Project
Photo: Alejandro Balaguer / Fundación Albatros MediaVictory: Panama Bay is Legally Protected
Panama Bay, one of the world’s most important nesting and roosting sites for migratory birds, is now permanently protected, thanks in part to AIDA’s expertise in international law.
The bay supports endangered species, including jaguars and loggerhead turtles, as well as the vast majority of the country’s fishing industry. Its coastal mangroves capture 50 times more carbon pollution than a tropical forest of similar size. Mangroves also protect coastal communities from storm surges that grow in severity as the climate warms. Panama has already lost 75 percent of its mangroves.
In 2012 tourism developers had secured a Supreme Court decision overturning the National Environmental Authority’s decision to protect the bay as a wildlife refuge.
AIDA worked with the Environmental Advocacy Center (CIAM), a Panamanian environmental law organization, to defend Panama Bay’s protected status. We submitted a brief containing arguments based on international law. We made analogies between Panama Bay and Las Baulas National Marine Park in Costa Rica. In a legal case about Las Baulas, a balancing test found that the public right to a healthy environment outweighed the interests of tourism developers.
Then, on February 2, 2015—World Wetlands Day—Panama passed a law creating Panama Bay Wetland Wildlife Refuge. The law emphasizes the importance of an ecosystem approach to management and the rational use of wetlands, as described in the Ramsar Convention.
AIDA and CIAM will continue working to see that the law is implemented properly and to ensure the protection of Panama Bay wetlands.
Related projects
Latest News
Geneva - A groundbreaking report titled "Unmasking Canada: Rights Violations Across Latin America" was unveiled at the United Nations Universal Periodic Review Process (UPR) pre-session in Geneva, spanning from August 28 to September 1, 2023. This in-depth investigation highlights extensive human rights and environmental breaches by Canadian companies in Latin America and the Caribbean. Compiled through the collaboration of over 50 civil society organizations, the report implicates 37 Canadian projects across nine countries in the region. Of these, 32 projects have been found responsible for environmental rights infringements, including 105 oil spills in Peru's Block 192, directly linked to Frontera Energy. Additionally, the right to Free, Prior, and Informed Consent was violated in 26 projects, exemplified by dubious practices in Ecuador's Warintza project managed by Solaris Resources Inc. Violent confrontations tied to 16 projects are also highlighted, with a notable incident in Peru in July 2023, where 20 individuals were injured. While Canada positions itself as "climate forward," this report challenges such a portrayal, emphasizing Canada's protection of extractive industries that are responsible for significant human rights and environmental harm. In response to these findings and anticipating Canada's UPR on November 10, 2023, the report advocates for UN member states to impose legally binding resolutions on Canada, compelling the nation to address corporate misconduct overseas. Mauricio Terena, Legal Coordinator from Brazil’s Association of Indigenous People (APIB), said: "We have come here to denounce the involvement of Canadian companies in human rights violations in Brazil, particularly the case of the Belo Sun mining company in Pará, which aims to establish the country's largest open-pit gold mine. While Canada portrays itself as a defender of human rights and the environment, its actions contradict this narrative, especially when infringing upon the rights of indigenous peoples in Brazil. The discrepancy becomes evident when we realize that Canada has not signed the ILO's Convention 169. Therefore, we hope that the states with which we are in dialogue recognize this reality and urge Canada to reassess the operations of its corporations, seeking tangible action in defense of indigenous peoples and traditional communities". Addressing the UPR's function, where every four years UN member states review each other's human rights records, Latin American civil society representatives presented new recommendations for Canada. These recommendations underscore the need for Canada to introduce binding and comprehensive legislation centered on due diligence and corporate accountability. This encompasses the oversight of financial institutions and Canadian corporations throughout their global supply chains, aiming to prevent, mitigate, and penalize corporate misdeeds while ensuring victims of such practices overseas can seek justice and full reparation. "We hope that the UPR (Universal Periodic Review) process will establish itself as another strategy in our defense of indigenous peoples' rights, serving as a tool for the protection of human, indigenous, and environmental rights. It is essential to acknowledge that corporations involved in such violations are committing criminal acts. These actions should not be viewed merely as isolated incidents, but rather on a broader scale, as violating indigenous rights impacts all of humanity. Thus, beyond national and international laws, these transgressions should be seen from a more comprehensive perspective. It is crucial for states to commit, within the UN framework, to join a global mechanism where they recognize the need to monitor and mutually hold each other accountable for actions that uphold human, indigenous, and environmental rights", said Maria Judite "Kari" Guajajara, Legal Advisor at the National Indigenous Organization of the Brazilian Amazon (COIAB). This isn't the first instance of Canada facing allegations within the United Nations Universal System due to the activities of its corporations abroad. Six recommendations were directed at Canada during the 3rd cycle of the Periodic Review. These addressed, among other concerns, Canadian businesses' vital assurance and protection of human rights. Nevertheless, even after pledging to meet these recommendations, Canada consistently failed to fulfill its extraterritorial obligations, neglecting to take effective action to supervise corporate activities domestically and internationally. Gisela Hurtado, Advocacy Manager at Amazon Watch, commented: "Our report unveils the disturbing reality behind Canada's corporate endeavors in Latin America. While Canada boasts of ethical business conduct, the documented evidence reveals a starkly contrasting picture – one where profit is prioritized over people and the environment. Urgent change is paramount." The report's presentation in Geneva was spearheaded by a delegation that included Mauricio Terena from APIB; Maria Judite "Kari" Guajajara from COIAB; Josefa de Oliveira, a Popular Educator with Movimento Xingu Vivo Para Sempre; Lorena Aranha Curuaia, Vice President of the Iawá Community; ; and Brayan Mojanajinsoy Pasos, General Secretary of the Association of Indigenous Councils of the Municipality of Villagarzón Putumayo (ACIMVIP). The delegation was further supported by representatives from organizations including Amazon Watch, AIDA (Regional), Earthworks (US) Gaia (Colombia), and Ambiente y Sociedad (Colombia). Short summary involving Canadian companies involved in rights violations highlighted in the report 1. Frontera Energy in Lote 192 in Peru: - Over 2,000 sites contaminated, affecting 26 Amazonian indigenous communities. - Proposed activity closure plan doesn’t include reparations for affected communities. 2. Mineradora Argentina Gold SRL (joint venture between Barrick Gold and Shandong Gold): - Responsible for at least five toxic substance leakages, including cyanide and arsenic, into the Jáchal River in Argentina from the Veladero mine. - The project is in violation of the Glacier Law due to its location in a glacial zone and affects the UNESCO recognized biodiversity heritage site, the San Guilhermo Reserve. 3. Belo Sun's Volta Grande project in Brazil: - Cumulative impacts with the Belo Monte hydroelectric dam, located less than 10 km away from the prospected mining site; - Armed security forces hired by the Canadian mining company to monitor local leaders and hindering their freedom of movement; - Utter disrespect to Free, Prior and Informed Consent of Indigenous and riverine communities; - Imminent and irreversible risks of an environmental tragedy if toxic waste spills into the Xingu River due to a potential dam break, given the lack of sysmic and tailings dam safety studies. - Direct impact on communities, their traditional livelihoods, and local ecosystems. 4. The Mina Varadero in Chile: - Contaminated water sources with mercury, impacting rural populations and children. 5. ISAGEN - Brookfield Asset Management's Hidrosogamoso dam in Colombia: - Significant harm to local ecosystems and communities. 6. American Lithium's mining projects (Falchani, Macusani, and Quelccaya) in Peru: - Regularly release toxic residues, affecting over 700,000 people and contaminating the Lake Titicaca and Amazon River basins. 7. Solaris Resources Inc.'s Warintza mining project in Ecuador: - Ignored the territorial rights of the Shuar Arutam indigenous people and adopted divisive tactics. 8. Mining project of Ixtaca in Mexico: - Suspended due to violations of indigenous rights. 9. El Pato II mining project in Guatemala: - Affected the Poqomam Maya and mestizo communities without proper prior consultation. 10. Libero Copper's Mocoa mining project in Colombia: - Directly harmed the ancestral territory of the Inga people, violating their rights. 11. Cosigo Resources LTD's Machado gold extraction project in Colombia: - Severely impacted sacred indigenous sites in the Yaigojé Apaporis territory. 12. Barrick Gold's Pueblo Viejo mine in the Dominican Republic: - Forced the displacement of 65 local families due to the El Llagal waste dam. 13. Mining projects of La Plata by Atico Mining Corporation and Las Naves by Curimining S.A. (a subsidiary of Adventus Mining Corporation) and **Salazar Resources Limited in Ecuador: - Tried legalizing their operations despite violating national and international human rights laws, leading to confrontations and injuries. 14. Petrotal's Lote 95 in Peru: - Protests demanding community rights resulted in several deaths by police forces guarding the oil field. 15. Equinox Gold in Brazil: - Concealed data regarding their operations and impacts, including a dam break. - 4,000 of people directly impacted by toxic waste resulted from the dam break that contaminated local Amazonian rivers, violating the right to a clean environment and adequate access to drinking water. - Criminalization of local community leaders that protested for the right to water. 16. Gran Tierra Energy in Ecuador: - Conducted explorations without proper information dissemination in the Charapa, Chanangué, and Iguana blocks.
Read more
Latest News
The situation of the community of La Oroya in Peru, affected by decades of toxic pollution and the lack of effective government action to combat it, is not an exception in Latin America. Unfortunately, there are many environmental and social sacrifice zones in the continent where highly polluting activities, such as the La Oroya metallurgical complex, are developed. These activities are poorly supervised by the authorities responsible for guaranteeing life, health, personal integrity and other human rights. The importance of the case responds precisely to these realities and transcends the Peruvian context, representing a historic opportunity to set an important precedent for the entire continent. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which has yet to rule on the responsibility of the Peruvian state and the reparations to be made to the victims, has taken up the case. In anticipation of the decision, we’d like to share the testimonies of those who have been a key part of the search for justice for La Oroya. They are voices that demonstrate the gravity of the damage caused, and that show that the road to justice has been long, but fruitful. They are voices that express the urgency of guaranteeing a better future for the inhabitants of La Oroya and, ultimately, the effective enjoyment of the right to a healthy environment in the continent. 1. yolanda zurita, petitioner in the case "Community of La Oroya v. Peru" before the Inter-American Human Rights System: 2. anna cederstav, AIDA’s Deputy Director and CFO: 3. Liliana Ávila, Coordinator of AIDA's Human Rights and Environment Program:
Read more
Latest News
By Camila Bartelega, Florencia Ortúzar and Francisco Pinilla* Women and girls are disproportionately affected by the onslaught of the climate crisis. This is because they are usually the ones responsible for fetching water and food, and for taking care of children, the elderly, and the sick. Climate change makes this unpaid care work much more difficult. Evidence also shows that women and girls are more vulnerable to natural disasters. It's estimated that they're 14 times more likely to die than men when natural disasters strike. This may be because they are caring for vulnerable people, because they are often not taught how to swim or climb trees, or because they wear inadequate clothing to respond, amongst others. On the other hand, as the climate crisis creates chaos and increases conflict, they are more vulnerable to sexual assault and domestic violence. This is fueled by the growing frustration of a world in which resources are becoming scarcer and more difficult to obtain. It is clear, then, why it is important to include a gender perspective when talking about how best to address the climate crisis. But doing so is important not only to "level the playing field" for historically disadvantaged women, but also because they have a lot of knowledge to contribute, and the additional burdens they carry affect their ability to contribute to the best solutions. Including a gender perspective in climate action is therefore both fair and desirable for more effective and beneficial outcomes. If they are excluded, women lose, and we all lose. For Maite Smet, Executive Director of the International Analog Forestry Network, when we talk about a gender approach, or even a feminist approach, we are talking about issues of power. "Working from a gender and climate justice perspective is about wanting to change systems of power that have historically oppressed and socially excluded people," she said. "It opens up the possibility of including people who have not been part of important climate conversations and decisions." Now let's look at the relationship between gender and climate finance, a critical element in the uphill battle to preserve a livable planet. Gender and climate finance Tackling the global climate crisis will require transforming the way we live on the planet, including energy and food production, infrastructure and transportation. This will require significant financial resources. The Paris Accord stipulates that developed countries must provide financial assistance to the least developed and most vulnerable countries. This brings us to the world of climate finance: The provision of funds to implement mitigation and adaptation measures. All climate finance must have a gender perspective, as the impacts of the climate crisis disproportionately affect women and girls. What does this mean? It means funding that understands and intentionally addresses these differentiated impacts. It means that funding decisions are made with the participation of women, recognizing that they have valuable knowledge of their territories and are therefore the bearers of valuable solutions. Finally, it means making funding available and accessible to women. According to Natalia Daza, gender monitor of the Green Climate Fund for Latin America and the Caribbean and member of the Women Environment and Development Organization, the gender approach to climate finance has a lot to do with understanding that inequality shapes the way social relations take place. "Women are affected differently, usually more negatively, by the impacts of climate change,” she explained. “That's why civil society has a very important role to play in ensuring that climate action includes the voices of women, LGBTIQ+ and feminist organizations, from design to implementation.” The Gender Approach in the Green Climate Fund At AIDA, when we track climate finance coming into the region, we focus on the Green Climate Fund (GCF), the world's leading climate fund, which is accountable to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Although far from perfect (not least because what is written is not necessarily followed), it is perhaps the most progressive fund on gender issues. The GCF's gender policy recognizes that climate change affects women and men differently and emphasizes the importance of women's participation and leadership in decision-making processes related to finance. It is considered progressive, compared to other funds, because of its cross-cutting approach, which seeks to integrate gender considerations into all aspects of financing. According to Seblewongel Deneke, the GCF’s gender specialist, any policy or strategy that emerges from the fund must take the gender perspective into account. "It is clear that both women and men contribute equally and should have equal opportunities. But we need to recognize that there are differentiated challenges for men and women, and that both are part of the solution." The policy includes capacity building, tools and materials. "The climate debate is not just about the climate agenda; it brings other elements of inequality to the table. We need to change access to education and health and ensure the basic rights that every individual should have, including women," Deneke said. What is needed? We cannot deny that we have made progress. The importance of the gender perspective in climate action and finance is discussed and recognized. There are policies to ensure it, institutions to implement it, and sometimes even staff and budgets to do so. But the job is not done. Women still have less access to climate finance and fewer positions of power. And mitigation and adaptation projects often fail to consider the disproportionate impact of climate change on women. It is not easy to change things when they move with the inertia of what has always been. But we cannot give up. At AIDA, we have integrated a gender perspective across all our work. In doing so, we have broken new ground on many fronts and improved our results, and not just for the benefit of women. As a regional node of GCF Watch, an international observatory that monitors the Green Climate Fund, AIDA is a bridge between decision-making at the Board level and the territories that receive the projects financed. Florencia Ortúzar, Senior Attorney at AIDA, says that it is not enough to have funds, there must also be adequate investments. "Civil society monitoring is key to ensure that investments in the name of climate are made with respect for human rights and with a gender focus, and to achieve the maximum potential of the funds allocated to these types of projects and programs." This was the theme of an in-person event held in Rio de Janeiro in June. Supported by the Global Alliance for Gender and Green Action (GAGGA) - and organized by CASA Socio-Environmental Fund, AIDA and Both Ends - the event aimed to train and motivate regional organizations with a feminist base to be better prepared to follow up on the Green Climate Fund. Lola Gutiérrez, director of the Bolivian Women's Fund, who attended the event, emphasizes the importance of learning more about the fund, other countries' experiences, and how to access these resources. "Women are affected in different ways by extractivism and climate change, and we are fundamental actors in the solution. It is important to be present and to problematize what is happening." One of the conclusions of the event was that with the progress in policies and with a narrative that is much more receptive to gender, we can stop being gatekeepers that prevent the passage of bad projects and become strikers that propose projects to be implemented to stop the climate crisis. Therein lies the hope that these grassroots organizations will soon be the ones accessing funds and proposing solutions. Only then can we celebrate and rest. * Camila Bartelega is a fellow with AIDA's Climate Program, Florencia Ortúzar is a senior attorney and Francisco Pinilla is a digital communications strategist.
Read more