Latin America

Salar de Pastos Grandes en Potosí, Bolivia
Climate Change, Human Rights, Indigenous Rights

Human rights and the rights of nature in the governance of minerals for the energy transition

A reading of Advisory Opinion 32 of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights by the Andean Wetlands Alliance The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) outlined in its Advisory Opinion No. 32 (OC-32), released on July 3, 2025, how human rights must be upheld in the face of the climate emergency. The Court also recognized the rights of nature and the responsibilities of States and companies regarding climate change. This advisory opinion followed more than 150 oral interventions and over 260 written submissions—including those from organizations that are part of the Andean Wetlands Alliance.This pronouncement sets a course for protecting valuable ecosystems and the rights of people in Latin America, a region deeply affected due to its significant reserves of minerals increasingly in demand for the global energy transition.Human rights and "critical" mineralsThe IACHR, a central institution in setting human rights standards for Latin America and the Caribbean, provided through OC-32 a set of tools for moving toward policies grounded in equity and justice. These tools align with the principles put forward by the UN Secretary-General in relation to the minerals value chain for the energy transition.Minerals such as lithium and copper are at the heart of current energy transformation policies due to their value for battery manufacturing. This value chain begins in territories such as the high Andean wetlands of Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile, with the exploration and extraction of mineral deposits. It continues with their processing and refining in specialized facilities for the production of cells, which are later integrated into batteries that power a range of devices—mainly individual electric vehicles.The Court placed special emphasis on the protection of human rights during the extraction of so-called “rare or critical” minerals for the energy transition, which make up the first links in this value chain. This directly reflects Principle 1 of the 2024 Report of the UN Secretary-General’s Panel on Critical Minerals for the Energy Transition and offers a key legal instrument for protecting human rights in Latin American countries. It also outlines essential elements for respecting the integrity of ecosystems (Principle 2) from the most biodiverse region on the planet, as well as advancing justice and equity (Principle 3), transparency and accountability (Principle 6), and strengthened multilateral cooperation (Principle 7).Rights of Nature in a Megadiverse RegionAmong its conclusions, the Court recognizes the rights of nature, referring to the need to preserve its essential ecological processes. This contributes to consolidating a development model that respects planetary boundaries and ensures the availability of vital resources for present and future generations.This recognition is especially critical in Latin America, one of the most biodiverse regions in the world. It holds 50% of the planet’s biodiversity in ecosystems such as wetlands and tropical forests—especially the Amazon. It is home to 12 of the 14 terrestrial biomes and is a key epicenter for nature’s contributions to people.These issues are particularly relevant for a region whose historical role as a provider of natural resources has helped build the global economy, yet at great cost—causing severe ecosystem damage and violating community rights. The protection of nature’s rights provides a central tool for managing the mineral wealth essential for the energy transition, especially given that the region holds more than 50% of the world’s lithium reserves and 40% of its copper reserves.Latin America is also one of the most culturally diverse regions: approximately 54.8 million Indigenous peoples live across its territories, representing 8.5% of the total population—the highest global proportion relative to total population—and occupying over 20% of the land.OC-32 particularly highlights the role of communities in preserving ecosystems and a healthy climate, free from human interference. It acknowledges the importance of local, traditional, and Indigenous knowledge for informed decision-making and cultural preservation. This approach empowers local and Indigenous communities—long-standing guardians of ecosystems who possess deep traditional knowledge—yet who are often excluded from decision-making processes and denied their rights to free, prior, and informed consultation and participation.The right to a healthy climate: Promising newsOC-32 recognizes the right to a healthy climate as part of the broader right to a healthy environment, free from human interference. States are thus required to prevent any irreversible harm to the planet’s ecological balance and exercise heightened due diligence—taking into account the degree of potential harm, the best available science, and the specific vulnerabilities of at-risk groups, without creating or exacerbating such vulnerabilities.In their mitigation strategies, States must prioritize both people and ecosystems—particularly those that play a vital role in regulating the Earth’s climate systems and natural cycles.In this regard, the Court’s acknowledgment of the Andean wetlands of Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile is especially significant. These ecosystems contribute to climate adaptation through water regulation. They also have the capacity to mitigate climate change by acting as carbon sinks: studies have recorded significant levels of carbon dioxide absorption through their vegetation and extremophile microorganisms.Ironically, these very wetlands are now under threat from the expansion of mining for the energy transition.Corporate Obligations on Human RightsOC-32 makes it clear that, in addition to States, companies also bear obligations concerning the climate emergency and its impact on human rights. The Court calls on States to regulate and oversee corporate due diligence across the entire value chain, in accordance with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs). These obligations include identifying, preventing, mitigating, and accounting for business-related impacts on the environment, climate, and human rights. These are non-transferable obligations—they cannot be outsourced to third parties, such as certification bodies. The advisory opinion also calls for the avoidance of greenwashing and undue influence from third-party actors in corporate decision-making.A perspective on Advisory Opinion 32 from the Andean wetlandsSpanning more than 200 pages, OC-32 provides tools to ensure the protection of human rights throughout the mineral value chain, as well as the integrity of ecosystems, from a Latin American perspective. It also promotes implementation of the UN Secretary-General’s Panel principles on critical minerals for the energy transition.No less important, it upholds the interdependence of democracy, the rule of law, and human rights protection within the Inter-American system, and strengthens the role of access rights and the protection of human rights, environmental, and climate defenders, in accordance with the Escazú Agreement. This recognition is especially crucial for the most dangerous region in the world for defending nature.In a context of climate denialism, fueled by political leaderships that reject humanity’s role in the climate crisis, OC-32 stands as a vital roadmap to urge States to meet their climate commitments through a human rights-based approach.From the Andean Wetlands Alliance, we view this opinion with hope—as a key tool to help ensure the rights of those who have inhabited these wetlands for generations and to protect these vital ecosystems. Reactions from Members of the Andean Wetlands Alliance to Advisory Opinion No. 32 of the Inter-American CourtPía Marchegiani, Deputy Executive Director, Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (Argentina):"In a context where discussions on critical minerals are increasingly shaped by security and military interests, and unilateral or bilateral agendas from the Global North seek to control mineral supply chains, the Inter-American Court has taken a clear, strategic step in defining how the balance must be struck: placing human rights and nature at the center. Only in this way can we move forward toward justice and equity, as proposed by the UN Secretary-General’s Panel on Critical Minerals."Ricardo Frez, Director, ONG Defensa Ambiental (Chile):"This unprecedented recognition of nature as a rights-bearing subject marks a shift toward ecocentric approaches in international human rights law. It is especially significant amid the growing—and often irreversible—impacts of mining for critical minerals like lithium and copper in the Global South. The Court affirms the autonomous protection of nature, not only as a means to secure human rights, but as an end in itself. It reinforces States’ obligations to prevent irreparable climate and environmental damage. In a context where the energy transition risks replicating extractivist models, this advisory opinion provides crucial normative tools to defend territories and life."Vivian Lagrava Flores, Empodérate, Human Rights Collective (Bolivia):"Although communities may not be familiar with technical terms like climate, energy transition, and so on, they have welcomed with hope the fact that Advisory Opinion 32/25 places greater obligations on States. Laws, constitutions, and human rights standards are being ignored, while all kinds of impacts are overlooked. Wetlands—especially freshwater bofedales—are nature’s miracle that sustains our way of life and are essential for mitigating climate change. Yet they are being destroyed by extractivism. The Bolivian State must grasp the magnitude of its obligations."Ezio Costa Cordella, FIMA NGO (Chile):"The concept of a just transition appears in several parts of the advisory opinion issued by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. There is a specific and explicit mention of this type of transition, and the Court refers to the obligation of States to uphold this principle when developing climate policies and strategies. This means they must avoid deepening situations of multidimensional poverty and instead assess how a transition will affect a given territory and the people who live there—including, of course, the workers in industries undergoing change. In this sense, it is important to understand that the ecological transition is not limited to policy measures; it also concerns how a range of social systems, including those of production and consumption, will adapt to the new climate and environmental reality. In this process—from the present state of affairs to what will emerge as a result of this new environmental condition—we must ensure that no further violations of human rights occur. On the contrary, we should create conditions that lead to better protection and fairer distribution of those rights."Oscar Campanini, CEDIB (Bolivia):"The advisory opinion of the Inter-American Court is an enormously important reinforcement of civil society’s defense of the environment, water, Indigenous peoples’ territories, and life itself—a defense that benefits not just specific groups but is, in fact, the only way to ensure our survival as a species. In the case of the high Andean plateau, this opinion supports the struggles of communities defending water and wetlands against growing pressure from critical mineral extraction projects such as lithium."Verónica Gostissa, Asamblea PUCARÁ (Argentina):"We are at a turning point for climate justice and human rights. The Inter-American Court now recognizes the autonomous right to a healthy climate. In regions like northwest Argentina—where ecosystems of high ecological value, such as high Andean wetlands, coexist with intense extractive pressures from lithium mining—this decision directly challenges the current mining and energy model. This legal milestone reinforces a truth that communities and peoples have long upheld: if it dries up rivers, it’s not an energy transition. And there can be no true transition without environmental justice."Paulina González Quiroga, Fundación Tantí (Chile):"We deeply value the statement issued by the Inter-American Court at a strategic moment for our bodies and territories, especially for those of us living in the Global South—in the highland and coastal desert regions of Chile. This is a mining and productive zone where both continental and marine waters are being affected by the entire value chain operating in the area. In our territory, marked by a history of environmental sacrifice, there is no real transition. On the contrary, the same communities and ecosystems are now facing an intensification of extractivist practices—now labeled ‘green.’ We are witnessing an unimaginable increase in the impacts on our high Andean and marine ecosystems, and on the ways of life that exist here. In this context, the Court’s opinion will be crucial in strengthening the legal defense of our territories in various processes of Indigenous consultation and environmental justice that are already underway and will undoubtedly continue within the framework of these policies." Yeny Rodríguez, senior attorney and Line Coordinator, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA)"The Advisory Opinion No. 32 of the Inter-American Court recognizes the high degree of vulnerability and risk in which strategic ecosystems in Latin America are found for the water cycle and climate, such as the Andean salt flats, and sends a very clear message to the governments of the region and to the companies operating in our territories: in application of enhanced due diligence, they must avoid mining activities that could generate irreversible damage to ecosystems and aggravate the situation of vulnerability of indigenous peoples or communities at risk." 

Read more
Corte Interamericana hace pública su Opinión Consultiva 32 sobre emergencia climática
Climate Change, Human Rights

Climate Justice in the Courtroom: The impact of the Advisory Opinion from the Inter-American Court

In a landmark ruling published on July 3, 2025, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued its Advisory Opinion No. 32, taking a historic step toward strengthening global climate accountability. For the first time, a regional human rights tribunal has clearly articulated the legal obligations of States in response to the climate crisis—establishing legal standards that governments across the Americas must meet to protect human rights and the environment.The Court recognized the existence of an autonomous human right to a healthy climate, derived from the right to a healthy environment. The opinion affirms that States have binding legal obligations to address the climate emergency as a human rights issue, in line with domestic legislation and international treaties.This decision is expected to catalyze a new wave of strategic climate litigation, strengthen previous decisions, such as that of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, and serve as a key reference for the forthcoming advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice.In this webinar, we analyzed the legal significance and practical implications of Advisory Opinion No. 32. Together with regional experts and movement leaders, we explored how the Court’s decision can guide climate action, strengthen legal tools to protect people and nature, and help deliver justice to affected communities across Latin America and beyond. PanelAstrid Puentes, UN Special Rapporteur for the human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment.Javier Palummo, Rapporteur on Economic, Social, Cultural, and Environmental Rights, IACHR.Catalina Fernández, Head of the Department of Multilateral Systems for the Protection of Human Rights and Bilateral Affairs, Chile's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.Nora Cabrera Velasco, director of Nuestro Futuro.Fábio Ishisaki, public policy advisor to the Observatório do Clima.Moderator: Marcella Ribeiro, AIDA. Recording   

Read more
Mujer pastorea camélidos en una zona de los Andes de Perú
Climate Change, Human Rights

The Inter-American Court's Opinion: 7 reasons it matters for climate justice

On July 3, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights released its long-awaited Advisory Opinion No. 32 (OC-32), clarifying the scope of States' obligations in the face of the climate crisis – including, among other responsibilities, the duty to guarantee the right to a healthy climate.This marks the first time that a regional human rights court has made a broad and comprehensive statement on the issue of climate change.The opinion was issued in response to a request submitted by the governments of Chile and Colombia in January 2023. It is also the outcome of an unprecedented participatory process within the Inter-American Human Rights System, in which dozens of States, civil society organizations, Indigenous peoples, activists, and academics engaged through oral statements in public hearings and a record number of written submissions.Below are seven reasons why this landmark decision — written in and for Latin America — represents a turning point for climate justice in the region and beyond. 1. Clarifying States’ legal obligations in the face of the climate emergencyIn its decision, the Court affirms that the world is currently experiencing a climate emergency—a crisis driven by human activities, unequally generated by different States, and one that progressively and severely impacts people, especially those in vulnerable situations.In response, the Court underscores that States have binding legal obligations—not merely voluntary commitments—to confront this emergency with “urgent and effective actions, articulate, with a human rights perspective, and under the prism of resilience.” This means that, amid the climate emergency, States are required to respect and guarantee human rights. 2. Recognizing the human right to a healthy climateFor the first time, the Court explicitly recognizes the autonomous human right to a healthy climate, derived from the broader right to a healthy environment. This recognition establishes that States must protect the ability of both present and future generations to live in a climate system free from dangerous human-caused interference.Protecting this right—which underpins the enjoyment of other human rights—also requires honoring the principle of intergenerational equity. In practice, this means that States must act today to ensure that future generations inherit conditions of environmental stability that allow for equal opportunities for well-being and development. 3. Strengthened protection for people in vituations of VulnerabilityAdvisory Opinion No. 32 establishes that States must ensure that individuals and groups in situations of particular vulnerability — including women, children, Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendant communities, peasant and fishing communities, older adults, persons with disabilities, LGBTIQ+ individuals, and human rights defenders, among others — are able to exercise their rights on equal terms in the face of climate impacts.The Court also recognizes that certain territories in the Americas — such as the Amazon, the Insular Territories, and Caribbean States — are especially vulnerable to the effects of climate change. 4. Emissions control and regulation of business activitiesAccording to the opinion, States are required to set clear greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation targets and maintain an up-to-date mitigation strategy grounded in human rights. They must also tighten and rigorously regulate both public and private activities that produce GHG emissions.In line with these mitigation strategies, States must determine which projects or activities require an environmental impact assessment that explicitly evaluates potential climate impacts. 5. Protecting human rights within the energy transitionAdvisory Opinion No. 32 underscores that States must safeguard human rights from potential violations linked to the extraction of minerals and other resources necessary for the energy transition.The Court also affirms that States are obligated to ensure the fair distribution of both the burdens of climate action and the impacts of climate change. This includes avoiding disproportionate burdens on certain populations — for example, in how the costs of the energy transition are allocated. 6. Recognition of traditional knowledge in climate actionThe opinion recognizes local, traditional, and Indigenous knowledge as protected under Inter-American human rights treaties and as a key part of the best available science. This recognition opens new avenues for demanding the inclusion of such knowledge in climate solutions.The Court thus reaffirms that the right to science also encompasses the intellectual and practical contributions that Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendant communities, and other local groups have sustained and safeguarded over generations. 7. Advancing the global movement for climate justiceThis decision reinforces and builds upon earlier rulings, such as the one issued in May 2024 by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, which clarified States’ obligations to protect the marine environment from the effects of the climate crisis. It also contributes to ongoing global legal efforts — including the forthcoming Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice, which will further define States’ responsibilities in the face of the global climate emergency.Together, these decisions are strengthening the global movement for climate justice, as well as supporting citizen demand for stronger government action. 

Read more
Audiencia sobre crisis climática ante la Corte Interamericana en Manaos, Brasil
Climate Change, Human Rights

Landmark Inter-American Court Decision Requires States to Protect Human Rights in the Face of the Climate Crisis

In a groundbreaking advisory opinion issued today, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights clarifies the obligations of States to effectively protect people and communities from the harmful impacts of the climate crisis. The decision sets a powerful precedent for climate justice and offers critical guidance to national and international courts worldwide.San José, Costa Rica. In its Advisory Opinion No. 32, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has taken a historic step toward strengthening global climate accountability. The Court sets a powerful precedent by establishing legal standards that States across the continent must meet to protect human rights in the face of the climate crisis. This landmark ruling is expected to drive a new wave of strategic climate litigation, enabling affected people and communities to access justice.“The Court’s decision marks a watershed moment for climate justice in Latin America and around the world, as it is the first time a regional human rights tribunal has clearly spelled out States’ legal obligations in response to the climate crisis,” said Gladys Martínez, Executive Director of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). “We welcome this significant step forward — one that will not only help protect communities and individuals, but also guide national and international courts, including the International Court of Justice, which is now developing its own opinion on this critical issue.”The Court recognized, for the first time, the existence of an autonomous human right to a healthy climate, derived from the right to a healthy environment. In light of Advisory Opinion No. 32, States across the region now have legal obligations to address the climate crisis as a human rights issue, in accordance with their domestic laws and applicable treaties and agreements, including:Guaranteeing a climate system free from dangerous anthropogenic interference, as a precondition for the exercise of other human rights.Respecting the principle of intergenerational equity, by ensuring that current generations leave behind conditions of environmental stability that allow future generations similar opportunities for development.Regulating, supervising, and overseeing, as well as requiring and approving environmental impact assessments, to fulfill their duty to mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.Defining a mitigation goal; developing and maintaining an up-to-date mitigation strategy grounded in human rights; and strictly monitoring and supervising public and private GHG-emitting activities.Ensuring an equitable distribution of the burdens of climate action and climate impacts, avoiding the imposition of disproportionate burdens—this includes the fair allocation of the costs associated with the energy transition. In addition, the Court recognized in its opinion that local, traditional, and Indigenous knowledge is protected under Inter-American treaties and constitutes an integral part of the concept of the best available science—opening a new path for the enforceability and inclusion of these knowledge systems in responses to the climate emergency.“This decision by the Inter-American Court ushers in a new era for climate negotiations and litigation by providing individuals, communities, and civil society organizations with a clearer and more robust legal framework,” said Liliana Ávila, Director of the Human Rights and Environment Program at AIDA. “It empowers people to hold States accountable – both in climate negotiations and courtrooms – and to push for the structural changes needed to confront the climate crisis. This includes meeting their obligations on mitigation, adaptation, and addressing loss and damage, all while upholding fundamental human rights.”The Court’s decision responds to a request submitted in January 2023 by the governments of Colombia and Chile. In their petition, the two States emphasized that their populations — along with those of other countries across the Americas — are already experiencing severe impacts from the global climate crisis, including droughts, floods, wildfires, and other extreme events. They called on the Court to clarify how the American Convention on Human Rights should be interpreted in the context of the climate emergency, its root causes, and its wide-ranging consequences.“This decision serves as a binding interpretive tool for States in the region, opening new legal pathways to hold governments accountable for protecting human rights,” said Marcella Ribeiro, Senior Attorney at AIDA. “States must now align their domestic policies to meet the legal standards set by the Court — including, among other things, properly regulating corporate activity in the context of the climate crisis and ensuring a stable climate for future generations.”From the outset of the process, AIDA played a proactive role. The organization supported various communities across the region in ensuring their voices were heard by the Inter-American Court, submitting legal briefs that highlighted the socio-environmental impacts of the climate emergency on Indigenous peoples, women, children, people of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, and on particularly fragile ecosystems such as coral reefs. AIDA also facilitated the participation of community representatives in the public hearings held as part of the process, which took place in Barbados and Brazil in April and May 2024, respectively.AIDA additionally submitted its own legal brief to the Court, arguing that the right to a “stable and safe climate” should be recognized as part of the universal right to a healthy environment – underscoring States’ obligations to prevent and mitigate the harmful effects of the climate emergency on their populations.The process saw the submission of more than 200 written observations — an unprecedented number for an Advisory Opinion of the Inter-American Court — reflecting the region’s strong engagement with the issue. Advisory Opinions play a vital role in shaping human rights law by clarifying how existing rights should be interpreted, thereby guiding States in how to uphold and enforce them within their territories or jurisdictions.Advisory Opinion No. 32 builds upon and reinforces earlier rulings, including the 2024 advisory opinion from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, which clarified States’ obligations to protect the marine environment from the climate crisis. It also complements the forthcoming opinion from the International Court of Justice – the UN’s highest judicial body – which will define States’ responsibilities in the face of the global climate emergency.In a global context that demands ever-stronger climate action, the Inter-American Court’s decision reaffirms that governments must act based on binding legal obligations — not merely voluntary commitments. This legal milestone provides people and communities across the region a powerful foundation from which to demand real action and the full protection of their rights in a safe, just, and sustainable climate. Press contact:Víctor Quintanilla, [email protected], +52 5570522107 

Read more
participación en audiencia pública de la Corte IDH
Human Rights

Media Advisory: Inter-American Court Decision on Climate and Human Rights Approaching

Expected Release: Early July 2025The Inter-American Court of Human Rights is expected to release a historic Advisory Opinion in early July, clarifying how states must uphold human rights in the context of the climate crisis.This legal milestone follows public hearings where frontline communities, Indigenous leaders, and civil society organizations shared powerful testimony on the real-world impacts of environmental degradation and government inaction. The Court’s decision will have far-reaching implications for climate policy, state accountability, and the protection of environmental defenders across the Americas.From the beginning of the process, AIDA assumed a proactive role, promoting the involvement of communities affected by the climate crisis in Latin America. We supported a diverse array of amicus briefs and community testimonies before the Court in public hearings and presented our own amicus brief arguing that the right to a “stable and safe climate” should be recognized as part of the universal right to a healthy environment.Spokespeople Available for Media Interviews:Legal Experts & Organizational LeadersMarcella RibeiroSenior Attorney, AIDALanguages: Portuguese (native), Spanish, English Expertise: Community participation, just transition, climate reparationsBased in: Brazil Available for: Interviews and background briefingsLiliana ÁvilaProgram Director, AIDA Languages: Spanish (native), EnglishExpertise: Human rights law, climate litigation, regional legal mechanismsBased in: ColombiaAvailable for: Interviews and background briefingsFrontline Community VoicesWe can coordinate interviews with several key members of frontline communities who testified directly before the Court during the public hearings.These spokepeople bring a vital human and territorial perspective to the legal decision and are available for media conversations in Spanish and local language, with interpretation support as needed. Background Materials:AIDA's amicus brief on the right to a safe and stable climate.Civil society contributions from around Latin America, on the Climate Litigation Platform for Latin America & the Caribbean.Frontline community interviews from the Manaus public hearing.The Manaus Declaration signed by nearly 400 people and organizations from across the continent.AIDA's background ABC on the Advisory Opinion process. Media Contacts:Victor QuintanillaMedia Coordinator, AIDA 📧 [email protected]📱 +52 55 7052 2107Lorena ZáratePositioning Coordinator, AIDA 📧 [email protected]📱 +52 55 7052 2107  

Read more
Hammerhead sharks of Galapagos
Oceans

International Ocean Conference ends with High Seas Treaty on verge of entry into force

Nice, France. The 3rd UN Ocean Conference is ending today with a historic step towards ensuring greater High Seas protection. With 19 additional countries depositing their ratifications, the total number of that count toward the High Seas Treaty’s entry into force has now reached 50. Only 10 more are needed to cross the critical 60-country threshold that would trigger the Treaty’s coming into effect.Several countries have already indicated their intent to deposit their ratification instruments at the UN very soon. There is no obligation for them to wait for the UNGA meeting in September, which could mean the Treaty’s entry into force could be activated in the coming weeks."The journey towards a high seas treaty has been nearly as long as the great migrations of whales, sharks and turtles but the wave of new ratifications at the UN Ocean Conference shows we are in the final straight," said Matthew Collis, Senior Director of Policy at the International Fund for Animal Welfare.In addition to the boost in ratifications, the number of countries signing the Treaty also surged. An extra 20 countries added their signatures during the week, bringing the total number to 136. This is an encouraging sign, as widespread ratification will be crucial to ensuring the Treaty’s full effectiveness.Rebecca Hubbard, Director of the High Seas Alliance, emphasized the urgency to maintain momentum: "We must keep our foot on the #RaceForRatification accelerator. The Treaty’s power lies in the number of countries that join, so while we celebrate this incredible progress, we urge all remaining nations to ratify without delay and help drive this Treaty past the first 60 to make it a truly global force for ocean protection."Around 60 heads of state and government attended the meeting reflecting a significant high level attention for the plight of the ocean. The momentum on High Seas Treaty ratification showed what is possible when the world comes together with urgency and purpose.“This is a landmark moment to safeguard the ocean as our greater common good, an opportunity to achieve equity and justice for all nations, and to empower regions, such as Latin America, in defining actions that can shape a fair and sustainable future for all,” said María José González-Bernat, Co-Director of Ecosystems Program of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA).Attention is now also turning to how the Treaty will be implemented once it enters into force. Several major announcements were made earlier in the week including the re-launch of the High Ambition Coalition for BBNJ and the €10 million that has been made available through the EU’s €40 million Global Ocean Programme to provide technical assistance to developing countries for both ratification and implementation. Private philanthropy also stepped up with the Minderoo Foundation pledging an additional USD6.5 million to support High Seas protection, and funding was confirmed to support a secretariat for the First Movers initiative, which will help advance early proposals for High Seas marine protected areas.Focus is intensifying on building strong bodies and processes under the Treaty to ensure it functions effectively as well as identifying critical High Seas sites for protection once the Treaty is operational through an ongoing Preparatory Commission process at the UN. Efforts to build the case for High Seas MPA proposals submissions under the Treaty were also showcased at the Conference, profiling a number of areas including the Salas y Gomez and Nazca Ridges, the Lord Howe Rise and South Tasman Sea, the West Indian Ocean Sub-Antarctic  and the Thermal Dome in the Eastern Pacific.“While the Race to Ratification will soon come to an end, the hard work to fully implement the treaty is just about to begin. Protecting and sustainably managing the High Seas – 50% of the planet – cannot come soon enough. The inclusion of Indigenous and local knowledge systems in the BBNJ Treaty sets new ocean governance foundations for how and for whom this treaty is implemented,” said Ernesto Fernández Monge, International Oceans Director at Oceans North.Notes to editorAs of Friday 13 June at 1400CET,19 additional instruments of ratification were deposited by countries at the UN during the conference and 20 more countries signed the Treaty, signaling their intent to ratify.Additional countries that ratified during UNOC: Albania, Bahamas, Belgium, Croatia, Côte d’Ivoire, Denmark, Fiji, Malta, Mauritania, Vanuatu, Greece, Guinea-Bissau, Indonesia, Jamaica, Jordan, Liberia, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu,  VietnamThe European Union has also deposited its instrument of ratification on 28 May 2025. However, as a regional economic integration organization, its ratification does not count toward the total, only ratifications by its individual member states.Additional countries that signed during UNOC: Andorra, Armenia, Burundi, Cambodia, Equatorial Guinea, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Jordan, Lebanon, Lesotho, Montenegro, Niue, North Macedonia, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Senegal Serbia, South Africa, Saint Kitts and Nevis, YemenThe High Seas Treaty is formally titled the Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement).The High Seas Alliance (HSA) sometimes uses the term “High Seas Treaty“ as a short-hand for the BBNJ Agreement. HSA acknowledges that the scope of the BBNJ Agreement encompasses all Areas beyond national jurisdiction, including the seafloor and water column. This choice of wording is intended to ease understanding for broad audiences and does not convey a prioritization among the components or principles of the BBNJ Agreement.The official status of signatures and ratifications can be found on the UN website and the High Seas Alliance’s ratification tracker. Note: The number shown on the High Seas Alliance tracker reflects only the ratifications that count toward entry into force and does not include the EU’s ratification and therefore differs from the UN’s total count.The Treaty enters into force 120 days after the 60th instrument of ratification has been deposited at the UN.For more information on the BBNJ High Ambition Coalition.For more information on the EU’s Global Ocean Programme.A series of Preparatory Commission (PrepCom) sessions are happening at the UN to agree on the different institutions and processes that will sit under the Treaty. The first of these sessions happened in April 2025, the second one will be from 18-29 August 2025, and a third one is likely to take place in early 2026. The way these institutions are structured and how they function will shape the Treaty’s long-term effectiveness and determine how quickly global ambition can be translated into tangible results for ocean protection, including the establishment of High Seas marine protected areas.Members quotes-RISE UP: "The wave of High Seas Treaty ratifications at UNOC 3 marks a powerful step toward a thriving ocean future, bringing us closer to protecting our shared ocean heritage. Implementation must be driven not only by science and policy, but also by the leadership and wisdom of Indigenous Peoples and traditional knowledge holders. This is ocean justice in action." – Flora McMorrin, Director, RISE UP.-The Ocean Race: "We at The Ocean Race are thrilled to become a Friend of the High Seas Alliance, recognizing the vital alignment in our joint race for the Ocean. We look forward to collaborating to help the implementation of the High Seas Treaty, working towards the 30x30 target and amplifying critical campaigns for ocean health.” - Richard Brisius, Race Chairman, The Ocean Race.-Accountability.Fish: "A great watershed in the history of sustainable ocean governance. With sufficient support for getting the BBNJ implemented on short notice, Nice has proved a boost for the international commitment with saving biodiversity on the High Seas." -  Steven Adolf, Senior Advisor for Accountability.Fish.-AIDA: "The entry into force and the implementation of the BBNJ Agreement is a landmark moment to safeguard the ocean as our greater common good, an opportunity to achieve equity and justice for all nations, and to empower regions, such as Latin America, in defining actions that can shape a fair and sustainable future for all." - María José González-Bernat, Co-Director of Ecosystems Program of AIDA. -Birdlife International: "As a member of the High Seas Alliance, BirdLife International stands ready to provide the science, tools and global-to-local action to build a strong High Seas treaty. Here at UNOC, we now commit to identify the most important areas across 100% of ocean flyways until 2030. This is a key building block for the High Seas treaty to be successful. We call on governments to unite in saving our ocean and to send a strong signal from Nice to the world." - Martin Harper, CEO of BirdLife International.-Global Choices: "Global Choices congratulates the High Seas Alliance on driving increasing ratifications of  the BBNJ and we add our voice to the call for urgent full and meaningful implementation of the Agreement. For our work on collaborating to protect the Central Arctic Ocean, an Area Beyond National Jurisdiction, the enhanced Environmental Impact Assessments  in the BBNJ agreement will be of particular benefit to enhancing precaution of harm to this most fragile and unique biome." -  Inge Relph - Executive Director and Co-Founder, Global Choices.-OceanCare: "Over the past week, we’ve seen an impressive wave of ratifications. While this is a major milestone, it is only the beginning. The real work lies in implementation — and the true test will be whether the Agreement delivers tangible benefits for marine ecosystems. Success will depend on robust institutional arrangements, adequate financing, capacity-building, and genuine cooperation among States and stakeholders. We must seize the momentum generated by the 3rd UN Ocean Conference and act swiftly — the health of our ocean hangs in the balance." - Fabienne McLellan, Managing Director at OceanCare.-The German Ocean Foundation: "The German Ocean Foundation celebrates the growing number of States who have ratified the BBNJ Agreement and urges other States, in particular the German government, to prioritize ratification, so that this treaty can realise its true potential as the catalyst for meaningful and lasting protection of the High Seas that it is designed to be." - Frank Schweikert, Director of the German Ocean Foundation.-Campaign for Nature: "Jumping from 31 to 50 country ratifications within a few days is a remarkable achievement. We now need to capitalise on this momentum and ensure we reach the magic number of 60 before the UN General Assembly meets in September in New York. Every country should aspire to be among this top 60 in the next three months." - Adrian Gahan, Ocean Lead, Campaign for Nature.-MarViva Foundation: "UNOC presented a unique opportunity to strengthen the momentum around the protection of the high seas. We look forward to continuing working along with governments and partner organizations from the High Seas Alliance to ensure the implementation of the BBNJ Treaty and the adequate management and conservation of key sites such as the Thermal Dome." - Katherine Arroyo Arce, Executive Director.-IFAW (The International Fund for Animal Welfare): "The journey towards a high seas treaty has been nearly as long as the great migrations of whales, sharks and turtles but the wave of new ratifications at the UN Ocean Conference shows we are in the final straight. IFAW urges all nations that have not yet done so to ratify the treaty as a matter of urgency so we can at last give meaningful protection to marine life on the high seas." - Matthew Collis, Senior DIrector of Policy.-Sustainable Ocean Alliance: "The BBNJ Treaty is a historic step toward protecting the biodiversity of the high seas, a global commons that no country owns, but all depend on. Contrary to misinformation, this agreement fully respects national sovereignty: it only applies to the High Seas that is generally beyond 200 nautical miles, where no country has exclusive rights. By ratifying the BBNJ Treaty, countries are not giving up power, they are stepping up to protect life beyond borders and ensure that international waters are governed by cooperation, science, and fairness." - Daniel Cáceres Bartra, SOA Hispanoamérica.-Greenpeace International: "Ratification of the High Seas Treaty is now within touching distance. The progress made on Monday reminded us of the multilateral cooperation we saw when the Treaty text was agreed by consensus in 2023. This momentum now must be maintained. We need to cross the threshold of sixty ratifications as soon as possible, so the Treaty can enter into force in 2025. Following this, we must see governments take marine protected area proposals to the first Ocean Conference of Parties in 2026. One billion people rely on the oceans, and if we can protect 30% of the oceans using this Treaty, they will continue to provide for us." - Megan Randles, Greenpeace International’s Head of Delegation for the Conference.-WILDTRUST: "The South African based NGO WILDTRUST – WILDOCEANS programme team have been blown away by ocean conservation commitments made by both the South African government and the Union of Comoros at UNOC 2025. South Africa’s Minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment Dr Dion George, signed the BBNJ Agreement, also known as the High Seas Treaty, on the 9th of June. The Minister touched on how signing the Agreement builds on the countries record of active multilateral engagement and positions them as a bridge-builder between global ambition and local action for the oceans.On Tuesday the 10th of June the Ministry of Comoros confirmed the country’s readiness to take swift action to support global marine conservation goals. They signed and committed to move to ratify the High Seas Treaty, as well as pledged to protect 30% of their ocean by designating approximately 50 000km2 in Marine Protected Areas by 2030.Ecological sustainability is only possible when paired with socio-economic prosperity, especially in vulnerable coastal communities, where lasting marine conservation depends on both nature and people thriving together," commented Strategic Ocean Lead at the WILDTRUST. "This is why we are so pleased about these bold steps to protect the western Indian Ocean at large."-Oceans North: "While the Race to Ratification will soon come to an end, the hard work to fully implement the treaty is just about to begin. Protecting and sustainably managing the high seas – 50% of the planet – cannot come soon enough. The inclusion of Indigenous and local knowledge systems in the BBNJ Treaty sets new ocean governance foundations for how and for whom this treaty is implemented." - Ernesto Fernández Monge, International Oceans Director, Oceans North.-The Ocean Project: "We are highly encouraged with the progress made toward ratification and urge all nations to "seas the day" and swiftly ratify the High Seas Treaty.  Ratification provides an historic opportunity for nations of the world to come together and finally safeguard this global commons. Critically important, ratification will provide the ability to protect at least 30% of the ocean, which nations of the world committed to achieving by 2030. Doing so will help both current and future generations because no matter where we live on our blue planet, we all need a healthy ocean to survive and thrive." - Bill Mott, Executive Director, The Ocean Project | World Ocean Day.-Conservation International and the Coral Reefs of the High Seas Coalition: "The wave of international commitments to the High Seas Treaty signals growing global recognition that we must urgently conserve marine biodiversity in our shared ocean. This landmark agreement lays the foundation for creating marine protected areas beyond national jurisdiction - safeguarding the rich biodiversity and deep cultural heritage of the high seas for future generations." - Haydée Rodriguez-Romero, Director of the Coral Reefs of the High Seas Coalition, Conservation International.-The Pew Charitable Trusts: “"This remarkable progress demonstrates the global community’s commitment to swiftly implement the BBNJ Agreement and secure benefits for marine life and people worldwide. This includes a global ambition to establish the first generation of high seas marine protected areas, which is critical for meeting the world’s 30 by 30 conservation goal within the next five years." – Nichola Clark, senior officer on The Pew Charitable Trusts’ ocean governance team.-Iceland Nature Conservation Association: "We very much welcome Iceland’s commitment to ratifying the BBNJ treaty during the autumn session of the Icelandic Parliament. However, given Iceland’s previous commitments, Iceland must be among the first 60 states to ratify the BBNJ." - Árni Finnsson, Iceland Nature Conservation Association.-iSea: "At iSea, we are proud to have supported the High Seas Alliance's Race for Ratification, and we welcome Greece’s and Cyprus's ratification of the BBNJ Agreement as a crucial step toward ocean protection. With only a few national ratifications remaining after the momentum of UNOC3, the High Seas Treaty is closer than ever to entering into force. As an NGO dedicated to the conservation of the marine environment, iSea remains committed to actively supporting the next steps for the Treaty’s effective implementation worldwide."-Global Fishing Watch: "UNOC has given us a glimmer of hope that the challenges facing our ocean are being seen and will be tackled. Transparency at all levels has rightly emerged as crucial in this work, because we can’t protect what we can’t see. As we edge closer to the High Seas Treaty coming into force, governments need to double down - using both transparency and new technologies - to safeguard the ocean and its riches for the benefit of all those who rely on it." - Tony Long, chief executive officer of Global Fishing Watch.-The Nature Conservancy: "Achieving meaningful change on the high seas requires a whole-ocean approach grounded in global cooperation and local leadership. The momentum behind the BBNJ Treaty shows that this is possible. Now is the moment to double down. As we approach the 60 ratifications needed to bring it into force, we move closer to protecting the ocean systems that sustain life— safeguarding food security, livelihoods, and climate resilience for communities around the world." – Dr. Elizabeth McLeod, Global Ocean Director, The Nature Conservancy.-Iceland Nature Conservation Association: "We very much welcome Iceland’s commitment to ratifying the BBNJ treaty during the autumn session of the Icelandic Parliament. However, given Iceland’s previous commitments, Iceland must be among the first 60 states to ratify the BBNJ." - Árni Finnsson, Chair of Board, Náttúruverndarsamtök Íslands / Iceland Nature Conservation Association.-EarthEcho: "On behalf of our global community of young people at EarthEcho, I am extremely excited by the multilateral progress made here at Nice in the Race for Ratification. Young people are already strongly mobilized in laying the groundwork for BBNJ Treaty implementation, and we’re ready and eager to hit the ground running once it enters into force. To our world leaders, the ball is in your court!" - Taylor Cargill, EarthEcho International Youth Leadership Council member.  

Read more
Audiencia de la Corte IDH en Manaos, Brasil
Climate Change, Human Rights, Indigenous Rights

From rights to remedies: What's at stake in the Inter-American climate advisory opinion

On January 9, 2023, Chile and Colombia jointly submitted a request to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) to clarify State obligations in the face of the climate emergency. The request raised critical questions about States’ duties related to the prevention, adaptation, mitigation, and reparation of climate impacts, as well as the protection of environmental defenders and the promotion of equity.The process, which included the submission of over 200 written observations—an unprecedented number for an advisory opinion before the Court—and three rounds of hearings in April and May 2024, has created a unique space to understand the legal positions of States, international organizations, civil society, and Indigenous Peoples.In this webinar, co-hosted by AIDA, CDH - Honduras, CIEL, Earthjustice, ERI, FACE, Greenpeace International, La Ruta del Clima, UCS, and other allied organizations, we explored the transformative potential of this historic advisory opinion.We shared key reflections on the legal arguments presented to the Court, the broader scope of the proceedings, and what an ideal outcome might look like. We also examined how this opinion—alongside others issued or pending before international courts such as ITLOS and the ICJ—can strengthen climate justice, guide State action, influence climate litigation, and make a meaningful difference in people’s lives across Latin America and beyond. SpeakersElisa Morgera, UNSR on climate change and human rights.Alana Lancaster, West Indies University, Cave Hill Campus, Barbados.Sandra Reyes and Dagoberto Majano, Mesa Justicia Climática, Cedeño community, Honduras.Moderator: Luisa Gomez, CIEL. Recording 

Read more
Peces nadan en praderas submarinas en alta mar
Climate Change, Oceans

The natural wonders we could protect with the High Seas Treaty

For decades, the ocean has protected us from the impacts of climate change, absorbing 90 percent of the excess heat produced by global warming. It’s given us food and the genetic resources we use to produce life-saving drugs. As if that weren’t enough, it’s enabled millions of families to thrive in an economy based on its bounty.Despite its importance, the ocean remains unprotected in large part; no country governs the high seas, international waters that comprise 64 percent of the ocean’s total surface area.  Management measures have given rise to a patchwork of uncoordinated protections.To fill this gap, in June 2023, UN member countries formally adopted an agreement to protect biodiversity in the high seas, which requires ratification by at least 60 countries to enter into force.The High Seas Treaty - short name for the Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) - proposes, among other aspects, the creation and adequate management of marine protected areas (MPAs) in the high seas, regions that would allow for the conservation and rescue of the rich biodiversity found in the ocean. Protection at a high costIn addition to absorbing a large part of the planet’s excess heat, the ocean absorbs nearly 30 percent of all greenhouse gases, which are responsible for climate change.But this protective role comes with serious consequences. By interacting with and absorbing pollutants such as carbon dioxide, the ocean suffers from acidification - a phenomenon that reduces the levels of calcium, an element necessary for the shells and external skeletons of several species of marine fauna - and loss of oxygen, essential for life under the sea.These impacts consequently affect the food supply and employment in the fishing and tourism industries.Faced with the impacts of the climate crisis on marine ecosystems, governments must do much more to protect the ocean, starting with ratifying the High Seas Treaty, which establishes a clear legal framework and process for maintaining its health and resilience. Protected natural wondersAs the ratification of the High Seas Treaty progresses, there is growing interest from governments and civil society to lay the groundwork for greater protection of the high seas.As part of this push, areas of high ecological value have been identified that could form the first wave of protection once the treaty goes into effect. High Seas Alliance - a coalition of organizations of which AIDA is a member - has highlighted 8 priority sites that could be part of this first generation of MPAs, which it has called the Hidden Natural Wonders of the World:Salas y Gómez and Nazca Ridges: Deep in the waters of the southeastern Pacific, these two unique chains of submarine slopes and peaks are separated from South America by the waters of the Humboldt Current and the enormous chasm of the Atacama Trench. They are critical habitats and migratory corridors for at least 82 threatened or endangered species, along with many others of ecological and economic importance.The Termal Dome: Each year in the eastern tropical Pacific, strong seasonal winds push warm waters from the coast offshore, where they meet cooler waters carried by ocean currents. This interaction causes a unique upwelling system that brings cold, nutrient-rich waters to the sea surface, benefiting many species.Emperor Seamounts: Located in the North Pacific, this chain of more than 80 seamounts extends for 2,000 kilometers on the seafloor between the northwesternmost point of the Hawaiian Islands and the Kuril-Kamchatka Trench (Pacific Northwest). Its nutrient-rich waters feed a great diversity of species. And in the mountains, a range of corals and sponges shelter countless species of fish and invertebrates.Walvis Ridge: It is a range of seamounts that extends for about 3,000 kilometers off the coast of southwestern Namibia to the mid-Atlantic ridge (submarine ridge that runs along the Atlantic Ocean). It is composed of several seafloor types and includes many features of the deep ocean floor, along with its abyssal plains, seamounts and guyots (seamounts).Sargasso Sea: It is the only sea in the world without land borders. It is geographically defined by four Atlantic Ocean currents in an area of about 1,100 kilometers wide and 3,200 kilometers long. It is called the “golden rainforest of the high seas” because of the sargassum algae that float on its surface and provide habitat for a myriad of species, while absorbing and storing carbon and producing oxygen.South Tasman Sea: Located between Australia and New Zealand, it is a diverse and dynamic area that supports abundant marine life. It is also an important breeding area and migratory corridor for a large number of species, including endangered species such as the Antipodean albatross, which often transit its waters.The Lost City: It is a complex of 30 hydrothermal vent chimneys located on the upper slopes of the Atlantis seamount massif in the North Atlantic Ocean. The complex of vents rises 4,300 meters from the seafloor, with peaks at a depth of 750 meters. The Lost City chimneys are believed to be more than 120,000 years old.Saya de Malha: Located in the heart of the Indian Ocean, midway between the Seychelles and Mauritius, this unique seascape is home to the world’s largest seagrass community. It is a rare example of seagrass meadows on the high seas and the largest submerged ocean bank in the world, covering more than 40,000 square kilometers.Preserving these natural wonders through marine protected areas requires the entry into force of the High Seas Treaty.It is time to take care of the ocean as it takes care of us. 

Read more
Ejemplar de tiburón ballena recorre aguas de alta mar
Oceans

The treaty protecting life on the high seas: Why should governments ratify it?

The ocean covers two-thirds of the planet. It is so immense and vast that 64% of its waters are outside any border, in a space known as the high seas.It is an area that lies outside national jurisdictions and represents 40% of the Earth's surface.Because of the wealth of marine life it harbors - including species new to science - the high seas are one of the world's greatest reserves of biodiversity. It is also a source of food and oxygen, regulates the climate, cushions the impacts of the climate crisis and sustains the livelihoods of fishing and tourism communities.Despite their importance, only 1.2% of the waters of the high seas have international protection.To fill this gap, in June 2023, UN member countries formally adopted an agreement to protect biodiversity in the high seas, which needs ratification by at least 60 countries to enter into force.Find out how many and which countries have ratified the treaty. As a reservoir of global common goods, the protection and sustainable use of the high seas is a right and an obligation of all governments. What does the High Seas Treaty state?The High Seas Treaty - short name for the Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) - is universal and can benefit all countries, even those that are not party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), such as Colombia, El Salvador, Peru and Venezuela.The treaty contains the following key elements:Area-based management tools. The treaty establishes a legal framework and a clear process for creating networks of marine protected areas, which can provide comprehensive protection for biodiversity in the high seas from multiple activities, maintaining the health and resilience of this part of the ocean.Environmental impact assessments. Under the treaty, any new activity on the high seas is subject to detailed, modern environmental impact assessments that include the cumulative impacts of multiple activities affecting the same ecosystem. Developing countries will be supported to take part in this task.Fair and equitable sharing of benefits from marine genetic resources. The agreement establishes obligations to share monetary and non-monetary benefits from the utilization of genetic resources found in the high seas (genetic material of any animal, plant or microbe) to develop new medicines, for example.Capacity building and technology transfer. The treaty provides for the provision of financing and technology transfer on fair terms for developing countries to increase their marine scientific and technological capacity, including data exchange, infrastructure development and improvement, and respect for traditional knowledge. Why should governments ratify the High Seas Treaty?Having a High Seas Treaty took more than two decades, including five years of negotiations at the UN. To secure this historic breakthrough, the agreement must enter into force - become law under international law - which will occur 120 days after 60 countries have ratified it. So far, 28 countries have ratified the treaty.Ratification means that countries, in addition to signing it, give their formal consent to the treaty, which often involves ensuring that their national laws are consistent with it.There are many reasons why ratification of the agreement will benefit developing countries, particularly those in Latin America and the Caribbean. Some of these are:The treaty brings us closer to environmental justice. It will benefit countries historically excluded from access to the resources of the high seas, providing them with new opportunities for technological, scientific and economic development. It will also allow all countries to be active players in a global platform for decision-making, coordination and cooperation for the protection and sustainable use of these resources.The treaty allows for the conservation of key ecosystems. Under the treaty, all countries will be able to propose marine protected areas on the high seas, including landlocked countries (such as Bolivia and Paraguay). This will allow the protection of areas rich in biodiversity and endemic species in Latin America, such as the Salas y Gómez & Nazca submarine mountain ranges (Chile-Peru) or the Thermal Dome in the Central American Pacific.The treaty benefits local livelihoods and economies. By promoting a healthy and resilient high seas, the treaty will have positive effects on coastal areas and economic activities that depend on migratory species, such as whale and turtle watching, diving, tourism, commercial and sport fishing. Highly migratory species such as squid are vital to Latin American economies.The treaty provides a voice in decision-making on the high seas. Countries that have signed the treaty will participate in the meetings of the Preparatory Commission and those that ratify it will be able to participate in the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the agreement, the first version of which will take place one year after its entry into force, where key aspects of its implementation and the realization of its benefits will be decided.The call is therefore for all countries to ratify the High Seas Treaty, thus protecting 64% of our ocean, which today lacks effective protection.It is time to act for marine life and for future generations. 

Read more
Complejo Metalúrgico de La Oroya, Perú
Toxic Pollution, Human Rights

Families of La Oroya demand Peru comply with Inter-American Court ruling

One year after the decision, the state has still not implemented the ordered reparations. The population lacks comprehensive health care and is once again exposed to toxic contamination due to the reactivation of the La Oroya smelter complex, which is operating without adequate environmental management.One year after the Inter-American Court of Human Rights ordered the Peruvian state to provide comprehensive reparations to the residents of La Oroya, after finding it responsible for violating their rights, the victims are still waiting for the ruling to be implemented and for state to comply with its international obligations."It's already been a year since the ruling was announced, how much longer will we have to wait?" asked Yolanda Zurita, a resident of La Oroya and a petitioner in the case. "Enough is enough! We demand that the Peruvian state immediately comply with the ruling of the Inter-American Court, which will benefit not only the victims of the case, but also the population of La Oroya and the country exposed to toxic substances from the indiscriminate development of extractive and industrial activities in our territories."On March 22, 2024, in a landmark decision for the protection of a healthy environment in Latin America, the Court responded to the long and tireless search for justice by the families of La Oroya, who have been affected for decades by the extreme levels of contamination from the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex (CMLO) and the lack of adequate protective measures by the State, which today ignores the ruling and underestimates its importance.Although the Court ordered the State to ensure that CMLO's operations comply with international environmental standards and to prevent and mitigate damage to the environment and human health, the opposite is currently the case: the complex has reactivated its operations without having modernized its facilities to prevent and mitigate the environmental and health risks it generates for the population.It is urgent that the CMLO stops polluting and that the Peruvian State adopts the measures required by the Court to modernize it in accordance with international environmental standards of environmental protection, in compliance with the ruling."With the reactivation of the metallurgical complex, the people of La Oroya are once again being exposed to levels of pollution that endanger their lives; the Inter-American Court's ruling is clear and the State is obligated to comply," said Rosa Peña, senior attorney with the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). "The delay in complying with the ruling is re-victimizing the families who have been demanding justice for more than 20 years."The court also ordered the state to provide free medical care to the victims and to guarantee specialized care to residents with symptoms and illnesses related to contamination from the mining and metallurgical activities. Today, however, comprehensive health care is not guaranteed in La Oroya. It is necessary that the State, through and in coordination with the Ministry of Health, the Regional Health Directorate of Junín, the General Directorate of Environmental Health, and health care providers, create and implement the protocol for comprehensive care for victims in La Oroya, as established by the Court.The ruling set a historic precedent for the control of industrial pollution by states. For the Peruvian State to make real progress in its implementation, it is imperative that the Attorney General's Office issue the Compliance Resolution."Despite the deadlines set by the Inter-American Court for the Peruvian State, there has been virtually no progress in the implementation of the ruling," said Christian Huaylinos, coordinator of the legal department of the Pro Human Rights Association (APRODEH). "Above all, the nature of the case must be taken into account, which implies that La Oroya has been classified as a sacrifice zone due to the high levels of contamination; therefore, the need to fully compensate the victims is urgent." Background of the caseLa Oroya is located in the central mountain range of Peru, in the department of Junin, 176 km from Lima. In 1992, the US company Cerro de Pasco Corporation installed the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex (CMLO) to process mineral concentrates. The complex was nationalized in 1974 and operated by the state under the name Centromin Peru until 1997, when it was taken over by Doe Run Peru, which operated it until 2009. In short, the CMLO is over 100 years old.In La Oroya, most of the people affected by the CMLO contamination, including children, have lead levels higher than those recommended by the World Health Organization. In some cases, they have registered higher levels of arsenic and cadmium, in addition to stress, anxiety, skin problems, stomach problems, chronic headaches, and respiratory or cardiac problems, among others.In the absence of effective responses at the national level and on behalf of the victims, an international coalition of organizations filed a complaint against the Peruvian State with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in 2006. In October 2021, the Commission found the Peruvian government responsible and referred the case to the Inter-American Court. In October 2022, more than 16 years after the international complaint was filed, the victims, represented by AIDA and APRODEH with the assistance of Earthjustice, brought the case before the Court. Press contactsVíctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 5570522107María Nieve Sullón (Peru), APRODEH, [email protected], +51 984926868 

Read more