Press Center
Organizations and communities call for intervention by the IACHR in response to the human rights impacts of mining for the energy transition
On Friday, November 15, representatives of national and regional organizations from Latin America, together with members of indigenous communities and peoples, participated in a regional public hearing before Commissioners and the Rapporteur on Economic, Social, Cultural, and Environmental Rights (REDESCA) of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) to discuss the Human Rights violations that mineral extraction for the energy transition is causing on the continent.Specifically, they asked the IACHR to urge States to:Create or strengthen intangible mining-free zones in consideration of their cultural, climate, or ecosystem values.Refrain from modifying regulatory frameworks that protect the environment and indigenous peoples to facilitate investment in mining projects for the energy transition, without considering the protection of human rights.Respect and ensure the framework for protecting the right to a healthy environment, considering synergistic, cumulative, and perpetual impacts, as well as climate impacts; and implement effective mechanisms to supervise and monitor public and private actors involved in the extraction of these minerals.Strengthen their justice systems, taking into account the principles of prevention and precaution against irreparable damage to ecosystems, people, and communities. They also requested that the IACHR prepare a report examining the measures that should be adopted by the States of the region to ensure that the promotion of minerals for the transition does not lead to human rights violations, especially in communities living in areas that are highly vulnerable to the impacts of mining activities.The hearing highlighted, based on specific cases, the serious human rights issues associated with the mining of lithium, cadmium, copper, cobalt, and other minerals used in the development of renewable energy technologies.At the outset, Felipe Pino, Project Coordinator at ONG FIMA, Chile, emphasized that as the rollout of energy transition projects accelerates, there are growing calls for a just transition, which should be interpreted as a wake-up call about the lack of coherence between transition strategies and the basis for climate action: protecting people and ecosystems on the planet. “The communities most affected by the climate crisis are now threatened by strategies to combat climate change. The success of our efforts will depend on whether we are able to resolve this supposed paradox of acceleration versus justice, which is particularly evident in our region,” he said.Pia Marchegiani, Deputy Executive Director of Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN), Argentina, said: “The great interest surrounding these minerals is also reflected in the enormous geopolitical dispute to gain control over them. Countries in North America, Europe, and Asia have enacted regulations to exploit these minerals and ensure their supply. International organizations such as the World Bank Group and the G20 have developed policies to ensure financing with certain safeguards in place for their use.”Marchegiani also noted that this issue has become so significant that the United Nations Secretary-General himself established a set of guiding principles to ensure justice, equity, and sustainability in the global energy transition. The first of these principles emphasizes the importance of placing human rights at the center of mineral value chains. The second highlights the need to address the transition comprehensively, with a focus on protecting the planet, biodiversity, and the environment.“It is estimated that demand for these minerals will grow exponentially in the coming years. Some forecasts suggest that global demand could quadruple by 2040 if climate agreements are fulfilled. Electric vehicles and batteries account for approximately half of the growth in this demand over the next two decades. This increase in demand translates into enormous pressure for Latin America, which already supplies 40% of the world’s copper production and 35% of lithium,” added Marchegiani.To explain the link between lithium extraction and human rights violations, Óscar Campanini, Executive Director of the Centro de Documentación e Información Bolivia (CEDIB), pointed out: “Lithium is extracted from the salt water beneath the salt flats, which requires the removal of tens of millions of cubic meters of salt water and fresh water. The salt flats in the so-called lithium triangle are located in desert areas where life is only possible thanks to fossil groundwater.”Verónica Gostissa, lawyer and activist at the Asamblea PUCARÁ in Catamarca, Argentina, said: “Since 1997, transnational companies have been extracting lithium from the Salar del Hombre Muerto, a sensitive high-altitude wetland. Due to the use of millions of liters of fresh and salt water, the companies—with the endorsement of the state—have already caused irreversible environmental damage: they have dried up the Trapiche River vega—that is, more than 5 km of river—which has died.”For her part, Lady Sandón, representative of the Environment Unit of the Consejo de Pueblos Atacameños, Chile, stated: “They are trying to secure production for 30 years to exploit lithium in fragile ecosystems such as salt flats, without having carried out consultation processes with indigenous communities, without adequate transparency, without considering those of us who live in the salt flats, arbitrarily choosing which salt flats to protect, without understanding that there is an interconnection of water.”Verónica Chávez, a member of the Comunidad de Santuario de Tres Pozos, one of more than 38 indigenous communities living in the Salinas Grandes Basin and Guayatayoc Lagoon, in the provinces of Salta and Jujuy in Argentina, said: “What we are defending is our life, that of plants, domestic and wild animals, vicuñas, llamas, etc. The lives of our ancestors, lagoons, and salt flats, which are part of our families. We all need water to live; clean water and a healthy territory. We are aware that this is not a task for the future. It is bread for today, hunger for tomorrow, and we will be sacrificed in order to extract this mineral.”Juan Sebastian Anaya, advocacy advisor at the Gaia Amazonas Foundation in Colombia, indicated that the human rights of indigenous peoples, Afro-descendants, and peasants in the Amazon are being affected by the legal and illegal extraction of minerals for the transition. “Today, there are extraction sites for rare earth elements, coltan, copper, and other strategic minerals, most of which operate without any state control… Mining activity is alien to the knowledge systems and legal order of the vast majority of Amazonian indigenous peoples,” he emphasized.Finally, Liliana Ávila, director of the Human Rights and Environment Program at the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), highlighted that the testimonies reveal at least three cross-cutting elements: violations of the right to water, violations of the right to a healthy environment, and aggravated impacts on indigenous peoples and local communities. “The region has experienced decades of human rights impacts resulting from fossil fuel extraction. It is essential that new forms of energy production overcome this legacy of abuse,” she said.The hearing was requested during the 191st session of the IACHR by the Due Process of Law Foundation (DPLF), the Gaia Amazonas Foundation, and the organizations that make up the Alliance for Andean Wetlands: the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), a regional organization; the Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN) and Asamblea PUCARÁ of Argentina; the Centro de Documentación e Información Bolivia (CEDIB) and the Human Rights Collective Empodérate of Bolivia; ONG FIMA, Defensa Ambiental, and Fundación Tantí of Chile. Press contactVíctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 5570522107
Read more
Organizations and communities alert to human rights impacts of mineral extraction for the energy transition
A public hearing before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights will focus on the impact of the expansion and intensification of extractive operations for transition minerals like lithium and copper on communities in Latin America. Washington DC. On November 15, at a public hearing before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, representatives of national and regional organizations, as well as members of communities and indigenous peoples, will present updated information on how the exponential increase in the demand for and extraction of transition minerals has caused serious human rights violations as part of a transition process that is proposed only as a change in the energy matrix and is incapable of addressing inequalities in energy production and consumption, particularly in the Global South.Transition minerals like lithium, copper, cadmium, and cobalt—also called “critical” minerals—have been proposed in many global discussions as one of the main solutions to the climate crisis, as they are used in the development of technologies for the production of renewable energy, thus reducing or replacing the use of fossil fuels. A large part of these minerals are located in Latin America, in areas of great biocultural diversity.At the hearing, participants will present the main threats that mining for energy transition poses to the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, the right to a healthy environment, access to environmental information, citizen participation, and justice. In addition, concrete cases of human rights violations in the context of mining for energy transition will be presented through testimonies.These impacts are already occurring in countries such as Argentina, Bolivia and Chile, which concentrate about 53 percent of the world's known lithium deposits in their Andean wetlands, extremely fragile ecosystems confronting water scarcity; in Chile and Peru, where 40 percent of the world’s copper is mined; and in the Colombian Amazon, where concessions, mining claims and illegal extraction of transition minerals are violating the rights of indigenous peoples.Several international organizations have spoken out about human rights abuses related to climate crisis response, particularly energy transition processes. In September, the UN Panel on Critical Minerals for Energy Transition issued a set of recommendations and voluntary principles for governments, industry and other stakeholders to ensure equitable, fair and sustainable management of these minerals. These guidelines aim to ensure that the transition to renewable energy is based on fairness and equity, and that it promotes sustainable development, respect for people, and environmental protection in developing countries.The hearing will take place during the 191st period of sessions of the Inter-American Commission. It was requested by the Due Process of Law Foundation (DPLF), the Gaia Amazonas Foundation and the organizations that are members of the the Alliance for Andean Wetlands (Alianza por los Humedales Andinos): the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), a regional organization; the Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN) and the PUCARÁ Assembly, of Argentina; the Centro de Documentación e Información Bolivia (CEDIB) and the Colectivo de Derechos Humanos Empodérate, of Bolivia; ONG FIMA, Defensa Ambiental and Fundación Tantí, of Chile.The hearing will be held from 9:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. (Washington DC time) and will be broadcast via Zoom, which requires prior registration at the following link: https://www.zoomgov.com/webinar/register/WN_dsEZdrDqSyOA8-i7ikveJQ#/registration. Quotes from representatives of organizations and communities Verónica Chávez, representative of the communities of Salinas Grandes and Laguna de Guayatayoc, Argentina:"All of us who are part of the Salinas Grande watershed are living a situation in which our rights are being affected. We hope that the IACHR can resolve this situation because it is very serious; they are damaging our territories, living beings, and nature itself." Liliana Ávila, director of the Human Rights and Environment Program at the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA):"The energy transition in our countries should be an opportunity to move towards more just and equitable energy production and distribution processes. The human rights framework and the role of the international protection system are fundamental in this regard. It is very important that the Inter-American Commission closely follows this process and promotes the protection of human rights." Verónica Gostissa, attorney with Asamblea Pucará of Catamarca, Argentina:"In our territory, the province of Catamarca, Argentina, we are living a serious violation of our rights, which is reflected first and foremost in the visible environmental impacts. Since 1997, lithium mining has caused significant environmental damage, including the drying up of a branch of the Trapiche River, a damage that persists to this day. Water continues to be taken from this damaged river, despite recognition of the damage by the company and government authorities. Access to public information, participation and consultation, and access to justice are also affected. For years, extractive projects have been approved without adequate procedures, and although a lawsuit filed by the Atacameños del Altiplano indigenous community resulted in a regulation, it does not meet the standards for effective indigenous consultation. In addition, more than 10 lithium projects are being developed in the same territory, the Salar del Hombre Muerto, without any cumulative and comprehensive impact assessment to date." Vivian Lagrava Flores, coordinator of the Colectivo de Derechos Humanos Empodérate, Bolivia:"Indigenous communities reject mining projects, they can even issue their resolutions and say no in the mining consultation process, but their decisions are not binding for governments. International standards are not respected, and the subjugation of territories and the imposition of mining rights are legitimized with discourses of progress and development, but it is not development from the vision of the indigenous peoples, nor from ours." Lady Sandón, representative of the Environment Unit of the Consejo de Pueblos Atacameños, Chile:"There is a lot of ignorance of the law for the native/indigenous people, which favors the state, and that is why the inhabitants of the land, by not knowing, do not enforce their guarantees. The state institutions violate the social, environmental, and cultural aspects; sometimes they use the indigenous people themselves to create divisions and to have supporters or political and mining operators who promote the change of the thinking of the genetic memory that we have as native people. I hope that we can revisit the situation of ancestral indigenous justice as a mechanism that previously established corrections so that the values and principles of ‘Buen Vivir’ are respected." Daniel Cerqueira, program director of the Due Process of Law Foundation (DPLF):"This hearing is an opportunity for the Inter-American Commission to clarify the parameters of action for both States and companies in the management of transition minerals. It is imperative to have specific obligations in this area, as human rights violations resulting from the extraction of these minerals are a reality that tends to worsen in several countries in the region." Juan Sebastian Anaya, advocacy advisor at the Gaia Amazonas Foundation (Colombia):"The indigenous governments of the Amazon exercise their territorial and environmental authority in accordance with the Law of Origin, which guides their knowledge systems and principles of relationship with the elements of the territory, such as minerals. The decarbonization of the energy matrix to maintain consumption standards in the global north should not be done at the expense of indigenous territories and the communities that protect them, govern them and make them flourish with their daily practices."Press contactsVíctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 5570522107Rocío Wischñevsky (Argentina), FARN, [email protected], +54 91159518538 Karen Arita (Mexico), DPLF, [email protected], +52 442 471 9626
Read more
COP16: To conserve biodiversity, governments must respect indigenous and local knowledge
At the UN Conference on Biodiversity, countries must also make progress in ensuring the participation of indigenous and local communities in decision-making on biodiversity. The energy transition model of the global north implies irreversible impacts for the Andean wetlands and the communities that inhabit them, whose territories overlap with lithium reserves. Ahead of the 16th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP16) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), which will take place from October 21 to November 1 in Cali, Colombia, the Alliance for Andean Wetlands (Alianza por los Humedales Andinos) calls on member countries to respect, preserve and maintain the knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. Doing so implies honoring the obligations acquired with the signing of the treaty.In addition, the signatory countries of the convention must make progress, through the presentation of concrete action plans at the national level, in ensuring the participation of communities in decision-making on biodiversity issues, one of the 23 targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework adopted in 2022.One of the goals of COP16 is to review compliance with these targets, aimed at halting and reversing biodiversity loss by 2030.According to the Living Planet Report, Latin America is the region with the greatest loss of biodiversity, as populations of all species show an average decline of 94% and 83% in the case of freshwater species.The Alliance warns of the irreversible impacts that the energy transition model promoted from the global north implies for the Andean wetlands, where some of the most sought-after transition minerals, such as lithium and copper, are found.These ecosystems harbor more than that: they are home to an enormous and unique biodiversity, as well as to local communities that depend on them and that for thousands of years have protected and preserved them, maintaining the ecological balance. Quotes from members of the Alliance for Andean WetlandsLaura Castillo, Coordinator of the High Andean Program at Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN), Argentina:"To address the biodiversity crisis, it is crucial to transcend the current paradigm of production and consumption, which promotes excessive use of environmental goods and exacerbates the ecological crisis. To this end, it is imperative to promote the reduction of high levels of consumption of natural goods, especially from the global north. Solutions to the climate and biodiversity crises -which are closely related- will inevitably require countries to define their own socio-ecological transitions towards models of life that respect human rights and planetary limits." Vivian Lagrava Flores, Coordinator of Empodérate and the Wetlands, Biodiversity and Water Protection project, Bolivia:"Biodiversity and water should not be assumed as an 'exploitable resource' by the States. As long as this mercantilist view persists, we will have more people affected by mining and sacrificed and, therefore, more biodiversity exposed and at risk of extinction." Verónica Gostissa, attorney and coordinator of the Alianza por los Humedales Andinos project at Asamblea Pucará, Catamarca, Argentina:"It is urgent to address the problem of lithium exploitation in the Puna. It is advertised as 'clean energy', but it is devastating our ecosystems. In Argentina, they intend to turn the Salar del Hombre Muerto into an industrial park, installing more than eight projects in the same territory. In this COP, it is crucial to recognize the irreversible impact generated by extractivism and, from there, to deploy ecosystemic links based on the care of all that is vital." Cynthia Escares, biologist and director of the NGO Defensa Ambiental, Chile:"The climate crisis is an undeniable reality. However, in its name, forms of extractivism disguised as clean energy and equity are being promoted, without recognizing the profound implications of these processes. Projects such as lithium and rare earth mining, essential for batteries and green technologies, are presented as solutions to climate change, but they replicate the same logics of exploitation that have historically devastated territories and communities. This time, not only will we lose the inhabitants of these vulnerable regions, but we are leading the planet and all its biodiversity towards an irreversible collapse." Yeny Rodríguez, senior attorney with the Ecosystems Program at the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA):"The biological and cultural diversity of our region is at risk. After COP16, it should be understood that we can no longer talk about defossilization as the panacea that will save us from the climate crisis. The energy transition towards 'clean energy' also requires the extraction of minerals such as lithium, an industry that in Latin America is already causing the destruction of Andean wetlands and the disappearance of rivers. We are facing an opportunity to move towards the protection of biodiversity and the human rights of the native communities that have cared for the territories since before the existence of our States." Ramón Balcázar Morales, executive director and researcher of Fundación Tantí, Chile:"The salt flats from which South American lithium is obtained are wetlands, territories inhabited by indigenous peoples and communities whose ways of life are key to the conservation of ecosystems that sustain a threatened biodiversity. Faced with the deepening of the polycrisis, we must promote democratic processes that allow us, as a society, to overcome the profound contradiction between the climate agenda based on green growth and the biodiversity conservation agenda. This requires governmental and institutional efforts and will to strengthen and dialogue with communities and social actors in the territories affected by mining and energy megaprojects associated with the energy transition."
Read more
Organizations concerned by Mendoza Supreme Court rejecting their Participation while allowing that of the oil industry in litigation over fracking
The Mendoza Supreme Court’s differential treatment occurred in a lawsuit over the authorization of fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, for extracting oil and gas from the Vaca Muerta formation in the Argentinian province. Civil society groups express concern about the Mendoza Supreme Court’s refusal to receive information about the dangerous impacts of using fracking to extract oil and gas on indigenous peoples and the environment in Mendoza. The Court rejected the participation of seven organizations--including an organization of the Mapuche Indigenous People and both Argentinian and international groups on human rights and the environment--in a case that will impact the regulation of the oil and gas industry in Mendoza.The court has instead shown preference toward the fossil fuel industry, having allowed the participation of several groups representing the interests of oil companies in the same court case.The court is weighing a decision involving the authorization of hydraulic fracturing--also known as fracking--to extract oil and gas from the Vaca Muerta formation in Mendoza. Although fracking has not been widely used in Mendoza, the technique has caused public health and safety risks in other countries because of its impact on the environment.The organizations requested to participate in the case as "Friends of the Court" (amicus curiae). This is a common practice permitted in Mendoza and many countries around the world that allows people not otherwise connected with litigation to share information with the courts in cases that affect the public interest.One justice dissented from the Supreme Court's decision, criticizing that this ruling "is far from the level of listening that ought to demand the judge's attention in the resolution of cases of undoubted social interest, such as the one at issue here." Furthermore, the justice pointed out that "[t]he entities requesting this Court to grant them participation as amicus, have vast experience and specialization in environmental issues."So far, the Supreme Court has rejected the interventions of the following organizations: Organización Identidad Territorial Malalweche (Mendoza); Xumek (Mendoza); Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (national); the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (international), the Center for International Environmental Law (international); Earthjustice (international) and the Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (international). Statements from the organizations Ana Laura Piccolo, executive director of XUMEK:"At Xumek, we are concerned by the provincial Supreme Court’s repeated rejections of the participation of civil society organizations through the figure of the 'Friend of the Court.' The organizations that have come forward to collaborate have established experience in the subject matter of the case and we make our contributions from a serious and objective perspective, in accordance with the technical and legal knowledge and expertise we possess. In addition, we have participated as amicus curiae in numerous judicial proceedings, both local and international". Ñushpi Quilla Mayhuay Alancay, attorney in charge of the Indigenous Peoples Area of XUMEK:"As expressed in the dissenting vote, ignoring all the voices of civil society in a case of high social complexity affects the dialogue between the judiciary and the citizens, thereby weakening the democratic process in cases of social interest where the human rights of society can be affected". Erika Schmidhuber, attorney with the Center for Legal and Social Studies (CELS):"We consider it essential that the province complies with international human rights standards on free, prior and informed consultation with indigenous peoples for development projects in their ancestral territory, regardless of whether or not that territory is formally recognized. The Argentine State has already been condemned internationally for not complying with these standards. It is necessary for the Mendoza court to evaluate the arguments we have presented as they reflect the obligations that Mendoza must comply with." Jacob Kopas, attorney at Earthjustice:"Strong scientific evidence from other countries shows that fracking generates serious contamination risks, particularly by leeching toxic chemicals into nearby water supplies. It is essential that the Supreme Court of Mendoza take this evidence into consideration along with the support for fracking it has received from groups that profit from oil extraction." Sofía Barquero, attorney with AIDA's Ecosystems Program:"Our interest in this case stems from our desire to ensure that environmental protection and the rights of indigenous peoples are an integral part of any decision that may affect these communities. In that sense, we respectfully call on the Court to reconsider its decision and allow for the inclusion of civil society voices in this judicial process. We trust that the Court will take into consideration the importance of listening to all stakeholders in this case." Upasana Khatri, attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL):"Fracking poses long-term environmental and health hazards that outlast production. It is essential that the Court hears from civil society experts on the evidence of such harms and the legal duty to prevent them - not just from industry actors with a stake in fossil fuel production - to ensure an informed decision on the risks and regulation of fracking in Mendoza."Press contactsOrganización Identidad Territorial Malalweche, Werken Gabriel Jofre, +54 2604592679XUMEK Asociación para la promoción y protección de los derechos humanos, Ñushpi Quilla Mayhuay Alancay, +54 9 2616807798CELS, Martina Noailles, [email protected], +54 9 11 6562-6566AIDA, Víctor Quintanilla, [email protected], +521 5570522107Earthjustice, Jacob Kopas, [email protected], +1 5862924603CIEL, Press Office, [email protected]
Read more
AIDA petitions Argentine court for protection of human rights in lithium mining case
In a legal brief supporting the litigation of the indigenous communities of the Puna in Argentina, we ask the Court of Justice of Catamarca to cancel the permits for two mining projects to avoid irreversible environmental impacts on the territory of the Salar del Hombre Muerto. We also ask that it order a cumulative and comprehensive environmental impact assessment that meets international standards and guarantees the participation of the communities. In support of the lawsuit filed by the Atacameños del Altiplano Indigenous Community, the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) filed an amicus curiae or "friend of the court" brief before the Court of Justice of Catamarca, requesting that the national government and the government of the province of Catamarca, in accordance with their international obligations, protect the rights of local communities against the cumulative environmental impacts of lithium mining projects in the territory and watershed of the Salar del Hombre Muerto."The accumulation of lithium mining activities in the Salar del Hombre Muerto has exacerbated water stress in the province and today threatens to affect the health of indigenous communities due to the use of large quantities of water and polluting chemicals," said Yeny Rodríguez, Senior Attorney at AIDA. "In application of the principles of prevention and precaution, it is imperative that the State take measures to avoid further impacts; if it fails to do so, it may incur international liability for the damages caused."The brief provides grounds for the application of justice and for the defense of the rights to a healthy environment, to water and to the life project of the communities. The document shows that the national and provincial governments have an obligation under international treaties and standards, such as the American Convention on Human Rights, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Convention on Wetlands, among others, to use an environmental assessment that addresses comprehensive and cumulative impacts to authorize existing, proposed, and related mining projects.The writ was filed as part of the amparo action filed by the Atacameños del Altiplano Indigenous Community in August 2021. In it, they asked the Court of Justice of Catamarca to revoke the authorizations granted by the environmental authorities to the projects "Fénix Project Expansion" of the company Livent and "Sal de Vida" of the company Galaxy Lithium S.A., until a proper environmental impact assessment is carried out.In a decision released last March 13, the court ordered the provincial government, as a precautionary measure, to refrain from issuing new permits until a "cumulative and comprehensive" environmental impact study is conducted for all lithium mining projects being developed in the area, and to guarantee free access to information and free, prior and informed consultation with communities for all projects. However, the court did not accept the request to stop lithium mining in the area, so the socio-environmental risks remain.In this sense, in order to protect the ecosystem and not irreparably affect the life project of the indigenous peoples, AIDA presented arguments to the Court of Justice of Catamarca in support of the communities' requests:In application of the international environmental principles of prevention and precaution, revoke the permits for the projects identified in the lawsuit and for all projects in the Salar Basin until an environmental assessment is carried out in accordance with international law.Order the competent authorities to carry out a cumulative and comprehensive environmental impact assessment, respecting at all stages the right to consultation or consent, as well as the right to timely and effective environmental participation of the Atacameños del Altiplano Indigenous Community. "AIDA reiterated before the Court that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has ruled that the Environmental Impact Assessment is the measure that guarantees the subsistence of indigenous communities in the face of the restrictions imposed by the concessions granted in their territory," said Rodríguez.The brief points out that in this case — given that lithium mining and other projects have already caused serious environmental degradation and affected the water carrying capacity of the ecosystem, in addition to jeopardizing the community's livelihood project — the state had an obligation to conduct a cumulative and comprehensive environmental impact assessment.Due to low rainfall and water evaporation, the Salar del Hombre Muerto — an Andean wetland located in northwestern Argentina, between the provinces of Catamarca and Salta — has a negative natural water balance, which has been exacerbated in the last 27 years by lithium mining. This activity requires the extraction of large quantities of brine (water with a high salt content) and fresh water (surface and groundwater).The region of the Salar Basin has been inhabited for more than 10,000 years by indigenous communities who have a special relationship with the environment that guarantees their individual and collective survival, their culture and their traditions. As a result of lithium mining, their members have had to change their traditional practices and have also suffered water shortages and significant animal losses.The Fénix mining project has diverted the Trapiche River to the point of drying up its last stretch before it reaches the salt flats. And the expansion of mining activities in the area threatens to dry up the Los Patos River as well.In the development of the projects mentioned in the lawsuit, the companies did not provide information to the communities, did not hold public hearings with their participation, and did not carry out a process of free, prior and informed consultation.Press contact:Víctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107
Read more
UN takes major step toward prioritizing justice regarding transition minerals
The United Nations’ Critical Energy Transition Minerals Panel issued a series of recommendations and voluntary principles aimed at ensuring equitable, fair and sustainable management of these minerals. The guidelines are aimed at governments, industry and other stakeholders in energy transition processes.This comes at a time when the global renewable energy movement, which seeks to reduce emissions that exacerbate the climate crisis, has highlighted how the environmental and social costs of transition minerals extraction fall disproportionately on local communities and ecosystems.Claudia Velarde, co-director of the Ecosystems Program of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), said: “For Latin America, the recommendations and principles are very important, since a large part of the reserves of resources essential for the energy transition are in the region, in complex territories rich in biological and cultural diversity.Significantly, the panel places human rights and justice at the center, recognizing the complexity of the energy transition and the inequality between countries in the global South that host the minerals and those in the North that need them for their own transition.To move forward with justice, the energy transition must break with the development status quo, include perspectives from the global South, respect the human rights of local communities, and recognize ecosystem boundaries.While there is still a long way to go to achieve a truly just and popular energy transition for Latin America, we hope that this contribution will be a step in that direction.” The recommendations and principles are contained in a report in which the Panel explains how the transition t to renewable energy can be based on justice and equity, promoting sustainable development, respect for people, and protection of the environment in developing countries.The Panel proposes seven voluntary guiding principles, based on standards, commitments and legal obligations established in United Nations texts:Human rights must be at the core of all mineral value chains.The integrity of the planet, its environment and biodiversity must be safeguarded.Justice and equity must underpin mineral value chains.Development must be fostered through benefit sharing, value addition and economic diversification.Investments, finance and trade must be responsible and fair.Transparency, accountability and anti-corruption measures are necessary to ensure good governance.Multilateral and international cooperation must underpin global action and promote peace and security. Read the panel report: https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/report_sg_panel_on_critical_energy_transition_minerals_11_sept_2024.pdfLearn more about panel: https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/critical-mineralsPress contact:Víctor Quintanilla (Mexico), [email protected], +5215570522107
Read more
Organisations demand justice in criminalization case against Rigoberto Juárez, ancestral authority and environmental and human rights defender of Guatemala
Organisations dedicated to the protection of human rights defenders, and national and international organisations working on the promotion and protection of human rights and indigenous peoples rights, express our concern over the criminalization process against Rigoberto Juárez, ancestral authority, environmental and human rights defender, and general coordinator of the Plurinational Ancestral Government of the Original Nations Mayas Akateka, Chuj, Q’anjob’al y Popti’.The judicial process against Rigoberto began in 2015 due to his role as a mediator and ancestral authority in a land conflict within the Q'anjob'al territory, specifically in the Ixquisis micro-region. This conflict arose from the indigenous Maya community's resistance to the poorly implemented and unconsulted hydroelectric projects by Energía y Renovación S.A., financed by BID Invest.The judicial process lacked an intercultural and differentiated approach. Additionally, the decisions made in the second instance and by the cassation court have ignored the factual and legal arguments presented by the defense regarding Rigoberto Juárez's role as an ancestral authority, which involved, at the community's request, assuming a mediator role in the high-conflict situation.From the perspective of the signing organizations, this judicial process has been used as a reprisal mechanism against the human rights defender’s legitimate human rights work. In particular, due to his crucial role in bringing visibility to, and reporting on, the Ixquisis case through a complaint submitted to the Independent Consultation and Investigation Mechanism (MICI) of the Inter-American Development Bank. Evidence of this can be found in the temporal overlaps of this process with crucial moments of the complaint filed with the MICI.In view of this concerning situation, we request judicial authorities to consider the arguments submitted by the legal defense of Rigoberto Juárez in the amparo action filed on 22 August and to make a decision that takes into account the specific guarantees of Rigoberto Juárez as an ancestral authority and as an environmental and human rights defender. Likewise, we call on international human rights institutions to urge the State of Guatemala to resolve the case of Rigoberto in accordance with their international obligations, and to prevent and address the serious trend of criminalization of indigenous authorities exercising their rights and responsibilities. Signed by:International Platform against ImpunityProtection International MesoaméricaInteramerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA)Franciscans InternationalRed Nacional por la Defensa de la Soberanía Alimentaria en Guatemala (REDSAG)Bank Information CenterInternational Service for Human RightsFront Line DefendersNISGUA (Network in Solidarity with the People of Guatemala)ASERJUSP. Marco Tulio Recinos Torres. CPPS.Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL)María Eugenia Solís GarcíaAlba Cecilia del Rosario Mérida PiedrasantaPress contact:Víctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107
Read more
Declaration of Manaus urges the Inter-American Court to clarify State obligations in climate emergency
San Jose, Costa Rica - Today, a coalition comprising over 400 communities, Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, and representatives of civil society presented the “Declaration of Manaus on Human Rights in the Climate Emergency” to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR). The widely endorsed declaration calls on the Court to articulate, in its forthcoming Advisory Opinion on the Climate Emergency and Human Rights, minimum standards for respecting and protecting human rights in the context of the climate crisis. It draws upon the insights of more than 150 participants who contributed during the public hearings on the process of the Advisory Opinion mentioned.The hearings, conducted in Bridgetown, Barbados (April 22–25), Brasilia (May 24), and Manaus (May 25–29), Brazil, served as a forum for the presentation of compelling testimonies from individuals and entire communities impacted by the climate emergency. In Manaus, in the heart of the Amazon, there was a strong emphasis on the expectation that the Court would issue a robust advisory opinion aimed at ensuring the protection of both people and the planet.The Declaration urges the Court to clarify the human rights obligations of States and reinforce the accountability of corporations and financial actors for their role in the climate crisis."The role played by the IACtHR Advisory Opinion is strategic at a historic moment for climate justice globally. The Court’s decision can reinforce and expand on what has already been established by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) on the obligations to protect the oceans from climate change. It will undoubtedly influence the subsequent interpretation of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the duties of States to protect communities and the planet in the face of the climate crisis," said Marcella Ribeiro, senior attorney with the Human Rights and Environment Program of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense. "The standards set by the Court will set new paradigms for access to justice in the context of the triple planetary crisis, influencing pending and future cases, as well as laws and policies inside and outside the continent. Lastly, this decision has great potential to help overcome the political impasse in the international climate negotiations."The Declaration, signed by over 400 parties, requests the Court to:Acknowledge that in the face of the climate emergency, all human rights, including the right to a healthy environment, must be upheld by all States. This obligation should be interpreted under the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and in line with the average global temperature increase limit established by the Paris Agreement and informed by the best available science.Specify that States need to transition to fossil-free economies without harming local communities and causing environmental impacts that exceed planetary limits.Ensure public access to information and participation, as well as the right to climate justice. This includes providing legal and institutional mechanisms for communities affected by the crisis to seek legal recourse, as well as raising awareness and training the judiciary on climate-related issues.Protect and facilitate the work of environmental defenders in the context of the climate emergency and energy transition.Guarantee adaptation measures to address the effects of climate change, ensuring the protection of all human rights, especially for vulnerable or historically discriminated groups.Uphold the right to self-determination of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples by obtaining their consent for measures directly affecting them in the context of climate change and energy transition.Ensure that victims and survivors of climate-related harm are granted comprehensive and just reparations and that climate judgments have financial resources for their implementation. "The Manaus Declaration also addresses corporate responsibility for the crisis. We urge the Court to reinforce States’ obligations to regulate corporate actors and ensure that those responsible for human rights violations related to the climate crisis are held accountable," adds Luisa Gómez Betancur, senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL). "Consistent with the polluter pays principle in international law, fossil fuel and agribusiness companies that are the primary drivers of climate change must cover the costs of mitigation and adaptation, as well as provide full reparation to victims for climate harm."Those supporting the Declaration are urging the IACtHR, as a guardian of human rights, to take a strong and forward-thinking stance. This approach should hold those who have had the most impact on the climate crisis responsible, guide inter-American policies towards environmentally sustainable economies, and establish a foundation for climate, environmental, and social justice worldwide, starting with Latin America."We hope that by listening to the testimonies of those of us who suffer the worst consequences of the climate emergency, the IACtHR will heed our call and order the States to respect our right to self-determination and the way in which we relate to our territories, prioritizing their care and conservation. For this reason, we join our voices in the Manaus declaration to remind the Court of the unique opportunity it has to mark a before and after in the fight for climate justice and the protection of our rights," said Everildys Córdoba Borja, legal representative of the Community Council of Black Communities of the Tolo River Basin and Southern Coastal Zone (COCOMASUR), Colombia.Read and download the declaration Press contactsNiccolo Sarno, CIEL, [email protected] Arista, EarthRights International, [email protected], +51 941 242 447Karina Saravia, CANLA, [email protected], +505 84331292
Read more
Mexican Supreme Court order to protect the Veracruz reef still unenforced
A port expansion project threatens the reef that hosts the greatest biodiversity of reef species in the western Gulf of Mexico. More than two years after the Supreme Court of Mexico ordered the adoption of several measures to protect the Veracruz Reef System and surrounding ecosystems affected by a port expansion project, the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (Semarnat) still refuses to comply with the ruling, putting the largest reef in the Gulf of Mexico and its environmental benefits at risk. The environmental organizations Territorios Diversos para la Vida, A.C. (TerraVida), Mexican Center for Environmental Law (CEMDA), Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) and Earthjustice denounce this failure to comply with the court order. The Veracruz Reef System—a Wetland of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention since 2004—hosts the greatest biodiversity of reef species in the western Gulf of Mexico and is home to several critically endangered species such as the hawksbill sea turtle. The reefs are of high importance to the Veracruz community because they protect the coast from hurricanes and support local fishing and tourism. On February 9, 2022, residents of Veracruz won a victory before the Supreme Court in an amparo action filed to defend the Veracruz reef and other relevant ecosystems from the impacts of the port expansion. The highest court in Mexico determined that Semarnat violated the people of Veracruz’s right to a healthy environment after finding the project’s approval to be severely deficient. As a result, the Court ordered the revocation of the project’s permits, as well as a complete and holistic reevaluation of the project’s impacts, tasks that Semarnat has not yet complied with. "Today, the right to a healthy environment of the people living in the Veracruz-Boca del Río-Medellín metropolitan area continues to be violated because Semarnat, when re-evaluating the port expansion’s environmental impact after the court order, used outdated scientific information, failed to conduct a new evaluation, and allowed the port to again fragment its project by separating out the rock quarries and breakwaters," said Francisco Xavier Martínez Esponda, co-coordinator of TerraVida, the organization representing the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. "In short, the project was never evaluated in a complete and holistic manner, as ordered by the Court, and therefore we remain unaware of the project’s true environmental risk." The environmental authority had authorized the project in a fragmented manner, dividing it into 15 sections, which it evaluated and approved independently, obscuring its full impact. Far from complying with the court’s order, on December 30, 2022, Semarnat's General Directorate of Environmental Impact and Risk conditionally reauthorized the Veracruz port’s expansion, but once again in a fragmented manner, without adequately assessing the full project using the best available science and without allowing for public participation, as the court required. In its decision, Mexico’s highest court also ruled that Semarnat was obligated, among other things, to seek international technical assistance to preserve the site within the framework of the Ramsar Convention, an intergovernmental treaty for the protection and sustainable use of wetlands and coastal areas. To date, Semarnat has not yet finalized its request for international support. "In the absence of adequate and meaningful government efforts, there is a clear delay in obtaining expert advice from the Ramsar Convention," said Jorge Lu Palencia, an attorney with AIDA. "It is paradoxical that the expansion of the port has been authorized while still awaiting an independent technical evaluation, which, by its nature, should be prior to any decision that puts the ecosystem at risk." In addition, a scientific analysis prepared by independent researchers concluded that the mitigation measures proposed by the project promoter—the Veracruz Port System Administration—are not capable of avoiding the adverse consequences on the Veracruz reef because they were not based on a scientifically valid assessment of the project’s impacts. The scientific analysis shows that the environmental agency has not studied the potential impacts on the entirety of the reefs within the Veracruz Reef System National Park. In addition, dredging activities were carried out without considering the direct impact on the invertebrate species that inhabit the marine sediments. In view of the situation, the analysis recommends an external evaluation provided by a public research center. For these reasons, the organizations, at different times, have requested the Fifth District Court in Veracruz—in charge of supervising compliance with the judgment—to withhold from ruling on compliance with the judgment until these deficiencies are corrected. Press contacts Gabriela Sánchez, TerraVida, [email protected], +52 5511429935 Víctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107
Read more
Warning of increased contamination in La Oroya and slow progress by the State to comply with the Inter-American Court ruling
The State's progress in implementing the international court's ruling has been slow and insufficient. Meanwhile, a high level of sulphur dioxide has recently been registered in the Andean city due to the partial reactivation of the metallurgical complex and the lack of prevention, warning, monitoring and control measures by the state. Two months after the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued its ruling in the case "La Oroya Community vs. Peru," the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) and the Pro Human Rights Association (APRODEH), organizations that legally represent the victims, warned at a press conference that the Peru is making slow and insufficient progress in effectively complying with the ruling.The ruling, issued on March 22 and considered a landmark in international law, established Peru’s responsibility for violating the rights of La Oroya residents affected by decades of toxic contamination.The international tribunal ordered comprehensive remedial measures, including environmental cleanup, reduction and mitigation of polluting emissions, air quality monitoring, free and specialized medical care, compensation, and a resettlement plan for the affected people. Increased pollution in La OroyaThe organizations also denounced that the government’s slow action is occurring in the midst of an increase in the presence of toxic contamination in the area due to the partial reactivation of the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex and the lack of prevention, warning, monitoring and control measures by the state.According to the Environmental Monitoring System of the Environmental Evaluation and Control Agency, a high presence of sulfur dioxide has recently been recorded in La Oroya, which makes it imperative that Peru take urgent action based on its international responsibility.One of the measures ordered by the Inter-American Court is to ensure that the operations of the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex comply with international environmental standards, preventing and mitigating damage to the environment and human health. Challenges in implementing the rulingDuring the press conference, Rosa Peña, Senior Attorney for AIDA's Human Rights and Environment Program, said: "The ruling is a great opportunity for the State of Peru to prevent and better manage the environmental impacts of mining and metallurgical activities, as well as to improve health care for people exposed to contamination. The Court has already identified the key aspects, now it is up to the State as a whole to ensure a good implementation that will serve as an example for other cases at national and international levels."Christian Huaylinos, coordinator of the legal sector of APRODEH, emphasized the need for an articulated multisectoral work: "A coordinated effort of the three levels of the state—local, regional and national—is needed to advance in the effective compliance of the sentence. In addition, clear mechanisms must be put in place to ensure the effective participation of victims in the implementation of the orders issued by the Court." Community demandsYolanda Zurita, a petitioner in the case, emphasized the community's frustration with the lack of prompt and effective action: "We, as a population, need to feel and see that there is compliance. It is not possible that after 20 years of litigation, and after the Court's ruling has been made public, there are officials who claim to be ignoring the ruling."The Inter-American Court's ruling not only focuses on reparations for direct victims, but also includes restitution measures and guarantees of non-repetition for the entire population of La Oroya and the country. It defines parameters for the proper conduct of mining and metallurgical operations in Peru, in defense of the environment and health.The ruling is an important precedent for the protection of the right to a healthy environment in Latin America and for adequate state oversight of corporate activities.AIDA and APRODEH urge the Peruvian government to comply with the measures ordered by the Inter-American Court and to take immediate action to protect the environment and health of the community of La Oroya.Press contactVíctor Quintanilla-Sangüeza (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 5570522107
Read more