Press Center

July 17 2013

México failed to attend the Green Climate Fund’s fourth Board meeting

Senator Ernesto Cordero, Mexico’s representative on the Board, must be held accountable for his failure to attend a key event for establishing financial support for fighting climate change. Mexico City, Mexico. Senator Ernesto Cordero, Mexico’s representative on the Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board, missed the fourth meeting of the entity, held June 25-28 in Songdo, South Korea. At the meeting, Board members started setting the rules of operation of the Fund, a financial mechanism essential for developing countries to secure the financial support needed to combat climate change. According to the GCF Secretariat, Cordero’s absence was because he had to attend important sessions of the Mexican Congress. Also missing at the Songdo meeting was Chile, the alternate member for Mexico. Chile’s representative also informed the Secretariat of his inability to attend the event. With the absence of both of these countries, one of the seats held by Latin America on the GCF Board was left empty. The Board consists of 24 members: 12 representatives from developing countries and an equal number from developed nations. Each member has an alternate who may participate in the Board meetings without voting rights unless they assume the role of the Board member. Latin America has three seats on the Board, broken down by regional groups: Colombia is paired up with Peru, Belize with Cuba, and Mexico and Chile. Each pair also represents other countries. In this regard, Mexico and Chile’s absence from the fourth meeting jeopardizes the interests of the Latin American countries represented by the duo, which includes Brazil and Argentina. It also contradicts the active role Mexico has played in recent years in climate change negotiations worldwide. What is more, a good opportunity was missed to influence the decisions taken in South Korea. The Fund is being developed to become a main source of financial resources to combat climate change, and at this Board meeting critical decisions were taken to this end. These included decisions on the Fund’s mission, the results and performance indicators to follow, procedures for access, home ownership, financial instruments, structure and organization, among others. The formation of the Green Climate Fund must meet the needs of all regions, but especially those in Latin America. Mexico, Chile and the other countries with a seat on the Board must commit to be active and efficient participants, and to be consistent with their national policies on climate change. It is of utmost importance to ensure the involvement of Latin American governments in international spheres like the GCF because this will ensure effective benefits for the people of this region. For more information on the Green Climate Fund, visit this page.

July 04 2013

World Bank investment in Eco Oro Minerals in Colombia to be audited

Decision supports complainants’ arguments that the International Financial Corporation did not adequately evaluate the environmental and social impacts of company’s project in Colombia. Washington/Bogota/Ottawa. The Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO), the independent complaints office of the International Financial Corporation (IFC), will carry out an audit of the IFC’s decision to purchase US$18.2 million in shares of Eco Oro Minerals (previously Greystar Resources). The Canadian company is proposing to develop the Angostura gold mine project in the high altitude wetlands – known as páramos – of Santurbán, located in the Colombian departments of Santander and North Santander. The decision comes in response to a complaint presented in June 2012 by the Committee for the Defense of Water and Páramo of Santurbán with support from the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and MiningWatch Canada. The complainants argue that the investment did not comply with the social and environmental sustainability policies of the IFC, an arm of the World Bank Group. “We welcome the decision of the CAO to move forward with an audit. This adds to our arguments regarding the unviability of the Angostura project in Santurbán,” stated Miguel Ramos lawyer and member of the Committee for the Defense of Water and Páramo of Santurbán. “If the CAO concludes that the project fails to comply and will not comply with the standards, the IFC should sell its shares in the company.” The IFC recognized that páramo, high altitude wetlands, provide fresh water and habitat for endemic species and species in danger of extinction, such as the Andean bear and the Andean condor. They are also essential ecosystems for climate change mitigation. Colombian and international law prohibit mining in páramos. As a result, in May 2011, the Colombian Ministry of the Environment denied Eco Oro’s petition for an environmental license for the project, initially designed as an open-pit mine and now proposed as an underground operation. “Whether this project is designed as an open-pit or underground mine, we believe that it will cause irreparable damages to an ecosystem that is essential for Colombia and for the region given its high biodiversity, importance to mitigate climate change and as a source of fresh water for two million people,” said Astrid Puentes, Co-Executive Director of AIDA. “It should simply not be implemented.” The CAO’s investigation will focus on whether the evaluation of social and environmental risks was adequate, particularly considering the long-term and cumulative risks. “The IFC invested in order to stimulate the mining sector in Colombia without necessary information about potential impacts, whether of Eco Oro’s project or of the development of a mining district in the area of Santurbán, which has been affected by the armed conflict and where some 70,000 hectares have been concessioned to various companies since Eco Oro arrived,” remarked Jen Moore, Latin American Program Coordinator for MiningWatch Canada. “The decision reveals an irresponsible and unmanageable policy.” The CAO’s decision comes two weeks after it similarly decided to carry out an audit of a copper mine in Peru. In this latter case, the IFC bought shares in the project at an early phase in the project without evaluating the impacts. “From our perspective, by continuing with these sorts of investments, the IFC would fail to comply with its standards. It’s a highly worrisome trend,” concluded Kris Genovese, Senior Attorney at CIEL. The organizations that presented the complaint hope that the result of the CAO’s investigation will be comprehensive and will fundamentally question the current policy of the IFC to stimulate large scale mining through acquisition of equity holdings in exploration mining companies, known as junior firms. See a pdf version of the CAO’s report.

June 19 2013 Human Rights, Indigenous Rights

UN Representative on Indigenous Peoples asked to investigate human rights violations caused by Panama’s Barro Blanco dam

Washington, DC, United States. A total of 12 civil society organizations urged the United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, James Anaya, to conduct a formal investigation into the human rights impacts of the Barro Blanco dam located on the Tabasará River in Panama. The Panamanian and international organizations also asked Mr. Anaya to call on the government of Panama to immediately halt the dam’s construction until the threats to the rights of the indigenous Ngӓbe people affected by the project have been fully addressed. The Barro Blanco controversy received special attention at the UN climate talks held last week in Bonn, Germany, because the project is registered under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), a carbon offsetting scheme established under the Kyoto Protocol. “The Barro Blanco dam will directly affect Ngӓbe people, yet we were not even consulted about the project before it was approved,” said Weni Bagama, an indigenous Ngӓbe leader of the Movimiento 10 de Abril, a community-based movement defending the Tabasará River from development projects. In September 2012, the UN Development Programme (UNDP) conducted a fact-finding mission at the project site and interviewed Ngäbe community members about projected impacts. UNDP’s assessment report confirmed that the dam will flood homes and religious, historical and cultural sites in the Ngӓbe-Buglé territory. The report further documented the project’s impacts, including that the dam will convert the flowing Tabasará River into a stagnant lake ecosystem, affecting the Ngäbe’s diet and means of subsistence. “Despite proof that the dam will have grave impacts on the Ngӓbe way of life and cultural heritage, the construction of the dam continues,” added Ms. Bagama. “We urge Mr. Anaya to investigate the situation and do all he can to protect the rights of the indigenous peoples affected by this project.” “The public forum where the project was discussed was held as a community meeting without a clear notification of its true objective, and there was no representation from the affected indigenous communities,” said Tania Arosemena, Legal Director of the Environmental Advocacy Center, Panama (CIAM by its Spanish initials). “The consultation process did not comply with the minimum standards demanded by national and international law on this matter.” CIAM filed a lawsuit in 2011 on behalf of members of the Ngäbe communities, who challenge the approval of the project’s environmental impact assessment. That suit is pending. Several of the organizations that wrote to Mr. Anaya also raised the Barro Blanco case at the UN climate talks in Bonn last week. “The Barro Blanco project illustrates an urgent need for reform within the CDM,” said Alyssa Johl, senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL). “Once a project has been registered under the CDM, affected communities have no means to voice their concerns regarding the project’s social and environmental impacts. The UN climate regime must establish a process that allows communities to seek recourse for the harms associated with CDM projects, as well as a process to deregister projects where there are clear violations of CDM rules as in the case of Barro Blanco.” “Given the CDM’s lack of a complaint procedure and the Panamanian government’s failure to protect the Ngäbe’s rights, the communities need Mr. Anaya’s support,” said Abby Rubinson, associate attorney in Earthjustice’s International Program. “We appreciate Mr. Anaya’s past efforts to engage the Panamanian government to respond to the Ngäbe’s concerns, and we ask him to continue to play this much-needed role to prevent further violations.” The Panamanian non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that signed the letter to Mr. Anaya were CIAM, Movimiento 10 de Abril, and Asociación Ambientalista de Chiriquí. CIEL, Earthjustice, Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), International Rivers, Carbon Market Watch, Both ENDS, Collective Voices for Peace, Salva la Selva and Marin Interfaith Task Force on the Americas comprised the international groups that signed the letter to Mr. Anaya.

May 06 2013 Toxic Pollution, Human Rights

Report on the situation in La Oroya (Peru): When investor protection threatens human rights

The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) presented a balance of the controversial case of industrial pollution. Huancayo, Peru – The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) released a report on the situation in La Oroya, a city in the central Andean region of Peru that is at the center of a controversial case of industrial pollution caused by a poly-metallic smelter in operation since 1922. For decades, the people of La Oroya have been exposed to high levels of air pollution stemming from the complex’s emissions of toxic substances including lead, cadmium, arsenic and sulfur dioxide. In the middle of the 2000s La Oroya was identified as one of the 10 most polluted cities in the world. According to independent studies, 97% of children between the ages of 6 months and 6 years, and 98% of those between 7 and 12 years old still have high levels of lead in their blood. The percentage reaches 100% in La Oroya Antigua, the area closest to the smelter. The effects of lead poisoning are irreversible. Doe Run Peru, a subsidiary of the U.S.-based Doe Run Company, began operating the complex after its privatization in 1997. Both the company and the Peruvian State have failed to comply with their obligations to prevent environmental impact and respect the human rights of the population of La Oroya. In response, the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) and other organizations requested the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) in 2005 to issue precautionary measures for people whose health was at serious risk from the pollution in the city. On August 31, 2007 the IACHR ordered the State to adopt measures to protect the health, integrity and life of a group of residents of La Oroya. The precautionary measures require Peru to provide a specialized medical diagnostic to the beneficiaries plus specialized and adequate medical treatment to those who, based on the diagnosis, are in danger of irreparable damage to their physical integrity or lives. Also since 2007, a complaint against Peru has been pending before the IACHR for the violation of human rights due to the toxic emissions from the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex. AIDA, APRODEH, Earthjustice and the Center for Human Rights and Environment (CEDHA) are representing the victims and the beneficiaries of the precautionary measures in the case. “AIDA has been working and monitoring the situation in La Oroya for over a decade. Over this time we have seen the extent of the damage to victims’ health in La Oroya due to the pollution that they have been and continue to be exposed to. The State must assume its obligations and fully comply with the IACHR´s precautionary measures that are in effect”, said Maria Jose Veramendi, an AIDA legal advisor. Meanwhile, parents of children with high levels of lead in their blood have tried to obtain compensation for the damages through a collective action in the United States (Missouri), headquarters of the complex’s parent company The Renco Group. In late 2010, Renco initiated international arbitration alleging its rights as a foreign investor as guaranteed by the Free Trade Agreement between Peru and the United States were violated. Renco asked for compensation of $800 million. “The company not only denied the impacts on the citizens and tried to evade responsibility, but in the face of the protests it pursued a campaign of stigmatization and attacks against those who were trying to defend their rights”, said Souhayr Belhassen, president of the FIDH. This case illustrates the conflict between international human rights law and investor protection. It also exposes the legal strategy of the companies allegedly involved in human rights violations that seek to evade responsibility and deny victims their right to reparation. The FIDH report, entitled Metallurgical Complex of La Oroya: When investor protection threatens human rights, includes a series of recommendations directed at the Peruvian authorities and the company involved. AIDA and APRODEH, as organizations representing the victims of La Oroya before the Inter-American Human Rights System, thank the FIDH and believe that the report is an important contribution to visualize the increasingly serious human rights violations suffered by the residents of La Oroya, who still expect the State to recognize its responsibility and bring justice to their claims. At the same time, the Archdiocese of Huancayo, whose role in defending the right to a healthy environment in La Oroya has been crucial, says the report is a major contribution to its work. See de PDF version of the report.

April 12 2013

Groups seek investigation into Mexico’s approval of four “mega resorts”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 11, 2013 Media contacts: Mexico Sandra Moguel, [email protected], +52 (164) 621-02353 USA Sarah Burt, [email protected], +1 (415) 217-2055 Serena Ingre, [email protected], +1 (415) 875-6155 Groups seek investigation into Mexico’s approval of four “mega resorts” Massive tourism developments threaten fragile ecosystems and endangered species San Francisco, USA/La Paz, Mexico. In a petition submitted to the Commission for Environmental Cooperation, eleven conservation groups charged the Mexican government with failing to enforce its own environmental laws in authorizing the construction of four “mega resorts” in the Gulf of California. The Commission is an international body established under the North American Free Trade Agreement to promote cooperation among Canada, Mexico and the U.S. on environmental issues of continental concern. “The Mexican authorities’ approval of massive tourism projects in violation of environmental laws is unacceptable and demonstrates little regard for threatened species, the environment and local communities”, said Sandra Moguel of the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense, and one of the signers of the petition. “We urge the new Administration and Minister Guerra Abud to ensure that the approval process of development projects is transparent and not arbitrary”. The approval of projects such as Cabo Cortés, Paraíso del Mar, Entre Mares, and Playa Espíritu threatens the unique coral reefs and mangrove ecosystems of the region, and endangered species such as humpback and gray whales, whale sharks, manta rays, sea turtles, sea lions, jaguars, crocodiles and many species of migratory birds. The petition highlights the four projects as examples of the Mexican Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources’ repeated failure to enforce environmental laws when approving large-scale tourist development projects in the Gulf of California. In particular, the government ignores laws requiring effective environmental impact assessment, protection of endangered species, and conservation of coastal ecosystems. The petitioners are requesting that the Commission investigate and develop a factual record to examine Mexico’s lack of enforcement of its environmental laws when authorizing these developments. Such a finding would pressure Mexico to comply with its own environmental safeguards. “These natural treasures are of importance to Mexican communities that depend on them as cultural, economic and recreational resources”, says Judith Castro with the Friends for the Conservation of Cabo Pulmo. “Mexico cannot continue to approve mega projects that displace residents, bulldoze wildlife habitat, and pollute the waters of this vital ecosystem”. Known as the “World’s Aquarium”, the Gulf of California is considered one of the most diverse marine regions on the planet, and is home to thousands of species. Specifically, these mega projects, two of which are already under construction, threatened the following critical areas in the region: Cabo Pulmo National Park: One of the healthiest coral reef systems in the world, a UNESCO World Heritage Site and a Ramsar Wetland of International Importance, Cabo Pulmo is threatened by massive developments like Cabo Cortés. The Cabo Cortés proposal included the equivalent of nearly 30,000 guest rooms in its hotels, condominiums and villas, two 27-hole golf courses, a 490 berth marina, and a system of canals and artificial lakes. Additionally, because the region has a desert climate without sufficient water to accommodate such amenities and the expected population growth, the proposal included a desalination plant that could have discharged hypersaline brine into the reef. While the project was ultimately rejected in June 2012, Cabo Pulmo is threatened by similar developments still being considered. The Marismas Nacionales Wetlands: Playa Espíritu, a project already under construction that includes three golf courses, two marinas, a wastewater plant, and additional infrastructure spread across more than 35,000 acres, threatens the Marismas Nacionales, the most extensive and well-preserved mangrove forest habitat on the western coast of Mexico, and home to more than 280 species of migratory and resident bird species. The Bay of La Paz: One of the most productive water bodies in the Gulf of California and an important area for nesting birds, the Bay of La Paz is jeopardized by two adjacent projects, Paraíso del Mar, currently under construction, and Entre Mares, proposed for construction on a sandbar extending into the bay. Combined, these two projects will develop nearly ten thousand hotel rooms, plus 4,000 homes, two golf courses and a large marina and would bring an additional population of more than 10,000 people in high season. Earthjustice and the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) are filing the petition on behalf of the Ecological Network for Escuinapa Development (REDES), Friends for the Conservation of Cabo Pulmo (ACCP), WiLDCOAST, SUMAR, Los Cabos Coastkeepers, Alliance for the Sustainability of the Mexican Coastal Northwest (ALCOSTA), the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Greenpeace México and AIDA. The petitioners are calling on Mexico to protect the marine and coastal ecosystems of the Gulf of California, particularly coral reefs like the ones in Cabo Pulmo. “By approving these projects, Mexico is failing its obligations to protect wetlands, coral reefs and species of environmental and international importance”, said Carolina Herrera, Latin America Advocate with the Natural Resources Defense Council. “What this region in the Gulf of California needs is low-impact sustainable development where the well-being of local communities and the environment is the first priority”. A map of the projects, photos, videos, and background information are available at: http://earthjustice.org/cortes Read the petition here: http://earthjustice.org/documents/legal-document/pdf/petition-to-commission-english

February 08 2013 Freshwater Sources, Toxic Pollution

The declaration of Santurbán as a Regional Natural Park is a start toward complying with the prohibition on mining in páramos

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 7, 2013 Media contacts: Astrid Puentes Riaño, AIDA Co-Director, [email protected], +52-55 5212-0141 Paulo Bacca, AIDA Legal Advisor, [email protected], +57-1 232-4246 The declaration of Santurbán as a Regional Natural Park is a start toward complying with the prohibition on mining in páramos AIDA supports the decision and urges the Ministry of Environment to guarantee the protection of all páramo ecosystems. Bogotá, Colombia. The Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) welcomed the declaration of a portion of the Santurbán páramo in the Colombian departments of Santander and Norte de Santander as a Regional Natural Park. The measure, taken in January, reaffirms the prohibition on mining activities in Colombia’s páramo ecosystems, a move that helps improve the protection of these sensitive wetlands and critical carbon sinks. AIDA expressed its support for the creation of the park in a letter to the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, the Alexander Von Humboldt Institute and the Autonomous Regional Corporation for the Defense of the Bucaramanga Plateau (CDMB) of Colombia, confirming that this act is congruent with the prohibition on mining in the region. It also reminded the government that this does not mean mining can be permitted in other parts of the páramo. The park declaration encompasses 11,700 of the 92,000 hectares of the páramo, and was proposed to the CDMB board of directors by Environment Minister Juan Gabriel Uribe based on a technical report issued by the Von Humboldt Institute. “At AIDA, we have spent more than five years highlighting the national and international obligation of the state to protect páramos. Although creation of the park is a good first step, we insist that the government comply with the law and ensure mining will be prohibited in the entire ecosystem”, said Paulo Bacca, a lawyer at the NGO. AIDA has worked to create and enforce the prohibition on mining in páramos, providing feedback on the Mining Code and related bills, and by following paradigmatic cases like Santurbán. It is a positive step that the Ministry of Environment, in accordance with constitutional and international commitments, has denied the environmental license requested by the Canadian company Greystar Resources Ltd. (now Eco Oro Minerals Corp.) to develop the Angostura gold mine in the heart of the páramo. “This issue goes beyond the legal arena. It is a matter of national security and the quality of life for Colombians given that the páramos are essential for the supply of 70% of drinking water, biodiversity conservation, climate change mitigation and even power generation”, said Astrid Puentes Riaño, co-executive director of AIDA. To prevent the lack of territorial demarcation from being used as justification for allowing mining projects in páramo areas, AIDA urges the Ministry of Environment to immediately make use of the new mapping of páramos provided to it by the Von Humboldt Institute a few months ago. The use of that mapping can help prevent mining companies from hiding behind the lack of a definition and demarcation of critical ecosystems like páramos to advance mining projects in areas where such activities clearly should not be permitted, thus furthering ecosystem and water resource protection critical to Colombian citizens. See the PDF version of the letter (Spanish only). For more information about the Angostura case and Santurbán páramo, please see: http://www.aida-americas.org/en/protecting_the_santurban_paramo_from_angostura_project

November 29 2012 Freshwater Sources, Human Rights, Indigenous Rights, Large Dams

Amidst criticism, BNDES approves unprecedented loan for controversial Belo Monte dam in Brazilian Amazon

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE November 29, 2012 Media Contacts: Astrid Puentes, AIDA, [email protected], +52 1-55 2301-6639 Brent Millikan, International Rivers, [email protected] +55 61 8153-7009 Maíra Irigaray, Amazon Watch, [email protected] +1 415 622-8606 Amidst criticism, BNDES approves unprecedented loan for controversial Belo Monte dam in Brazilian Amazon Financing ignores violations of human rights and environmental safeguards, tarnishing bank’s reputation, critics state Brasilia—On Monday, November 26, the Brazilian National Development Bank(BNDES) announced approval of an unprecedented loan of BRL 22.5 billion (approximately US$10.8 billion) for construction of the controversial Belo Monte dam project on the Xingu river, a major tributary of the Amazon. It is the largest loan in the bank’s 60-year history. BNDES is slated to be responsible for BRL 13.5 billion of direct finance, while Caixa Econômica Federal (CEF), a public bank, will pass through BRL 7 billion and private investment bank BTG Pactual will administer another BRL 2 billion. Responding to the BNDES announcement, nine Brazilian civil society organizations filed a petition yesterday with the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office (Ministério Público Federal) calling for an investigation of apparent violations of legally-binding requirements related to the project’s social and environmental impacts, risks and economic viability. The petition calls on prosecutors to take urgent measures to prevent BNDES from disbursing loan proceeds to the project developer (Norte Energia, S.A.) prior to the completion of a full investigation. The controversial project has been paralyzed on at least six occasions by affected indigenous communities and fishermen, who have protested over the failures of Norte Energía and government agencies to comply with the project's mandated environmental and social provisions. Eight thousand of the project's own workers also have shut down the dam, recently setting fire to construction camps and machinery and blocking roads, in protest against violations of labor legislation. “As long as Norte Energia and the Brazilian government, including BNDES, continue to ignore demands by affected peoples, there will be resistance and increased conflict. By approving the massive loan with so much conflict on the ground shows the lack of commitment by BNDES to meet rights and environmental safeguard commitments. It should reconsider the loan approval to avoid any further conflict,” said Maira Irigaray, International Finance Advocate at Amazon Watch. Belo Monte was suspended twice in 2012 by federal judges for the lack of prior consultations with affected indigenous communities, as required by the Brazilian Constitution and international human rights agreements. The International Labor Organization and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) have declared that the project places at risk the rights of affected indigenous communities. Expert and independent analysis has found that Belo Monte is economically, socially and environmentally unviable. Norte Energía and federal government agencies are facing 15 civil proceedings in the Brazilian courts lodged by the Public Ministry, the Public Defender’s Office and civil society institutions, as well as international suits that question the large number of illegalities and irregularities committed since the start of the project. Despite massive legal, financial and reputational risks surrounding Belo Monte, BNDES has decided to finance the project anyway, apparently under intense pressure from the administration of President Dilma Rousseff. By approving the loan, BNDES makes itself the main financier of a project notorious for violations of environmental legislation and human rights, including the culture integrity of indigenous and river communities. Among its environmental impacts, Belo Monte is expected to cause large emissions of greenhouse gases, including methane, a gas that is 25 times stronger than carbon dioxide. “The violations of human rights caused by the construction of the Belo Monte dam have been denounced before international organizations for which the State of Brazil and now also BNDES could be responsible,” said Astrid Puentes, Executive Co-Director of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), an organization that offers legal support to the affected communities. In 2011, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights – IACHR, part of the Organization of American States (OAS), called for precautionary measures to protect the life, personal and cultural integrity of the contacted and uncontacted indigenous communities of the Xingu River affected by the construction of the Belo Monte dam. The Brazilian government chose to ignore the Commission’s recommendations. “No serious social and environmental safeguards were implemented by BNDES prior to the approval of this loan for Belo Monte using the money of Brazilian taxpayers” argued Antonia Melo, coordinator of the Movimento Xingu Vivo para Sempre. “BNDES claims that part of the funds will be used in the mitigation of the impacts of Belo Monte, but this is just talk. No one guarantees that this money is going to minimize the suffering of those affected. To date, virtually none of the promises made to indigenous, river people and fishermen have been met. BNDES already has transferred BRL 2.9 billion to Norte Energia without any serious risk analysis, and you can see the disastrous situation of the people in the region, the deforestation and the lack of infrastructure in Altamira.” The unprecedented BNDES loan for Belo Monte, slated to be the world’s third largest dam project, is the largest in the bank’s 60-year history. Critics charge that the project is economically unviable, due to factors such as burgeoning construction costs that increased over six fold from BRL 4.5 billion reais in 2005 to current estimated of BRL 28.9 billion. The project is expected to produce only 39% of its installed capacity of 11,233 MW capacity. According to Brent Millikan, Amazon Program Director at International Rivers, “If the true social and environmental costs, along with the financial, legal and reputational risks of Belo Monte were seriously taken into consideration, BNDES would never get near the project.” Further information: www.aida-americas.org/es/project/belomonte www.internationalrivers.org/campaigns/belo-monte-dam www.amazonwatch.org/work/let-the-river-run www.xinguvivo.org.br

August 16 2012 Freshwater Sources, Human Rights, Indigenous Rights, Large Dams

Belo Monte Dam Suspended by Brazilian Appeals Court

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Media Contacts: Brent Millikan, International Rivers [email protected], +55 61 8153-7009 Andrew Miller, Amazon Watch [email protected], +1 202 423 4828 Joelson Calvacante, Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) [email protected], +52 55 5212-0141 Belo Monte Dam Suspended by Brazilian Appeals Court Project was illegally authorized by Congress without prior consultation with indigenous tribes, judges say Altamira, Brazil: A high-level court yesterday suspended construction of the controversial Belo Monte dam project on the Amazon’s Xingu River, citing overwhelming evidence that indigenous people had not been properly consulted prior to government approval of the project. A group of judges from Brazil's Regional Federal Tribunal (TRF1) upheld an earlier decision that declared the Brazilian Congress’s authorization of the project in 2005 to be illegal. The decision concludes that the Brazilian Constitution and ILO Convention 169, to which Brazil is party, require that Congress can only authorize the use of water resources for hydroelectric projects after an independent assessment of environmental impacts and subsequent consultations with affected indigenous peoples. The ruling means that Brazilian Congress will have to correct its previous error by organizing consultations on the project’s impacts with affected indigenous peoples of the Xingu River, especially the Juruna, Arara and Xikrin tribes. Their opinions should be considered in a Congressional decision on whether to authorize Belo Monte, and in the meantime the project consortium has been ordered to suspend construction. Project consortium Norte Energia, S.A, led by the parastatal energy company Eletrobras, faces a daily fine of R$500,000, or about US$250,000, if it does not comply with the suspension. The dam consortium is expected to appeal the decision in the Brazilian Supreme Court. “The court’s decision highlights the urgent need for the Brazilian government and Congress to respect the federal constitution and international agreements on prior consultations with indigenous peoples regarding projects that put their livelihoods and territories at risk. Human rights and environmental protection cannot be subordinated to narrow business interests” stated Federal Judge Souza Prudente, who authored the ruling. “This latest court ruling vindicates what indigenous people, human rights activists and the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office have been demanding all along. We hope that President Dilma’s Attorney General and the head judge of the federal court (TRF1) will not try to subvert this important decision, as they have done in similar situations in the past,” said Brent Millikan of International Rivers, based in Brasilia. “This decision reinforces the request made by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in April 2011 to suspend the project due to lack of consultations with indigenous communities. We hope that Norte Energia and the government comply with this decision and respect the rights of indigenous communities,” said Joelson Cavalcante of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), an organization giving legal support to affected communities. The Brazilian Congress authorized construction of Belo Monte seven years ago without an environmental impact assessment (EIA). A subsequent study - produced by state-owned energy company Eletrobras and three of Brazil’s largest construction companies (Camargo Correa, Andrade Gutierrez, and Odebrecht) - was widely criticized for underestimating socio-environmental impacts, especially on indigenous peoples and other traditional communities living downstream from the huge dam that would divert 80% of the Xingu’s natural flow. The EIA was approved by Brazil’s federal environmental agency (IBAMA) in February 2010 under intense political pressure and over the objections of the agency's own technical staff. With dam construction racing ahead since June 2011, many of Belo Monte’s forewarned social and environmental consequences are proving real. As a result, indigenous people have become more vocal in their opposition to Belo Monte. During the United Nations' Rio+20 conference in June, indigenous leaders launched a 21- day occupation of the dam site, protesting against the growing impacts of the project and broken promises by dam-builders. Two weeks later, indigenous communities detained three Norte Energia engineers on tribal lands. Both protests demanded suspension of the project due to non-compliance of mitigation requirementes. Last month, the Federal Public Prosecutors’ Office filed a lawsuit calling for suspension of the Belo Monte’s installation license, given widespread non-compliance with conditions of the project’s environmental licenses. Given this contentious and convoluted history, the long overdue process of consultations with indigenous peoples on Belo Monte is not likely to produce a positive verdict on Belo Monte, from the point of view of indigenous peoples. Similar conflicts over violations of indigenous rights by dam projects are emerging elsewhere in the Brazilian Amazon. Last week, in another landmark decision led by judge Souza Prudente, a group of judges from the TRF1 , the same court ordered the immediate suspension of one of five large dams planned for the Teles Pires river, a major tributary of the Tapajos river, noting a lack of prior and informed consultations with the Kayabi, Apiakás and Munduruku indigenous peoples affected by the project. According to Souza Prudente, "the aggression against indigenous peoples in the case of the Teles Pires dam has been even more violent than in Belo Monte. A political decision to proceed with the construction of five large dams along the Teles Pires river was made by the Ministry of Mines and Energy with no effective analysis of impacts on the livelihoods and territories of indigenous peoples. The Sete Quedas rapids on the Teles Pires river are considered sacred by indigenous peoples and are vital for the reproduction of fish that are a staple of their diets. Yet none of this was taken into account in the basin inventory and environmental impact studies. Moreover, the government and Congress simply ignored their obligations to ensure prior and informed consultations with indigenous peoples, as determined by the Federal Constitution and ILO Convention 169". Late yesterday, the President of the TRF1 announced his intention to overturn the decision of Souza Prudente and other federal judges regarding the Teles Pires hydroproject, marking a growing crisis within Brazil’s judiciary system over the Dilma Rousseff administration’s ambitious dam-building plans in the Amazon.

July 16 2012

World Bank Group Opens Case on Eco Oro Minerals Gold Mine in Fragile Colombian Wetlands

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Press Contact: Astrid Puentes Riaño, Co-Director, AIDA, (+52) 155-2301-6639, [email protected] Kristen Genovese, CIEL, (+31) 0652-773-272, [email protected] Jen Moore, MiningWatch, (+1) 613-569-3439, [email protected] Miguel Ramos, Comité por la Defensa del Agua, (+57) 314-416-4531, [email protected] World Bank Group Opens Case on Eco Oro Minerals Gold Mine in Fragile Colombian Wetlands IFC’s Ombudsman to hear complaints of downstream communities Bucaramanga, Colombia – Late last week, the World Bank Group accepted a complaint and will evaluate its investment in Eco Oro Mineral’s Angostura mining project, a proposed large-scale gold mine located in a fragile, high-altitude wetland called the Santurbán páramo, which provides water to over 2.2 million Colombians. The Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO), the independent grievance mechanism of the International Finance Corporation (IFC), will review complaints alleging that the IFC failed to evaluate the project’s potentially severe and irreversible social and environmental impacts. The CAO’s decision was prompted by a complaint submitted last month by groups that would be affected by the project in Bucaramanga, Colombia. The complaint asserts that the IFC, the World Bank’s private-sector lending arm, ignored its own policies when it invested US$11.79 million in the Vancouver-based company’s project. “It is outrageous that such a damaging mining initiative has the backing of the World Bank, whose mission is to advance real and sustainable development,” said attorney Miguel Ramos of the Committee for the Defense of Water and the Santurbán Páramo, a coalition of nearly 40 local groups which spearheaded the complaint before the CAO. “There could be some 20 counties whose water will be affected by this project.” The CAO’s Ombudsman will evaluate the case before the CAO determines whether a full audit is warranted. An audit would examine if the IFC’s environmental and social policies have been violated. In May 2011, following controversial hearings and protests numbering in the tens of thousands, the Colombian Ministry of the Environment rejected Eco Oro’s initial request for an environmental license, citing environmental, constitutional and international law prohibiting mining activity in páramo wetlands. Páramos are fragile ecosystems that supply about 75% of Colombia’s freshwater, including the drinking water of millions of people, and play a key role in mitigating and adaptation to climate change. The Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and MiningWatch Canada supported the Committee’s request that the CAO audit the project and that the IFC withdraws its funding of the project. “The IFC sets the standard for future investment in Colombia, and must be extra careful to avoid promoting unsustainable projects such as Angostura,” said Astrid Puentes Riaño, Co-Director of AIDA. “We are confident that this investigation will reveal that the IFC did not even ensure minimal protection for communities and the environment when it failed to require necessary impact assessments before investing.” “Prior armed conflict in this area could further compound the deleterious impacts this project would have on communities and their water supplies. Nonetheless, the IFC invested, explicitly hoping to spur greater interest in Colombia’s mining sector,” said Jen Moore, Latin America Program Coordinator for MiningWatch Canada. “This evaluation is warranted and ultimately, the IFC should pull out.” The CAO will review allegations that the IFC glossed over potential security issues related to Eco Oro’s project. The complaint questions the IFC’s original assessment, providing documented evidence of violence associated with guerrilla and paramilitary activity following a major military operation and the establishment of military installations in the area around 2003. Eco Oro holds mining rights to nearly 30,000 hectares (74,130 acres) of land in the Santurbán páramo near the city of Bucaramanga in the northeastern department of Santander. Eco Oro’s project has already stimulated investments from at least five other companies in the immediate area, more than doubling the area under mining concessions in the páramo. Full text of the complaint here (in Spanish).

June 28 2012 Large Dams, Freshwater Sources, Human Rights

Leaders of Brazilian movement opposed to controversial Belo Monte dam threatened with imprisonment, for Lawful Protests

International Groups Denounce Attempts to Criminalize Civil Society Leaders before OAS and UN Human Rights Bodies. Altamira (PA), Brazil – Brazilian social movements and civil society organizations are facing politically motivated prosecutions for their lawful opposition to the Belo Monte dam complex in the heart of the Amazon, a leading international human rights and environmental organization said today. In a report issued to the human rights arms of the Organization of American States (OAS) and the United Nations (UN), Brazilian and international groups detailed attempts to prosecute human rights and environmental activists and seek the arrests of 11 civil society leaders. Among the accused are a local reporter, leaders of the Xingu Alive Forever Movement, a Catholic priest and nun who led a mass during the Xingu+23 protest, a documentary filmmaker and a fisherman whose house was recently demolished to make way for dam construction. “The complaints filed by the dam consortium and the request for arrest warrants are based on fabricated information and gross distortions of the facts, with the clear intention of criminalizing leaders of a legitimate social movement opposed to the federal government’s obsession with the construction of Belo Monte, regardless of the project’s human and environmental costs and the rule of law”, said Marco Apolo, lawyer and co-director of SDDH, a renowned human rights NGO based in the state of Para. The police request for the arrest still pending approval in a local court, came in response to a complaint filed by of the consortium of companies building the dam. The peaceful protests organized by Brazilian civil society groups were celebrating 23 years of resistance to the project. Activities were focused in Santo Antonio, a small riverside village whose inhabitants are being displaced by construction of the large dam. In an isolated incident, a small group of protestors autonomously entered the offices of the consortium, causing some damages. Despite the absence of evidence linking the incident to the leaders of the movement and the protests, the police request for arrest warrants charges them with invasion and damage to private property, theft, arson, and disturbing the peace. “We expect a prompt response from the OAS and the UN regarding this blatant attempt to intimidate and criminalize human rights and environmental defenders working to protect the communities affected by Belo Monte,” stated Joelson Cavalcante, a Brazilian lawyer with the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), which co-authored the report. “The Brazilian government cannot simply silence critiques of its development policy by putting them in jail.” Some of the accused also are plaintiffs in a case before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights against Brazil for failing to consult local communities and ignoring important safeguards to protect the rights and environment of the people affected by the dam. In April 2011, the Inter-American Commission requested special measures to protect the rights of 12 indigenous communities. The Brazilian government has refused to comply with the resolution so far. Brazilian and international groups, including AIDA, have raised multiple claims of human rights violations surrounding the development of the Belo Monte dam. The project would seriously harm the lands and livelihoods of indigenous and rural communities including un-contacted tribes in voluntary isolation. The dam is slated to be the world’s third largest and displace as many as 40,000 families. The attempt to silence protest against the project comes in the wake of recommendations from the UN Human Rights Council calling on the Brazilian government to safeguard the work of human rights defenders and protect the human rights of indigenous and African-descendant communities. “Belo Monte is a sad example of misdirected development policy gone awry,” said Astrid Puentes, Co-Director of AIDA. “We expect the Brazilian government to heed the recommendations of the UN and OAS and promote truly just and sustainable development, demonstrating that statements made at the Rio +20 Conference are real. Stopping the unwarranted criminalization of human right defenders in the Xingu would be a positive step in that direction.”