
Project
Mitchell Gilbert for AIDA.
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.
Two years after the Court issued its ruling, its implementation remains in the early stages, with minimal progress, due primarily to the Peruvian government’s lack of political will and its constant shifting of arguments to delay the process.
Read the full ruling of the Inter-American Court (in Spanish).
Read the official summary of the ruling (in Spanish).
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.

Photo: Mitchell Gilbert for AIDA.
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.
In March 2024, the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex resumed operations and is currently once again causing pollution levels in the city that exceed those recommended by the World Health Organization.

Photo: Inter-American Court of Human Rights.
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.
Two years after the ruling was issued, there has been no significant progress in its implementation by the Peruvian State. The victims in this case are still awaiting the implementation of the reparations ordered by the Court, including comprehensive and specialized health care, measures to mitigate pollution from the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex, and the payment of compensation.
Partners:

Related projects

Science in the Service of Environmental Justice
By David Cañas and Mayela Sánchez* Science—or rather, the sciences—are the systems of knowledge that different social groups have developed over time to describe the phenomena of nature and society. Thanks to these knowledge systems, humanity has been able to find solutions to countless challenges, and today, more than ever, they must respond to global crises such as climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss.Understanding ecosystem processes is essential for protecting the environment and providing verifiable, replicable evidence of natural phenomena and the impacts of human activities. It also enables the development of innovative solutions to protect and restore the environment.For science to contribute meaningfully to environmental justice—a concept centered on ensuring that all people enjoy a healthy environment—scientific work must be grounded in the realities of the people and communities affected by environmental degradation, who live in or rely on ecosystems vulnerable to harm. It must also be built on empathy and respect for other forms of knowledge, while seeking to reduce social inequalities.At AIDA, science is a central part of our work, supporting and complementing the strategic litigation we pursue to protect a healthy environment in Latin America. Through science, we can demonstrate the environmental impacts caused by human activities and hold those responsible accountable. How Do We Do Science at AIDA? The AIDA scientific team is a multidisciplinary group of professionals specializing in diverse fields, including geography, geology, biology, marine biology, oceanography, anthropology, and economics.Among other tasks, they collect and develop scientific evidence to strengthen the legal arguments in the cases we support across our various lines of work—from protecting the ocean and other critical ecosystems to defending human rights, such as the right to health and access to safe drinking water.The strategic use of science has been central to AIDA’s work since the organization was founded more than 25 years ago. One early example is the case of La Oroya in Peru, where a group of residents sued the government for failing to protect them from decades of heavy metal pollution caused by a metallurgical complex.Then we did something that had not been done before: we connected existing studies with the lived reality of La Oroya. This approach allowed us to demonstrate the relevance of the case and establish a clear link between pollution and its impact on the health of the city’s residents. Our analysis, compiled in the report La Oroya Cannot Wait, served to build the legal case and formulate proposals to the Peruvian government for corrective and preventive measures to address the problem. In 2024, in a decision that set a historic precedent for state oversight of industrial pollution, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights held the Peruvian state responsible and ordered it to adopt comprehensive reparations measures. Among the scientific team’s more recent contributions is a geospatial analysis of the Salar del Hombre Muerto in the Argentine provinces of Catamarca and Salta. Using maps and satellite imagery, the team documented water loss in this ecosystem caused by lithium mining.Another example is the expert report on solid waste pollution in the tributaries of the Motagua River in Guatemala, in which we recorded and characterized illegal dumps along the banks of the Chinautla River. This work enabled the affected communities to gather the evidence needed for the lawsuit they filed against the municipality of Chinautla for failing to address the contamination of rivers and soil caused by inadequate solid waste management. The Right to Science When science serves social and environmental justice, its benefits extend to everyone. This purpose was recently upheld by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in its Advisory Opinion 32, which recognizes the “right to science” as the right of all people to enjoy the benefits of scientific and technological progress, as well as to have opportunities to contribute to scientific activity without discrimination.The Court also recognized indigenous, traditional, and local knowledge as equally valid forms of knowledge. This acknowledges how the deep understanding that indigenous peoples and local communities have of their environment—their worldview based on respect and interdependence, and their spiritual connection to nature—has been fundamental to ecosystem conservation.As an organization that uses science as a tool for environmental protection, we believe in a science that embodies these principles: one built on dialogue between different forms of knowledge, whose benefits reach all people, and which contributes to the socio-ecological transformation the planet urgently needs. *David Cañas is AIDA's Interim Director of Science; Mayela Sánchez is our digital community specialist.
Read more
Science in the Service of Environmental Justice
By David Cañas and Mayela Sánchez* Science—or rather, the sciences—are the systems of knowledge that different social groups have developed over time to describe the phenomena of nature and society. Thanks to these knowledge systems, humanity has been able to find solutions to countless challenges, and today, more than ever, they must respond to global crises such as climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss.Understanding ecosystem processes is essential for protecting the environment and providing verifiable, replicable evidence of natural phenomena and the impacts of human activities. It also enables the development of innovative solutions to protect and restore the environment.For science to contribute meaningfully to environmental justice—a concept centered on ensuring that all people enjoy a healthy environment—scientific work must be grounded in the realities of the people and communities affected by environmental degradation, who live in or rely on ecosystems vulnerable to harm. It must also be built on empathy and respect for other forms of knowledge, while seeking to reduce social inequalities.At AIDA, science is a central part of our work, supporting and complementing the strategic litigation we pursue to protect a healthy environment in Latin America. Through science, we can demonstrate the environmental impacts caused by human activities and hold those responsible accountable. How Do We Do Science at AIDA? The AIDA scientific team is a multidisciplinary group of professionals specializing in diverse fields, including geography, geology, biology, marine biology, oceanography, anthropology, and economics.Among other tasks, they collect and develop scientific evidence to strengthen the legal arguments in the cases we support across our various lines of work—from protecting the ocean and other critical ecosystems to defending human rights, such as the right to health and access to safe drinking water.The strategic use of science has been central to AIDA’s work since the organization was founded more than 25 years ago. One early example is the case of La Oroya in Peru, where a group of residents sued the government for failing to protect them from decades of heavy metal pollution caused by a metallurgical complex.Then we did something that had not been done before: we connected existing studies with the lived reality of La Oroya. This approach allowed us to demonstrate the relevance of the case and establish a clear link between pollution and its impact on the health of the city’s residents. Our analysis, compiled in the report La Oroya Cannot Wait, served to build the legal case and formulate proposals to the Peruvian government for corrective and preventive measures to address the problem. In 2024, in a decision that set a historic precedent for state oversight of industrial pollution, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights held the Peruvian state responsible and ordered it to adopt comprehensive reparations measures. Among the scientific team’s more recent contributions is a geospatial analysis of the Salar del Hombre Muerto in the Argentine provinces of Catamarca and Salta. Using maps and satellite imagery, the team documented water loss in this ecosystem caused by lithium mining.Another example is the expert report on solid waste pollution in the tributaries of the Motagua River in Guatemala, in which we recorded and characterized illegal dumps along the banks of the Chinautla River. This work enabled the affected communities to gather the evidence needed for the lawsuit they filed against the municipality of Chinautla for failing to address the contamination of rivers and soil caused by inadequate solid waste management. The Right to Science When science serves social and environmental justice, its benefits extend to everyone. This purpose was recently upheld by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in its Advisory Opinion 32, which recognizes the “right to science” as the right of all people to enjoy the benefits of scientific and technological progress, as well as to have opportunities to contribute to scientific activity without discrimination.The Court also recognized indigenous, traditional, and local knowledge as equally valid forms of knowledge. This acknowledges how the deep understanding that indigenous peoples and local communities have of their environment—their worldview based on respect and interdependence, and their spiritual connection to nature—has been fundamental to ecosystem conservation.As an organization that uses science as a tool for environmental protection, we believe in a science that embodies these principles: one built on dialogue between different forms of knowledge, whose benefits reach all people, and which contributes to the socio-ecological transformation the planet urgently needs. *David Cañas is AIDA's Interim Director of Science; Mayela Sánchez is our digital community specialist.
Read more
A Practical Toolkit for Using Advisory Opinion 32/25 in Climate Justice Work
READ AND DOWNLOAD THE TOOLKIT The climate crisis is already affecting people and communities across Latin America and the Caribbean—damaging homes, livelihoods, ecosystems, and the fundamental right to a healthy environment.Advisory Opinion 32/25 of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights is the first of its kind to establish that both States and non-State actors—including companies—have clear and binding legal obligations to confront the causes and consequences of the climate emergency as a human rights issue.The historic interpretation, made public on July 3, 2025, gives human rights and environmental defenders a powerful new tool to demand action and justice.But how can this decision be used in real cases, campaigns, and policies today? A Legal Toolkit for Climate JusticeTo help answer that question, more than 20 experts and organizations—including AIDA—created a new publication analyzing the Court's decision with an emphasis on its practical applications.Climate Justice and Human Rights: Legal Standards and Tools from the Inter-American Court’s Advisory Opinion 32/25 contains 14 briefs, organized into four key areas:Foundational Rights and Knowledge;State and Corporate Obligations;Rights of Affected Peoples and Groups;Environmental Democracy and Remedies. Each brief contains:Context and background to situate the issue.A clear legal analysis of the Court’s key contributions.A critical look at how these standards can be applied in practice.Identification of opportunities to advance advocacy and litigation, as well as the gaps that remain. All content was rigorously peer-reviewed to ensure clarity and accuracy. Why Does This Matter Now?With OC-32/25, advocates and local communities across the region now have:Stronger grounds for litigation—incorporating human rights standards into climate-related cases.Legal leverage for corporate accountability—clarifying businesses’ duties to prevent and remedy harm.Arguments to expand protections for those most affected: children, women, Indigenous Peoples, Afro-descendant communities, and environmental defenders.Policy tools to demand national climate actions aligned with human rights. In a region facing disproportionate climate risks, this decision shifts power toward communities and movements seeking justice.What You Can Do With This ToolkitThis publication is a tool to facilitate understanding of the Court's decision and promote concrete legal and political actions to protect communities and ecosystems from the climate emergency.It is addressed to individuals, communities, organizations, and networks working on the climate crisis and human rights issues, providing them with standards and practical recommendations to strengthen their litigation and advocacy strategies and efforts.In short, it's designed to help you incorporate strong legal arguments your work, including:Shaping urgent protection actions for frontline communities.Strengthening advocacy campaigns with legal backing.Informing climate legislation and public policy debates.Supporting community-led demands for adaptation and resilience.Integrating human rights standards into strategic litigation. Whether you are a lawyer, organizer, community leader, or policymaker—this toolkit can help you to turn legal standards into real protection and accountability. A Call to ActionLatin America has contributed least to global emissions but is among the most impacted by climate harms. OC-32/25 opens a new chapter: one where the defense of human rights is also the defense of our climate.Now is the time to use this decision to advance justice across the region.Together, we can transform this legal milestone into tangible protections for the people and places who need them most. READ AND DOWNLOAD THE TOOLKIT
Read more