Project
Photo: UNFCCCMonitoring the UN Climate Negotiations
As changes in climate become more extreme, their affects are being hardest felt throughout developing countries. Since 1994, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has laid out actions to limit the increase of global average temperatures and confront the impacts of climate change.
The States that are Parties to the Convention meet every year in the so-called Conference of the Parties (COP) to review their commitments, the progress made in fulfilling them, and pending challenges in the global fight against the climate crisis.
At COP21 in 2015, they adopted the Paris Agreement, which seeks to strengthen the global response to the climate emergency, establishing a common framework for all countries to work on the basis of their capacities and through the presentation of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) that will:
- Limit the increase in global temperatures to 2°C compared to pre-industrial levels and continue efforts to limit it to 1.5°C;
- Increase the capacity of countries to adapt to the impacts of climate change; and
- Ensure that financing responds to the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Our focus areas
THE CLIMATE CRISIS AND HUMAN RIGHTS
The climate crisis, due to its transversal character, has repercussions in various fields, geographies, contexts and people. In this regard, the Preamble to the Paris Agreement states that it is the obligation of States to "respect, promote and fulfill their respective obligations on human rights, the right to health, the rights of indigenous peoples, local communities, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations and the right to development, as well as gender equality, the empowerment of women and intergenerational equity."
AIDA at the COP
COP25: Chile-Madrid 2019
At COP25 in Madrid, Spain, we advocated for the inclusion of the human rights perspective in various agenda items. We promoted the incorporation of broad socio-environmental safeguards in the regulation of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, which refers to carbon markets. We closely followed the adoption of the Gender Action Plan, as well as the Santiago Network, created "to catalyze technical assistance […] in developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse affects of climate change." We also encouraged the inclusion of ambitious and measurable targets for the reduction of short-lived climate pollutants in the climate commitments of States.
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