Press Release

Vista panorámica de la ciudad de La Oroya, Perú.

March 22 2024 Toxic Pollution, Human Rights, Mining

Inter-American Court ruling on La Oroya case sets key precedent for the protection of a healthy environment

The Court found Peru responsible for violating the rights of residents of La Oroya, who have been exposed to unsafe levels of toxic contamination for generations. San José, Costa Rica. The ruling of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the case "Community of La Oroya vs. Peru" sets an important precedent for the protection of the right to a healthy environment across the Americas and for adequate state oversight of corporate activities. The first-of-its-kind decision holds Peru accountable for its failure to protect the inhabitants of the Andean city of La Oroya who were exposed to toxic pollution from a smelter complex that operated without adequate pollution controls for a century.The Inter-American Court heard the case in a public hearing against Peru. 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 Peru before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in 2006. In October 2021, the Commission established the Peruvian government's responsibility in the case and referred it to the Inter-American Court. In October 2022, more than 16 years after the filing of the complaint, the victims presented the case before the Court in a public hearing, represented by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) and the Pro Human Rights Association (APRODEH), with the support of Earthjustice."This ruling is a very important step forward and a key precedent for environmental justice in Latin America, as it is the first case in which the Court recognizes a state’s responsibility for violating the right to a healthy environment and the impact this has on the guarantee of several other rights," said Liliana Avila, coordinator of AIDA's Human Rights and Environment Program. "The Court also referred to the collective and individual dimensions of this right, acknowledging the differential impact of its violation on children, women and the elderly, and the important role of environmental defenders."In its judgment, published on March 22, 2024, the international court established the Peru’s responsibility for the violation of the rights to a healthy environment, health, personal integrity, life with dignity, access to information, political participation, judicial guarantees and judicial protection of the 80 people involved in the case; for the violation of the rights of the children of 57 victims; and for the violation of the right to life of two victims. The Court also concluded that the State was responsible for violating the obligation of progressive development by adopting regressive measures in environmental protection."The decision is a fundamental precedent in international law that establishes the parameters of the State's obligation to regulate, control and remediate the effects of environmental pollution, as well as the obligations derived from the right to a healthy environment as an autonomous right and its interdependence and indivisibility with other fundamental rights of human existence, such as health, life and personal integrity," said Christian Huaylinos, Legal Coordinator of APRODEH. "It is also a great satisfaction for the victim’s two decades long struggle.”For more than 20 years, the residents of La Oroya have been seeking justice and redress for the widespread contamination caused by the La Oroya smelter complex, which was operated by Doe Run Peru from 1997 to 2009. The town has been recognized as one of the most polluted places on the planet."Twenty years ago, when this fight started, I was carrying my banner saying that the health of the children is worth more than gold," recalls Don Pablo, a resident of La Oroya. "We never gave up, and now I am very happy with the Court's decision."In the judgment, the Court ordered the State of Peru to adopt comprehensive reparation measures for the damage caused to the population of La Oroya, including identifying, prosecuting and, where appropriate, punishing those responsible for the harassment of the victims; determining the state of contamination of the air, water and soil and preparing an environmental remediation plan; providing free medical care to the victims and guaranteeing specialized care to residents with symptoms and illnesses related to contamination from mining and metallurgical activities; ensuring the effectiveness of the city's warning system and developing a system for monitoring the quality of air, water, and soil; ensuring that the operations of the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex comply with international environmental standards, preventing and mitigating damage to the environment and human health; providing monetary compensation to victims for material and non-material damages."What we expect now is that the ruling will be implemented, that for the first time the State will fulfill its obligations and guarantee our rights as environmental defenders," said Yolanda Zurita, a resident of La Oroya and a petitioner in the case. "Compliance with this ruling is the least we expect from a state that is committed to guaranteeing the rights of its citizens."Since 1999, the government of Peru has known that almost all the children living near the complex suffer from lead poisoning yet failed to offer proper medical care and remediation. For decades, the population of La Oroya was exposed to extreme levels of lead and other harmful contaminants, including arsenic, cadmium, and sulfur dioxide. Nearly all the children in the case have had lead and other heavy metals in their blood at concentrations many times higher than the guidelines established by the World Health Organization. And many residents suffer from chronic respiratory illness, in addition to stress, anxiety, skin problems, stomach problems, chronic headaches, and heart problems, among others."This ruling issues a warning to governments across the Americas that they cannot sit idly by while multinational corporations poison local communities. Corporations will now be on notice that exposing families to unhealthy levels of industrial pollution is a violation of international law and governments must hold polluters accountable,” said Jacob Kopas, Earthjustice senior attorney. ResourcesCourt's press release on the judgment, available here (in Spanish).Official summary of the judgment, available here (in Spanish).Full text of the judgment, available here (in Spanish).Background information on the case, available here.Folder with photographs, available here.Press contactVíctor Quintanilla-Sangüeza (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 70522107

March 08 2024 Climate Change, Human Rights

Communities in Nicaragua win Green Climate Fund withdrawal from project that violated their rights

In an unprecedented decision resolving a complaint filed in 2021, the Green Climate Fund terminated a forestry project because the developers failed to comply with the Fund's policies and procedures on socio-environmental safeguards. This non-compliance violated the human rights of indigenous and Afro-descendant communities. The Green Climate Fund, the world's leading multilateral climate finance institution, decided to terminate funding for a forest conservation project in Nicaragua because the developers failed to comply with the institution's policies and procedures on socio-environmental safeguards. The non-compliance violated the rights of indigenous and Afro-descendant communities, as the project threatened to exacerbate the situation of violence from which they were already suffering. The Fund had not made any disbursements for the project and project implementation had not yet begun.The decision, the first of its kind in the Fund's history, is in response to a complaint filed in June 2021 by representatives of the affected communities, with the support of local and international organizations, with the Fund's Independent Redress Mechanism. The Independent Redress Mechanism hears complaints from people who are or may be affected by projects or programs financed by the Fund."This decision is a recognition of the tireless efforts of the communities behind the case, who were able to demonstrate the difficult situation they face, as well as a reminder of the importance of involving local communities in all stages of a project, from its conception," said Florencia Ortúzar, Senior Attorney at AIDA, one of the organizations that accompanied and provided legal support to the complaint process.In the complaint, the communities argued that implementing the project— called Bio-CLIMA: Integrated Climate Action to Reduce Deforestation and Strengthen Resilience in the BOSAWAS and Río San Juan Biospheres— would have serious impacts because:There was no adequate disclosure of information, no indigenous consultation, and no free, prior, and informed consent.The project would cause environmental degradation and increase violence against indigenous communities due to land colonization.The conditions imposed by the Fund's Board of Directors for project approval (including independent monitoring of project implementation and ensuring the legitimate participation of indigenous peoples) were not met.There was a lack of confidence in the Central American Bank for Economic Integration, the entity accredited to channel the funds, as to its compliance with the Fund's policies.There was a lack of confidence in the ability of the Government of Nicaragua, as the implementing agency, to fulfill its obligations in the execution of the project. The goal of the project, for which the Fund committed $64 million USD in 2020, was to restore degraded forest landscapes in Nicaragua's most biodiverse region (home to 80 percent of the country's forests and most of its indigenous peoples) and to channel investments toward sustainable land and forest management.However, the project was designed without adequate consultation, with a complete lack of transparency on the part of the sponsoring bank and ignoring the difficult context of violence and lack of human rights protection still suffered by indigenous communities in Nicaragua, particularly in the project area.In recent decades, the harsh local situation has only worsened because of organized crime, drug trafficking, the expansion of agriculture and cattle ranching, and the promotion of extractivist policies, as well as the lack of state protection.The investigation launched by the Independent Reparations Mechanism, which included field work and face-to-face and virtual interviews with all stakeholders, confirmed some of the allegations made in the complaint, including the lack of adequate consultation processes and the lack of free, prior, and informed consent of the affected communities. This is stated in the investigation’s final report.In July 2023, the Fund's Board of Directors, which was called upon to decide on the future of the project based on the Investigation Report, delegated the task to the Fund's Secretariat. As a result, neither the IRM nor the claimants had any further say in the matter.Finally, on March 7 of this year, the Secretariat announced its decision: to terminate the project's financing agreement, acknowledging that the developers had failed to comply with the Fund's policies, as alleged by the communities in the complaint."The decision is a valuable lesson for the Green Climate Fund, whose policies and safeguards exist to prevent these unfortunate situations and must be applied rigorously and consistently from the conception of projects seeking funding," said Ortúzar. Press contactVíctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 5570522107

November 21 2023 Climate Change, Human Rights, Indigenous Rights

The Alliance for the Andean Wetlands brings together organizations for the protection and conservation of wetlands

The alliance seeks to protect the water, biodiversity, territories and ways of life that depend on these ecosystems in Latin America, especially in Argentina, Bolivia and Chile. With the aim to promote the protection and conservation of wetlands -as well as the water, biodiversity, territories and livelihoods of indigenous and peasant communities that depend on them- the Alliance for Andean Wetlands (Alianza por los Humedales Andinos) brings together the Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN) and the PUCARÁ Assembly (Pueblos Catamarqueños en Resistencia y Autodeterminación), of Argentina; the Centro de Documentación e Información de Bolivia (CEDIB) and Empodérate, of Bolivia; ONG FIMA, Defensa Ambiental and Fundación Tantí, of Chile; and the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), a regional organization.The Andean wetlands - including salt flats, lakes and lagoons - are recognized worldwide as ecosystems of high environmental and social significance. They are also extremely fragile due to their characteristics, whose central element is water, a common good that controls the environment and wildlife. Their vulnerability also rises from the threats they face, including the climate crisis and the negative impacts of extractive activities such as the mining of lithium, copper and other minerals considered "critical" for the transition to new forms of energy generation.In this sense, the increase in demand for lithium in the global north has set in motion an accelerated process of extraction and production at a global level, focused on regions rich in this mineral, such as the Andean salt flats of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile, which are home to more than 53% of proven global reserves.From November 30 to December 12, representatives from nearly 200 countries will meet in Dubai, United Arab Emirates during the twenty-eighth United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 28) to continue advancing the implementation of the Paris Agreement, which seeks to strengthen the global response to the climate emergency.The protection of wetlands is crucial in this task because they are ecosystems that act as natural carbon sinks, helping to mitigate the crisis.Accelerating the energy transition will be one of the main lines of action at COP 28Faced with this global trend, the alliance promotes a just, participatory and popular socio-ecological transition with a long-term vision, prioritizing integrated water management under a socio-environmental and climate justice approach. Thus, it supports and accompanies local communities and organizations in the care of Andean wetlands and in the construction of socioeconomic alternatives that go beyond mining extractivism.The alliance also seeks to ensure the participation of communities and their access to complete, truthful and transparent information, as well as to provide information to the global society - involving organizations, States and the private sector - highlighting the value of the Andean wetlands and the multiple threats they face.To achieve its objective, the alliance employs pedagogical, legal, research, advocacy, communication and mobilization strategies collectively and in dialogue with communities and organizations. Recognizing the differentiated impacts of the climate crisis on women, girls, sexual dissidents and other vulnerable groups, the alliance incorporates a gender perspective in all its activities. Press contacts:Víctor Quintanilla, AIDA (regional), [email protected], +521 5570522107Carlos Ulloa Fuentes, Fundación Tantí (Chile), [email protected] +569 37614815Rocío Wischñevsky, FARN (Argentina), [email protected], +541159518538Manuel Fontenla, Asamblea PUCARÁ (Argentina), [email protected], +54 9 3834790609Faviola Rivera Seifert, Empodérate (Bolivia), [email protected], +591 77129989Oscar Campanini, CEDIB (Bolivia), [email protected], +591 70344801

October 23 2023 Indigenous Rights, Mining

High court orders Colombian government to adopt concrete actions for climate crisis mitigation and adaptation

After evidencing that the Ministry of Environment failed to comply with climate obligations contained in the national legislation, the State Council ordered the entity to take concrete measures to meet these commitments within one year. This is the final decision in the litigation filed by various stakeholders demanding the State to include the climate impact of the coal sector in its climate crisis management. The State Council ordered the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development to adopt, within one year, specific measures to mitigate and adapt to the climate crisis in order to fulfill part of the country's climate commitments. With this ruling, the High Court resolved a compliance action filed on May of this year by a coalition of civil society organizations, think tanks and universities to require the State to include the impacts of the coal production chain in the climate policy.In the decision, the State Council acknowledges the Ministry's failure to comply with the norms to include climate impacts in projects with environmental management and control instruments, the lack of regulations regarding emissions from the coal sector, and the absence of a report and evaluation of the impact of the implementation of nature-based solutions programs and projects.Although the decision could have been more ambitious by also recognizing other alleged non-compliances that were proved in the litigation, the high court issued four fundamental orders to be complied by the Ministry of Environment:Inclusion of climate change adaptation and mitigation considerations in the environmental management and control instruments of projects, emphasizing the quantification of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the contributions of environmental compensation measures to the Nationally Determined Contributions, submitted by the State to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.Adopt a national guideline for formulating, developing, monitoring, reporting and evaluating the impact of implementing nature-based solutions programs and projects. This must include climate change management, integration with an ecosystem approach, contributions to the economy, benefits to biodiversity and human communities.Determining the methodologies for calculating direct and indirect emissions that must be reported, the methods, tools, processes and periodicity of reporting on GHG emissions, and the information and documentation required for GHG inventories.Regulation of the conditions for the verification, certification and registration of GHG emissions, emission reductions and removals as well as determination of the follow-up and control procedures foreseen. Based on the result, this litigation is the first successful case of strategic and climate litigation in the continent, as it was possible to prove that the State failed to comply to specific climate commitments, and has succeeded to order to one of the competent authorities to adopt concrete actions for appropriate climate management. The strategy employed and the precedent achieved can well be replicated in other countries in the region.The enforcement action was filed with the Administrative Court of Cundinamarca by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense, the José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers Collective, Censat Agua Viva, Centro de Investigación y Educación Popular, POLEN Transiciones Justas, Universidad de Magdalena and researcher Paola Yanguas.In July, the court issued the first-instance ruling in this case. In it, it issued eight orders requiring not only the Ministry of Environment—but also the Ministry of Mines and Energy—to comply with Law 1931 of 2018 and Law 2165 of 2021, which set out the minimum actions that Colombia must take to meet its climate commitments at international level.This litigation showed that over the last six years, the government has omitted the obligations contained in these laws, particularly in relation to the climate impact caused by the coal sector.The case was subsequently referred to the State Council, whose final decision confirmed part of the ruling of the Administrative Court of Cundinamarca.As the largest coal exporter in Latin America, Colombia is obliged to include in its climate commitments the true extent of the impact of the coal sector. This was demanded by the communities of La Guajira, which have been directly affected for decades.Although these communities did not sign the litigation, they sponsored it and accompanied its presentation with traditional dance and music. Press contact:Víctor Quintanilla-Sangueza (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107

August 31 2023 Accountability and Transparency, Human Rights, Indigenous Rights

Report reveals shocking rights violations by Canadian corporations in Latin America

Geneva - A groundbreaking report titled "Unmasking Canada: Rights Violations Across Latin America" was unveiled at the United Nations Universal Periodic Review Process (UPR) pre-session in Geneva, spanning from August 28 to September 1, 2023. This in-depth investigation highlights extensive human rights and environmental breaches by Canadian companies in Latin America and the Caribbean. Compiled through the collaboration of over 50 civil society organizations, the report implicates 37 Canadian projects across nine countries in the region. Of these, 32 projects have been found responsible for environmental rights infringements, including 105 oil spills in Peru's Block 192, directly linked to Frontera Energy. Additionally, the right to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent was violated in 26 projects, exemplified by dubious practices in Ecuador's Warintza project managed by Solaris Resources Inc. Violent confrontations tied to 16 projects are also highlighted, with a notable incident in Peru in July 2023, where 20 individuals were injured. While Canada positions itself as "climate forward," this report challenges such a portrayal, emphasizing Canada's protection of extractive industries that are responsible for significant human rights and environmental harm. In response to these findings and anticipating Canada's UPR on November 10, 2023, the report advocates for UN member states to impose legally binding resolutions on Canada, compelling the nation to address corporate misconduct overseas. Mauricio Terena, Legal Coordinator from Brazil’s Association of Indigenous People (APIB), said: "We have come here to denounce the involvement of Canadian companies in human rights violations in Brazil, particularly the case of the Belo Sun mining company in Pará, which aims to establish the country's largest open-pit gold mine. While Canada portrays itself as a defender of human rights and the environment, its actions contradict this narrative, especially when infringing upon the rights of indigenous peoples in Brazil. The discrepancy becomes evident when we realize that Canada has not signed the ILO's Convention 169. Therefore, we hope that the states with which we are in dialogue recognize this reality and urge Canada to reassess the operations of its corporations, seeking tangible action in defense of indigenous peoples and traditional communities". Addressing the UPR's function, where every four years UN member states review each other's human rights records, Latin American civil society representatives presented new recommendations for Canada. These recommendations underscore the need for Canada to introduce binding and comprehensive legislation centered on due diligence and corporate accountability. This encompasses the oversight of financial institutions and Canadian corporations throughout their global supply chains, aiming to prevent, mitigate, and penalize corporate misdeeds while ensuring victims of such practices overseas can seek justice and full reparation. "We hope that the UPR (Universal Periodic Review) process will establish itself as another strategy in our defense of indigenous peoples' rights, serving as a tool for the protection of human, indigenous, and environmental rights. It is essential to acknowledge that corporations involved in such violations are committing criminal acts. These actions should not be viewed merely as isolated incidents, but rather on a broader scale, as violating indigenous rights impacts all of humanity. Thus, beyond national and international laws, these transgressions should be seen from a more comprehensive perspective. It is crucial for states to commit, within the UN framework, to join a global mechanism where they recognize the need to monitor and mutually hold each other accountable for actions that uphold human, indigenous, and environmental rights", said Maria Judite "Kari" Guajajara, Legal Advisor at the National Indigenous Organization of the Brazilian Amazon (COIAB). This isn't the first instance of Canada facing allegations within the United Nations Universal System due to the activities of its corporations abroad. Six recommendations were directed at Canada during the 3rd cycle of the Periodic Review. These addressed, among other concerns, Canadian businesses' vital assurance and protection of human rights. Nevertheless, even after pledging to meet these recommendations, Canada consistently failed to fulfill its extraterritorial obligations, neglecting to take effective action to supervise corporate activities domestically and internationally. Gisela Hurtado, Advocacy Manager at Amazon Watch, commented: "Our report unveils the disturbing reality behind Canada's corporate endeavors in Latin America. While Canada boasts of ethical business conduct, the documented evidence reveals a starkly contrasting picture – one where profit is prioritized over people and the environment. Urgent change is paramount." The report's presentation in Geneva was spearheaded by a delegation that included Mauricio Terena from APIB; Maria Judite "Kari" Guajajara from COIAB; Josefa de Oliveira, a Popular Educator with Movimento Xingu Vivo Para Sempre; Lorena Aranha Curuaia, Vice President of the Iawá Community; ; and Brayan Mojanajinsoy Pasos, General Secretary of the Association of Indigenous Councils of the Municipality of Villagarzón Putumayo (ACIMVIP). The delegation was further supported by representatives from organizations including Amazon Watch, AIDA (Regional), Earthworks (US) Gaia (Colombia), and Ambiente y Sociedad (Colombia). Short summary involving Canadian companies involved in rights violations highlighted in the report 1. Frontera Energy in Lote 192 in Peru: - Over 2,000 sites contaminated, affecting 26 Amazonian indigenous communities. - Proposed activity closure plan doesn’t include reparations for affected communities. 2. Mineradora Argentina Gold SRL (joint venture between Barrick Gold and Shandong Gold): - Responsible for at least five toxic substance leakages, including cyanide and arsenic, into the Jáchal River in Argentina from the Veladero mine. - The project is in violation of the Glacier Law due to its location in a glacial zone and affects the UNESCO recognized biodiversity heritage site, the San Guilhermo Reserve. 3. Belo Sun's Volta Grande project in Brazil: - Cumulative impacts with the Belo Monte hydroelectric dam, located less than 10 km away from the prospected mining site; - Armed security forces hired by the Canadian mining company to monitor local leaders and hindering their freedom of movement; - Utter disrespect to Free, Prior and Informed Consent of Indigenous and riverine communities; - Imminent and irreversible risks of an environmental tragedy if toxic waste spills into the Xingu River due to a potential dam break, given the lack of sysmic and tailings dam safety studies. - Direct impact on communities, their traditional livelihoods, and local ecosystems. 4. The Mina Varadero in Chile: - Contaminated water sources with mercury, impacting rural populations and children. 5. ISAGEN - Brookfield Asset Management's Hidrosogamoso dam in Colombia: - Significant harm to local ecosystems and communities. 6. American Lithium's mining projects (Falchani, Macusani, and Quelccaya) in Peru: - Regularly release toxic residues, affecting over 700,000 people and contaminating the Lake Titicaca and Amazon River basins. 7. Solaris Resources Inc.'s Warintza mining project in Ecuador: - Ignored the territorial rights of the Shuar Arutam indigenous people and adopted divisive tactics. 8. Mining project of Ixtaca in Mexico: - Suspended due to violations of indigenous rights. 9. El Pato II mining project in Guatemala: - Affected the Poqomam Maya and mestizo communities without proper prior consultation. 10. Libero Copper's Mocoa mining project in Colombia: - Directly harmed the ancestral territory of the Inga people, violating their rights. 11. Cosigo Resources LTD's Machado gold extraction project in Colombia: - Severely impacted sacred indigenous sites in the Yaigojé Apaporis territory. 12. Barrick Gold's Pueblo Viejo mine in the Dominican Republic: - Forced the displacement of 65 local families due to the El Llagal waste dam. 13. Mining projects of La Plata by Atico Mining Corporation and Las Naves by Curimining S.A. (a subsidiary of Adventus Mining Corporation) and **Salazar Resources Limited in Ecuador: - Tried legalizing their operations despite violating national and international human rights laws, leading to confrontations and injuries. 14. Petrotal's Lote 95 in Peru: - Protests demanding community rights resulted in several deaths by police forces guarding the oil field. 15. Equinox Gold in Brazil: - Concealed data regarding their operations and impacts, including a dam break. - 4,000 of people directly impacted by toxic waste resulted from the dam break that contaminated local Amazonian rivers, violating the right to a clean environment and adequate access to drinking water. - Criminalization of local community leaders that protested for the right to water. 16. Gran Tierra Energy in Ecuador: - Conducted explorations without proper information dissemination in the Charapa, Chanangué, and Iguana blocks.

August 02 2023 Coral reefs, Oceans

Mexican environmental authority violates Mexico’s highest court and international obligations when reissuing a permit for a port expansion that threatens the Veracruz Reef System

In a legal brief, AIDA and Earthjustice argue the Secretary of the Environment failed to properly evaluate the environmental impact of the project to the reef, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, as required by Mexico’s highest court. Mexico City, Mexico – Today, AIDA (Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense) and Earthjustice filed a brief with the Fifth District Court of Veracruz to help protect the Veracruz Reef System from the Veracruz port expansion project. When reauthorizing the project, the Secretary of the Environment and Natural Resources (Semarnat) not only failed to comply with a ruling of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, but also ignored Mexico’s international obligations regarding environmental protection and human rights, including the human right to a healthy environment guaranteed in the Mexican Constitution. This was demonstrated by AIDA and Earthjustice in a legal brief (Amicus Curiae or "Friend of the Court") filed before the Fifth District Court of Veracruz. In it they request that the court -- which is in charge of determining whether the Supreme Court’s ruling was complied with or not -- establish contempt and force Semarnat to re-examine the project based on the environmental impact assessment procedure required by the high court. "The authorities must comply with the Supreme Court ruling and protect this internationally-recognized natural treasure of Mexico. The human right to a healthy environment cannot be ignored," said Guillermo Zúñiga, a Veracruz native and Earthjustice attorney. "The reef not only hosts the greatest biodiversity of species in the central region of the Gulf of Mexico, but also helps mitigate the impact of storm surges and hurricanes. The people who grew up here, as I did, and who live here now, know the value of this sanctuary where land and sea harmonize in unity." On February 9, 2022, residents of Veracruz won a victory before the Supreme Court in an amparo action filed to defend the Veracruz Reef System -- the largest reef in the Gulf of Mexico -- and its environmental services against the Veracruz port expansion project. The Supreme Court ordered the revocation of the permits by determining that Semarnat, by approving the project, violated the right to a healthy environment of the people of Veracruz. Despite the ecological, cultural, and economic importance of the Veracruz Reef System, the environmental authority had authorized the port expansion in a fragmented way, dividing the project into 15 permits and diluting its true impact. In addition, it completely excluded from its analysis a non-emerging reef ("La Loma") located in the area of the Veracruz Reef System National Park. In its ruling, the Supreme Court ordered the environmental authority to reevaluate the project in an integral, holistic and complete manner. In addition, it ordered that the new evaluation be made in accordance with the elements that make up the right to a healthy environment, as well as the principles of prevention and precaution, enshrined in international law. It also requested the support of the National Council of Natural Protected Areas and the International Wetlands Committee of the Ramsar Convention to design a protection scheme for the Veracruz Reef System. "Right now, the court has the opportunity to confirm the transformative effect of the Supreme Court's ruling and set a valuable precedent for the real protection, not just on paper, of Veracruz's reefs and the universal right to a healthy environment," said Sandra Moguel, an attorney with AIDA's Ecosystems Program. "Including the international authorities of the Ramsar Convention would mean strengthening the project's environmental impact assessment with technical knowledge and transparency." As demonstrated in the brief, by granting a second permit to the project -- on December 30, 2022 -- Semarnat failed to comply with the Court's ruling and the Mexican State's obligations because: It did not require a new environmental impact study -- mandatory for projects of this size under international law and national legislation -- to analyze the cumulative impacts of all segments of the original project. On the contrary, the environmental authority based its assessment on the original deficient statements. Even so, it left three of the original segments out of its analysis. It failed to submit its new assessment to a public consultation nor did publish new information on the impacts of the project before authorizing it again. In this way, it ignored the rights of the people of Veracruz to public participation and access to information in environmental decision-making. Semarnat has not yet requested the support of the National Council of Natural Protected Areas or the International Wetlands Committee. The participation of this committee is of particular importance due to its experience and technical knowledge in the protection of protected areas and wetlands. The Veracruz Reef System is a Natural Protected Area designated under national legislation, a wetland of international importance under the international Ramsar Convention, and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. AIDA is an international non-profit organization that has been protecting the human right to a healthy environment in the Americas for 25 years. Earthjustice is the premier nonprofit public interest environmental law organization in the United States. We wield the power of law and the strength of partnership to protect people's health, to preserve magnificent places and wildlife, to advance clean energy, and to combat climate change. press contacts Sandra Moguel, AIDA, [email protected] (Spanish and English) Kathryn McGrath, Earthjustice, [email protected] (English) Guillermo Zúñiga, Earthjustice, [email protected] (Spanish)

July 20 2023 Human Rights

Right to a healthy environment global coalition wins UN Human Rights Prize

Manila (PHP), Geneva (CH), Casablanca (MAR), New York (US), Mexico City (MX), Buenos Aires (ARG) — Today, the Global Coalition of Civil Society, Indigenous Peoples, Social Movements, and Local Communities for the Universal Recognition of the Human Right to a Clean, Healthy, and Sustainable Environment was recognized as one of the recipients of the prestigious 2023 United Nations Human Rights Prize. The coalition is awarded for its essential role in advocating for the recognition of the right to a healthy environment by the UN General Assembly (UNGA) in July 2022. The UN Human Rights Prize is awarded once every five years to several recipients at a time. This year is the first time that it has been granted to a global coalition. The prize will be presented in New York on December 10, which also marks the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, making this recognition even more special. This achievement was only possible thanks to tireless efforts that began decades ago and resulted in thousands of people from all across the globe joining forces to achieve a milestone: the recognition by the United Nations of the human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. First and foremost, the award highlights the importance of collaborating to advance the much-needed protection of our planet and fulfillment of human rights. Alone, no organization, movement, or person would have been able to achieve the universal recognition of the right to a healthy environment. Together, a diverse global coalition made this a reality. Furthermore, the prize recognizes the need to protect participatory spaces for everyone. As civic spaces are worryingly shrinking and many human rights and environmental defenders are under attack worldwide, the award sends a strong reminder: It is essential to respect and strengthen spaces for participation and collaboration. The protection of civic spaces and the respect and support for all human rights defenders is essential for the effective implementation of this newly recognized right. The right also is an integral component of environmental justice and democracy and provides a seamless path to protecting the rights of future generations. This announcement arrives just a few days ahead of the July 28 anniversary of the UNGA’s recognition of the human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. Since then, millions have continued to experience the cumulative and accelerating impacts of the triple planetary crisis of biodiversity loss, climate change, and pollution, exacerbated by systemic inequalities, that is contributing to ongoing violations of the right to a healthy environment around the world. This prize emphasizes that today more than ever, States must make this right a reality. It is both a recognition and a call to action for governments, businesses, institutions, and people worldwide to ensure that the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment is effectively guaranteed and legally protected so that it can be enjoyed by all. Read the reactions from the members of the coalition here. press contact: Víctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107

March 04 2023 Oceans

Agreement reached to advance High Seas Treaty

New Treaty agreed to protect half the planet but formal adoption still required. Late this evening governments meeting at the United Nations in New York reached agreement on key substantive issues for a new treaty to protect high seas marine life. To ensure this hard won progress is not lost, The High Seas Alliance is calling for the UN to conclude the formalities of adoption as soon as possible in the final resumed session. "Following a two week long rollercoaster ride of negotiations and super-hero efforts in the last 48 hours, governments reached agreement on key issues that will advance protection and better management of marine biodiversity in the high seas," said Rebecca Hubbard, Director of the High Seas Alliance. The high seas, the area of ocean that lies beyond countries’ national waters, is the largest habitat on Earth and home to millions of species. With currently just over 1% of the high seas protected, the new treaty will provide a pathway to establish marine protected areas in these waters. It is also a key tool to help deliver the recently agreed Kunming-Montreal target of at least 30% protection of the world’s ocean by 2030 that was just agreed in December- the minimum level of protection scientists warn is necessary to ensure a healthy ocean. But time is of the essence. The new Treaty will bring ocean governance into the 21st century, including establishing modern requirements to assess and manage planned human activities that would affect marine life in the high seas as well as ensuring greater transparency. This will greatly strengthen the effective area-based management of fishing, shipping and other activities that have contributed to the overall decline in ocean health. The issue of sufficient financing to fund the implementation of the treaty, as well as equity issues surrounding the sharing of benefits from marine genetic resources was one of the key sticking points between North and South throughout the meeting. However, right up to the final hours of the meeting, governments were able to land an agreement that provided for equitable sharing of these benefits from the deep sea and high seas. "It’s been a very long journey to get to a treaty. We will be looking to the 52 states that make up the High Ambition Coalition to lead the charge to adopt, ratify and identify important high seas areas to protect," said Hubbard. High Seas Alliance Member Quotes Gladys Martínez de Lemos, Executive Director, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA): "Governments have taken an important step that strengthens the legal protection of two-thirds of the ocean and with it marine biodiversity, the livelihoods of coastal communities and global food sovereignty. The agreement sets out a path for establishing areas of high and full protection on the High Seas, as well as for the environmental assessment of projects and activities that may harm this vast area." Laura Meller, oceans campaigner, Greenpeace Nordic: "This is a historic day for conservation and a sign that in a divided world, protecting nature and people can triumph over geopolitics. We praise countries for seeking compromises, putting aside differences and delivering a treaty that will let us protect the oceans, build our resilience to climate change and safeguard the lives and livelihoods of billions of people. We can now finally move from talk to real change at sea. Countries must formally adopt the treaty and ratify it as quickly as possible to bring it into force, and then deliver the fully protected ocean sanctuaries our planet needs. The clock is still ticking to deliver 30x30. We have half a decade left, and we can’t be complacent." Matthew Collis, Deputy Vice President for Policy, IFAW: "The agreement of a new Treaty to conserve the high seas is a wonderful way to celebrate World Wildlife Day for ocean animals and their high seas homes. IFAW congratulates governments on this significant step, which charts a course to protect 30% of the ocean by 2030. To achieve 30x30, governments must now adopt, ratify and implement the new Treaty without delay." Minna Epps, Director of Global Marine and Polar Programme, IUCN: "The High Seas Treaty opens the path for humankind to finally provide protection to marine life across our one ocean. Its adoption closes essential gaps in international law and offers a framework for governments to work together to protect global ocean heath, climate resilience, and the socioeconomic wellbeing and food security of billions of people." Lance Morgan, President, Marine Conservation Institute: "Coming on the heels of the Global Biodiversity Framework, this historic agreement is a huge step towards ensuring marine protected areas in the High Seas and reaching 30x30." Lisa Speer, Director of the International Ocean program, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC): "This text provides the basis for protecting key biodiversity hotspots in the high seas. We now have a pathway to achieve the goal of meaningfully protecting at least 30% of the ocean by 2030, a goal that scientists tell us is crucial to maintaining ocean health in the face of ocean warming, acidification and other impacts of climate change. Now let’s get started." Fabienne McLellan, Managing Director, OceanCare: "This Treaty will be the game-changer the ocean urgently needs. We particularly welcome the conservation focused elements, such as environmental impact assessments. EIAs are one of the most effective and important mechanisms to prevent, mitigate and manage harmful activities in cases where there is severe harm to marine life through, for instance, underwater noise pollution. While we advocated for more ambition in the EIA provisions, these requirements will nevertheless strengthen ocean conservation." Susanna Fuller, VP Conservation and Projects, Oceans North: "Following the Kunming Montreal Agreement, which sets out a global path for biodiversity protection, this treaty will bring a similar ambition to the high seas. Because Canada’s waters are bounded by three international ocean basins, it has an outsized role in ensuring that the treaty is fully implemented, once formally adopted." Liz Karan, Director of Ocean Governance project, Pew: "The effective implementation of this landmark treaty is the only pathway to safeguard high seas biodiversity for generations to come and provides a pathway for nations to fulfill the 30 by 30 target. Governments and civil society must now ensure that the agreement is adopted and rapidly enters into force." Christopher Chin, Executive Director, The Center for Oceanic Awareness, Research, and Education (COARE): "With this finalized text, the world is now one great step closer to embracing the importance of the High Seas, and to achieving the 30x30 objectives. Once adopted, however, member States must still ratify the treaty, and we call upon them to do so swiftly." Andrew Deutz, Director of Global Policy, Institutions & Conservation Finance, The Nature Conservancy: "While the treaty leaves room for improvement, we should nevertheless celebrate the fact that –after more than a decade of discussions and three concerted attempts to wrestle it across the line – we finally have a global framework in place for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity for almost half of our planet’s surface. Whether this has arrived in time to slow the accelerating ecological crisis happening in our ocean will depend on how quickly countries can ratify the treaty at national level and start mainstreaming ambitions like 30x30 into both their own decision-making, and that of the global bodies which manage human activity on the high seas. If they can do so swiftly, putting people and planet above politics, we may yet have a chance to move beyond the damaging status quo and into a new era of nature-positive stewardship for this most critical of ecosystems." Farah Obaidullah, Ocean Advocate and Founder, Women4Oceans: "This is an historic moment for humanity and for the protection of all living beings in our global ocean. A rare and welcome moment of hope for all of us rightfully concerned with the state of the world. Almost half our planet will now have a chance of some sort of protection from the ever-increasing onslaughts to the ocean. This treaty comes not a moment too soon. With the climate and global wildlife crises worsening and a reckless new industry of deep-sea mining on the horizon, we cannot afford any delays in putting this treaty into force." Press contacts: Patricia Roy (EU), +34 696 905 907 Michael Crocker (US), +1 (207) 522-1366 Mirella von Lindenfels, + 44 7717 844 352 Julio Whalen-Valeriano (UN), +1 (850) 292-4689

February 20 2023 Oceans

Decision time for world’s governments on new global treaty for the ocean

New York: Today governments resume negotiations at the United Nations in New York to finalize a new High Seas Treaty to ensure the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction. The two-week Intergovernmental conference is taking place from 20 February to 3 March 2023 and is a resumption of negotiations from August 2022, when governments ran out of time. Covering half of the planet, the High Seas support vibrant marine ecosystems, life that is vital to the global food supply, and the planet’s climate system. However, it has been plagued by poor or patchy governance, and with only 1.2% protected, vast High Seas areas are open to unsustainable exploitation. This new treaty aims to address these shortcomings and offers a historic opportunity to put in place game-changing new measures for the ocean, including establishing highly and fully protected areas and strengthening assessment and management of human activities. The recent global commitment to protect at least 30% of the ocean by 2030 (the “30x30” goal) offers an ambitious backdrop for ensuring this new treaty provides the legal tools to turn the target into a reality. The pressure is now on governments to ensure the treaty that is finally agreed upon will be ambitious enough to result in a healthy ocean rather than a degraded one. Key issues that still need to be addressed at the meeting include: measures to ensure that the new treaty can deliver effective new marine protected areas rather than “paper parks”; safeguards to avoid harm arising from human activities affecting the high seas and the deep seabed; a strong institutional framework to ensure effective implementation and compliance; decision-making rules to avoid enabling one or two countries to block progress; and critical finance and equity issues related to capacity building and the sharing of benefits from marine genetic resources. "We came frustratingly close to getting this treaty over the line in August at what was supposed to be the final round of negotiations. With the accelerating climate and biodiversity crises, time is not a luxury we have to put ocean health back on track," said Sarah Bevis from the High Seas Alliance. "This time round we need to seize the moment and get an ambitious treaty over the finish line, so we can roll up our sleeves and work on the crucial tasks of getting the treaty ratified and implemented." Additional Quotes from High Seas Alliance member organizations: Dr Laura Meller, Oceans Campaigner and Polar Advisor, Greenpeace Nordic said: "The oceans support all life on Earth. Their fate will be decided at these negotiations. The science is clear. Protecting 30% of the oceans by 2030 is the absolute minimum necessary to avert catastrophe. It was encouraging to see all governments adopt the 30x30 target last year, but lofty targets mean nothing without action." "This special session taking place so soon after the last round of negotiations collapsed gives us hope. If a strong Treaty is agreed on the 3rd of March, it keeps 30x30 alive. Governments must return to negotiations ready to find compromises and deliver an effective Treaty. We’re already in extra time. These talks are one final chance to deliver. Governments must not fail." Trevor Jones, Campaign Manager, Only One said: "Without protections for the high seas, we cannot hope to have a healthy ocean, and without a healthy ocean we put marine life, coastal livelihoods, and global food stability at grave risk. Millions of people from around the world have spoken out: They want a strong High Seas Treaty, and they’re counting on their leaders to finally get the job done." Liz Karan, Director of Pew’s Ocean Governance Project said: "The high seas support diverse marine life and unique ecosystems critical to the health of our ocean and planet. Countries must seize this opportunity to finalize a robust high seas treaty to establish highly protected, cross sectoral high seas MPAs for the benefit of current and future generations." Jennifer Morris, CEO of The Nature Conservancy said: "Ensuring legal protection for the vast areas of open ocean beyond national jurisdiction, and actively acknowledging the importance of addressing this situation, is a pivotal step in moving toward our ambitious ‘30x30’ target in the new UN Global Biodiversity Framework. Ensuring a successful outcome from the New York negotiations, in the form of a formally agreed and legally binding High Seas Treaty, is imperative to meet the collective commitment to conserve 30% of the Earth’s ocean this side of 2030." Gladys Martínez, Executive Director of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) said: "The high seas urgently needs a governance framework. We look forward to states concluding a strong and ambitious treaty during these two weeks." Fabienne McLellan, Managing Director OceanCare said: "We have high hopes that governments will find a way to finalize the High Seas Treaty during the resumed session of IGC 5. Countries must understand that it would be grossly negligent to once again fail to conclude an agreement to conserve marine diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. The climate and biodiversity crises are in full swing, and the ocean is our ally, not an infinite resource to be exploited. It is not only important that the Agreement is finalized, but what is agreed needs to make a tangible difference in protecting biodiversity. Against this backdrop, it is difficult to imagine that no agreement will be reached - the agreement is vital for marine biodiversity, a healthy ocean and thus also for us humans". PRESS CONTACTS Patricia Roy, + 34 696 905 907 - CET Mirella von Lindenfels, +44 7717 844 352 - EST

November 17 2022 Mining, Toxic Pollution, Human Rights

Organizations, coalitions, academia, and specialists support victims of toxic contamination in La Oroya

Experts filed 15 amicus briefs before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights upholding the central argument of the case: that the government of Peru is responsible for violating the human rights of residents of La Oroya for the lack of urgent and effective actions to address pollution from a metal smelter, and its harmful effects. San José, Costa Rica. Organizations, coalitions, academia, and specialists presented 15 legal briefs (Amicus curiae) before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to support the case of residents of La Oroya against the government of Peru, for human rights resulting from a metal plant spewing toxic pollution into the Andean city for nearly 90 years. The briefs contain solid evidence that support the central argument of the case: that the Peruvian government—by not taking urgent and effective action to address the pollutions and its effects—is responsible for the violation of the rights to life, health, personal integrity, childhood, and a healthy environment of the residents of La Oroya. This argument as expressed in a public audience on October 12 and 13, when the international court heard from witnesses, experts, victims, and government representatives. The briefs, sent to the Court between October 11 and 28, demonstrate that the importance of the case surpasses the Peruvian context and represents a historic opportunity to establish a key precedent in Latin America, and the world, that strengthens the right to a healthy environment and government’s role supervising business activities. One of the briefs was presented by the University Network for Human Rights in partnership with a panel of experts: five former authorities from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (Tracy Robinson, James Cavallaro, Paulo de Tarso Vannuchi, Flávia Piovesan and Paulo Abrão) and three former Special Rapporteurs to the United Nations (John Knox, James Anaya, and Juan Méndez). Briefs were presented by Peruvian organizations— including the Technical Committee for Environmental and Human Health and the Civil Society Platform on Business and Human Rights—as well as from other countries in Latin America—the Mexican Center for Environmental Law (Mexico), Defensoria Ambiental (Chile), and Justice for Nature (Costa Rica)—and international organizations such as Earthjustice and The Center for Justice and Environmental Law. Furthering the international scope of the hearing, The Working Group for Strategic Litigation of Red-DESC and the United Nations Working Group on Business and Human Rights. From the academic sector, support came from the Human Rights Research and Education Center of the University of Ottawa (Canada), the Clinic for Human Rights of the Postgraduate Law School of the Pontificia Catholic University of Paraná (Brazil), and the Legal Clinic of Environmental and Public Health of the University of the Andes (Colombia). Other writings were presented by experts on the issues that the case addresses: David R. Boyd, Special Rapporteur to the UN on human rights and the environment, medical anthropologist Susana Ramírez, and attorneys Carla Luzuriaga-Salinas, Macarena Martinic Cristensen, and Ezio Costa Cordella. Following the hearing and the briefs, the next step in the legal process is to present written closing arguments a potential visit to La Oroya by the judges from the Court. The sentence, which cannot be appealed, is expected within six months. press contact Víctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +525570522107