful landscapes of San Andrés and the interest of all the people I spoke with filled me with satisfaction and energy to continue working. But there is still a lot to do. Our marine resources are in danger of disappearing in the face of the global climate crisis. And the urgency to do something about it is becoming ever more pressing. Our coral reefs are among the ecosystems most threatened by this crisis, mainly due to changes in the acidity and temperature of our oceans. In addition, human actions such as pollution and overfishing are causing irreversible damages. That’s why AIDA will continue to support local efforts to conserve important marine species, such as the parrotfish and his herbivorous relatives.    LEARN MORE  

Read more

Fracking

State Council maintains suspension of fracking in Colombia

We are proud to be part of the litigation in which this decision occured and hope that the high court will continue to prioritize the precautionary principle and consider the risks of harm that fracking poses to the environment and human health. Bogotá, Colombia. In response to an action filed by the Public Interest Legal Clinic of the Universidad del Norte, Colombia's State Council maintained the provisional suspension of the exploration and exploitation of non-conventional hydrocarbon deposits through hydraulic fracturing. This means that fracking continues to be suspended in Colombia, that it is currently illegal to carry it out, and that Colombia is in the midst of a moratorium on fracking by court order. With its decision, the State Council, a Colombian High Court, rejected the government's request, which sought to lift the suspension that has been in force since last November and give free rein to fracking in the country. AIDA celebrates the State Council's decision and we feel very honored to be part of this litigation. It is undoubtedly a step in the right direction given the high degree of uncertainty about the risks associated with fracking. These include: air pollution, the contamination of surface and groundwater sources, damages to human health, and emissions of methane—a potent greenhouse gas and one of the main aggravators of the climate crisis facing the world. In this scenario, the urgency of moving towards clean energy is evident. The high court concluded that the precautionary principle should be applied because, even without absolute scientific certainty, there is minimal evidence of potential damage resulting from an apparent deficiency in the measures contemplated in the regulation of fracking. Colombia today aims to be an example for Latin America. The provisional suspension of the regulation corresponds to a precautionary measure while the case is definitively resolved. It is essential that the State Council continue to give priority to the precautionary principle, taking into account the lack of full certainty about the risks of irreversible damage that fracking implies for the environment, the climate and for people. At AIDA, we welcome judicial independence, because it is fundamental for the legal protection of the environment. We hope that the ongoing judicial process will properly consider the evidence and arguments presented, including those related to an increasingly urgent task: the fight against the climate crisis. PRESS CONTACT: Victor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +5215570522107  

Read more

Large Dams

Inter-American Development Bank washes its hands of responsibility for dangerous Hidroituango dam and related human rights violations in Colombia

Fearing imminent collapse of the dam, communities in Antioquia, Colombia, have learned that the public lending arm of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) will not be investigated. Washington, DC — Last month, the Board and management of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) announced it would not approve an investigation of the Bank’s role in financing the construction of the controversial Ituango Hydroelectric Project (Hidroituango) in Colombia. The decision disregards allegations of acute and far-reaching harms caused by the project, including a humanitarian crisis that has displaced hundreds of families and caused human rights abuses, including assassination and intimidation of community members who oppose the project. The announcement comes more than a year after communities affected by the construction of the Hidroituango dam on the Cauca River in Antioquia, Colombia, filed a claim with the Independent Consultation and Investigation Mechanism (MICI). The claim, signed by more than 400 individuals affected by the dam, sought recourse from the MICI for the IDB’s alleged failure to comply with its own environmental and social safeguards. "We publicly denounce the IDB’s decision to evade its responsibility for the environmental damage and human rights violations resulting from the Hidroituango project, and we condemn the role of the MICI in facilitating and manifestly supporting this decision,2 remarked Isabel Zuleta, representative of Movimiento Ríos Vivos Antioquia. "It is unconscionable that the IDB is attempting to rewrite history by absolving itself from its responsibility for enabling and financing high-risk development projects that have extreme environmental impacts and blatantly violate human rights," added Zuleta. The IDB has two lending arms, one that invests in the public sector (the IDB) and another that invests in the private sector (IDB Invest). The MICI is the accountability mechanism of the bank, in charge of evaluating environmental and social compliance of the institution’s investments. The IDB initially invested in the Hidroituango project in 2012, which paved the way for and facilitated millions of dollars of additional investments from the IDB, as well as an additional billion from other international banks. The MICI, whose mandate is to provide accountability for harms caused by IDB investments, recommended no investigation of the IDB’s role in the project. Despite the decision not to review the IDB’s compliance, the MICI could continue its investigation regarding IDB Invest’s investment in the Hidroituango project. However this will depend completely on approval by the Bank’s Board. Before the dam was approved, communities warned of precisely the environmental and social impacts that have occurred. "For an institution that seeks to improve the lives of people in Latin America, the IDB’s decision is absurd, irresponsible, and disrespectful. It exemplifies a complete disregard for people living within the Cauca River Basin. Unfortunately, this disregard too often characterizes the IDB’s engagement in large-scale infrastructure projects throughout the region," said Alexandre Andrade Sampaio of International Accountability Project. "What is the value of environmental and social policies at the IDB, when they are ignored and dismissed precisely when they are most needed to protect people’s lives? This lack of accountability is unacceptable, and it demonstrates why communities affected by the actions of development banks have found it necessary to resort to the courts to secure their rights," remarked Carla García Zendejas, Senior Attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), in reference to the recent US Supreme Court decision in Jam v. IFC, which recognized that international organizations such as the IDB are not immune from litigation in US courts. "This decision exemplifies the perils of an accountability mechanism that lacks the independence and legitimacy to initiate and carry out a genuine investigation of a bank’s projects," added García Zendejas. "Since day one, the Hidroituango project carried out a weak impact assessment, inaccurate surveys of affected people and deficient environmental implementation and monitoring, but the IDB has continued to invest in it," sustained Carlos Lozano, Senior Attorney at the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). "The project was approved and is under construction without having previously carried out an evaluation of alternatives," he pointed out. Members of Movimiento Ríos Vivos Antioquia, who represent affected communities in the complaint, continue to receive ongoing threats and suffer intimidation, homicides, and other forms of violence. The IDB has shown its disregard for the volatile situation surrounding Hidroituango, including the continued presence of paramilitary groups in the area. The IDB has also ignored community requests to delay dam construction to exhume mass graves from the armed conflict in the area affected by the dam. Press Contacts: Isabel Zuleta, Movimiento Ríos Vivos Antioquia, +57 3217347264, [email protected] (Spanish) Carla Garcia Zendejas, Center for International Law, +1 202 374 2550, [email protected] Alexandre Andrade Sampaio, International Accountability Project, [email protected] Carlos Lozano Acosta, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense, [email protected] Note for editors: The Ituango hydroelectric plant will be the largest in Colombia, with a 49-mile (79 km) reservoir that will flood a surface of 11,120 acres (4,500 hectares). The IDB Group has financed the project through various types of investment: initially $2 million in technical cooperation for the Colombian State in 2012 and then $550 million in direct investments in 2016 to Empresas Públicas de Medellín (EPM), the company in charge of the project. Additionally, the IDB manages a $1 billion dollar loan package, with funds from multiple institutional investors, including European banks. After a construction failure at the dam construction in May 2018, more than 25,000 people had to be evacuated from the area due to flooding, landslides, and avalanches. The humanitarian crisis has worsened dramatically: people have lost their property, livelihoods, and access to health and education services, which have always been meager in the area. Many people have been displaced and those who have stayed are not properly cared for. In addition, people who are members of Movimiento Ríos Vivos are discriminated against. There is a lack of food, people suffer from diseases, and shelters are deficient. People are pressured to return to risk areas and sign documents waiving their claims. In short, communities are facing a situation of systematic human rights violations as a result of the project.  

Read more

Un camino seco fue lo que dejó el desvío del arroyo Bruno en la Guajira, Colombia

Coal or life: Walking where a stream once ran

The appointment was on a hot Sunday in July. Together with Wayuu indigenous and Afro-descendant communities displaced by coal mining, members of social and human rights organizations, employees of Cerrejón, and government officials, I walked for more than five hours over the barren land where the Bruno Stream once ran. What I saw in my path were the remains of snails that died of thirst, stuck to the mud, and the lifeless body of a tigrillo that showed us so clearly what mustn’t happen again. The Bruno is a vein of water that once irrigated the department of La Guajira, located in Colombia’s far north, a region hit years ago by extreme drought. It is a major tributary of the Ranchería River, one of the department’s most important water sources, and forms part of the underground water systems that have long given life to the region’s communities. It was painful to walk where the Bruno once flowed free, and to think—while doing so—that what is now a dry riverbed was once abundant with life. That Sunday, we also toured the area intended to be the artificial channel of the stream. In 2014, the National Environmental Licensing Authority authorized Cerrejón to divert 3.6 kilometers of Bruno’s flow to favor ongoing coal exploitation in La Guajira. Several things made on impact on me that day. One of them was that, although the rivers belong to us all and natural water sources are public, we were accompanied the entire time by employees of the company. While walking the stream, we entered the land “owned” by the coal-mining concessionaire. Communities that used to travel freely along the banks of the stream can no longer do so today. Although the Bruno is one of few streams in Colombia’s driest department and one of the scarce sources of fresh water for communities living there, its channel was clogged and diverted to facilitate mining. An engineering project has altered one of the most important streams for a thirsty region and created an artificial path through which not a single drop of water flows. “If they carry water, they’re rivers; if not, they’re roads,” a verse from Guatemalan indigenous poet Humberto Ak’abal teaches us. The new “channel” of the Bruno is not a river, but “a barren road” attesting to the deterioration of a sensitive ecosystem. The “road” does not recover or mitigate the damages from the stream’s diversion. On the contrary, it produces new ones. The world is facing a climate crisis, and coal mining is one of its primary causes. While many countries are replacing the use of coal in their energy matrices with cleaner options, Colombia has decided to dry up a river to exploit more and more coal. Walking paths of justice The day after the walk, the frustration of the absurd did not prevent me from embracing a glimmer of hope. On Monday, I joined representatives of indigenous communities and local organizations at a public hearing convened by several Congressmen to discuss what happened with the Bruno. The strength and dignity of their words, in which decades of resistance were encrypted, fed my soul. “This territory is ours, our rivers are our life and we care for life—for our children, for our present, for our future and that of the world.” As it has done many times before, La Guajira spoke to the country and the world. They told the Congressmen that it’s not possible to prioritize the use of water for mining over human consumption. They warned that the country must transition to an energy production that doesn’t cause the damages that coal mining has to the climate, human rights, and the species and ecosystems that sustain us. The stream must return to its channel, the snails must drink again from its waters, and no tigrillo should die due to the intentional destruction of its natural habitat. In a 2017 ruling, the Constitutional Court demonstrated that uncertainties exist as to the environmental and social impacts of the Bruno Stream riverbed modification project. The Court ordered the creation of an Inter-Institutional working group to resolve the complaints of the affected people. Communities will continue to demand compliance with that ruling and demonstrate that the uncertainties are, in fact, certain damages that will continue to undermine their lives. AIDA, along with our partner organizations, will continue to accompany this struggle to demonstrate the harms of coal mining and promote clean alternatives that respect both people and the environment.  

Read more

We Too Demand Peace: International Civil Society Organizations Join with Colombians Marching for Peace

Washington, D.C. Colombians march for peace in their country on July 26, we echo their call for a permanent end to the war that claimed 260,000 lives and forced 8 million people, the majority from Afro-descendant and indigenous communities, and mostly women and children, to flee their homes. We join their call for the Colombian government to protect the social leaders building peace in their communities. Hundreds have been killed since the peace accords were signed in 2016, while many more live under the constant pressure of daily threats and attacks. This tragedy must end. We vigorously support their demand that the Colombian government fully and faithfully implement the peace accords signed between the government and the FARC guerrillas—or this once-in-a-lifetime chance for peace will be lost. Finally, we call on the United States and the international community at large to back the effective implementation of the peace accords wholeheartedly. We stand in solidarity with the millions of Colombians who are struggling to build a just, complete, and lasting peace and who tomorrow say #26deJulioElGrito. Signed, 350.org Abogadas y Abogados para la Justicia y los Derechos Humanos Acción Solidaria ActionAid USA AFL-CIO ÁGORA Espacio Civil Paraguay Amazon Watch Asistencia Legal por los Derechos Humanos A.C. (ASILEGAL) Asociación Interamericana para la Defensa del Ambiente (AIDA) Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) Center for Reproductive Rights Centro de Derechos Humanos Fray Bartolomé de Las Casas, A.C. - México Centro de Derechos Humanos y Ambiente (CEDHA) Centro de Documentación en Derechos Humanos "Segundo Montes Mozo S.J." (CSMM) Chicago Religious Leadership Network on Latin America (CRLN) Christian Peacemaker Teams Ciudadanos en Apoyo a los Derechos Humanos, A.C. (CADHAC) CIVICUS - World Alliance for Citizen Participation Colombia Grassroot Support, New Jersey Colombia Human Rights Committee, Washington DC Comisión Ecuménica de Derechos Humanos Comisión Mexicana de Defensa y Promoción de los Derechos Humanos Comité de América Latina y el Caribe para la Defensa de los Derechos de las Mujeres Convergencia por los Derechos Humanos Coordinadora Nacional de Derechos Humanos Corporación Humanas Chile CSW Defensor de derechos humanos en México Equipo de Reflexión, Investigación y Comunicación de la Compañía de Jesús en Honduras (ERIC-SJ) Global Witness International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights (Race and Equality) International Labor Rights Forum International Rivers InterReligious Task Force On Central America and Colombia Latin America Working Group (LAWG) Movimiento Autónomo de Mujeres, Nicaragua Mujeres Libres COLEM, A.C. Grupo de Mujeres de San Cristóbal Las Casas, A.C. NJ Peace Council Not1More Oxfam Paz y Esperanza Presbyterian Church USA Presbyterian Peace Fellowship Red Para la Infancia y la Adolescencia de El Salvador (RIA) Redes por los Derechos de la Infancia (REDIM) Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Servicio Internacional para los Derechos Humanos (ISHR) United Church of Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) Witness for Peace Solidarity Collective  

Read more

Coral reefs

Resolution provides measures to protect corals in the Colombia Caribbean

Setting a positive precedent in Colombia and an important region of the Greater Caribbean, CORALINA has prohibited the fishing and commercialization of several species of herbivorous and omnivorous fish, a measure aimed at conserving the area’s coral reef ecosystems. San Andrés, Colombia. With the objective of conserving the coral reef and beach ecosystems of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Colombia, the region’s autonomous corporation authority emitted a resolution prohibiting the capture and commercialization of several species of herbivorous and omnivorous fish. The waters around these Caribbean islands host the greatest marine and coastal biodiversity in Colombia, with more than 2,354 marine species registered to date. “This progress towards the conservation of corals and beaches occurs after a process of more than 20 years that included environmental education, research and monitoring,” said Nacor Bolaños, coordinator of protected areas for the Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina (CORALINA). “The need to protect parrotfish and other species of herbivorous and omnivorous fish was supported by artisanal fishermen themselves and by local communities, with whom we met.” The resolution issued by the decentralized public entity protects 14 species of parrotfish, four of surgeonfish, five of butterfly fish and six species of angelfish. It completely prohibits commercial, industrial, sport, or recreational fishing of these species. It also prohibits commercial fishing using harpoons and/or similar fishing gears. It also completely restricts their commercialization, possession and storage, as well as their transfer to other areas of the country. “The resolution is of great importance because it recognizes the benefits of corals for fishing, tourism, pharmaceutical resources, and protection against the impacts of the climate crisis,” said Maria José Gonzalez-Bernat, scientific advisor to AIDA. “It also recognizes the vital role several species of fish play in keeping these ecosystems healthy.” By feeding on algae that take away light and space from corals, herbivorous fish support the survival of these fragile environments. Numerous studies have demonstrated that parrotfish contribute to the growth of corals and the creation of sand for beaches. Some omnivorous species like angelfish also help to clean algae from corals. AIDA has supported CORALINA’s initiative since its inception, providing technical, scientific and legal information; and has advocated for the inclusion in the resolution of international and regional commitments that protect these fish. The Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina concentrates 77 percent of the surface coral areas of Colombia and houses the third largest coral reef in the world. The area was declared a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve in 2000, and borders eight nations of the Greater Caribbean: Venezuela, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Jamaica, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Panama. Yet its coral coverage has deteriorated over time due to natural phenomenon and human activities, as have populations of herbivorous fish like the parrotfish. “In this sense, this regulation is an example for other countries with coral reefs along their coasts,” said Gonzalez-Bernat. “The resolution is based on scientific information and emphasizes the international legal framework that recommends the protection of corals and the fish that support their conservation.” Press contacts: Victor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 155 70522107 Claudia Marcela Delgado (Colombia), CORALINA, [email protected], +57 313 8517300  

Read more

Fracking

Colombia makes the right move by suspending fracking project

Citing a recent court order, Colombia’s environmental authority has suspended the licensing process for a fracking project in the Middle Magdalena Valley. The decision represents an advance in the movement to stop fracking’s expansion in Latin America. Bogotá.  In an advance for the struggle against fracking’s expansion in Latin America, Colombia’s National Environmental Licensing Authority has suspended the licensing process for a fracking project in the Middle Magdalena Valley. With this decision, Colombia joins a growing list of communities, municipalities, and regions across Latin America and the world who have made progress to stop the expansion of fracking in their territories, many through the enactment of bans or moratoriums. "The Environmental Authority’s decision is a positive example for nations across Latin America and the world,” said Astrid Puentes Riaño, co-executive director of AIDA. “It’s the result of an admirable civic movement and of the use of the precautionary principle as a tool to protect human health and ecosystems, and to confront the climate crisis.” The decision to halt the process for Ecopetrol’s "APE Guane A” project is founded on the State Council’s suspension, in November 2018, of the regulatory framework for fracking in the country, citing the precautionary principle. The Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) supports the Council’s decision and considers the Environmental Authority’s enactment of that order to be a step in the right direction. “In the absence of existing regulations on fracking, in Colombia we have a judicial moratorium. This implies that no project may be implemented that seeks to exploit unconventional oil and gas deposits using this technique,” explained Juana Hofman, AIDA attorney. “All activities aimed at the development of fracking activities must be suspended.” In its decision, the Environmental Authority states: “… The temporary suspension of the aforementioned provisions translates to those provisions being temporarily outside the legal system, which consequently means that this Environmental Authority does not have technical regulations that allow it to verify the management measures that should be included in the Environmental Impact Study, to be analyzed within the environmental assessment procedure, and thus could not determine whether or not the granting of the environmental license required for new projects in unconventional deposits was viable.” The suspended project involves the use of hydraulic fracturing in a boggy complex located between the municipalities of Barrancabermeja and Puerto Wilches in Northeast Colombia. Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is an extractive technique that proves incredibly damaging for water, air quality, human health and the climate. It emits methane, a pollutant strongly associated with global warming. Due to its negative impacts on the environment and public health, fracking has been prohibited by judicial or legislative means in many municipalities, regions and nations around the world, such as Scotland, the state of New York (USA), and the province of Quebec (Canada). Global efforts to stop fracking’s expansion have largely been citizen-led and driven by concerns for the risks fracking poses to the climate, environment and public health. The Alliance for a Colombia Free from Fracking has been steadfast in their commitment to stopping fracking’s advance in Colombia, and should be congratulated for this important advance. AIDA urges the Colombian government to continue down the path of prevention and to comply with its international environmental obligations to confront the climate crisis, and to protect its land, water and communities. We urge the government to deny authorizations for fracking operations in Colombia. “Fracking is a procedure that furthers us from our climate goals, and from the energy path that all nations should be targeting” Puentes Riaño said. “Decisions like these are an invitation to seek out renewable energies that are better for our planet and our communities, not only in Colombia but around the world.” Press Contacts: Carlos Lozano Acosta (Colombia), AIDA, [email protected], +57 (300) 564 0282 Juana Hofman (Colombia), AIDA, [email protected], +57 (310) 884 6715  

Read more

Organizations ask the UN to intervene in the protection of the Santurbán páramo, at risk from mining

They request that the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights to Drinking Water and Sanitation prepare a report on the case, visit the site, and support the Colombian government in taking the necessary actions to protect the ecosystem, an important source of water for millions of people, from the dangers of mining. Bucaramanga, Colombia. Civil society organizations in Colombia sent a communique to Léo Heller, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Rights to Drinking Water and Sanitation. In it, they warn that their rights are at serious risk in the face of proposed mining projects in or near the Santurbán páramo, a water source for more than 10 municipalities and 3 large cities. They request that the Rapporteur prepare a report on the case, visit the site, and support the Colombian government in protecting that ecosystem. Actions and omissions by the Colombian government have allowed the development of mining projects that threaten the availability and quality of water provided by the páramo. The government’s protection of the páramo did not include the entire ecosystem, leaving a part of it unprotected, and did not allow for public participation. As a result, the Constitutional Court ordered the government to redo the process of delimiting the páramo. The submission details: the process of defining the boundaries of the Santurbán páramo; the importance of that process for the environment and the enjoyment of the right to water in Colombia; the legal framework for the protection of páramos in the country; and the development of projects in or near the site. It also outlines associated environmental impacts or threats, including a decrease in the quality and quantity of water, contamination due to the use of explosives, a decrease in air quality, an increase in noise level, and the permanent loss of habitats. Likewise, the submission details the impacts of Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) claims on governmental decisions to protect their water sources. Several mining companies have tried for more than 15 years to extract gold from the Santurbán páramo. Some of those are Canadian companies, who are currently using this arbitration process to demand hundreds of millions of dollars from the Colombian government in compensation for their “lost” profits. The organizations ask that the Rapporteur monitor the situation in the Santurbán páramo and urge the Colombian government to comply with its international obligations in relation to the right to water. Find more information on the case here.  press contacts: Alix Mancilla, Comité para la Defensa del Agua y el Páramo de Santurbán, [email protected], +57 311 2439273 (Spanish only) Carlos Lozano, AIDA, [email protected], +57 300 56 40 282 Carla García, CIEL, [email protected], +1 202 374 2550 Kirsten Francescone, MiningWatch Canada, [email protected], +14373459881 Kristen Genovese, SOMO, [email protected], +31 65 277 3272  

Read more

World Bank Arbitration Tribunal Refuses to Listen to Those Affected by Mining in Santurbán, Colombia

The World Bank’s International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) has declined to accept an Amicus Curiae that was to be presented by the Committee for the Defense of Water and the Páramo of Santurbán and allied international organizations. Bucaramanga, Bogotá, Washington, Ottawa, Amsterdam. National and international civil society organizations rebuffed the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes’ (ICSID) refusal to accept an Amicus Curiae within the process of the ongoing international arbitration brought forth by Canadian mining company Eco Oro Minerals Corp. against Colombia. The arbitration centre is hearing the ongoing international arbitration put forth by the Canadian company in question against the Andean nation. The company is attempting to pursue its Angostura gold mining project in the Santurbán páramo, located in the northeast of the country. The arbitration questions the decisions taken by the Colombian State to protect its páramos, high mountain wetlands that are a natural source of water for 70% of its inhabitants. The arbitration is being heard at the ICSID, an organization dependent on the World Bank that is in charge of the resolution of disputes between investors and States. Colombia could be condemned to pay $746 million US dollars, an unprecedented sanction for the country. “At a time when Latin American countries are embracing the principles of environmental democracy with the adoption of the Escazú Agreement, ICSID is going in the opposite direction. It is regrettable that in the midst of the regional movement for transparency and participation, ICSID has opted to constrict itself even more. In doing so, it is only generating more anger and distrust, not only in the face of this mechanism, but also in the face of the whole system of Investor-State Arbitration worldwide,” stated Carla García Zendejas, Senior Attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL). “The communities affected by mining in Santurbán have to be heard and can provide crucial elements for the case,” said Carlos Lozano, Senior AIDA Attorney. The organizations consider that the Committee for the Defense of Water and the Páramo of Santurbán has a significant interest in the outcome of the process and that they could have provided expertise to the arbitration tribunal, which would have been helpful for a better decision in the case. In the same way, they urge ICSID to expand citizen participation and make its decision-making processes more transparent. This is transcendental for the public interest of the countries whose governments are subject to its jurisdiction. Find more information on the case here.  PRESS CONTACTS: Alix Mancilla, Comité para la Defensa del Agua y el Páramo de Santurbán, [email protected], +57 311 2439273 Carla García Zendejas, CIEL, [email protected], +1 202 374 2550 Carlos Lozano Acosta, AIDA, [email protected], +57 300 56 40 282 Kirsten Francescone, MiningWatch Canada, [email protected], +14373459881 Kristen Genovese, SOMO, [email protected], +31 65 277 3272, Manuel Perez Rocha, Institute for Policy Studies, [email protected] +1 240 838 6623  

Read more