Search

Astrid Puentes Lectures at American University

The link between protection of the environment and human rights isn’t always immediately obvious. In fact, international law didn’t begin to establish the human right to a healthy environment until the 1990s. But these are some of the things that can happen when the natural environment is harmed: We can lose our source of food. Our health can suffer. We may lose access to clean water. Our livelihoods can be destroyed if the land we farm or the sea we fish no longer supports a harvest. If a dam floods a village, people lose their homes. In some cases, these losses lead to the loss of a way of life—a culture. International law is clear: the right to food, water, work, home, personal safety, and culture are all protected human rights. That’s why AIDA uses international law to protect the human right to a healthy environment. The relationship between human rights and the environment is gaining wider understanding in the national and international environmental and legal communities. Indeed, American University’s Washington College of Law, in Washington D.C., invited AIDA Co-Executive Director Astrid Puentes Riaño to share her expertise on the subject in June. She gave a weeklong seminar on human rights and the environment in Latin America, available for students attending the summer program. Astrid also spoke on a panel, organized by the Academy of Human Rights of American University and AIDA, about how the two are linked in the specific case of the Belo Monte Dam. Belo Monte is a large hydropower dam under construction in Brazil. The dam will destroy rainforest, kill off plant and animal species, and increase the emission of greenhouse gases, worsening climate change. The human impact is dire. More than 20,000 people will be displaced (independent estimates double this number). Already communities are being stripped of their villages, their cultures, and the cemeteries of their ancestors to make way for the world’s third-largest hydropower dam. Many river dwellers have moved to cities where they find themselves alone and struggling to find new trades. “Our work is a constant David and Goliath battle. Sharing experiences with expert colleagues from the environment and human rights departments at one of the most prominent universities in the US was an honor” said Astrid Puentes Riaño, AIDA’s co-executive director.  “It gives us hope that academia is recognizing this link, and is willing to study it. We look forward to continuing this kind of exchange, and to helping train more young lawyers about these issues.”

Joint letter: Mexico – Detention of environmental and human rights defender Mr. Marco Antonio Suástegui Muñoz

The 57 organizations and persons signatory to the letter, which work for the protection of human rights and the environment, express their deep concern at the detention of Mr. Marco Antonio Suástegui, leader of the Consejo de Ejidos y Comunidades Opositores a la Presa La Parota – CECOP (Council of Communal Lands and Communities Opposing the La Parota Dam), on 17 June by members of the Ministerial Police of the Attorney General of Justice of Guerrero State. We call upon the Mexican State to take effective and urgent measures to guarantee the human rights of Mr. Suástegui and the important work that the human rights defender performs in defence of the Papagayo River. In particular, we consider it fundamental that the State: Take measures to ensure that the competent authorities guarantee the right to a defence and due process of Mr. Marco Antonio Suástegui, and reverse any action taken in the detention procedure and past transfers that tainted by illegalities, Take measures to guarantee his physical and psychological integrity, and Take all necessary measures to secure the work for the defence of human rights and the environment undertaken by Marco Antonio Suástegui, and take an active role in avoiding any act that hinders the actions taken to defend the Papagayo River.

Defending the Veracruz Reef from a port expansion project

Colombia must choose between gold and water: Al Gore

Colombia faces a pivotal choice for its future. It must choose between protecting its high-altitude moors as its water source for millions of people or authorizing large-scale mining in these fragile ecosystems. AIDA, together with its allied organizations, is working to convince the authorities to choose water and this cause recently won a new ally: Al Gore. The former U.S. vice president, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate for his success at raising awareness about climate change, brought up the issue of mining in the moors, known locally as páramos, in April. “Colombia must choose between the gold in the páramo and profits for a few people, or the drinking water that supplies all of its citizens,” he said at an international summit on the environment in Bucaramanga, a city in northeastern Colombia that gets its water from the Santurbán Páramo. We’ve been calling on the Colombian government to protect this moor and others around the country from mining, given that they provide 85% of the country’s water. Will this happen? By law, the government must keep mining out of the páramos. But to do this, their boundaries must first be mapped. This poses a problem. In April, the government unveiled its map showing that the Santurbán Páramo stretches over 42,000 hectares (104,000 acres). That’s more than the 11,000 hectares of previous estimates. But it’s only about half the 82,000 hectares measured by the Alexander von Humboldt Biological Resources Research Institute, an independent state research center that used a larger scale map than the government. The larger scale provides richer details that show how the moor extends further. The government has not adopted an official measurement, leaving important parts of the moor open to mining, an industry it is promoting to spur economic growth. But at what costs? Large-scale mining will cause irreversible damage to these flora-rich moors that not only supply water to millions of people but also help mitigate the effects of climate change by capturing carbon emissions. Gore was clear on what choice he recommends for Colombia or any country facing questions of economic growth versus environmental protect. “Without a planet, there is no economy that is worth anything,” he said. You can help us spread the message by making a donation and signing our petition so that we can continue the fight to save Colombia’s moors. Thank you!

Organizations come out in defense of the Veracruz Reef System

Technical and legal arguments are submitted in support of a lawsuit against modifying the boundaries of the Veracruz Reef System National Park in eastern Mexico, a site protected by international obligations to preserve the natural barrier against storms and hurricanes.

Frustration to hope: Finding the drive to continue from those you help

By María José Veramendi Villa, senior attorney, AIDA, @MaJoVeramendi  I can get frustrated in my work as an environmental and human rights lawyer.  It is frustrating to explain that the work we do on cases of human rights violations may not produce immediate results. It is frustrating to know that our work is a struggle that can take years to find justice for victims and induce change in state policies and our societies. It is frustrating to watch programs designed to protect human rights come under the influence of political interests. The dearth of resources for pursuing these cases is also frustrating. So too are the long waits for justice – or injustice. So what do we do when we get discouraged?  My answer is to return to the origins, the basics and the very reason for our struggle and commitment: the victims. I relearned this lesson in March. On a trip to Washington D.C., I met two Brazilian fighters for the cause of their communities: Alaíde Silva and Josías Manhuary Munduruku. Alaíde had traveled for days from Buriticupu, a municipality in the northeastern state of Maranhão, and Josías from Jacareacanga, a municipality in the northern state of Pará, to participate in a hearing (in Spanish and Portuguese) before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. They came to present information on how Brazilian judges are continuing to use a law from the country’s 1964-85 dictatorship to violate their right to access to justice. The law is called Security Suspension. It allows the federal government to request the suspension of judicial rulings. The government has used Security Suspension to invalidate rulings that favor the rights of indigenous peoples and other communities against the development of mega-projects like the Belo Monte hydropower dam in the Amazon. The government can do this on the basis that any adverse rulings to “development” projects are threats to national security or to social and economic order. At the hearing, Josías described an imminent threat to the Munduruku indigenous community of 11,000 people in 118 villages. The Brazilian government plans to build a hydropower complex (in Spanish) on the Tapajós River and its tributaries—and has not followed a law requiring it to consult the Munduruku and to obtain their prior, free and informed consent. He said flooding from the project threatens to devastate his people’s land and the survival of their community and culture. He explained how a judge revoked a favorable court decision for his people, allowing the project to continue in open violation of their rights. “We want respect for our land, our river, our sacred sites, our cemetery. And want to be consulted!” Josías said.  Alaíde spoke about a similar plight. He explained how Vale, a Brazilian mining company, is enlarging the Carajás Railroad to the detriment of 1.7 million people in 27 municipalities in Maranhão and Pará and in at least 100 indigenous, Afro-descendants, peasant and urban communities on the banks of the railway. The railroad stretches 900 kilometers from the Carajás mines in Pará to the Ponta da Madeira Maritime Terminal in Maranhão. It transports iron, manganese, copper and coal. With the expansion, Vale will duplicate 115 kilometers of the line to increase transport capacity and the flow of minerals. Alaíde said the impacts are vast. These range from the noise pollution caused by the grinding of the train wheels on the tracks and from the train horn, to the running over of people and animals, to the displacement of communities, villages and families without fair compensation. Alaíde provided details on how Vale terrorizes the population, co-opts leaders, intimidates people and spies on social movements, all in the name of meeting its own interests. As with Tapajós, Security Suspension was used to revoke a court ruling that had favored the communities. That decision had ordered Vale to suspend construction and conduct an environmental impact assessment with a detailed analysis of all the existing indigenous and Afro-descendant communities along the railroad. But with Security Suspension, this ruling was overturned with the argument that suspending the project would affect the economic interests of the state. These are just two examples of the impact of Security Suspension. There are many more instances in which the rights of communities and people have been affected by major “development” projects justified by “economic interest, public order and safety.” We hope that cases like these will expose the impact that Security Suspension has on the human rights of hundreds of people and communities, and we hope that this will drive international organizations to call on Brazil to change this legal instrument. Thanks to everyone who worked so hard to make the hearing possible. Thanks to our colleagues in Brazil without whose work and commitment Alaíde and Josías would never have been able to make the long journey. And thanks to these two Brazilian human rights fighters for a lesson that drives away the fog of frustration and allows the sun to shine again.  I want to dedicate this post to my dear former colleague Joelson Cavalcante, who recently left this world to become a being of light. With him I visited the Xingu River in the Brazilian Amazon for the first time, and I will never forget his happiness and his big smile when, after a year outside his country, he could once again swim in those waters. In his memory, the fight continues.

COP20: A chance to fight climate change

The world is poised for more poverty, hunger and disease as flooding, heat waves, storms and droughts increase. This is how the newest report of the the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change describes humanity´s near future. That’s why AIDA is helping Latin American policymakers to influence decisions about climate change responses at the highest levels of international law. We’re building their capacity for influence by developing recommendations and disseminating information. This year Latin America has the best opportunity yet to put its needs on the international climate change agenda. In December, Lima will host the main session of climate negotiations, the 20th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP20). The event’s mission is to advance the draft of a new binding climate agreement to be signed at the Paris climate conference in 2015. To make the most of this opportunity, AIDA is supporting policymakers – government officials, negotiators and members of international financial institutions – and civil society organizations. Our objectives are to help them participate more effectively in the climate negotiations, to educate them about options for improvements in international law, and to encourage them to create solutions and press their governments to take immediate action. In March, we took part in Climate Change: Progress and Prospects, an international forum held in the Peruvian Congress. Peru is considering creating a climate change bill, and at the event we shared our experiences in international climate finance. We highlighted the need for Latin American institutions to improve their ability to access funds for climate change adaptation and mitigation projects. We’re also advocating a commitment to long-term financing as a chief component of the new climate agreement that will be discussed at COP20. If countries know that economic resources will become and remain available, they can plan viable actions to help communities most vulnerable to climate change. In February, AIDA and our partner organizations held a webinar on the Green Climate Fund (GCF), a financial mechanism of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The GCF was founded to mobilize large amounts of public and private money to support climate change responses in developing countries. AIDA is closely monitoring the GCF to make sure that its contribution is effective. Your renewed support will help us to do even more to generate effective international actions that reduce the severity of climate change. As we actively prepare for COP20 and continue our efforts to promote sustainable energy alternatives at the regional level, we will keep you informed of our progress. Thank you!

Colombia’s Ministry of Environment unveils the demarcation of the Santurbán Páramo without specifying details of the measurements

With the water supply of millions of people at risk, we urge the ministry to publish details of the demarcation and ensure that this fragile ecosystem remains free of large-scale mining operations.

Brazilian judicial abuses questioned on anniversary of military coup

Human rights commission hears case questioning state use of dictatorship-era legal device.

Legal ways to protect the environment in Colombia

By Héctor Herrera, AIDA legal advisor and coordinator of the Colombian Environmental Justice Network, @RJAColombia Our activities make an impact on biodiversity and the environment every day. The trouble is that our impact is getting increasingly harsher such as with climate change and the extinction of species like the Colombian Grebe  (Podicepsandinus, in Spanish). In Colombia, in response to the above situation, the law has been improved to help protect the environment. The Colombian Constitution, for example, recognizes the importance of protecting the environment and the right to a healthy environment in Article 79, while national environmental laws and in other legal instruments offer more help.  The following are some of the most important legal proceedings in Colombia designed to achieve and protect the right to a healthy environment. Action of "tutela" This legal remedy was created with the 1991 Constitution to provide immediate protection for fundamental rights such as the right to life. To protect the right to a healthy environment, the Constitutional Court of Colombia ruled in Sentence T-1527 in 2000: “While the right to a healthy environment is not considered a fundamental right in our constitution, it is a collective right that can be protected by popular actions. It can be protected through the exceptional mechanism of the action of tutela when actions or omissions by public authorities or private individuals threaten or violate fundamental rights, such as to life, health, physical integrity, or if it affects the public right to a healthy environment. It is thus a fundamental right by connection."[1] Compared to other legal proceedings, the action of tutela is simpler and swifter in its procedures.  Popular Action This action is enshrined in Article 88 of the Colombian Constitution. It provides protections for collective interests and rights associated with public health and the environment.  Article 88 was further developed in Law 472 of 1998, whose Article 4 contains a non-exhaustive list of collective rights and interests that can be protected by this legal proceeding. These include the enjoyment of a healthy environment, the existence of ecologic balance and access to public services. The goal of this popular action is to eliminate hazards, threats or violations to collective rights, and restore things to their previous state when possible. This action is preventive, restorative and compensational in nature. An emblematic case involving popular action was taken by the Corporación para el Desarrollo Sostenible del Archipiélago de San Andrés, Providencia y Santa Catalina (CORALINA) before the Dispute Tribunal of San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina. CORALINA demanded protection for the right to a healthy environment, the existence of ecological balance, and the rational management and use of natural resources as well as the protection and attention to regional species and ecosystems to permit a sustainable development of the community and the environment. The tribunal ruled in favor of CORALINA in a sentence that can be consulted here (in Spansih). Group Action This action is contained in Article 88 of the Colombian Constitution and should be considered in combination with Article 79, which stipulates the right to a healthy environment.  Unlike popular action, which seeks to prevent damage to a public right, group action seeks economic compensation for damages caused to a group of people with homogeneous characteristics with respect to the activity that caused the damage. A symbolic case was the group action taken by peasants and fishermen affected by an oil spill on the Trans-Andean pipeline, which is operated by Colombia’s state oil company Ecopetrol, in 2000 on the Rosario river in Nariño, a southeastern department on border with Ecuador. The oil spill caused serious environmental damage. For a detailed explanation and better understanding of this subject, you can consult the legal sources for the aforementioned proceedings. These include the Political Constitution, Law 472 of 1998, and the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court (in Spanish). [1] Sentence T-1527 of 2000 MP Alfredo Beltrán Sierra.