Project
Protecting the health of La Oroya's residents from toxic pollution
For more than 20 years, residents of La Oroya have been seeking justice and reparations after a metallurgical complex caused heavy metal pollution in their community—in violation of their fundamental rights—and the government failed to take adequate measures to protect them.
On March 22, 2024, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued its judgment in the case. It found Peru responsible and ordered it to adopt comprehensive reparation measures. This decision is a historic opportunity to restore the rights of the victims, as well as an important precedent for the protection of the right to a healthy environment in Latin America and for adequate state oversight of corporate activities.
Background
La Oroya is a small city in Peru’s central mountain range, in the department of Junín, about 176 km from Lima. It has a population of around 30,000 inhabitants.
There, in 1922, the U.S. company Cerro de Pasco Cooper Corporation installed the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex to process ore concentrates with high levels of lead, copper, zinc, silver and gold, as well as other contaminants such as sulfur, cadmium and arsenic.
The complex was nationalized in 1974 and operated by the State until 1997, when it was acquired by the US Doe Run Company through its subsidiary Doe Run Peru. In 2009, due to the company's financial crisis, the complex's operations were suspended.
Decades of damage to public health
The Peruvian State - due to the lack of adequate control systems, constant supervision, imposition of sanctions and adoption of immediate actions - has allowed the metallurgical complex to generate very high levels of contamination for decades that have seriously affected the health of residents of La Oroya for generations.
Those living in La Oroya have a higher risk or propensity to develop cancer due to historical exposure to heavy metals. While the health effects of toxic contamination are not immediately noticeable, they may be irreversible or become evident over the long term, affecting the population at various levels. Moreover, the impacts have been differentiated —and even more severe— among children, women and the elderly.
Most of the affected people presented lead levels higher than those recommended by the World Health Organization and, in some cases, higher levels of arsenic and cadmium; in addition to stress, anxiety, skin disorders, gastric problems, chronic headaches and respiratory or cardiac problems, among others.
The search for justice
Over time, several actions were brought at the national and international levels to obtain oversight of the metallurgical complex and its impacts, as well as to obtain redress for the violation of the rights of affected people.
AIDA became involved with La Oroya in 1997 and, since then, we’ve employed various strategies to protect public health, the environment and the rights of its inhabitants.
In 2002, our publication La Oroya Cannot Wait helped to make La Oroya's situation visible internationally and demand remedial measures.
That same year, a group of residents of La Oroya filed an enforcement action against the Ministry of Health and the General Directorate of Environmental Health to protect their rights and those of the rest of the population.
In 2006, they obtained a partially favorable decision from the Constitutional Court that ordered protective measures. However, after more than 14 years, no measures were taken to implement the ruling and the highest court did not take action to enforce it.
Given the lack of effective responses at the national level, AIDA —together with an international coalition of organizations— took the case to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) and in November 2005 requested measures to protect the right to life, personal integrity and health of the people affected. In 2006, we filed a complaint with the IACHR against the Peruvian State for the violation of the human rights of La Oroya residents.
In 2007, in response to the petition, the IACHR granted protection measures to 65 people from La Oroya and in 2016 extended them to another 15.
Current Situation
To date, the protection measures granted by the IACHR are still in effect. Although the State has issued some decisions to somewhat control the company and the levels of contamination in the area, these have not been effective in protecting the rights of the population or in urgently implementing the necessary actions in La Oroya.
Although the levels of lead and other heavy metals in the blood have decreased since the suspension of operations at the complex, this does not imply that the effects of the contamination have disappeared because the metals remain in other parts of the body and their impacts can appear over the years. The State has not carried out a comprehensive diagnosis and follow-up of the people who were highly exposed to heavy metals at La Oroya. There is also a lack of an epidemiological and blood study on children to show the current state of contamination of the population and its comparison with the studies carried out between 1999 and 2005.
The case before the Inter-American Court
As for the international complaint, in October 2021 —15 years after the process began— the IACHR adopted a decision on the merits of the case and submitted it to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, after establishing the international responsibility of the Peruvian State in the violation of human rights of residents of La Oroya.
The Court heard the case at a public hearing in October 2022. More than a year later, on March 22, 2024, the international court issued its judgment. In its ruling, the first of its kind, it held Peru responsible for violating the rights of the residents of La Oroya and ordered the government to adopt comprehensive reparation measures, including environmental remediation, reduction and mitigation of polluting emissions, air quality monitoring, free and specialized medical care, compensation, and a resettlement plan for the affected people.
Partners:
Related projects
The Risks of the Salmon Industry’s Expansion in Chilean Patagonia
In Chile, the salmon industry has grown rapidly over the last 20 years, often at the expense of the environment, as has been made evident in the regions of Los Lagos and Aysén, where salmon farms have been firmly established. In search of more pristine waters, the industry is now settling into the country’s last virgin coasts, in the region of Magallanes, in Southern Patagonia. The expansion is taking place without scientific evidence or serious studies to establish the limits of production in terms of water capacity. This could have catastrophic consequences for local ecosystems, a fact that has sparked concern among environmental organizations. The purpose of this report, written for AIDA by the biologist Héctor Kol, with the support of the Waitt Foundation, is to contribute to the understanding of the current and potential damages that the industrial production of salmon implies for Magallanes. With this, it also seeks to contribute to the effective protection of the aquatic-marine environment of Patagonia, through the use of existing legal tools. The document presents a detailed analysis of the situation of salmon farms in Magallanes, responding to the following questions: How many exist? Where are they? How much do they produce and in what conditions do they do so? The study includes the farms already authorized by the government and those whose permits are in process. These were divided by geographical sectors to facilitate the analysis. The information on each project includes a location map and estimates of the amount of waste left in the waters, a key aspect to determining their impact on marine life. In this way, the author illustrates the magnitude of the problem. The report also contains basic information on the authorization process for this type of project and on the regulations that exist for the sector, as well as an annex with scientific and legal documents related to each project. The analysis leads to several important conclusions, including the following: Of the 261 projects analyzed, a little less than half have been authorized and the rest could receive their authorizations in the short- and medium- term. This demonstrates the rapid growth of the industry in the region and alerts to the need for constant monitoring, above all of the environmental and sanitary conditions in which they operate. Of the authorized projects only 35 (equivalent to 25 percent of the total) are effectively in operation. There exist, in a same geographic sector and without explanation, large differences in the production and quantity of waste that the government has authorized for different subsectors. This demonstrates the lack of a scientific evaluation that would guarantee the water’s capacity to safely receive the authorized amounts of waste. More than half of the projects currently in operation have generated a total or partial lack of oxygen in the water, which gravely affects marine life. Even more serious is that at least nine of them are located in protected natural areas. This demonstrates that, before operating permits were authorized, adequate studies were not conducted to ensure that the capacity of the waters would not be exceeded by the quantity of fish authorized for breeding. It also means that projects are not subject to appropriate environmental impact assessments. There is not environmental information available for all the authorized projects, which makes it impossible to determine with greater precision the potential damages that the salmon industry could cause in Magallanes. In short, the study concludes that neither the State nor the salmon companies have done enough to prevent the damages already caused by the industry in other regions of Chile, which may now be repeated in one of the country’s most pristine natural areas. Consult and download the complete report (in Spanish) MAP - Salmon farms by geographic area Red icons and polygons: projects with authorized aquaculture concession, approved Technical Project and available environmental assessment (104 in total). White icons and red polygons: projects with authorized aquaculture concession and approved Technical Project, but without RCA or environmental information available (22 in total). Yellow icons and polygons: pending projects, without approved aquaculture concession, but with approved Technical Project (10 in total). Icons and green polygons: pending projects, without approved aquaculture concession and without approved Technical Project, but considered viable by the SUBPESCA (124 in total). View larger map
Read more
Eight key themes for Colombia’s environmental agenda in 2018
For Colombia, 2017 was a year marked by debate on the right of communities to be consulted about decisions that affect their territories and ecosystems. We saw it through the organization of popular consultations and mobilizations that questioned mining and fracking projects and, in short, the continuity of extractivism. It was also evident in the decision of the Constitutional Court, the highest court in the country, to invalidate the delimitation of the Santurbán páramo, a water source for millions, because the government’s decision did not take into account the population. On the other hand, Colombia joined the global debate on climate change and the need to promote a model of economic development free of fossil fuels. Now, in the face of the presidential elections and the implementation of the peace accord, environmental participation, territorial autonomy and fracking remain particularly important issues. What follows are eight topics key to Colombia’s environmental agenda in 2018: Environmental participation: Popular consultations, as an expression of empowered communities seeking to have a say on projects that will affect them, will continue holding a privileged place in public debate. Territorial autonomy: Although constitutionally recognized, the ability of departments and municipalities to govern themselves autonomously in various areas, including the environment, is not entirely defined. It remains to be answered: Who should decide? And about what can they decide? Indigenous authorities: Following on the heels of the above, the autonomy and decision-making ability of indigenous authorities in relation to environmental issues will give us much to discuss this year. Fracking: The key question is, faced with fracking’s expansion throughout the region, will Colombia adopt the position of social organizations on the application of the precautionary principle to avoid the health and environmental damages associated with fracking? Decarbonization: As an energy producer, will Colombia join France, the United Kingdom and Italy, nations that recently signed an alliance to close coal plants before 2030 and comply with the Paris climate agreement? La Niña: The strong winds and rains of the La Niña climate phenomenon will return to the country this year. Adequate measures to mitigate the risk will be fundamental, as will the application of lessons learned in 2010, when the phenomenon left hundreds dead and the loss of millions of pesos. Páramos: Following the decision of the Constitutional Court to invalidate the delimitation of the Santurbán páramo, this year promises to be full of controversies about the new delimitation of this important ecosystem. Also key will be the issue of community participation in the demarcation of the rest of Colombia’s páramos, a measure oriented to protect them against harmful projects like mining. Principle 10: The negotiation of a regional agreement on the access to information, to justice and to public participation on environmental issues, remains underway. The agreement seeks the application of Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, key to guaranteeing the right to a healthy and sustainable environment for present and future generations. At AIDA, and through the Network for Environmental Justice in Colombia, we will continue to promote solutions to the country’s environmental conflicts based on the effective application of national and international standards.
Read more
Sea turtle populations show sign of a comeback
Before 2008, hawksbill turtles had virtually disappeared from the Eastern Pacific. But small-scale conservation efforts enabled their return to the shores of El Salvador and Nicaragua, where researchers found them again laying eggs and slowly beginning to rebuild their population. Sea turtles are migratory animals. They spend most of their lives at sea, nesting on the beaches of various countries along their route. Among the main threats to their health are unsustainable fishing practices (they often get trapped in fishing nets) and inadequately developed projects in marine and coastal areas. The appearance of these turtles on Central American beaches, among other such events, demonstrates the success of small-scale conservation efforts, and the need for them to continue. Signs of recovery According to the recent study, Global sea turtle conservation successes, over the last decade sea turtle hatcheries have helped some populations rebound after historic declines. That’s the case of olive ridley turtles in the northeast Indian Ocean and of green turtles in the South Central Atlantic. After years of implementation, the protection of beaches, the regulation of fishing, and the creation of marine protected areas have helped improve sea turtle populations in waters around the world, according to researchers. The study also shows that, with adequate protections, even small populations of sea turtles have a chance of survival. Researchers found, for example, that in the area of Hawaii called French Frigate Shoals, the population of nesting green sea turtles increased from around 200 in 1973 – when the Endangered Species Act was created – to upwards of 2,000 in 2012. Green turtles are now considered a species of “minor concern” by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. Our contribution Sea turtle conservation, like that of other animals and plants, requires that organizations, communities, and governments work together. Such collaboration is a main tenant of AIDA’s work. In 1998, we organized a campaign to get the signatures needed for the negotiation of an international treaty to promote the protection, conservation and recovery of sea turtle populations. We are currently working to ensure that governments who signed the treaty are operating in compliance with it. We also helped save green turtles in Costa Rica, and are currently working to protect the Veracruz Reef System in Mexico, in whose warm and shallow waters hundreds of hawksbill and Atlantic ridley turtles swim. Both species are at risk due to the expansion of the Port of Veracruz, a project that would cause serious damage to the expansive reef system. Much work remains Despite the impressive recovery of several species of turtle, there are others that remain in need of protection, as their numbers continue to decline worldwide. This is the case, according to the study, of both the leatherback turtle in the eastern and western Pacific and of the flatback turtle in Australia. A new beacon of hope for turtles can be found in the development, before the United Nations, of a treaty to protect the high seas, those international waters that belong to no country (but make up two-thirds of the world’s oceans). Sea turtles, sharks, whales and birds live in these waters or travel them as part of their migratory routes. Through our active role in the treaty’s development, we seek to create Marine Protected Areas to ensure the high seas remain a safe home for not just sea turtles, but for the many species of plants and animals that contribute to the health of the oceans and support the global food supply.
Read more