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
Six measures to ensure our actions achieve climate justice
On December 2, the twenty-fifth Conference of the Parties (COP25) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change opened in Madrid. It’s a vital meeting for the planet, during which governments must drastically increase their ambitions and climate commitments if we hope to preserve life, as we know it today. So far, there have been more announcements than actions. That’s why I’d like to highlight six measures that will help us move towards the results the planet needs. The outlook is not encouraging. Change remains urgent. Every day, the climate crisis causes greater harm, particularly for the most vulnerable among us. According to the United Nations Emissions Gap report, emissions continue to rise and current actions are insufficient to achieving the necessary reductions. In an evident political and financial weakening, nations that once led climate actions are now withdrawing or refusing to comply with the agreements. Added to this are emerging social protests, particularly in Latin America. The governments of Ecuador, Chile and Colombia have declared curfews in recent weeks to deal with the serious situations in their countries; COP25 was moved from Santiago de Chile to Madrid. In some instances, abuse of force caused several deaths and hundreds of other injuries. All this demonstrates the urgency of heeding the social call, of acknowledging and dealing with inequality, of finding solutions and building countries where all have a place. One thing is clear: we’ve been moving in the wrong direction and we must change course. We need profound changes in energy, transportation and food systems, as well as in the negotiation, decision-making and implementation of climate actions. This is essential if we are to arrive at peak global emissions as soon as possible, cut them in half by 2030, and reach zero emissions by 2050. Significant efforts are undoubtedly being made. There are billion-dollar investments by governments, businesses, organizations and individuals. But it’s not enough. We must stop and assess what is serving us and what is not; what we should continue to do and what we must do differently. These six measures could make climate action more effective and help us achieve climate justice: 1. Include human rights as a transversal element (seriously). Although it’s been a petition of social movements, indigenous peoples and organizations for decades, official recognition of human rights has yet to materialize. Responding to this call is vital to increasing the ambition and responsibility that is so needed. While the Cancun and Paris Agreements refer to the importance of respecting human rights, their implementation has failed to include this perspective. This, despite the fact that human rights bodies have reminded States of their obligation to do so; and IPCC scientists have highlighted the importance of addressing social inequality and including the wisdom of indigenous communities as a fundamental element in resolving the climate crisis. 2. Ensure the effective participation of affected people and communities in the planning, discussion, decision-making and monitoring of climate actions. Indigenous peoples, rural communities, Afro-descendants, and youth are among the groups most affected by the climate crisis. In addition, local communities have protected millions of hectares of forests and other natural areas, essential for climate resilience. Yet spaces for the participation for these actors remain scarce and spaces for decision-making, in COPs and other instances, are almost non-existent. Ensuring that discussions and decisions are truly diverse is an essential step towards increasing climate ambition and effectiveness. Communities should be considered subjects of rights, not simply objects of protection projects and actions. 3. Secure the equitable distribution of funds We live in the midst of immense inequality, where wealth, property and privileges belong to a few, while the majority assume the negative impacts. The climate crisis is partly a result of this situation. Although Latin America is the most unequal region on the planet, inequality is underestimated, according to ECLAC. That’s why the distribution of economic and human resources must address this reality, ensuring that the Global South has access to opportunities to participate on equal footing towards true climate justice. This would increase the possibility of finding alternative solutions and replicating those already in place. 4. Hold accountable those responsible for the climate crisis Those causing the climate crisis should be held accountable for it, instead of attacking those who seek accountability and climate justice. This is one of the great obstacles to moving forward. It’s time to name those responsible and demand that they take charge and repair the damages, rather than accepting false solutions and ineffective voluntary actions. 5. Incorporate a feminine perspective, based in maternal love By this I mean the need to rescue a perspective of collaboration and serious dialogue in order to reach consensus, assuming responsibilities over differences and competition. Let us include a perspective that prioritizes the care of the Earth, of nature and of people. Let's stop putting economic interests and short-term vision above the health of our planet. Let's focus our efforts on agreeing how we can achieve climate justice, coming out of denial, and leaving behind excuses about why it can't be done. 6. Acknowledge the true costs of the climate crisis: social, economic, environmental and human. So far most economic assessments have focused on calculating the costs of the transition to a zero-emission economy. While there are estimates of the costs involved in not implementing the transition, these ignore the social, environmental and cultural impacts. This is particularly significant for regions such as Latin America, which, in addition to suffering human and cultural losses, are losing their natural wealth. Scientists have concluded that the changes will be more costly the longer they take to be implemented. COP25 could be an opportunity to incorporate these and many other measures in the battle against the climate emergency. At this point, insisting on the same thing will only bring more frustration and failures. Not taking action will condemn millions more people to suffer the consequences of the climate crisis, and of inadequate solutions that violate their rights. The reality is indisputable, which makes it imperative to include human rights as the crosscutting axis of our climate actions. If we do not, the actions resulting from the Conference of the Parties will resemble the emperor of the Brothers Grimm’s story. They will come out to the parade naked, proudly wearing a costly suit made with climate ambition, yet insufficient for what the planet needs. We must instead cover climate actions with a suit of climate justice—a visible one that we must weave together. We have no time to spare.
Read more
Sacrifice Zones: The injustice of living in an unhealthy environment
Forty percent of the energy produced and consumed in Chile comes from burning coal. Just 28 thermoelectric plants, concentrated in five locations across the country, generate that enormous amount of energy. In these so-called Sacrifice Zones, inhabitants live immersed in pollution. The result is severe health damages, children with learning disabilities, and poisoned seas. The serious detriment of living in one of these areas has been amply documented. A recent report from the Catholic University of Chile, commissioned by the NGO Sustainable Chile, shows that living in a Sacrifice Zone translates into greater risks of illness and premature death. The country’s current social unrest represents a historic opportunity for transformation. Pushed by the voice of its people, and in the Presidency of this year’s international climate negotiations, Chile can lead a structural change focused on the redistribution of burdens and benefits, both social and environmental. The result would be a cleaner and fairer country. The road to decarbonization In June, after a year of discussions with industry and other stakeholders, President Sebastian Piñera announced a schedule for the decarbonization of Chile. In the agreement, industry leaders pledged to close all coal-fired power plants by 2040. As positive as it may seem, an in-depth analysis of the proposal leads to the conclusion that the government’s goal is not ambitious enough to achieve the prompt justice that affected communities deserve. The timetable sets the nation’s eight oldest plants up for the closure by 2024, but fails to give dates or details on the closure of the remaining 20 plants, leaving it to the goodwill of future administrations. Under those terms, there is no way to guarantee that the plan will be implemented. Moreover, waiting 20 more years is not an acceptable deal for those who have already carried too much of the burden for far too long. Nor is it a move toward maintaining our planet’s climate equilibrium, a battle in which we have no time to spare. Another criticism of the government's proposal is that shortly after it was announced, the energy company Engie inaugurated a new coal-fired power plant in Mejillones, a Sacrifice Zone in the north of the country. The new plant has more than double the operating capacity of two thermoelectric plants in Tocopilla, which the same company would have closed after signing the decarbonization plan. But it's not all bad news. A month before social protests broke out in Chile, the government signaled a more ambitious decarbonization goal. In September, the Chamber of Deputies approved an initiative asking the President to move the closure of coal-fired power plants up by ten years, to 2030. The request is based on a study commissioned by the NGO Sustainable Chile and completed by the consulting firm Kas Engineers. Their research shows the technical and economic feasibility of reaching decarbonization by 2030. Chile’s current social crisis erupted in the midst of the search for a binding agreement to achieve decarbonization. Social unrest in Chile Chile is in the midst of a historic moment. Social discontent—generated by the injustices, inequality and lack of equity endured for years by the most vulnerable segments of the population—triggered ongoing protests, which have yet to abate. What’s happening in Chile is a mirror of what could happen in many countries of the world, particularly in Latin America. The metaphorical grass is dry and any spark could surely ignite social mobilization, uncovering chambers that have for years accumulated injustice and discontent. The figures confirm that Chile has grown and there is less poverty, but neither the benefits nor the burdens have been equitably distributed. Authorities have failed. Confidence is running out and disillusionment is increasing. The Sacrifice Zones are a very clear example of the structural problems afflicting our society: certain communities bear all the costs and enjoy none of the benefits. This is unacceptable. A new direction is possible Fires, floods and other extreme weather events, which uproot people’s lives, show us that nature will not stop protesting until we respect her. Society is also calling for respect, with an urgency that has gained the attention of decision-makers. Changes that once seemed impossible are within reach. It’s not that social demands are more important than environmental demands, or vice versa. Environmental demands are also social demands. Although the climate crisis and pollution affect us all, the damage is much greater for the most vulnerable populations. Changes that favor our planet can and must be made with a social justice perspective, and in harmony with nature. In the case of Chile, decarbonization—and with it, an end to Sacrifice Zones—is the change that will make us a better country. Because one of life’s greatest injustices is being forced to live in an unhealthy environment.
Read more
The oil spill devouring life on Brazil’s beaches
Photos: Marcela Cintra / Text: Laura Yaniz Since late August, oil has been registered at more than 500 points along 2,500 kilometers of coastline in northeastern Brazil. What began with the appearance of small black spots on some beaches quickly became huge stains that changed the color of the sand itself. The spill’s origin remains unknown, as local organizations and communities organize to clean up their beaches. Far from being resolved, the problem is getting worse every day. The oil’s advance is threatening the marine life in mangroves and coral reefs, both key ecosystems for the survival of species. In addition, residents of the affected communities, who depend on tourism and fishing, have seen their lifestyles and economies threatened. Their health is also at risk due to the consumption of contaminated seafood and direct exposure to the spill. Faced with the inaction of government authorities, the people have been cleaning the beaches and sea with their own hands. The spill itself, coupled with state neglect, violates the human rights of the inhabitants of the hundreds of affected beaches. AIDA—together with the Projeto Publico Institute, Salve Maracaipe, Projeto Caribessa and Rede Minha Jampa—denounced these violations before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in an effort to urge the Brazilian government to respond to this social and environmental crisis. Soledad García Muñoz, the Commission's Special Rapporteur on Economic, Social, Cultural and Environmental Rights expressed her solidarity with the Brazilian people and authorities in the face of the tragedy and called on the State to "take the necessary measures to avoid a bigger deterioration of the affected ecosystems, considering that the time, the resources and the way of acting focused on human rights are the key factors for the effectiveness of a contingency plan that the present situation deserves.” She added: “the slower and partial are the measures adopted, more irreparable will be the damages for the Brazilian coast and its biodiversity, as well as for the quality of life of the people that live in these affected regions. It is necessary an urgent and sensible response in face of these serious events generated by the contamination, because that could also accelerate the effects of the climate change in the coast, mangroves, swamps and other ecologically vulnerable habitats.”
Read more