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 city, our ecosystem
By Haydée Rodríguez, legal advisor, AIDA We are witnessing the biggest wave of urbanization in history. More than half of the world’s population lives in cities. The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) estimates that five billion people will live in urban zones by 2030 (State of the World Population: 2007).This growth could bring opportunities to improve our lives and fight for environmental sustainability, or it could create more poverty and accelerate the destruction of natural resources. When we talk about the environment it’s easy to imagine a lush greenlandscape or a sunny beach, birds singing and perhaps an animal running free in the forest. It is less likely to visualize a cityscape of asphalt, traffic and honking horns. But it is true that the urban environment also is an ecosystem. Urban ecology: The natural order of cities Urban ecology is a relatively new scientific discipline that seeks to understand how ecological processes function inside urban areas. Unlike other branches of ecology, it requires the collaboration of the social sciences and economics to understand the dominant species of this environment: the human being. In the city, just like in other ecosystems, every aspect contributes toward its definition. The characteristics of urban habitats include traffic, air pollution, population density, movement patterns, the real estate market, infrastructure, transport and natural elements like the availability of clean water, topography and geographic location. Everything surrounding our everyday life – the streets, pavements, parks, buildings, etc. – have been created by humans. The documentary Urbanized analyzes the design challenges in cities, the interaction between different elements and how the environment influences the population. Watch Urbanized trailer. Source: YouTube Beyond chaos: Building sustainable cities Initiatives to promote sustainable cities are on the rise. In the United States, where approximately 250 million people live in urban areas, local governments have created a project called Star Communities - Sustainability Tools for Assessing and Rating Communities (STAR). Through the initiative, each municipality can evaluate the sustainability of their cities in areas ranging from infrastructure to equity and empowerment. Cities can volunteer to join the project by using the methodology for measuring sustainability developed by a multidisciplinary group. To be considered sustainable, STAR requires cities to: 1) Think and take action as a collective system; 2) Be resilient, which is defined as the city’s ability to adapt, recover and evolve in a changing environment; 3) Promote innovation and creativity; 4) Measure the progress of the health and welfare of the people, the environment and the economy; 5) Use resources in a responsible and sustainable way; 6) Collaborate between cities and inpiduals; 7) Promote equity and persity; 8) Inspire leadership; and 9) Seek continual improvement. There is no stopping the progress of growing cities. In Costa Rica, for example, there are ongoing projects like Enamórate de tu ciudad (Fall in love with your city), which aims to improve the quality of life of residents in San José, the capital. Strategies have been put in place to improve safety, promote forms of clean public transport such as bicycles, and hold activities that bring the community together to enjoy the urban environment. City lights shine increasingly brighter across the world. Now is the time to think about what we want our cities to be like. Our urban ecosystem can be an important opportunity for social mobilization (a social process organized and based on dialog to improve our quality of life), education and the empowerment of the population. It can also help us reduce our impact on natural areas and on biopersity. We should seize this positive challenge and dare to see our cities with new eyes.
Read moreMéxico failed to attend the Green Climate Fund’s fourth Board meeting
Senator Ernesto Cordero, Mexico’s representative on the Board, must be held accountable for his failure to attend a key event for establishing financial support for fighting climate change. Mexico City, Mexico. Senator Ernesto Cordero, Mexico’s representative on the Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board, missed the fourth meeting of the entity, held June 25-28 in Songdo, South Korea. At the meeting, Board members started setting the rules of operation of the Fund, a financial mechanism essential for developing countries to secure the financial support needed to combat climate change. According to the GCF Secretariat, Cordero’s absence was because he had to attend important sessions of the Mexican Congress. Also missing at the Songdo meeting was Chile, the alternate member for Mexico. Chile’s representative also informed the Secretariat of his inability to attend the event. With the absence of both of these countries, one of the seats held by Latin America on the GCF Board was left empty. The Board consists of 24 members: 12 representatives from developing countries and an equal number from developed nations. Each member has an alternate who may participate in the Board meetings without voting rights unless they assume the role of the Board member. Latin America has three seats on the Board, broken down by regional groups: Colombia is paired up with Peru, Belize with Cuba, and Mexico and Chile. Each pair also represents other countries. In this regard, Mexico and Chile’s absence from the fourth meeting jeopardizes the interests of the Latin American countries represented by the duo, which includes Brazil and Argentina. It also contradicts the active role Mexico has played in recent years in climate change negotiations worldwide. What is more, a good opportunity was missed to influence the decisions taken in South Korea. The Fund is being developed to become a main source of financial resources to combat climate change, and at this Board meeting critical decisions were taken to this end. These included decisions on the Fund’s mission, the results and performance indicators to follow, procedures for access, home ownership, financial instruments, structure and organization, among others. The formation of the Green Climate Fund must meet the needs of all regions, but especially those in Latin America. Mexico, Chile and the other countries with a seat on the Board must commit to be active and efficient participants, and to be consistent with their national policies on climate change. It is of utmost importance to ensure the involvement of Latin American governments in international spheres like the GCF because this will ensure effective benefits for the people of this region. For more information on the Green Climate Fund, visit this page.
Read moreMéxico failed to attend the Green Climate Fund’s fourth Board meeting
Senator Ernesto Cordero, Mexico’s representative on the Board, must be held accountable for his failure to attend a key event for establishing financial support for fighting climate change. Mexico City, Mexico. Senator Ernesto Cordero, Mexico’s representative on the Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board, missed the fourth meeting of the entity, held June 25-28 in Songdo, South Korea. At the meeting, Board members started setting the rules of operation of the Fund, a financial mechanism essential for developing countries to secure the financial support needed to combat climate change. According to the GCF Secretariat, Cordero’s absence was because he had to attend important sessions of the Mexican Congress. Also missing at the Songdo meeting was Chile, the alternate member for Mexico. Chile’s representative also informed the Secretariat of his inability to attend the event. With the absence of both of these countries, one of the seats held by Latin America on the GCF Board was left empty. The Board consists of 24 members: 12 representatives from developing countries and an equal number from developed nations. Each member has an alternate who may participate in the Board meetings without voting rights unless they assume the role of the Board member. Latin America has three seats on the Board, broken down by regional groups: Colombia is paired up with Peru, Belize with Cuba, and Mexico and Chile. Each pair also represents other countries. In this regard, Mexico and Chile’s absence from the fourth meeting jeopardizes the interests of the Latin American countries represented by the duo, which includes Brazil and Argentina. It also contradicts the active role Mexico has played in recent years in climate change negotiations worldwide. What is more, a good opportunity was missed to influence the decisions taken in South Korea. The Fund is being developed to become a main source of financial resources to combat climate change, and at this Board meeting critical decisions were taken to this end. These included decisions on the Fund’s mission, the results and performance indicators to follow, procedures for access, home ownership, financial instruments, structure and organization, among others. The formation of the Green Climate Fund must meet the needs of all regions, but especially those in Latin America. Mexico, Chile and the other countries with a seat on the Board must commit to be active and efficient participants, and to be consistent with their national policies on climate change. It is of utmost importance to ensure the involvement of Latin American governments in international spheres like the GCF because this will ensure effective benefits for the people of this region. For more information on the Green Climate Fund, visit this page.
Read more