Project
Victory: Ecuador’s High Court Orders Halt to Contamination from Palm Oil Production
Palm oil plantations are threatening the biodiversity of Chocó, an ancient forest in Ecuador. The companies managing these plantations have caused massive destruction to the forest, endangering rare species and displacing local farmers with near impunity. In September 2007, the Constitutional Court ordered remediation and accountability for the damage.
The order came a year after AIDA teamed up with its Ecuadorean partner, ECOLEX, to document and shed light on the negative impacts of palm oil cultivation in Ecuador. The waste from the plantations, including pesticides and dangerous chemicals, contaminated nearby rivers and waterways. This harmed fish and plants and significantly affected the health and livelihoods of local communities.
The evidence was compelling enough to lead ECOLEX in September 2006 to file a constitutional suit against the Ministry of the Environment and plantation owners to protect the human right to a healthy environment. AIDA supported ECOLEX’s legal action with arguments from international environmental law.
The following year, the Constitutional Court (the highest court in Ecuador) ordered the Ministry to remediate the damages caused by the palm oil plantations and take measures to control and mitigate future potential harms.
Shortly after, the Ministry filed an appeal. But the appeal was not successful, and the Constitutional Court reinforced its original decision.
The decision is an important victory for those who suffered from the irresponsible palm oil cultivation in Ecuador. More importantly, the high court set a legal precedent that can be used by lower Ecuadorean courts in deciding environmental cases. With the victory, AIDA will be looking for more opportunities to protect Ecuador’s natural bounty.
Related projects
Organizations submit amicus curiae brief to Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court, demonstrating that Congressional authorization of the Belo Monte Dam is illegal
The authorization violates national and international law because the communities affected by the project were not consulted. Construction of the dam continues, causing harms to people, communities and the ecosystem of the Brazilian Amazon. Brasilia, Brazil. Construction of the Belo Monte Dam continues. Meanwhile, biodiversity and the communities of the area already suffer severe damage. Civil society organizations submitted to the Supreme Federal Court an amicus curiae (in Portuguese) (friend of the court) brief that demonstrates that the Congressional decree authorizing the controversial dam is illegal because the government didn’t consult with the affected communities. The brief contains national and international law arguments for the protection of the environment and human rights. The arguments support a legal action filed by the Federal Prosecutor’s Office (Ministério Público Federal), which seeks a Supreme Federal Court ruling that annuls the decree. The Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) prepared the document in cooperation with the Centro de Estudios de Derecho, Justicia y Sociedad (DEJUSTICIA), Instituto Socioambiental (ISA), la Associação Indígena Yudjá Mïratu da Volta Grande do Xingu (AYMÏX) and the Conselho Indigenista Missionário (CIMI). "The Belo Monte project was approved without the State having consulted and obtained the consent of the affected indigenous communities and traditional populations. This, alongside the environmental degradation that began with construction, has placed the individuals and communities in a situation of extreme vulnerability," explained AIDA’s attorney, María José Veramendi Villa. By not guaranteeing the right to free, prior and informed consent of the affected communities before authorizing the project, Congress violated the Brazilian Constitution and Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization (ILO). Even though public information meetings about the project were held, they did not constitute prior consultation because they were held after the project was approved. Additionally, information provided in the meetings was not translated into indigenous languages. Not all the affected people had access to the meetings and those who did received incomplete and last minute information about the project. As well as the issues related to free, prior and informed consultation and consent, the document reinforces the Federal Prosecutor’s arguments with regard to the right to access to justice. This right was violated when the government used a law known as Suspension of Security to suspend lower court decisions against the project and favorable to the affected population, ostensibly to protect public security and the economy. "If the Supreme Federal Court issues a favorable decision, the Brazilian State will have two obligations. Not only will it have to suspend the authorization it gave for the dam’s construction, but also it will have to remedy the past and ongoing harm inflicted on indigenous communities and other populations affected by Belo Monte," said Dejusticia’s international director, César Rodríguez Garavito. "Traditional populations affected by the dam are living in unacceptable conditions for democratic times. There is a judicial decision that recognizes that the right to prior consultation was violated, but at the same time another, preliminary and provisional, decision that authorizes construction to move forward," said Leonardo Amorim, an attorney with Instituto Socioambiental. "Consequently, this population suffers worsening health conditions and invasion of their lands. We hope that the Supreme Federal Court rejects this situation." This past Tuesday, the Xingu Alive Forever Movement (MXVPS), with the support of several organizations, requested a hearing (in Portuguese) with the President (Chief Justice) of the Supreme Federal Court to demand an immediate decision in this legal action, as well as in others that challenge large hydroelectric projects in the Amazon.
Read more
Our fight to protect the coral reefs and mangroves of Mexico goes beyond national borders
Coral reefs, the nurseries of the seas, are vital to the fisheries that provide food for millions of people. Mangrove forests also benefit people: they protect coastal communities from increasingly severe storm surges and help to mitigate climate change by absorbing huge amounts of carbon dioxide. But large infrastructure projects that ignore these benefits threaten some of these vitally important ecosystems. AIDA uses the law to protect coral reefs, mangroves and other wetlands. We have found that it’s not enough to fight at the local level, country by country. AIDA approaches defense at the ecosystem level, which is more effective. We engage in discussions with international authorities, bringing attention to the obligations that countries have to the world to preserve their marine and coastal environments. "What you get with these international legal actions is a strategy that weaves together various aspects of the case: legal, political, scientific and media. So we make the issue relevant not only to local decision makers, but also to international authorities. Public support is generated and consulting or certified experts speak out about it, "said Sandra Moguel, AIDA legal advisor. A prime example of this strategy for environmental protection is a case involving Mexico, a country rich in wetlands. In May AIDA alerted the Secretariat of the Ramsar Convention, an intergovernmental treaty for the protection of wetlands, about the possible breach of Mexico’s international obligations. Mexico’s government is considering approval of the proposed Las Cruces Dam, a hydroelectric project in Nayarit, a state in the country’s northwest. Among other damage, the project would alter the course of the San Pedro Mezquital River, which feeds Marismas Nacionales (National Wetlands), one of the most extensive mangrove systems in North America. National Wetlands are listed as wetlands of international importance under the Ramsar Convention. In 2010, diplomats from the Ramsar Convention recommended that the Mexican government advocate sustainable use of the wetland while assessing the project’s feasibility. We have alerted the Ramsar Secretariat that their recommendations would be ignored if Mexico gives a green light to a project that would irreversibly damage National Wetlands, biodiversity, and the communities that depend on that environment. By drawing the attention of international bodies, AIDA strengthens the efforts of our local partner organizations. AIDA has also employed this strategy to protect the unique Cabo Pulmo coral reef, in Baja California Sur. Since 2012, we have continually reminded the Mexican authorities that both the Ramsar Secretariat and the Unesco World Heritage Committee have asked them to consider the cumulative and indirect impacts of tourism projects proposed near the reef. Our arguments were added to those presented by our partners in Mexico to prevent authorization of Cabo Dorado, a mega-resort that would involve building a new city near the reef. This project is the third that tourism developers have attempted to build next to Cabo Pulmo. Construction would surely be fatal to the reef. In a victory that extends beyond Mexican borders, the government decided on May 29 to deny the environmental permit for Cabo Dorado. With your help, we will continue to bring the voice of local communities to international forums. We will continue to add value and support their struggle to preserve marine and coastal environments that benefit us all. Thanks!
Read moreOur fight to protect the coral reefs and mangroves of Mexico goes beyond national borders
Coral reefs, the nurseries of the seas, are vital to the fisheries that provide food for millions of people. Mangrove forests also benefit people: they protect coastal communities from increasingly severe storm surges and help to mitigate climate change by absorbing huge amounts of carbon dioxide. But large infrastructure projects that ignore these benefits threaten some of these vitally important ecosystems. AIDA uses the law to protect coral reefs, mangroves and other wetlands. We have found that it’s not enough to fight at the local level, country by country. AIDA approaches defense at the ecosystem level, which is more effective. We engage in discussions with international authorities, bringing attention to the obligations that countries have to the world to preserve their marine and coastal environments. "What you get with these international legal actions is a strategy that weaves together various aspects of the case: legal, political, scientific and media. So we make the issue relevant not only to local decision makers, but also to international authorities. Public support is generated and consulting or certified experts speak out about it, "said Sandra Moguel, AIDA legal advisor. A prime example of this strategy for environmental protection is a case involving Mexico, a country rich in wetlands. In May AIDA alerted the Secretariat of the Ramsar Convention, an intergovernmental treaty for the protection of wetlands, about the possible breach of Mexico’s international obligations. Mexico’s government is considering approval of the proposed Las Cruces Dam, a hydroelectric project in Nayarit, a state in the country’s northwest. Among other damage, the project would alter the course of the San Pedro Mezquital River, which feeds Marismas Nacionales (National Wetlands), one of the most extensive mangrove systems in North America. National Wetlands are listed as wetlands of international importance under the Ramsar Convention. In 2010, diplomats from the Ramsar Convention recommended that the Mexican government advocate sustainable use of the wetland while assessing the project’s feasibility. We have alerted the Ramsar Secretariat that their recommendations would be ignored if Mexico gives a green light to a project that would irreversibly damage National Wetlands, biodiversity, and the communities that depend on that environment. By drawing the attention of international bodies, AIDA strengthens the efforts of our local partner organizations. AIDA has also employed this strategy to protect the unique Cabo Pulmo coral reef, in Baja California Sur. Since 2012, we have continually reminded the Mexican authorities that both the Ramsar Secretariat and the Unesco World Heritage Committee have asked them to consider the cumulative and indirect impacts of tourism projects proposed near the reef. Our arguments were added to those presented by our partners in Mexico to prevent authorization of Cabo Dorado, a mega-resort that would involve building a new city near the reef. This project is the third that tourism developers have attempted to build next to Cabo Pulmo. Construction would surely be fatal to the reef. In a victory that extends beyond Mexican borders, the government decided on May 29 to deny the environmental permit for Cabo Dorado. With your help, we will continue to bring the voice of local communities to international forums. We will continue to add value and support their struggle to preserve marine and coastal environments that benefit us all. Thanks!
Read more