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
Resolution provides measures to protect corals in the Colombia Caribbean
Setting a positive precedent in Colombia and an important region of the Greater Caribbean, CORALINA has prohibited the fishing and commercialization of several species of herbivorous and omnivorous fish, a measure aimed at conserving the area’s coral reef ecosystems. San Andrés, Colombia. With the objective of conserving the coral reef and beach ecosystems of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina, Colombia, the region’s autonomous corporation authority emitted a resolution prohibiting the capture and commercialization of several species of herbivorous and omnivorous fish. The waters around these Caribbean islands host the greatest marine and coastal biodiversity in Colombia, with more than 2,354 marine species registered to date. “This progress towards the conservation of corals and beaches occurs after a process of more than 20 years that included environmental education, research and monitoring,” said Nacor Bolaños, coordinator of protected areas for the Corporation for the Sustainable Development of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina (CORALINA). “The need to protect parrotfish and other species of herbivorous and omnivorous fish was supported by artisanal fishermen themselves and by local communities, with whom we met.” The resolution issued by the decentralized public entity protects 14 species of parrotfish, four of surgeonfish, five of butterfly fish and six species of angelfish. It completely prohibits commercial, industrial, sport, or recreational fishing of these species. It also prohibits commercial fishing using harpoons and/or similar fishing gears. It also completely restricts their commercialization, possession and storage, as well as their transfer to other areas of the country. “The resolution is of great importance because it recognizes the benefits of corals for fishing, tourism, pharmaceutical resources, and protection against the impacts of the climate crisis,” said Maria José Gonzalez-Bernat, scientific advisor to AIDA. “It also recognizes the vital role several species of fish play in keeping these ecosystems healthy.” By feeding on algae that take away light and space from corals, herbivorous fish support the survival of these fragile environments. Numerous studies have demonstrated that parrotfish contribute to the growth of corals and the creation of sand for beaches. Some omnivorous species like angelfish also help to clean algae from corals. AIDA has supported CORALINA’s initiative since its inception, providing technical, scientific and legal information; and has advocated for the inclusion in the resolution of international and regional commitments that protect these fish. The Archipelago of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina concentrates 77 percent of the surface coral areas of Colombia and houses the third largest coral reef in the world. The area was declared a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve in 2000, and borders eight nations of the Greater Caribbean: Venezuela, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Jamaica, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica and Panama. Yet its coral coverage has deteriorated over time due to natural phenomenon and human activities, as have populations of herbivorous fish like the parrotfish. “In this sense, this regulation is an example for other countries with coral reefs along their coasts,” said Gonzalez-Bernat. “The resolution is based on scientific information and emphasizes the international legal framework that recommends the protection of corals and the fish that support their conservation.” Press contacts: Victor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 155 70522107 Claudia Marcela Delgado (Colombia), CORALINA, [email protected], +57 313 8517300
Read more
What we must do to preserve the planet’s biodiversity and natural heritage
Society is at serious risk of losing our natural world and all that sustains us. Our actions are provoking mass extinction and accelerating the loss of natural resources, plants and animals. Among these actions are the growth of agriculture and livestock production, the destruction of habitats, the introduction of invasive species, the expansion of urban areas, poaching and overfishing, overpopulation and pollution. That’s according to the most complete global evaluation of biodiversity yet, recently published by scientists at the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). The report shows that the capacity of Earth’s ecosystems to provide benefits to people has diminished drastically over the last 70 years. That’s because, on average: global resources have diminished by 47 percent; 25 percent of flora and fauna species are in danger of extinction; and the climate crisis is driving higher temperatures and increased acidification of the ocean, which is causing coral reef coverage worldwide to shrink. What’s more, a third of all species in the ocean are being overfished. Despite these alarming statistics, we can still take the planet out of the grave situation we’ve put it in. But it will require radical changes to our approach. The diagnosis for Latin America Historically, the world has passed through five mass extinctions that have caused the loss of more than 70 percent of the Earth’s life forms. Currently, we seem to be living through the sixth. Although species extinction occurs naturally, it generally does so at a rate of about one species per million each year. The current rate far exceeds that, as at least 100 species per million are going extinct each year—and that rate is rising. Another way to visualize this global threat is by listing the countries with the most species in danger of extinction. Five countries in Latin America are in the top 10 for species loss, with Mexico topping the list at 665 threatened species (71 species of birds, 96 mammals, 98 reptiles, 181 types of fish and 219 amphibians). Mexico’s situation is largely being driven by high rates of deforestation, a practice aimed at increasing agricultural area to cover the country’s growing demand for food. In fact, Latin America and Southeast Asia have lost millions of hectares of terrestrial ecosystems and fresh water through increased livestock production and agriculture (which includes the use of fertilizers). Other countries in the region with high rates of species loss include Colombia (540 species), Ecuador (436), Brazil (413), and Peru (385). Species extinction alters and impedes the proper functioning of ecosystems, which rely on interactions between varied forms of life to produce food, manage water supply, regulate climate, and more. Big changes to ensure a better future Although life on our planet has existed for some 4 billion years, humanity has only been around 200 thousand of those; yet we’ve managed to disrupt the Earth’s natural balance. Although our actions have negatively affected the earth, this shows that we, as humans, have the ability to transform our environment. The IPBES report mentions the Aichi Biodiversity Targets as transformative actions that can protect biodiversity. One of those is the creation of natural protected areas, which have helped reduce the risk of extinction for species like mammals and amphibians. Nevertheless, the report emphasizes the need for a drastic change in the values and objectives of our governments so that decisions at the local, national, and international levels are aligned to combat the causes behind the planet’s degradation. To that end, and taking into account the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, nations must: Expand and coordinate the global network of natural protected areas. Invest in green infrastructure. Produce food, materials, and energy in sustainable ways. Conserve and use water efficiently. Support indigenous and traditional communities, who protect many of the planet’s remaining natural resources. Adequately approach population growth and global consumption levels. Create new environmental laws and better compliance with existing ones. Slow pollution and the overexploitation of our natural resources. “People shouldn’t panic, but they should begin to make drastic changes,” said Josef Settele, an IPBES co-chair and entomologist at the Helmholtz Center for Environmental Research in Germany. “Business as usual with small adjustments won’t be enough.” Our air, water, and food depend on biodiversity—the varied forms of life on our planet and the interaction between them. Caring for this natural heritage is a shared task; it is now more important than ever.
Read more
Colombia makes the right move by suspending fracking project
Citing a recent court order, Colombia’s environmental authority has suspended the licensing process for a fracking project in the Middle Magdalena Valley. The decision represents an advance in the movement to stop fracking’s expansion in Latin America. Bogotá. In an advance for the struggle against fracking’s expansion in Latin America, Colombia’s National Environmental Licensing Authority has suspended the licensing process for a fracking project in the Middle Magdalena Valley. With this decision, Colombia joins a growing list of communities, municipalities, and regions across Latin America and the world who have made progress to stop the expansion of fracking in their territories, many through the enactment of bans or moratoriums. "The Environmental Authority’s decision is a positive example for nations across Latin America and the world,” said Astrid Puentes Riaño, co-executive director of AIDA. “It’s the result of an admirable civic movement and of the use of the precautionary principle as a tool to protect human health and ecosystems, and to confront the climate crisis.” The decision to halt the process for Ecopetrol’s "APE Guane A” project is founded on the State Council’s suspension, in November 2018, of the regulatory framework for fracking in the country, citing the precautionary principle. The Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) supports the Council’s decision and considers the Environmental Authority’s enactment of that order to be a step in the right direction. “In the absence of existing regulations on fracking, in Colombia we have a judicial moratorium. This implies that no project may be implemented that seeks to exploit unconventional oil and gas deposits using this technique,” explained Juana Hofman, AIDA attorney. “All activities aimed at the development of fracking activities must be suspended.” In its decision, the Environmental Authority states: “… The temporary suspension of the aforementioned provisions translates to those provisions being temporarily outside the legal system, which consequently means that this Environmental Authority does not have technical regulations that allow it to verify the management measures that should be included in the Environmental Impact Study, to be analyzed within the environmental assessment procedure, and thus could not determine whether or not the granting of the environmental license required for new projects in unconventional deposits was viable.” The suspended project involves the use of hydraulic fracturing in a boggy complex located between the municipalities of Barrancabermeja and Puerto Wilches in Northeast Colombia. Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is an extractive technique that proves incredibly damaging for water, air quality, human health and the climate. It emits methane, a pollutant strongly associated with global warming. Due to its negative impacts on the environment and public health, fracking has been prohibited by judicial or legislative means in many municipalities, regions and nations around the world, such as Scotland, the state of New York (USA), and the province of Quebec (Canada). Global efforts to stop fracking’s expansion have largely been citizen-led and driven by concerns for the risks fracking poses to the climate, environment and public health. The Alliance for a Colombia Free from Fracking has been steadfast in their commitment to stopping fracking’s advance in Colombia, and should be congratulated for this important advance. AIDA urges the Colombian government to continue down the path of prevention and to comply with its international environmental obligations to confront the climate crisis, and to protect its land, water and communities. We urge the government to deny authorizations for fracking operations in Colombia. “Fracking is a procedure that furthers us from our climate goals, and from the energy path that all nations should be targeting” Puentes Riaño said. “Decisions like these are an invitation to seek out renewable energies that are better for our planet and our communities, not only in Colombia but around the world.” Press Contacts: Carlos Lozano Acosta (Colombia), AIDA, [email protected], +57 (300) 564 0282 Juana Hofman (Colombia), AIDA, [email protected], +57 (310) 884 6715
Read more