Project

Victory: Constitutional Court Defends Right to Prior Consultation

On January 23, 2008, the Colombian Constitutional Court declared the Forest Law of 2006 to be unconstitutional and therefore, invalid, because lawmakers did not consult with indigenous, afrodescendant, and tribal communities during development of the law as required. 

This decision is an advance for these Colombian communities who view many economic development projects and policies as a threat to their traditional territory and cultural identity, as well as the environment. The ruling also establishes a valuable legal precedent that can be used to bolster indigenous and tribal communities’ rights in other legal cases throughout the Americas.

The Colombian government is required by law to consult with indigenous and tribal communities regarding administrative and legislative decisions that may affect them. It is obligated to do so because the Colombian Congress previously adopted into law “Convention 169,” a treaty of the International Labour Organization that protects this right and others.

In this case, the Court decided that indigenous and tribal communities should have been consulted because the Forest Law regulates forest issues in general terms, and contains provisions that “will likely affect areas generally used by the communities, which could impact their lifestyles and their close relationships with the forests.”  

The court also declared that the requirement to consult with indigenous and traditional communities cannot be replaced with the general public participation process that the government carried out regarding the Forest bill. Rather, to comply with the law, the government should inform the communities about the proposed law, explain its implications and how it could affect them, and give them opportunities to effectively state their opinions regarding the bill.

As a result of this court ruling and civil society’s call to respect the right to prior and informed consultation, the Colombian government proposed a law to regulate and enforce this fundamental right. The Ministry of Agriculture also began developing a new forest law, this time using a process that complies with prior and informed consent procedures. 

The lawsuit was brought by a group of students and professors from the University of Los Andes Law School in Bogota with the support of AIDA. Social organizations including the Proceso de Comunidades Negras, the National Indigenous Organization of Colombia (ONIC) and CENSAT Agua Viva also supported the group in presenting this case.

This group also filed a second lawsuit against the Forest Law alleging that the law violated Constitutional provisions protecting the environment. However, because of the January court decision, no decision will be made on this second suit.


A toolkit for using Advisory Opinion 32/25 in climate justice work
Climate Change, Human Rights

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

Hands weaving a basket
Climate Change, Human Rights

Climate Justice and Human Rights: Legal Standards and Tools from the Inter-American Court’s Advisory Opinion 32/25

On July 3, 2025, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) delivered its Advisory Opinion OC-32/25 on Climate Emergency and Human Rights (Advisory Opinion), marking a historic legal and political milestone in the global fight for climate justice. It is the first advisory opinion issued by an international court to find that both States and non-State actors, such as business enterprises, have obligations rooted in international human rights law to address the causes and consequences of the climate emergency.The Court articulates clear and binding obligations to act urgently in protecting the global climate system, preventing human rights violations resulting from its alteration, and securing climate reparations. The Advisory Opinion will guide climate litigation in local, regional, and national courts, and provide a foundation for climate policymaking, grounding local legislation and global negotiations not in voluntary commitments, but in legal duties. It will also serve as a testament to the lived experiences and expertise of those on the frontlines of climate harm and at the forefront of climate justice, affirming the peril that climate change represents for human rights and the promise of human rights-based climate action and remedy.This Advisory Opinion is not an isolated development but rather part of an unprecedented global movement for climate justice. It stands alongside the recent climate advisory opinions of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and may be joined by one from the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (AfCHPR) in the near future. Together, these proceedings mark a decisive moment in consolidating a more comprehensive and human rights-based legal framework to confront the climate emergency— what the IACtHR deems an exceptional threat that endangers life on the planet and severely undermines the enjoyment of human rights. Moreover, these advisory opinions may help cut through the political inertia that has long stalled progress in international climate negotiations and national climate policymaking.   This publication compiles fourteen thematic documents developed through the collaborative efforts of a coalition of environmental, human rights, and academic organizations, alongside experts who have actively participated in the advisory proceedings from the outset. The topics reflect the main thematic areas articulated by the Court in the Advisory Opinion and are organized into four sections: (i) Foundational Rights and Knowledge; (ii) State and Corporate Obligations; (iii) The Rights of Affected Peoples and Groups; and (iv) Environmental Democracy and Remedies.Each brief was prepared by a lead organization and subjected to rigorous peer review to ensure accuracy and consistency. Together, they provide an in-depth analysis of the Advisory Opinion’s key contributions, its legal and practical implications, and the gaps and opportunities this landmark decision presents across the selected thematic areas. They also present arguments, standards, and practical recommendations aimed at strengthening climate litigation and advocacy strategies.This series serves as a resource for legal and advocacy networks, enhancing understanding of the scope of the Court’s decision and encouraging legal and political action to advance the structural changes necessary for communities and ecosystems to achieve climate justice.Read and download the publication 

Read more

Tortuga marina en el fondo del océano
Oceans

High Seas Treaty: A Major Step Forward for a Healthy, Resilient Ocean

The world is celebrating a key milestone for keeping our oceans healthy and resilient for present and future generations.This month, the final requirement was met for the entry into force of the High Seas Treaty—a long-sought agreement that is essential for the protection and sustainable use of two-thirds of the ocean, nearly half of our blue planet.The high seas are areas beyond national jurisdiction and one of the largest reservoirs of biodiversity on Earth, home to an incredible variety of marine life. They also provide food and oxygen, regulate the climate, buffer the impacts of the climate crisis, and support the livelihoods of communities that rely on fishing and tourism.After more than 20 years of discussions and over five years of formal negotiations, governments agreed on the text of the treaty at the United Nations headquarters on March 4, 2023. The treaty was formally adopted on June 19 of that year.But that was not the end of the story.For the treaty to enter into force and be implemented, it needed to be ratified by at least 60 countries—a milestone that was finally reached on September 19. The treaty will officially take effect 120 days later, on January 17, 2026.At AIDA, we have contributed to this process for many years, helping ensure that the needs of Latin America are part of both the treaty’s design and its implementation.The High Seas Treaty—short for the Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement)—offers numerous benefits. Among them, it calls for the creation and proper management of marine protected areas on the high seas to conserve and restore the ocean’s rich biodiversity.The treaty also requires that any new activity on the high seas undergo environmental impact assessments, including consideration of the cumulative effects of multiple activities on a single ecosystem.AIDA’s Role in Protecting Life on the High SeasFrom the negotiation of the High Seas Treaty to the present day, AIDA has played an active role in the process, co-leading Latin American civil society contributions to help secure a strong and effective agreement.We have done this as part of the High Seas Alliance, a coalition of more than 70 organizations working to preserve biodiversity in the high seas, where AIDA serves as regional coordinator for Latin America. In this role, we have ensured that the realities, expectations, and challenges of the continent are incorporated into the Alliance’s strategies.During the treaty negotiations, we supported Latin American delegations through internal and regional processes, providing briefings on the benefits and obligations of the agreement. In doing so, we helped strengthen the region’s capacity to engage effectively, drawing on our scientific and technical expertise.Looking ahead to implementation, we have also provided technical support to regional delegations participating in the Preparatory Committee sessions, a United Nations body tasked with advancing the issues that will be addressed at the treaty’s first Conference of the Parties (COP).Countries that ratify the treaty will be able to participate in the COP, where key decisions will be made regarding implementation and the activation of the treaty’s benefits. The first COP session will take place one year after the treaty enters into force.Beyond this much-anticipated ratification, it is essential that all countries—not just the initial 60—join the agreement to ensure fair, equitable, and sustainable governance of high seas biodiversity. This will guarantee effective implementation, fulfillment of conservation objectives, and participation in the treaty’s benefits.At AIDA, we will continue working with a Latin American focus to ensure that the High Seas Treaty translates into concrete actions for the protection and sustainable use of the high seas—a shared responsibility of all governments.

Read more