Project
Shutterstock.
Pollution of the Motagua River in Guatemala: The Poqomam Maya people’s quest for environmental justice
The Motagua River basin—Guatemala’s largest and most important river—is severely polluted with wastewater, solid waste, and other types of debris.
This is a cross-border issue because the Motagua’s polluted waters flow into the Caribbean Sea, reach the coast of Honduras, and threaten the Mesoamerican Reef System.
For decades, this has violated the rights to health, water, development, and a healthy environment of all the people living in the river basin.
In June 2025, the Poqomam Maya community of Santa Cruz Chinautla—supported by AIDA, the Indigenous Peoples’ Law Firm, and allied organizations—achieved an unprecedented legal victory to halt degradation in the basin. In response to the lawsuit it filed, a Guatemalan court ordered the municipality of Chinautla to comply with a series of obligations to curb the pollution of the area’s rivers and soil.
The government's response to the ruling has so far been limited to technical working group meetings. Meanwhile, the community continues to work toward the proper implementation of the ruling and to take other actions to defend its territory and its rights.
Background
The Motagua River, which is 486 km long, flows through 96 municipalities and 14 departments in Guatemala. It originates in Quiché, a department located in the northwest, and empties into the Caribbean Sea.
Polluting activities occur throughout the entire basin, including sub-basins and micro-basins. The largest volume of pollution comes from Guatemala City, the country’s capital, and is carried by the waters of the Las Vacas River, which in turn receives a large amount of waste from the Chinautla River.
The Chinautla River, which flows through the municipality of the same name, carries solid waste from a landfill located in Zone 3 of the capital—where trash from at least 14 municipalities in the department of Guatemala is dumped—as well as sewage generated by some 500,000 people living in the northern part of the capital, which undergoes no prior treatment.
Other sources of pollution include the numerous illegal dumps in the municipality of Chinautla, the waste that private vehicles and garbage trucks dump along the banks of its rivers, as well as the sand-mining companies—which began setting up operations in the area between 1996 and 1997—whose activities weaken the rivers' basins, causing solid waste to be more easily carried away by the river currents.
Photo: Mayela Sánchez García.
The situation extends beyond national borders. Every year, the Motagua River discharges some 20,000 metric tons of plastic into the Caribbean Sea, making it one of the rivers that contributes the most plastic pollution to the ocean worldwide, according to estimates contained in a 2025 report by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR).
The river flows into the Mesoamerican Reef at its mouth, so pollution also threatens to degrade one of the largest and most biodiverse transboundary reefs on the planet, which spans the territorial waters of Belize, Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico.
In addition, the contaminated water reaches the coast of Honduras and spreads into Amatique Bay, located along the eastern coast of Guatemala, affecting the Caribbean Sea.
The roots of this chronic, cross-border problem are structural. Data from the Integrated Environmental Management of the Motagua River Basin project, funded by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), show that in Guatemala, 66% of municipal solid waste is not collected, and there is no guarantee that the remaining 34% is disposed of properly. Furthermore, of all landfills nationwide, 88.32% are illegal or lack municipal authorization.
In other words, the core issues that need to be addressed are the mismanagement of solid waste and water resources in Guatemala; noncompliance with existing regulations on wastewater discharge and the disposal and treatment of solid waste and residues; and the lack of a water law.
The Poqomam Maya people's quest for justice
The rivers of Santa Cruz Chinautla, a community of the Poqomam Maya people located just twelve kilometers from Guatemala City, have become conduits of pollution that are degrading the Motagua River.
For decades, the local population has seen its health and livelihoods—including pottery, one of the main economic activities and a source of identity—damaged due to the lack of waste management in the municipality of Chinautla and the urban area of the country’s capital, as well as the activities of sand-mining companies.
Photo: Mario Winter.
Voices for the Motagua River: Olga Vázquez.
Voices for the Motagua River: Nazario Pascual.
In early 2000, the Maya community organized to stop sand mining on their territory. At that time, the companies held mining permits that remained valid through 2021 and 2022. And although the permits expired, some companies continued to operate after requesting extensions. In June 2022, the indigenous authorities of the Poqomam people began a sit-in protest in front of the Piedrinera San Luis company, which they maintained for four years.
In July 2024, the Special Rapporteur on Economic, Social, Cultural, and Environmental Rights of the IACHR visited Santa Cruz Chinautla. During his visit, traditional authorities and community members spoke about the environmental, water-related, health, economic, and cultural impacts of the pollution in their rivers.
That same year, in October, the community—with support from AIDA, the Indigenous Peoples’ Law Firm, and partner organizations—filed a lawsuit (petition for amparo) against the municipality of Chinautla over its failure to take measures to address the contamination of its rivers and soil caused by improper solid waste management and the existence of illegal landfills.
AIDA’s scientific team, together with local residents and community authorities, collected key information on illegal landfills in the area. This community science initiative supported the litigation by highlighting the severity of the pollution, demonstrating the ongoing use of such practices, and providing evidence of the municipal authorities’ failure to fulfill their legal obligations regarding waste management.
Learn more about this community science initiative.
In June 2025, the Poqomam community won the support of the Guatemalan justice system when a constitutional court ordered the municipality of Chinautla to effectively address the claims in the lawsuit aimed at stopping the pollution of the rivers and soil in Santa Cruz Chinautla.
This is the first time a Guatemalan court has recognized a community's right to a healthy environment and its central role in finding solutions.
Find out the details of the legal victory.
Current situation
Since the ruling was issued, the municipality of Chinautla has held a series of “technical working groups” with representatives from the central government, civil society, and the community. A smaller group of technical experts was later created to develop a work plan with clear goals. Several months have passed without the municipality convening these working groups.
Furthermore, in December 2025, the IACHR noted in its report Human Rights Situation in Guatemala that the Motagua River basin is facing a severe pollution crisis that has had profound impacts on biodiversity and has resulted in systematic violations of the human rights of local communities, including the Maya Poqomam people.
And in May 2026, the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources revoked the license of the sand mining company Piedrinera San Luis for "failure to comply with environmental commitments."
AIDA continues to monitor the implementation of the court ruling to ensure the right to a healthy environment for the Poqomam Maya community and all those living in the Motagua River basin. Meanwhile, the residents of Santa Cruz Chinautla remain organized and mobilized to improve their environment and defend their rights.
Related projects
IACHR opens case against Brazil for human rights violations related to Belo Monte Dam
Para português, clique aqui Four years after civil society organizations filed their original petition, the Commission opens the case, asking the Brazilian government to respond to allegations of human rights violations stemming from the hydroelectric project under construction in the Brazilian Amazon. Washington D.C., United States. As the first reservoirs of the Belo Monte Dam are being filled, the Brazilian government is coming under fire from international organizations. On December 21, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) opened a case against Brazil, which was challenged by affected communities represented by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), Justiça Global and the Sociedade Paraense de Defesa de Direitos Humanos (SDDH). After an initial review lasting four years, and several requests for fast tracking the case by the petitioners, the Commission finally determined that the petition contains sufficient grounds to open the case, which means that Brazil must respond to the claims of human rights violations caused by Belo Monte. “We hope and believe that now is the time for Brazil to respond comprehensively to our claims about: the absence of consultation and free, prior and informed consent of affected indigenous communities; the lack of participation and adequate assessment of environmental impact; and the forced displacement and violations of the rights to life, health, integrity and justice of indigenous peoples, riverine communities, and residents of the city of Altamira,” said María José Veramendi Villa, AIDA attorney. Based on Brazil’s response, the Commission will then determine if requirements have been met to have the case admitted and, if so, to establish whether or not the project caused the alleged human rights violations. “The opening of the case is, above all, a victory for the affected communities and local social movements, who have endured for all these years, and remain strong and determined in their search for justice and reparation,” said Raphaela Lopes of Justiça Global. This past November, the Brazilian Institute of the Environment and Renewable Resources (IBAMA) authorized Belo Monte’s operating license, which allowed the dam’s reservoirs to be filled. IBAMA did so despite the fact that Norte Energía, the company in charge of the project, failed to comply with the conditions necessary (potable water and sanitation, among others) to guarantee the life, health and integrity of affected populations. By opening the case for processing, the Commission is using all available tools to monitor the situation surrounding Belo Monte. Indigenous communities affected by the dam have been protected by precautionary measures that the Commission authorized in 2011, which Brazil has yet to meet. In early December, the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights visited Altamira, the city closest to the Belo Monte project and one of the areas most affected by displacement and socio-environmental conflicts caused by the dam’s construction. There, they met with affected groups, among them members of indigenous and riverine communities, listening to their complaints. After their visit, the Working Group issued a statement that, among other things, urged the Brazilian government to respect human rights, not sacrifice them for economic development. The Working Group is expected to present the final report of their visit to the Human Rights Council in June 2016. It is our hope that they conduct an adequate follow-up to their visit, and that the report they produce is explicit regarding both the human rights violations surrounding Belo Monte, and the actions of the Brazilian government and the companies involved. As organizations representing the victims of Belo Monte, we will continue to press Brazil to respond to the human rights violations directly caused by the dam’s construction.
Read more
5 Recommendations for Integrating Climate Action into the Financial Sector
by Astrid Puentes Riaño This blog was produced in collaboration with Andrea Rodriguez, AIDA’s lead climate change attorney. During the Paris climate talks, I had the honor of participating in a panel on climate and the financial sector. We discussed the importance of ensuring that the fight against climate change is consciously integrated into all finance decisions. Financing is one of the primary challenges that has delayed effective worldwide progress on climate change, because many countries do not have the resources they need, and those that do have the resources haven’t contributed as much as they should. Currently, financial institutions are not providing sufficient funding to combat climate change. In fact, the majority of global resources are still invested in fossil fuels or other activities that have negative impacts on the climate. AIDA has been advocating at the highest levels to make climate finance more effective for more than five years. Our focus has been on ensuring that the allocation of climate finance is transparent, participatory, respectful of human rights, and responsive to the needs of the Global South. We have advocated for inclusion of and compliance with these principles before international and national financial institutions, as well as in a new global mechanism, the Green Climate Fund. To advance the discussion, AIDA requested a side event at the climate talks in Paris. As it turns out, a regional financial institution simultaneously requested a side event to present its voluntary principles for integrating climate change into the financial sector. Since there are thousands of requests for side-events and limited space, the Secretariat of the Convention merged the two events. This is how AIDA came to co-organize an event with a coalition of financial institutions. Although the institutions hadn’t planned to include comments from civil society in their presentation, they agreed to collaborate. This twist of fate created a great opportunity for the institutions to present their principles, and for us to provide early feedback from the point of view of civil society. Twenty-six institutions have supported the voluntary principles so far, including the Development Bank of Latin America (CAF), the European Investment Bank, the World Bank Group, and the Inter-American Development Bank. The Five Voluntary Principles, as described by the institutions, are: COMMIT to climate strategies MANAGE climate risks PROMOTE climate smart objectives IMPROVE climate performance ACCOUNT for your climate action An initial assessment Is not my intention to make a thorough analysis of the principles at this point. My goal, for the time being, is simply to ensure the principles are known, and to share with you a preliminary analysis, including our initial observations and the five recommendations that I presented at the panel. As a civil society organization, AIDA welcomes initiatives intended to advance climate action, accountability and participation. We therefore consider the voluntary principles a positive initiative from the financial sector, and a good place from which to start looking for concrete ways to integrate climate change fully into their activities. We consider mainstreaming climate finance an ongoing process, and view these principles as just one element of it. From AIDA’s perspective, the principles will actually benefit the sector, and help to decrease financial and other risks to financial institutions. If effectively implemented, the principles can help to increase climate actions while protecting communities and ecosystems, and fight poverty and inequality, two of the most important challenges facing the world. That said, improving access to information is fundamental to ensuring the principles positively impact climate change. Essential information should be made publicly available, including amounts of resources, types of activities or sectors, and projects in which financial institutions are investing. 5 Recommendations for Better Integration 1. Include a human rights perspective and incorporate social risk in assessments Financial investments that don’t incorporate human rights and social perspectives can contribute to rights violations and have severe impacts on communities. In addition to the consequences such investments have on people, they become a financial risk for the institution. Incorporating a human rights perspective in risk assessments can also help to advance goals related to fighting poverty and inequality, which are particularly applicable to public financial entities. 2. Define common concepts Concepts such as sustainable development, climate change, and climate finance can be interpreted very broadly and generate confusion. Additionally, the lack of agreement on what those concepts mean can lead, for example, to one institution considering an activity as clean or sustainable, when it is not. The definition of renewable energy is a good example. While several major financial institutions agree that large hydropower cannot be considered renewable energy, there are still some institutions that include hydropower, and even nuclear energy, projects in that definition. The inclusion of experts from the non-financial sector—particularly non-state actors—can help increase understanding of what the needs are and where investment should be enhanced or directed. 3. Create a clear, transparent and participatory road map The manner in which the voluntary principles are implemented is crucial. Therefore, a clear and measurable implementation plan is essential. It’s a good thing that the financial institutions highlighted the need to avoid duplication, and incorporate lessons learned. However, to ensure that the principles are as effective as possible, it is also important to at least incorporate experiences from existing accountability mechanisms and applications of safeguards. The current initiative considers a planning group that, as far as we understand, hasn’t been created, although there is a suggestion of how it should be formed. Aligning with the intention of the institutions to include other stakeholders, this planning group should also engage participants outside of the financial sector to increase the impact of investments. The work plan should include effective mechanisms to measure advancement, and be flexible enough to make necessary improvements. It should be seen as a dynamic process that incorporates lessons learned, not as a rigid mandate. 4. Embrace the opportunity in low-carbon economies The financial sector has a unique role to play in encouraging climate actions by helping clients avoid the same old carbon-intensive development. Financial institutions have the power to leapfrog this type of development and implement real, effective solutions for the 21st Century. They can be proactive by enhancing the capacity of other actors interested in fully integrating climate strategies into their operations. The financial sector naturally thrives from risk-taking and innovation. Low-carbon economies represent an important opportunity for growth. 5. Elevate accountability One question posed during the panel was whether or not the principles should be binding. If there is a strong willingness to implement the principles, and adequate mechanisms to measure advances and make adjustments, having a binding agreement isn’t the most important aspect. Accountability is key in this process, thus the importance of Principle Five. Climate change is the most important threat to human kind. It is an urgent matter that most profoundly impacts the world’s most vulnerable populations. There is no more time to lose. Effective actions must continue to be implemented, and the financial sector has an important opportunity to contribute to the solutions, rather than the problem. It’s time for financial institutions worldwide to walk the talk – it’s time for them to seriously commit to fighting climate change, and to start delivering results. The opportunity for us as members of civil society to sit beside representatives when they publically presented their five principles was an interesting start. Now we must follow up so that financial institutions put these principles into practice, especially Principle 5: being accountable. Building upon these comments, and providing recommendations from other stakeholders in the field, will be an important next step.
Read more
Urging the Brazilian National Development Bank to Invest Responsibly
The flow of the Xingú river in the Brazilian Amazon is diminishing to a trickle, while the rainforest around it disappears. Fish and other animals are scarcely seen, and many residents of the river communities have had to leave their homes and change their way of life forever. This devastating panorama is the result of the construction of Belo Monte dam, slated to be the third-largest dam in the world. Despite the project’s many reported irregularities, construction continues to ravage the surrounding environment. And despite the corruption and seemingly endless questions surrounding the dam, the energy company building it has had no problems obtaining funding, mostly from the Brazilian National Development Bank (BNDES). In Latin America, BNDES is more active than both the Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank in financing large energy and infrastructure projects. BNDES does not, however, have standards that guarantee its investments do no harm to the environment and vulnerable communities; nor does it have an effective system to process the claims and complaints of those whose human rights are violated as a result. AIDA is working alongside regional organizations in Brazil to draw attention to this unacceptable situation. Too few people know about the problems caused by BNDES-supported projects, which means that society at large is not demanding accountability. To raise awareness, AIDA and allied organizations created an infographic that explains the harmful effects of BNDES investments in the region. Please help us distribute this valuable tool by sharing it with your friends! “Our work aims to influence the Brazilian National Development Bank so it becomes a positive influence in the world of energy investments. We hope they begin to respect the environment and the human rights of the people who depend on it, and enable a shift towards a truly sustainable economy,” said Florencia Ortúzar, AIDA attorney. “We want the Bank to stop funding large dams. As well as displacing entire communities of indigenous and vulnerable people, they actually contribute to climate change, because rotting vegetation in dam reservoirs releases enormous amounts of methane—a very powerful greenhouse gas. Instead of building more dams, the bank should avoid socio-environmental conflicts and positively contribute to regional efforts to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change.”
Read more