Project
Liliana Ávila /AIDAMayan women’s struggle before the Inter-American Development Bank in Guatemala
Mayan communities succeeded in getting the IDB Invest to develop a responsible exit plan after withdrawing its financing for two hydroelectric projects that negatively impacted ecosystems and the livelihoods of indigenous peoples, especially women, in the micro-region of Yichk'isis (Ixquisis).
In the struggle to defend their water, territory and way of life, indigenous Mayan communities in the Yichk'isis (Ixquisis) micro-region of northern Guatemala convinced the Inter-American Development Bank Group to withdraw its financing of two hydroelectric dams whose implementation violated their rights. The decision was also significant in that the IDB, for the first time, designed a responsible exit plan.
That historic advance was the result of the complaint that the communities filed in August 2018—with the support of AIDA, the Plurinational Ancestral Government of the Akateko, Chuj, and Q'anjob'al Native Nations, and the International Platform against Impunity. The complaint was filed with the Independent Consultation and Investigation Mechanism (MICI), the IDB Group's accountability office.
In resolving the case in September 2021, the MICI concluded that IDB Invest failed to comply with its own operational policies and safeguards, in the framework of the financing granted to the company Energía y Renovación S.A. for the implementation of the San Mateo and San Andrés hydroelectric projects.
Learn more about this achievement
In the mountains of Northwestern Guatemala, near the border with Mexico, the land is rich and fertile. Several important rivers and many other water sources feed the soil.
The residents of these mountains, many indigenous women of Mayan descent, have long depended on the waters to nourish them, to provide them with fish, as well as for agriculture, sanitation, and cooking.
But the construction of the San Mateo and San Andres dams has caused water scarcity and the contamination of rivers and other natural resources long cherished by the communities.
The near lack of water has also drastically reduced harvests, lessening the income gained from selling corn, wheat, beans, coffee, sugar cane and other products in the market. As a result, the conditions of poverty in the area have deepened.
And the risk situation is profound, particularly for women, who have played a very important role in the defense of water and territory threatened by hydroelectric projects, and are therefore victims of intimidation and stigmatization.
As guardians of their land and water, they have come to its defense and they’ll continue to prevent environmental deterioration from further harming their families.
Read our fact sheet on the case
Related projects
IACHR Forwards La Oroya Human Rights Petition to Peruvian Government for Comment
For immediate release: April 24, 2007 PRESS CONTACTS: Astrid Puentes, AIDA (+5255) 52120141 [email protected] Martin Wagner, Earthjustice (510) 550-6700 [email protected] Carlos Chirinos (+511) 422-2720 [email protected] U.S. Smelter's Pollution Now Human Rights Issue for Peru IACHR to Examine Peru’s Responsibility for Contamination from Doe Run Corp. Facility WASHINGTON DC, LIMA – The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (a division of the Organization of American States) forwarded a petition alleging human rights violations to the Government of Peru, giving them two months to respond. The petition asserts that severe contamination from a smelter owned by U.S.-based Doe Run Corporation, and lack of effective pollution and human health controls by the government, gravely threaten the rights of the residents of La Oroya, Peru, including their rights to life, health, and integrity. “This first step by the IACHR is good news,” assured Carlos Chirinos, an attorney with the Peruvian Society for Environmental Defense (SPDA), an organization that has been associated with the case since its inception, and one of the lawyers representing the community. “It shows the strength of our petition, and is a positive step in the process to identify the government’s responsibilities.” The IACHR determined that the petition, prepared by Earthjustice, the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the Center for Human Rights and Environment (CEDHA), and Peruvian lawyer, Carlos Chirinos, met the Commission’s procedural requirements and forwarded it to the Peruvian government last week. According to the Commission’s rules, after this two-month period the IACHR will take into account Peru’s comments in evaluating the admissibility of the case, determining whether the contamination violates human rights, and the resulting responsibilities of the Peruvian government. The Commission is simultaneously evaluating a request by these groups for precautionary measures to address the urgent health threats to the citizens in La Oroya. “We are now waiting for the government’s comments on the petition, as well as a decision by the Commission on the request for precautionary measures. These measures could help considerably to provide effective protection for the people’s human rights in La Oroya,” added Astrid Puentes of AIDA. The precautionary measures requested include: adequate diagnosis and medical treatment for the persons represented, education programs and efficient access to information, effective emissions and contamination controls, an evaluation of contamination in key areas of the city, and implementation of adequate clean-up measures. According to Martin Wagner of Earthjustice, the goal of the precautionary measures is “to improve human rights conditions for the people we represent in La Oroya, and ensure that those responsible take definitive action to control the contamination.”
Read moreAIDA and Participating Organizations Submit La Oroya Petition to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 21, 2007 Press Contacts: Astrid Puentes, AIDA (+5255) 52120141 [email protected] Luis Eduardo Cisneros (+511) 422-2720 [email protected] Martin Wagner (510) 550-6700 [email protected] Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to Examine Responsibility for Violations at La Oroya, Peru Children breathe sulfur dioxide pollution at 300 times level permitted by WHO Lima, Peru, Washington, D.C. — Public health and environmental organizations from throughout the Western Hemisphere today announced the filing of a petition with the human rights division of the Organization of American States in Washington, D.C. The petition accuses the Peruvian government of doing little to halt contamination from a metallurgical complex that is impacting the lives and health of the citizens of La Oroya, Peru. The petition’s filing was announced at a press conference in Lima, Peru this morning by Carlos Chirinos of the Sociedad Peruana de Derecho Ambiental (SPDA), Astrid Puentes of the Interamerican Association Environmental Defense (AIDA), Earthjustice, and the Centro de Derechos Humanos y Ambiente (CEDHA). The petition claims the Peruvian government failed to place pollution controls on the metallurgical complex that operates in La Oroya, a situation that tramples on the human rights of the town’s citizens. Located in the city of La Oroya, some 175 kms from Lima, the complex has been operating for 80 years. Doe Run Peru, a subsidiary of Doe Run Company of St. Louis, Missouri, USA owns the complex. Recent monitoring of air quality – performed by Doe Run itself – has shown that daily average sulfur dioxide levels are between 80 and 300 times the maximum level permitted by the World Health Organization. The Blacksmith Institute even declared the city of La Oroya one of the Top Ten Most Polluted cities in the world. The petition asks the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) to recommend that the Peruvian government implement urgent measures to halt the grave violations against the health and lives of the citizens of La Oroya. Learn more about the conditions in La Oroya by watching a short film: http://www.youtube.com/v/gY6WXa9aKrM More Background http://www.aida-americas.org/en/project/doerun_en Read a copy of the petition here (in Spanish).
Read morePlan Colombia Aerial Herbicide Spraying Not Proved Safe for the Environment – Released to US Congress
For Immediate Release February 14, 2007 CONTACTS: Anna Cederstav, AIDA (510) 550-6700 [email protected] Astrid Puentes, AIDA (5255) 52120141 [email protected] PLAN COLOMBIA AERIAL HERBICIDE SPRAYING NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT Critique of recent studies by international environmental NGO released to Congress today OAKLAND, CA, MÉXICO, D.F. - In December, the Colombian government violated a bilateral accord with Ecuador by spraying a mixture of herbicides intended to destroy coca crops within 10 kilometers of the Ecuadorian border. To justify the spraying, Colombia relied on studies by a team from the Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission (CICAD) of the Organization of American States (OAS), claiming that the spray mixture is safe. However, an independent review of CICAD’s recent studies, released to members of the U.S. Congress today, shows that the pesticide mixture being sprayed has not, in fact, been proven safe for the environment, and that Ecuador has substantial cause to oppose the spraying. According to the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the first CICAD Environmental and Human Health Assessment of the Aerial Spray Program for Coca and Poppy Control in Colombia, released in 2005, did not assess many of the greatest potential ecological and human health risks posed by the aerial eradication program in Colombia. Because of these omissions and the potential environmental risk of the spraying, the U.S. Congress requested further studies to better assess whether the mixture is truly safe for the environment. Preliminary results from the follow-up studies, released in August 2006, show that the mixture is indeed potentially harmful to the environment, and particularly to amphibians – the spray mixture killed 50 percent of the amphibians exposed in less than 96 hours. According to Earthjustice scientist and AIDA’s Program Director Anna Cederstav, “Contrary to what is argued by the government, this study shows sufficient cause for concern to suspend the sprayings due to potential environmental impacts, especially considering that Colombia has the second highest amphibian biodiversity in the world and the most threatened amphibian species.” Many other key questions about the environmental impacts of the spraying also remain unanswered, despite the U.S. Congressional mandate to conduct the studies. For example, the State Department has not provided adequate information about the location of and risk to sensitive water bodies and has done nothing to address whether other threatened species are likely to be harmed. Without these determinations, the claim by the Colombian government that it is safe to spray along the Ecuadorian border is misinformed. “Given the number of unanswered questions about the safety of the spraying, and considering the precautionary principle and the international obligation not to cause impacts to the territories of other States, the Colombian government should halt spraying immediately, and instead implement more effective and environmentally safe alternatives for coca eradication,” said Astrid Puentes, AIDA’s Legal Director.
Read more