Press Release

Paisaje con río y nevado de fondo en Neuquén, Argentina

July 23 2025 Human Rights, Indigenous Rights, Fracking

Mapuche defend against extractive industry and forced evictions from ancestral lands in Argentina

Mapuche communities urge Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to further investigate abuses at nexus of extractive industry and land dispossession.Río Negro, Neuquén, Mendoza, Argentina - Organizations of the Indigenous Mapuche People addressed the urgent situation arising from conflicts with extractive projects on Indigenous land in Argentina in a public hearing before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights today. The human rights body of the Organization of American States heard testimony of those impacted by mining, oil, and gas projects that have been compounded by the lack of territorial recognition, ongoing evictions, and the criminalization of indigenous communities."The rapid expansion of extractive projects across ancestral Mapuche territories in Argentina is driving the eviction of our communities as projects proceed without their free, prior, and informed consent," emphasized Mirta Ñancunao y Hugo Aranea, werken (spokespeople) of the Mapuche-Tehuelche Parliament of Río Negro. This includes new mining projects across 1,800 square kilometers in Malargüe, oil and gas developments stretching 600 kilometers along the Vaca Muerta shale formation in Neuquén, and at least 53 new mining and energy projects in Río Negro, particularly in the Calcatreu open-pit gold and silver mining project, which threatens nearby water sources."The exploitation of natural resources has been accompanied by the intention to vacate traditional territories," said Lorena Bravo of the Mapuche Federation of Neuquen, Xaunko Regional Council. "The evictions have direct consequences including preventing the use of and access to land, sacred sites, impacts to health, access to water, impacting indigenous economies and traditional practices."Gabriel Jofré, werken of the Malalweche Organization, asserted that the "advance of extractive companies into the traditional territory of Mapuche communities is predicated on the lack of effective state recognition of Mapuche communities." He emphasized that the state has dismantled the processes used by Mapuche communities to assert their territorial rights, including the recognition of their legal status. Jofré also noted that the national government rolled back protections in Law 26.160, which had suspended evictions of recognized indigenous communities."The advance of land extraction is not possible without installing a racist and discriminatory discourse," which Jofre maintains endangers human rights and environmental defenders. Both national and provincial politicians have fueled racist and hateful discourses against Mapuche communities, labeling them "terrorists" and denying their Indigenous identities. This rhetoric has further stigmatized Indigenous defenders and increased the risks they face for engaging in rights advocacy.The communities urged the Commission to further investigate human rights violations occurring at the intersection of extractive industry expansion and the dispossession of Mapuche communities from their ancestral lands. In December 2024, the Commission issued a public statement calling on Argentina to respect the land rights of Indigenous Peoples.Organizations participating in the hearing included the Malalweche Organization from Mendoza, The Mapuche Confederation of Neuquén, and the Coordination of Mapuche Parlement of Río Negro, with support from the Observatory on the Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense. Earthjustice has partnered with the Malalweche Organization in defending territorial rights of the Mapuche people since 2022.Entre las organizaciones que participaron en la audiencia se encuentran la Organización Malalweche de Mendoza, la Confederación Mapuche de Neuquén y la Coordinadora del Parlamento Mapuche de Río Negro, con el apoyo del Observatorio de Derechos Humanos de Pueblos Indígenas, la Asamblea Permanente por los Derechos Humanos (APDH), la Asociación Interamericana para la Defensa del Ambiente (AIDA) y Earthjustice.Press contactVíctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 5570522107

Audiencia sobre crisis climática ante la Corte Interamericana en Manaos, Brasil

July 02 2025 Climate Change, Human Rights

Landmark Inter-American Court Decision Requires States to Protect Human Rights in the Face of the Climate Crisis

In a groundbreaking advisory opinion issued today, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights clarifies the obligations of States to effectively protect people and communities from the harmful impacts of the climate crisis. The decision sets a powerful precedent for climate justice and offers critical guidance to national and international courts worldwide.San José, Costa Rica. In its Advisory Opinion No. 32, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has taken a historic step toward strengthening global climate accountability. The Court sets a powerful precedent by establishing legal standards that States across the continent must meet to protect human rights in the face of the climate crisis. This landmark ruling is expected to drive a new wave of strategic climate litigation, enabling affected people and communities to access justice.“The Court’s decision marks a watershed moment for climate justice in Latin America and around the world, as it is the first time a regional human rights tribunal has clearly spelled out States’ legal obligations in response to the climate crisis,” said Gladys Martínez, Executive Director of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). “We welcome this significant step forward — one that will not only help protect communities and individuals, but also guide national and international courts, including the International Court of Justice, which is now developing its own opinion on this critical issue.”The Court recognized, for the first time, the existence of an autonomous human right to a healthy climate, derived from the right to a healthy environment. In light of Advisory Opinion No. 32, States across the region now have legal obligations to address the climate crisis as a human rights issue, in accordance with their domestic laws and applicable treaties and agreements, including:Guaranteeing a climate system free from dangerous anthropogenic interference, as a precondition for the exercise of other human rights.Respecting the principle of intergenerational equity, by ensuring that current generations leave behind conditions of environmental stability that allow future generations similar opportunities for development.Regulating, supervising, and overseeing, as well as requiring and approving environmental impact assessments, to fulfill their duty to mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.Defining a mitigation goal; developing and maintaining an up-to-date mitigation strategy grounded in human rights; and strictly monitoring and supervising public and private GHG-emitting activities.Ensuring an equitable distribution of the burdens of climate action and climate impacts, avoiding the imposition of disproportionate burdens—this includes the fair allocation of the costs associated with the energy transition. In addition, the Court recognized in its opinion that local, traditional, and Indigenous knowledge is protected under Inter-American treaties and constitutes an integral part of the concept of the best available science—opening a new path for the enforceability and inclusion of these knowledge systems in responses to the climate emergency.“This decision by the Inter-American Court ushers in a new era for climate negotiations and litigation by providing individuals, communities, and civil society organizations with a clearer and more robust legal framework,” said Liliana Ávila, Director of the Human Rights and Environment Program at AIDA. “It empowers people to hold States accountable – both in climate negotiations and courtrooms – and to push for the structural changes needed to confront the climate crisis. This includes meeting their obligations on mitigation, adaptation, and addressing loss and damage, all while upholding fundamental human rights.”The Court’s decision responds to a request submitted in January 2023 by the governments of Colombia and Chile. In their petition, the two States emphasized that their populations — along with those of other countries across the Americas — are already experiencing severe impacts from the global climate crisis, including droughts, floods, wildfires, and other extreme events. They called on the Court to clarify how the American Convention on Human Rights should be interpreted in the context of the climate emergency, its root causes, and its wide-ranging consequences.“This decision serves as a binding interpretive tool for States in the region, opening new legal pathways to hold governments accountable for protecting human rights,” said Marcella Ribeiro, Senior Attorney at AIDA. “States must now align their domestic policies to meet the legal standards set by the Court — including, among other things, properly regulating corporate activity in the context of the climate crisis and ensuring a stable climate for future generations.”From the outset of the process, AIDA played a proactive role. The organization supported various communities across the region in ensuring their voices were heard by the Inter-American Court, submitting legal briefs that highlighted the socio-environmental impacts of the climate emergency on Indigenous peoples, women, children, people of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, and on particularly fragile ecosystems such as coral reefs. AIDA also facilitated the participation of community representatives in the public hearings held as part of the process, which took place in Barbados and Brazil in April and May 2024, respectively.AIDA additionally submitted its own legal brief to the Court, arguing that the right to a “stable and safe climate” should be recognized as part of the universal right to a healthy environment – underscoring States’ obligations to prevent and mitigate the harmful effects of the climate emergency on their populations.The process saw the submission of more than 200 written observations — an unprecedented number for an Advisory Opinion of the Inter-American Court — reflecting the region’s strong engagement with the issue. Advisory Opinions play a vital role in shaping human rights law by clarifying how existing rights should be interpreted, thereby guiding States in how to uphold and enforce them within their territories or jurisdictions.Advisory Opinion No. 32 builds upon and reinforces earlier rulings, including the 2024 advisory opinion from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, which clarified States’ obligations to protect the marine environment from the climate crisis. It also complements the forthcoming opinion from the International Court of Justice – the UN’s highest judicial body – which will define States’ responsibilities in the face of the global climate emergency.In a global context that demands ever-stronger climate action, the Inter-American Court’s decision reaffirms that governments must act based on binding legal obligations — not merely voluntary commitments. This legal milestone provides people and communities across the region a powerful foundation from which to demand real action and the full protection of their rights in a safe, just, and sustainable climate. Press contact:Víctor Quintanilla, [email protected], +52 5570522107

participación en audiencia pública de la Corte IDH

June 18 2025 Human Rights

Media Advisory: Inter-American Court Decision on Climate and Human Rights Approaching

Expected Release: Early July 2025The Inter-American Court of Human Rights is expected to release a historic Advisory Opinion in early July, clarifying how states must uphold human rights in the context of the climate crisis.This legal milestone follows public hearings where frontline communities, Indigenous leaders, and civil society organizations shared powerful testimony on the real-world impacts of environmental degradation and government inaction. The Court’s decision will have far-reaching implications for climate policy, state accountability, and the protection of environmental defenders across the Americas.From the beginning of the process, AIDA assumed a proactive role, promoting the involvement of communities affected by the climate crisis in Latin America. We supported a diverse array of amicus briefs and community testimonies before the Court in public hearings and presented our own amicus brief arguing that the right to a “stable and safe climate” should be recognized as part of the universal right to a healthy environment.Spokespeople Available for Media Interviews:Legal Experts & Organizational LeadersMarcella RibeiroSenior Attorney, AIDALanguages: Portuguese (native), Spanish, English Expertise: Community participation, just transition, climate reparationsBased in: Brazil Available for: Interviews and background briefingsLiliana ÁvilaProgram Director, AIDA Languages: Spanish (native), EnglishExpertise: Human rights law, climate litigation, regional legal mechanismsBased in: ColombiaAvailable for: Interviews and background briefingsFrontline Community VoicesWe can coordinate interviews with several key members of frontline communities who testified directly before the Court during the public hearings.These spokepeople bring a vital human and territorial perspective to the legal decision and are available for media conversations in Spanish and local language, with interpretation support as needed. Background Materials:AIDA's amicus brief on the right to a safe and stable climate.Civil society contributions from around Latin America, on the Climate Litigation Platform for Latin America & the Caribbean.Frontline community interviews from the Manaus public hearing.The Manaus Declaration signed by nearly 400 people and organizations from across the continent.AIDA's background ABC on the Advisory Opinion process. Media Contacts:Victor QuintanillaMedia Coordinator, AIDA 📧 [email protected]📱 +52 55 7052 2107Lorena ZáratePositioning Coordinator, AIDA 📧 [email protected]📱 +52 55 7052 2107

Laguna de agua cristalina en el páramo de Santurbán, Colombia

May 20 2025 Freshwater Sources, Mining

UN experts denounce threats and stigmatization against defenders of water and the Santurbán páramo; demand protection for their work

Bucaramanga, Colombia. On March 6, 2025 the United Nations Special Rapporteurs on human rights defenders, a healthy environment, water and sanitation, and the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights sent formal letters to the governments of Colombia, Canada, and the United Arab Emirates, as well as to the companies Aris Mining and MDC Industry Holding Company LLC to denounce the threats and stigmatization faced by the Committee for the Defence of Water and the Santurbán Páramo for defending this ecosystem threatened by mining in Colombia. To date, only the Colombian government’s reply has been made public. While harassment is not new, content has recently been disseminated on social media labeling the Committee’s spokespersons as "persona non grata", endangering their lives by claiming false connections to illegal armed groups. Committee members have warned that "every day that passes without a response from the national government and the companies legitimizes those who seek to silence us".For 16 years, the committee has worked to protect the Santurban páramo - a high altitude wetland ecosystem which provides fresh water to more than two million people. Recently, they achieved recognition of part of the páramo as a Temporary Reserve Zone, which means that large-scale mining activities will be suspended for two years.Viviana Herrera, Latin America Program Coordinator at MiningWatch Canada, said, "it speaks volumes that Canada has not yet responded to the UN experts. Canada must prioritize the environmental defenders of the Santurbán Committee and their struggle to protect water."Sebastián Abad Jara, an attorney with the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), said that "through these letters, the offices of the UN recognized the committee as a coalition of rights defenders; they informed governments and companies of the clear, imminent, and specific risk to its members; and in doing so they dismantled the false narratives linking their activities to those of illegal groups."The UN agencies emphasize that Aris Mining, its subsidiary Minesa, and all companies in its supply chain associated with the Soto Norte project — such as Calimineros — have an obligation to respect and protect human rights, especially those of environmental and water defenders."Colombia is one of the most dangerous countries for those defending water and life against extractive projects, which is why immediate action by states and companies is urgently needed to stop the stigmatization and guarantee the safety of members of the committee," said Jen Moore, associate researcher at the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS).The Committee for the Defence of Water and the Santurbán Páramo, AIDA, MiningWatch Canada, IPS, Common Frontiers Canada, and the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) reiterate the call by United Nations experts to the governments of Colombia, Canada, and the United Arab Emirates, as well as to Aris Mining company and MDC Holding, to safeguard the lives and integrity of the committee members.In accordance with their obligations under national law, the Escazú Agreement, inter-American law and jurisprudence, and the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, we also urgently call on states and companies to respond to the substance of the letters and adopt measures — with verifiable deadlines and measurable progress — to prevent companies associated with the Soto Norte project from committing human rights violations.Only the protection and strengthening of historic leadership such as that of the Santurbán Committee in Colombia will bring us closer to environmental and climate justice. The concerns raised by the offices of the UN are a reminder that protecting those who lead the struggle for water in Latin America is an imperative of state and corporate due diligence.Press contactsCommittee for the Defense of Water and the Santurbán Páramo, [email protected] Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +5215570522107Viviana Herrera, Mining Watch Canada, [email protected], +14389931264Jennifer Moore, IPS, [email protected], +12027049011

March 24 2025 Toxic Pollution, Human Rights

Families of La Oroya demand Peru comply with Inter-American Court ruling

One year after the decision, the state has still not implemented the ordered reparations. The population lacks comprehensive health care and is once again exposed to toxic contamination due to the reactivation of the La Oroya smelter complex, which is operating without adequate environmental management.One year after the Inter-American Court of Human Rights ordered the Peruvian state to provide comprehensive reparations to the residents of La Oroya, after finding it responsible for violating their rights, the victims are still waiting for the ruling to be implemented and for state to comply with its international obligations."It's already been a year since the ruling was announced, how much longer will we have to wait?" asked Yolanda Zurita, a resident of La Oroya and a petitioner in the case. "Enough is enough! We demand that the Peruvian state immediately comply with the ruling of the Inter-American Court, which will benefit not only the victims of the case, but also the population of La Oroya and the country exposed to toxic substances from the indiscriminate development of extractive and industrial activities in our territories."On March 22, 2024, in a landmark decision for the protection of a healthy environment in Latin America, the Court responded to the long and tireless search for justice by the families of La Oroya, who have been affected for decades by the extreme levels of contamination from the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex (CMLO) and the lack of adequate protective measures by the State, which today ignores the ruling and underestimates its importance.Although the Court ordered the State to ensure that CMLO's operations comply with international environmental standards and to prevent and mitigate damage to the environment and human health, the opposite is currently the case: the complex has reactivated its operations without having modernized its facilities to prevent and mitigate the environmental and health risks it generates for the population.It is urgent that the CMLO stops polluting and that the Peruvian State adopts the measures required by the Court to modernize it in accordance with international environmental standards of environmental protection, in compliance with the ruling."With the reactivation of the metallurgical complex, the people of La Oroya are once again being exposed to levels of pollution that endanger their lives; the Inter-American Court's ruling is clear and the State is obligated to comply," said Rosa Peña, senior attorney with the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). "The delay in complying with the ruling is re-victimizing the families who have been demanding justice for more than 20 years."The court also ordered the state to provide free medical care to the victims and to guarantee specialized care to residents with symptoms and illnesses related to contamination from the mining and metallurgical activities. Today, however, comprehensive health care is not guaranteed in La Oroya. It is necessary that the State, through and in coordination with the Ministry of Health, the Regional Health Directorate of Junín, the General Directorate of Environmental Health, and health care providers, create and implement the protocol for comprehensive care for victims in La Oroya, as established by the Court.The ruling set a historic precedent for the control of industrial pollution by states. For the Peruvian State to make real progress in its implementation, it is imperative that the Attorney General's Office issue the Compliance Resolution."Despite the deadlines set by the Inter-American Court for the Peruvian State, there has been virtually no progress in the implementation of the ruling," said Christian Huaylinos, coordinator of the legal department of the Pro Human Rights Association (APRODEH). "Above all, the nature of the case must be taken into account, which implies that La Oroya has been classified as a sacrifice zone due to the high levels of contamination; therefore, the need to fully compensate the victims is urgent." Background of the caseLa Oroya is located in the central mountain range of Peru, in the department of Junin, 176 km from Lima. In 1992, the US company Cerro de Pasco Corporation installed the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex (CMLO) to process mineral concentrates. The complex was nationalized in 1974 and operated by the state under the name Centromin Peru until 1997, when it was taken over by Doe Run Peru, which operated it until 2009. In short, the CMLO is over 100 years old.In La Oroya, most of the people affected by the CMLO contamination, including children, have lead levels higher than those recommended by the World Health Organization. In some cases, they have registered higher levels of arsenic and cadmium, in addition to stress, anxiety, skin problems, stomach problems, chronic headaches, and respiratory or cardiac problems, among others.In the absence of effective responses at the national level and on behalf of the victims, an international coalition of organizations filed a complaint against the Peruvian State with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in 2006. In October 2021, the Commission found the Peruvian government responsible and referred the case to the Inter-American Court. In October 2022, more than 16 years after the international complaint was filed, the victims, represented by AIDA and APRODEH with the assistance of Earthjustice, brought the case before the Court. Press contactsVíctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 5570522107María Nieve Sullón (Peru), APRODEH, [email protected], +51 984926868

Cosecha de sal en el Salar de Uyuni, Bolivia

November 13 2024 Climate Change, Human Rights, Freshwater Sources

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

October 03 2024 Indigenous Rights, Fracking, Freshwater Sources

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]

September 24 2024 Indigenous Rights, Freshwater Sources, Mining

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

Vista panorámica de La Oroya, Perú, en 2024.

May 24 2024 Toxic Pollution, Human Rights, Mining

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

Bandera indígena en una carretera de Jujuy, Argentina

April 17 2024 Indigenous Rights, Mining

Argentina: the scramble for lithium threatens the rights of Indigenous Peoples in Jujuy

International civil society organisations with extensive experience in the defence of the environment and human rights present the conclusions of an observation mission to the Argentinian province of Jujuy in August 2023 following the constitutional reform approved in June of the same year, which facilitates lithium extraction. Paris and San Salvador de Jujuy. In a report published today, ten international civil society organisations with extensive experience in human rights and environmental issues warn that the lack of prior consultation of the 11 Indigenous Peoples of Jujuy in the approval process for the reform of the provincial constitution is incompatible with international human rights and environmental standards.The report also denounces that the new Jujuy Constitution authorises productive activities on public lands, which opens the door to the implementation of extractive projects in Indigenous ancestral territories, without guaranteeing prior, free and informed consultation with the communities. It also approves the large-scale use of water, which facilitates the use of an essential resource for the survival of Indigenous Peoples for the exploitation of lithium, an activity with a high water footprint.The constitutional reform process is framed in a context of mining deployment in the high Andean wetlands of Jujuy, whose watersheds are located in the area known by the mining industry as the "lithium triangle", located on the borders of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile. This area is so named because it is the largest, most easily extractable and economically profitable lithium reserve in the world."We denounce the permanent and disproportionate restriction of the right to social protest introduced by the Jujuy constitution - in particular the general prohibition of road and street blockades, which are not only a legitimate form of peaceful demonstration, but are also protected by international law," the organisations point out.The report also highlights the testimonies of victims of police repression, who suffered arbitrary detentions and serious physical injuries caused by the excessive and unjustified use of force. It also documents the cases of protesters who are currently facing arbitrary and disproportionate criminal proceedings for participating in and promoting public demonstrations against the constitutional reform.In light of the findings presented in the report, the organisations:Request compliance with the international obligations of the Argentinian State to guarantee the protection of the collective property of Indigenous communities over their ancestral territories, as well as to guarantee the right to water intended for human consumption and the reproduction of life.Urge the authorities to refrain from promoting regulations that restrict the ways, places or times in which citizens can exercise their right to demonstrate publicly.Make an urgent call to the judiciary to assess, based on a rigorous examination of international human rights standards, the probable unconstitutionality of the approval process for the reform and its contents. Relationship between the events in Jujuy and the reforms promoted by Javier Milei’s governmentThe analysis offered in the report on what happened in Jujuy is especially relevant in the current national context because President Javier Milei’s national government has followed a similar line to the trend observed in Jujuy of promoting reforms that deepen an extractivist model in protected ecosystems of the country. This occurs while eliminating frameworks for the protection of human and environmental rights and facilitating the repression and criminalisation of legitimate protests, as detailed in the report.Through Decree of Necessity and Urgency No. 70/2023, President Milei repealed the Land Law (26.737) on 20th December 2023, eliminating restrictions aimed at preventing land grabbing by foreign investment projects. In addition, the "omnibus" bill proposes to repeal environmental protection laws to facilitate economic activities in ecosystems such as native forests and glaciers.These measures, similar to those implemented in Jujuy, were accompanied by disproportionate restrictions on the exercise of the right to protest. For example, on 14th December 2023, the executive approved the "protocol of anti-picketing action", which considers any demonstration that interrupts or decreases the movement of people a flagrant offence, requiring police intervention. Read the report