Press Center

November 03 2014

Organizations asked that the IACHR urge the Colombian State to comply with international obligations, to declare a moratorium on mining and energy projects, and establish a Working Group between authorities and the affected communities

They also asked that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) urge the State to adequately attend to the victims of the forced displacement caused by the “development” projects, and to begin a dialogue between the victims and the authorities seeking effective solutions to the problem. Washington, D.C., USA – In a hearing last Monday before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), in its 153rd Period of Sessions, organizations and social movements requested that the international body urge the Colombian State to recognize that forced displacement caused by the implementation of "development" projects is a human rights violation that must be prevented. They also asked that the Commission verify this grave situation with a visit to the affected areas. The organizations expressed their deep concern for the dangerous situation in which people and communities are placed as they defend their land and their environment. The resistance to megaprojects has resulted in the murder of 13 people, the disappearance of one, and threats against 25 people who defend the country’s rivers. The violence has included the recent assassination of a Nasa indigenous community leader, opposed to the Colosa mine, and a serious threat against the indigenous governor of Córdoba. The participants presented concrete cases in which the megaprojects have destroyed territories, ecosystems and ancient cultures, causing irreparable damage and leading to the forced displacement of populations. The participants presented before the IACHR three main factors that have been driving the forced displacement: 1.The close relationship between the armed conflict and the implementation of megaprojects; 2. The deregulation and violation of laws in the authorization and implementation of projects; and 3. The direct impacts from the implementation of the megaprojects. They pointed out that sociopolitical violence has enabled the implementation of mining and hydroelectric projects, causing the exodus of people from their lands and the appropriation of those lands by corporations. "The paramilitary leader Salvatore Mancuso recognized that three-thousand people from the region of Córdoba were displaced to make way for the megaprojects, because the companies needed the land for the construction of dams," the participants stated. They also indicated that the implementation of megaprojects in Colombia precludes the processes of truth, justice, and reparation, let alone any guarantees to the victims of armed conflict and development that these wrongs will not be repeated. Additionally, the participants pointed out that the State is making arbitrary use of legal instruments, such as the declaration of public utility, to clear the way for these projects, without considering their impact on human rights and the environment. The State is championing the principle of public interest, which, in practice, has been converted into a mechanism for expropriation or legal dispossession, and, as a consequence, has been the cause of the displacement. The megaprojects are having a grave impact on the ancient territories and cultures, causing irreparable damage, such as environmental contamination, that is resulting in the forced displacement of entire populations. These causes, which have created at least 200,000 victims of forced displacement, are the basis of the organizations’ request that a moratorium on mining and hydroelectric projects be instituted in Colombia as the only guarantee for the protection of further human rights violations until the policy is structurally evaluated and fundamental rights are guaranteed to those affected populations. Finally, the organizations asked for the intervention of the IACHR so that the Colombian State immediately establishes an Integrated Working Group, where the victims may participate in a discussion about mining and energy policy and have a voice in the development of a responsive business model that meets the needs of the affected communities. In this discussion, the State would also be urged to take note of the warnings issued by the Constitutional Court and the Comptroller General of the Republic regarding the need to identify alternative sources of energy, as stipulated by the World Commission on Dams.

October 15 2014

Organizations alert World Bank to risks of Colombian mining investment

Delegation explains to the International Finance Corporation (IFC), a branch of the World Bank Group, illegalities and possible harms to people and the environment from Eco Oro Mineral’s Angostura mine in Santurbán, Colombia. Washington/Ottawa/Bogota/Bucaramanga. From September 11-13th, representatives from the Committee for the Defense of the Water and Páramo of Santurbán, a local coalition in the area affected by the mine, met with officials of the World Bank and the International Finance Corporation (IFC), to alert them to illegalities and socio-environmental risks associated with the Angostura mine project in Colombia, in which the IFC invested four years ago. The Committee was accompanied by representatives from the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (SOMO), and MiningWatch Canada. IFC bought shares in Eco Oro Minerals, which hopes to open a large scale gold mine in the Santurbán páramo, a source of fresh water for millions of Colombians, habitat for endemic and threatened species, and important for climate change mitigation through the capture of atmospheric carbon. The delegation emphasized that mining puts all of this at risk and as such, according to Colombian legislation and international norms, is prohibited in páramo ecosystems. They added that cumulative effects should have been considered because the Angostura project has stimulated interest in a possible mining district in the area, in which extensive areas have been concessioned to various mining companies and that has also been affected by the armed conflict. In 2012, the Committee, with support from its allies, presented a complaint to IFC’s accountability mechanism, the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO). As a result, the CAO opened an investigation to determine whether the IFC adequately evaluated the social and environmental risks associated with this project before making its investment. The results of the investigation will likely be published before the end of the year. "We hope that, as a result of the CAO report, IFC will withdraw its investment from this mining project, since there is no way that Angostura can live up to the World Bank policies," remarked Erwing Rodríguez, a member of the Committee. "This is a very important case in Santander and the whole country. Through thousands-strong marches and many other actions in defense of water, páramos and territory, we have made it clear that we do not support large-scale mining in the Santurbán páramo," stated Miguel Ramos, another Committee member. A lawyer for AIDA, Carlos Lozano Acosta, continued: "This is a key case because it will set a precedent in the region with regard to the protection of páramos, which are vital for the provision of water and in the fight against climate change." "The World Bank is taking on an unnecessary and unprofitable risk. The value of the shares in Eco Oro that the IFC purchased has considerably dropped. This project is not good for the páramo, for Colombians, or for the IFC. We don’t understand why the IFC insists on maintaining this investment," concluded Kris Genovese of SOMO.

October 10 2014

Tri-national organization to investigate Mexico for environmental enforcement in Gulf of California development

The Secretariat of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) recommended a thorough investigation of Mexico’s systemic failure to enforce its environmental law when authorizing the construction of tourism resorts in the Gulf of California, Mexico. The Gulf region contains many vulnerable ecosystems, endangered species. Mexico City, Mexico. The Secretariat of the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) — an intergovernmental organization created under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between Canada, Mexico and the U.S. — has recommended a thorough investigation of Mexico’s systemic failure to enforce its environmental law when authorizing the construction of mega tourism resorts in an important area of the Gulf of California. This investigation comes in response to a citizen petition submitted by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) and its partner organization Earthjustice on behalf of 11 local and international organizations. The petition uses the permitting of four mega resorts in this vulnerable region to demonstrate how environmental violations are prevalent. The Gulf of California is a vast area—comprised of the States of Sonora, Sinaloa, Nayarit, Baja California and Southern Baja California. The area contains sensitive ecosystems such as coral reefs and coastal mangroves, and is home to endangered species (whales, manta rays, sharks and turtles, among others), migratory birds, and traditional fishing communities. The latter depend on the local tuna, sardine, shrimp and squid fisheries, which provide employment for nearly 50,000 people. Yet, the Mexican government authorized the construction of three mega resorts in that area—Paraíso del Mar, Entre Mares, and Playa Espíritu—without complying with laws related to environmental impact assessment, endangered species protection, and coastal ecosystem conservation. With these projects, the natural environment in the Gulf of California, and the wildlife and human communities that depend on it, have been put at risk. The CEC Secretariat based its recommendation to conduct a detailed investigation and prepare a "factual record" on the lack of appropriate environmental impact assessments for the projects. The decision does not include Cabo Cortés project, because this project’s environmental permit was recently revoked. "Projects like Playa Espíritu, located in Marismas Nacionales [one of Mexico’s largest wetlands and a key mangrove forest], impact small local companies and the fishing sector. Fisheries are harmed when the mangroves are damaged because these wetlands are a critical nursery and reproductive site for fish," said Carlos Simental of the Ecological Network for the Development of Escuinapa (Red Ecologista por el Desarrollo de Escuinapa - REDES), one of the petitioners. The Gulf of California and its rich biodiversity face a serious problem. Among many examples and according to recent studies, the brown pelicans in the area are not reproducing as they used to, likely due to climatic changes and lack of food due to overfishing. Tourism development that is poorly planned and fails to comply with the laws aggravates the situation. "We hope the Mexican government will receive feedback on how it makes decisions related to environmental impact assessments for tourism development in the region", said Sandra Moguel, an AIDA attorney. "With the preparation of this factual record, we are seeking improvements in the environmental impact assessment process on various fronts. These include the consideration of cumulative impacts—both from separate projects and from all components that comprise any single development—as well as the use of best available information, and inclusion of effective measures for protecting endangered species and mangroves, as required by Mexican law and treaties that Mexico has ratified." The investigation of what has happened in the Gulf of California could yield positive outcomes such as legal reforms, dialogue to improve environmental impact assessment processes, and the design of sustainable tourism projects that involve local communities from the outset. The Council of the CEC, a panel of high-ranking environmental officials from Canada, the United States and Mexico, will decide within two months whether or not they accept the recommendation to develop a factual record. "The Secretariat’s recommendation points to a serious concern that Mexico is failing to effectively enforce environmental laws in the Gulf of California," said Martin Wagner, Director of the International Program of Earthjustice. "This environmental treasure is home to incredible marine biodiversity; it is a critical source of protein for the Mexican people and needs long-term protection. No mega-resort, most of which stem from foreign investment, should be exempt from complying with Mexican environmental protections."

September 30 2014 Large Dams, Indigenous Rights, Freshwater Sources

Mexico illegally authorizes hydropower dam

The permit for the project on the San Pedro Mezquital River violates national and international environmental and human rights laws. Mexico City, Mexico. In violation of national and international environmental and human rights laws, on September 18, 2014 Mexico’s environmental authority (SEMARNAT) authorized construction of the Las Cruces hydroelectric project in the state of Nayarit. On behalf of communities and indigenous peoples who will be harmed by the project, the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) will enlist the aid of United Nations Special Rapporteurs and of the Ramsar Secretariat, who oversees implementation of a wetlands-protection treaty. AIDA will ask these authorities to deem the permit process illegal and demand that the Mexican Government revoke its authorization. In its permit process, SEMARNAT ignored international laws requiring prior consultation with indigenous peoples, who must give their free, prior, and informed consent to the project. These actions are required by the International Labour Organization Convention No. 169 and by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. In the permit, SEMARNAT recognizes that the communities of San Blasito and Saycota, which will be evicted as a result of construction, were unaware of the consultation notices that the Federal Electricity Commission (FEC) allegedly posted. "International standards require more than just telling the indigenous people about the project, as FEC did in this case [1]," said Maria José Veramendi, senior attorney at AIDA. "Affected communities must participate since the planning phase. And consultation has to followed by traditional decision-making methods. Before and during consultation, affected people must be provided with precise information on the consequences of the project, with the objective of reaching an agreement," she added. Construction of Las Cruces Dam will force eviction of indigenous peoples, most of them Cora, and harm 14 sacred Cora and Huichol sites. These impacts violate their human rights to adequate housing, water, sustainable livelihoods, culture, and education. The dam will also reduce flow to Marismas Nacionales, which is listed as a wetland of international importance under the Ramsar Convention, an international treaty for wetland protection. Reduced flow will harm fishing and agriculture that sustains river communities. In 2009, the Ramsar Secretariat exhorted the Mexican Government to consider the environmental goods and services, and the cultural heritage, of the region before authorizing Las Cruces. That recommendation was ignored. "The Ramsar Convention does not prohibit infrastructure in this kind of ecosystem, but it does establish criteria and standards to guide wetland management [2]," said AIDA attorney Sandra Moguel. "As the authority in charge of ensuring compliance with Mexico’s international environmental commitments, SEMARNAT should have taken the Convention’s guidelines into account. It’s especially regrettable that SEMARNAT ignored the Ramsar Secretariat’s specific recommendations for Marismas Nacionales," said Moguel. SEMARNAT also ignored the technical opinion of the National Aquaculture and Fisheries Commission (CONAPESCA). The Commission pointed out that if Las Cruces is built, fish populations in Nayarit and Sinaloa will dramatically decrease, because they depend on Marismas Nacionales, which in turn depend on the fresh water and nutrients supplied by the San Pedro River. "This permit is a setback," said Moguel. "But AIDA will work closely with international legal authorities until we secure justice for the environment and affected communities." [1] Autorización de Impacto Ambiental del proyecto hidroeléctrico Las Cruces, p. 57 (in Spanish) [2] Autorización de Impacto Ambiental del proyecto hidroeléctrico Las Cruces, p. 62 (in Spanish)

September 22 2014

Climate Marchers to Global Leaders: No dirty energy in the Green Climate Fund

New York, NY – As world leaders prepared to announce pledges of climate action and money for the Green Climate Fund, thousands of people flooded the streets of New York City yesterday demanding a financial commitment to clean energy and climate-resilient solutions. Heads of state are gathering at the United Nations tomorrow, at the invitation of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, in an attempt to jump-start negotiations for a new global climate deal. According to Janet Redman, climate policy director at the Institute for Policy Studies, “Reaching an agreement to stabilize the climate rests on developed countries making good on their promises. Contributions to the Green Climate Fund are past due. We need to see serious commitments from our governments to deliver financing for low-carbon, climate-friendly development now.” Andrea Rodríguez, Mexico-based legal advisor for the climate change program of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), added, “Billions of people still lack access to energy. The Green Climate Fund should support communities to meet that need through truly clean, decentralized, sustainable renewable energy. Despite the interest from various sectors in promoting carbon capture, natural gas, and large dams as climate solutions, this institution should not provide financial support for any project that emits greenhouse gas pollution.” The policies established by the Fund's 24 board members, from both developed and developing countries, have so far not excluded any energy sector from receiving finance, increasing the risk that dirty projects could ultimately receive support. “Dirty energy is more than fossil fuels,” noted Zachary Hurwitz, a consultant for International Rivers. “Hydropower dams can release methane, they can destroy carbon-sequestering forests, and they can displace thousands of people. And there’s nothing clean about the human rights violations that all too often result.” Lidy Nacpil, director of Jubilee South Asia Pacific Movement on Debt and Development, based in the Philippines, said, “In my country, we’re already facing the devastation of climate change. Wealthy industrialized countries have a legal and moral obligation to repay their climate debt and support adaptation through the Green Climate Fund. But that’s not enough. The fund must not exacerbate climate change and its impacts by financing dirty energy.” Additional information: Read the latest commentary from the Institute for Policy Studies on the Green Climate Fund. Read the Global South Position Statement on the Green Climate Fund. Read the open letter to governments, international institutions and financial mechanisms to stop considering large dams as clean energy and to implement real solutions to climate change.

September 01 2014 Toxic Pollution, Human Rights

People harmed by environmental contamination in La Oroya have been waiting for seven years for the State to guarantee their rights

In 2007, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) asked the Peruvian State to provide medical care and institute environmental controls. These measures have yet to be implemented fully and the health of the affected people continues to deteriorate. The IACHR has yet to reach a final decision in the case. La Oroya, Peru. Seven years have passed since the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) asked the Peruvian State to adopt precautionary measures in favor of the individuals affected by toxic contamination in the city of La Oroya. Those affected, including boys and girls, still have not received the medical attention they require and their health continues to deteriorate. On August 31, 2007, the IACHR granted precautionary measures in favor of 65 inhabitants of La Oroya who were poisoned by air, water, and soil contaminated by lead, arsenic, cadmium, and sulfur dioxide coming from the metallurgical complex of the Doe Run Perú Corporation. In light of the gravity and urgency of the situation, the Commission asked the Peruvian State to take actions necessary to diagnose and provide specialized medical treatment to affected persons whose personal integrity or lives were at risk of irreparable harm. Although some medical attention was provided, the required comprehensive, specialized care has not. Now there are dire risks of setbacks. To date, the Health Strategy for Attending to Persons Affected by Contamination with Heavy Metals and Other Chemical Substances, which is operating in the La Oroya Health Center, does not have an assured budget starting in September and for the remainder of the year. The Strategy is essential for complying with the precautionary measures, given that the diagnosis and specialized medical treatment for the beneficiaries depend on it. Without a budget, the continuity of the medical personnel attending not only to the beneficiaries but also to the entire population of La Oroya will become unviable. "The precautionary measures continue to be in force; after seven years, there has not been full compliance with them. Nonetheless, the State insists on requesting that they be lifted, despite the fact that the health of the population is deteriorating and constant risk [exists]," declared María José Veramendi Villa, attorney for the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). On a related note, the IACHR continues to study the suit filed in 2006 for violations of the human rights of the same group of affected persons. The case is based on the failure of the Peuvian State to adequately control the activities of the metallurgical complex and protect the health and other rights of the affected persons. Regrettably, these individuals’ situation is worsening, and five years after accepting the suit, the IACHR has yet to reach a final decision. "Delay affects us more and more all the time. Our maladies are worsening. During this time, we have lost many of our fellows and seen our children fall ill," declared one of the affected individuals whose name is being withheld for reasons of security. Currently the metallurgical complex is undergoing a process of liquidation, but its operations will continue during the process of being sold. However, in May the complex had to suspend its operations because its suppliers stopped providing it with concentrates due to the company’s financial problems. "Although operations have been suspended, the violations of the individuals’ human rights have already occurred. Therefore, the Peruvian State must comply with its human rights obligations and guarantee that the company and its new owners comply with their obligations to protect the environment and human health," stated Jorge Abrego, attorney for the Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos [Association in Favor of Human Rights] (APRODEH).

August 06 2014

NGOs fight to defend Panama’s rivers

Panama NGOs have called on the National Environmental Authority to repeal a resolution that threatens watersheds and allows large-scale projects such as hydroelectric dams to use up to 90% of the water in rivers, lakes and other ecosystems. Panama City, Panama. Three Panamanian non-governmental organizations have presented a formal petition to Panama’s National Environmental Authority (ANAM), asking it to revoke a resolution that limits to 10% the environmental flow of all the rivers in Panama. The petition calls on the government to create a regulation for environmental flow that takes into account the environmental, human and cultural values of rivers. The NGOs also offer explanation of the importance of taking into account the specific characteristics of each ecosystem in terms of their ecology and their capacity to meet the needs of the people that depend on them. The NGOs also called for the public to be given the chance to participate in determining the environmental flow of rivers. The NGOs that made the presentation are the Environmental Advocacy Center of Panama (CIAM), the Foundation for Integral Development and Conservation of Ecosystems in Panama (FUNDICCEP) and the Friends of La Amistad International Park (AMIPILA). They prepared the petition and the proposal for regulating environmental flow to protect the environment and human rights in collaboration with attorneys and scientists from the Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (ELAW) and the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). "The existing regulation affects everyone in the country, especially communities in the province of Chiriqui and Veraguas, where a large number of hydroelectric dams have severely threatened rivers and water availability," said CIAM attorney Luisa Arauz. "Our petition explains how the current ecological flow resolution breaches national and international regulations by ignoring the needs of communities and requirements of the ecosystems." Panama’s government has international obligations to protect water ecosystems and ensure the human rights of the people that depend on the water flow. "We presented a letter to ANAM highlighting the most relevant international obligations and case studies supporting the petition and the regulation proposal," said AIDA lawyer Haydée Rodríguez. ELAW attorney Pedro León said, "The proposal will allow the ANAM to grant water-use permits and concessions based on the actual load capacity of water sources, making it possible to guarantee an effective protection of the human right to water and a healthy environment." The petitioners asked ANAM to strengthen public participation in water management by convening a public consultation to discuss the proposal. The proposal calls for a classification of existing water resources based on their degree of use and by taking into account the biological characteristics and the human uses that rivers must satisfy. It also recommends the application of holistic methods to assess environmental flows in fresh water ecosystems to guarantee their adequate and sustainable use. AIDA defends the individual and collective right to a healthy environment through the development, implementation, and enforcement of national and international law. "Freshwater Preservation" is one of our five areas of institutional focus. Clean water is a cornerstone of human and environmental health, and AIDA works to protect ecosystems that serve as vital freshwater resources for nearby communities and biodiversity.

July 02 2014 Large Dams, Freshwater Sources, Human Rights

Organizations submit amicus curiae brief to Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court, demonstrating that Congressional authorization of the Belo Monte Dam is illegal

The authorization violates national and international law because the communities affected by the project were not consulted. Construction of the dam continues, causing harms to people, communities and the ecosystem of the Brazilian Amazon. Brasilia, Brazil. Construction of the Belo Monte Dam continues. Meanwhile, biodiversity and the communities of the area already suffer severe damage. Civil society organizations submitted to the Supreme Federal Court an amicus curiae (in Portuguese) (friend of the court) brief that demonstrates that the Congressional decree authorizing the controversial dam is illegal because the government didn’t consult with the affected communities. The brief contains national and international law arguments for the protection of the environment and human rights. The arguments support a legal action filed by the Federal Prosecutor’s Office (Ministério Público Federal), which seeks a Supreme Federal Court ruling that annuls the decree. The Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) prepared the document in cooperation with the Centro de Estudios de Derecho, Justicia y Sociedad (DEJUSTICIA), Instituto Socioambiental (ISA), la Associação Indígena Yudjá Mïratu da Volta Grande do Xingu (AYMÏX) and the Conselho Indigenista Missionário (CIMI). "The Belo Monte project was approved without the State having consulted and obtained the consent of the affected indigenous communities and traditional populations. This, alongside the environmental degradation that began with construction, has placed the individuals and communities in a situation of extreme vulnerability," explained AIDA’s attorney, María José Veramendi Villa. By not guaranteeing the right to free, prior and informed consent of the affected communities before authorizing the project, Congress violated the Brazilian Constitution and Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization (ILO). Even though public information meetings about the project were held, they did not constitute prior consultation because they were held after the project was approved. Additionally, information provided in the meetings was not translated into indigenous languages. Not all the affected people had access to the meetings and those who did received incomplete and last minute information about the project. As well as the issues related to free, prior and informed consultation and consent, the document reinforces the Federal Prosecutor’s arguments with regard to the right to access to justice. This right was violated when the government used a law known as Suspension of Security to suspend lower court decisions against the project and favorable to the affected population, ostensibly to protect public security and the economy. "If the Supreme Federal Court issues a favorable decision, the Brazilian State will have two obligations. Not only will it have to suspend the authorization it gave for the dam’s construction, but also it will have to remedy the past and ongoing harm inflicted on indigenous communities and other populations affected by Belo Monte," said Dejusticia’s international director, César Rodríguez Garavito. "Traditional populations affected by the dam are living in unacceptable conditions for democratic times. There is a judicial decision that recognizes that the right to prior consultation was violated, but at the same time another, preliminary and provisional, decision that authorizes construction to move forward," said Leonardo Amorim, an attorney with Instituto Socioambiental. "Consequently, this population suffers worsening health conditions and invasion of their lands. We hope that the Supreme Federal Court rejects this situation." This past Tuesday, the Xingu Alive Forever Movement (MXVPS), with the support of several organizations, requested a hearing (in Portuguese) with the President (Chief Justice) of the Supreme Federal Court to demand an immediate decision in this legal action, as well as in others that challenge large hydroelectric projects in the Amazon.

May 06 2014 Coral reefs, Oceans

Organizations come out in defense of the Veracruz Reef System

Technical and legal arguments are submitted in support of a lawsuit against modifying the boundaries of the Veracruz Reef System National Park in eastern Mexico, a site protected by international obligations to preserve the natural barrier against storms and hurricanes. Veracruz, Mexico. Six civil society organizations have submitted to a Mexican court an amicus curiae brief containing legal and technical arguments that strengthen arguments in a lawsuit against a government decree to modify and reduce the boundaries of the Veracruz Reef System National Park. The proposed modification puts conservation of this internationally important wetland at stake. The organizations submitted the friend of the court brief to the Third Tribunal of the District of Veracruz on April 25. They are the Interamerican Association of Environmental Defense (AIDA), the Mexican Center for Environmental Law (CEMDA), the Strategic Human Rights Litigation Center (Litiga OLE), Pathways and Encounters for Sustainable Development (SENDAS), Pobladores A.C. and the Veracruz Assembly of Environmental Initiatives and Defense (LAVIDA). The Veracruz Reef System in eastern Mexico was declared a natural protected area in 1992 to safeguard its diversity of species and a rational use of its resources, and to encourage research into the ecosystem and its balance. In 2004, the Veracruz Reef System was included as a wetland of international importance under the Ramsar Convention, an international treaty to protect wetlands. The amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief highlights the importance of the reef system for Mexico and the region. “Coral reefs are natural barriers against large waves and storms like Hurricane Karl, which hit Veracruz in 1992,” said Sandra Moguel, a legal advisor to AIDA. “Reefs also provide abundant fishing and valuable information for medical research. They’re great spots for recreation and they help to sustain marine life.” The legal brief also argues that the decree, from Mexico’s National Commission on Protected Areas (CONANP), threatens regional biodiversity, violates the human right to a healthy environment, and breaches Mexico’s international obligations to protect this ecosystem. “The local population is more exposed to suffer the impacts of hurricanes and other climate phenomena, because the decree removes the Punta Gorda and Bahía de Vergara reefs from the national park,” said Xavier Martínez Esponda, regional director of CEMDA for the Gulf of Mexico. The organizations’ brief explains how CONANP’s decree infringes specific national laws and international treaties. For example, the Organization of American States’ Convention on Nature Protection and Wild Life Preservation in the Western Hemisphere states that natural park limits can only be modified by legislative authorities. CONANP is not such an authority. The decree also violates the Ramsar Convention, given that the modification of the national park’s defined boundaries did not follow the procedures established by that intergovernmental treaty for the protection of wetlands of international importance. The brief concludes by making it clear that CONANP’s decree is a regressive measure that erases the benefits of environmental protection attained with the creation of the protected area in 1992. “Setbacks like this can cause irreparable damage,” said Moguel.

April 07 2014 Freshwater Sources, Toxic Pollution

Colombia’s Ministry of Environment unveils the demarcation of the Santurbán Páramo without specifying details of the measurements

With the water supply of millions of people at risk, we urge the ministry to publish details of the demarcation and ensure that this fragile ecosystem remains free of large-scale mining operations. Bogotá, Colombia. Colombia’s Ministry of Environment announced the delimitation of the Santurbán Páramo, a high-altitude wetland ecosystem that supplies water to millions of people in the country. While the ministry disclosed some aspects of the measure to the media, it has not released full details. These include the full extension of the demarcation, exact coordinates and which mining operations are inside or outside of the defined area. The ministry stated that the protected area would increase from 11,000 hectares to 42,000 hectares in the department of Santander. However, according to the Colombian Humboldt Institute’s atlas, the ecosystem has a surface area of at least 82,000 hectares in the departments of Santander and North Santander. “We do not know if the protected area covers the total area of the páramo in both departments. Nor do we know the coordinates or what mining titles will be affected. We do not even know if there is a written draft of the official decision. This seems incompatible with the right to access accurate and impartial information, as enshrined in the Colombian Constitution,” said lawyer Carlos Lozano-Acosta of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). The páramo of Santurbán supply water to nearly two million people, including the cities of Bucaramanga and Cúcuta. As is common for this ecosystem, the páramo of Santurbán has a diversity of flora and fauna and is important for storage of atmospheric carbon, helping to mitigate climate change effects. According to the law, the demarcation of this ecosystem should be formally and clearly defined in order to prevent harmful activities such as large-scale mining, which could cause irreversible damage. According to the Ministry, companies with mining concessions and environmental licenses will remain in Santurbán. The ministry said that the demarcation affects only 10 of 29 mining titles, including those of the Canadian firm Eco Oro Minerals. It did not provide any further details. Without the exact coordinates of the ecosystem, it is not possible to know precisely the extent of the demarcation and the ongoing threat that large-scale mining poses to this water source. Eco Oro has threatened to pursue legal action if the final decision affects their investment, presumably basing its arguments on the free trade agreement between Colombia and Canada that would allow the company to sue Colombia in an international tribunal. “Colombians should not pay a company for investing where it should not, much less if it threatens their water supplies. Colombian law prohibits mining in páramos. We call on Eco Oro to respect Colombians’ right to water instead of threatening legal action to protect their investment,” said Jennifer Moore of MiningWatch Canada. Kristen Genovese of the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (SOMO) said, “Eco Oro is not only violating Colombian law with regard to mining in the páramo, but the project is inconsistent with the social and environmental standards of the International Finance Corporation (IFC), which is financing the project. We believe that an investigation now underway regarding the IFC’s investment in Eco Oro will confirm our analysis.” According to the Ministry, the decision will not be adopted immediately, and no date has been set to implement it. “The participation of citizens in the demarcation process has not been adequate. We do not know, for example, if the Ministry used rigorous technical studies provided by the Humboldt Institute. Nor is much known about how public participation took place regarding this decision,” said Miguel Ramos of the Committee for the Defense of Water and the Santurbán Páramo. Also unknown is how Andean forest ecosystems, or cloud forests, located at altitudes of 2,200 to 2,600 meters above sea level, will be protected and managed. These are also vital to ecosystem health and water regulation. Similar to Eco Oro’s approach in Santurbán, the mining company AUX plans to carry out underground mining in these ecosystems. To date, more than 19,000 people have signed a petition (in Spanish) urging the Colombian government to protect the water of Santurbán according to scientific criteria. The government received (in Spanish) 16,000 of those signatures in November 2013. Organizations and environmentalists have also asked (in Spanish) the Colombian government to properly define the limits of the páramo ecosystem. The demarcation of Santurbán will set a precedent for protecting the country’s other páramos. Colombia is home to half of the páramos in the world, which supply water to 85% of its population. The demarcation process must take into account the minimum projected area of the páramo in the Humboldt Institute’s Atlas and its technical studies at a scale of 1:25:000. “If the Santurbán Páramo is adequately defined, it would set an important precedent for the protection of all the páramos. This would lead the way, taking another step toward respecting the right to water of all Colombians” said Carla Garcia Zendejas of the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL). AIDA, CIEL, the Committee for the Defense of Water and the Santurbán Páramo, MiningWatch Canada and SOMO -- as allied organizations -- ask Eco Oro to refrain from threats of legal action in an attempt to influence the demarcation of the páramo, and ask the Colombian government to provide full, truthful, and impartial information about the process and final decision.