Oceans

Indigenous Rights, Oceans, Climate Change

10 good news stories from 2022, for a sustainable future

This year we saw important advances toward environmental justice in Latin America, and around the world. We’re celebrating decisions at the local, national and international levels that help move us toward a more sustainable future for all. We chose for you our top 10—stories that represent important advances for the protection of biodiversity, for the respect of human rights, for the recognition of indigenous and traditional populations, for responsible finance, for climate litigation as a tool for ability, and for the hope of a just energy transition.   1. Ecuador expanded the Galapagos Marine Reserve This year, through a national decree, Ecuador added 60 thousand square kilometers to the Galapagos Islands, the first site to be declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site. The new area, called the Hermandad Reserve, creates a marine corridor between the Galapagos Islands and Cocos Island in Costa Rica that will serve as a safe ageway for the dozens of protected species that move through the area, including sharks, whales, turtles, and dolphins. After the expansion, nearly 200 thousand square kilometers of the Galapagos have varying degrees of protection. Ecuador and Costa Rica have since called on Panama and Colombia to add protected areas to the new Reserve. 2. Honduras declared territory free from open-pit mining In February, the new government of Honduras declared the entire territory of the Central American country free of open-pit mining. According to a communiqué from the Secretariat of Natural Resources, Environment and Mines, the decision was made following the principles of climate justice and with a view toward respecting and protecting natural resources. Along these same lines, the government issued three other provisions: to cancel the approval of permits for extractive exploitation; to approve a mining moratorium through which environmental licenses, permits and concessions for metallic and non-metallic exploration and exploitation will be reviewed; and to intervene immediately in natural areas of high ecological value for their conservation. 3. Mexican Supreme Court protected the Veracruz Reef Residents of the coastal state of Veracruz and the Mexican Center for Environmental Law (CEMDA) won their case before the country’s supreme court to protect the Veracruz Reef, the largest reef system in the Gulf of Mexico. The Court unanimously recognized that the authorities violated the community's right to a healthy environment by approving the expansion of the Port of Veracruz. AIDA and Earthjustice presented evidence for recognition of the human rights to a healthy environment and access to justice enshrined in international law. These rights obligate the Mexican government to allow anyone whose rights are threatened by environmental degradation to achieve justice regardless of whether their connection to the threatened ecosystem is indirect or remote. This victory was a collective effort between organizations and the community, and sets a precedent for environmental justice in the region as the ruling points to Mexico's international obligations, including those under the Escazú Agreement. 4. Chile took important steps towards energy transition In June, Chile published the Framework Law on Climate Change, the first in its history, which assigns responsibilities for mitigating emissions and adapting to climate change. The law is the first in the region to establish a carbon neutral goal for 2050, which must be reviewed every five years. In addition, faced with a wave of intoxications derived from pollution, the President announced the closure of the Ventanas Smelter in Valparaíso. Congress is currently considering a bill to approve the closure of Ventanas, which will be progressive. Both the company and the government have committed to not leaving workers without a job, to taking charge of environmental remediation, and to continuing to process small-scale mining minerals. The corporation Enel also closed its last coal-fired power plant in Coronel, a region with a history of environmental conflicts due to impacts on the health and livelihoods of the community. The cases of Enel and Ventanas remind us that decisions towards energy transition must be made respecting the rights of the people involved, both the community and longtime workers. 5. United Nations recognized a healthy environment as a universal right In July, in a historic resolution, the United Nations General Assembly recognized a safe, healthy, clean and sustainable environment as a universal human right. Since this right was left out of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, the decision marks a milestone for international law, particularly in the area of human rights. "This resolution conveys the message that no one can take away our nature, clean air and water, or deprive us of a stable climate," said Inger Andersen, head of the United Nations Environment Programme. "At least not without a fight." This news was cause for great celebration at AIDA because the human right to a healthy environment has been the focus of our work since our founding. Costa Rica was one of the countries that led the proposal and that behind this milestone there are decades of work by organizations, movements and communities. 6. For first time, the Inter-American Bank prepared a responsible exit plan In Guatemala, Mayan communities filed a complaint about the damage that two hydroelectric projects caused to their territory, livelihoods and social fabric. The projects had received financing from the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) Group. After the Bank's ability office concluded that IDB Invest failed to comply with its operational policies and safeguards, the bank decided to withdraw its financing from the projects. In addition to the divestment, and as a result of the complaint, the IDB Group developed a responsible exit plan for the first time in its history. This sets a historic precedent for all communities affected by investments by international financial institutions. Although there are challenges for the implementation of the exit plan, the case is a great opportunity for the IDB to strengthen its policies as well as the monitoring and supervision of the projects it s in order to avoid non-compliance with its guidelines. 7. Recognition grew for the region’s indigenous peoples Despite the fact that indigenous and traditional peoples suffer constant violations of their human rights—often for protecting their own territory—this year their contributions, knowledge and work were recognized on various fronts. In Colombia, the ancestral knowledge system of the Arhuaco, Kankuamo, Kogui and Wiwa indigenous peoples of the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta was recognized as Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity by UNESCO. In Brazil, Sonia Guajajara and Célia Xakriabá, indigenous women with environmental and social causes, were elected to Congress in the October general elections. And, for the first time in Ecuador, Amazonian indigenous organizations received $2.5 million to finance conservation and deforestation reduction projects. 8. World leaders created a fund for climate loss and damage One of the strongest demands of the global South at climate summits had been the creation of a fund for losses and damages for the countries most vulnerable to the climate crisis. This year, at the 27th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP27), a financing mechanism was finally created for this purpose. This mechanism will seek to mobilize resources to complement existing ones, and calls for richer countries to contribute more. The decision adopted at COP27 also called on the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to provide "financing solutions." The details for the fund’s operation and for the inclusion of a human rights approach are a task for the next conference. 9. Brazilian court settled first-ever climate litigation In 2020, four political parties and two civil society organizations filed a lawsuit over the Brazilian government's failure to provide resources to the federal Climate Fund. The case was resolved in July of this year, becoming the first climate litigation in Brazil's Supreme Federal Tribunal, the highest court in the country. The court determined that the government has a constitutional duty to allocate the necessary economic resources for the operation of the Climate Fund, which had been paralyzed in recent years. In its findings, the court equated the Paris Agreement with a human rights treaty, which may give way for courts and judges in other Latin American countries to make the same recognition. This case shows that strategic climate litigation is an effective and necessary way to demand that governments and companies in the continent comply with their climate commitments. 10. Historic agreement reached to protect global biodiversity In December, roughly 200 member countries of the Convention on Biological Diversity adopted a historic agreement that seeks to reverse decades of environmental degradation and the resulting risks to the planet's species and ecosystems. Gathered at the 15th United Nations Conference on Biodiversity in Montreal, Canada, the countries' delegates reached an agreement committing to protect at least 30 percent of the world's terrestrial and marine areas by 2030. In addition, they agreed to provide at least $20 billion in annual international aid for biodiversity by 2025 and at least $30 billion by 2030.   Want more good news? Learn about AIDA's four most important achievements in 2022  

Read more
Oceans, Climate Change, Human Rights

Toward environmental justice: 4 achievements for AIDA in 2022

Success stories are the result of processes that take time, perseverance and t actions. Faced with the challenges of environmental degradation and the climate crisis, these precepts are more relevant than ever. They are a reminder that the defense of the environment is collective and long-term. For AIDA, 2022 was a year of important achievements in our efforts to contribute to environmental and climate justice in Latin America. These advances demonstrate the importance of collaboration and persistence. They are in turn precedents for litigation, advocacy and alliance-building in favor of the broader regional movement of which we are a part.   1. LA OROYA POLLUTION VICTIMS HEARD BY INTER-AMERICAN COURT People affected by toxic contamination from a metal smelter in the Andean city of La Oroya, Peru, presented their case before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. More than 20 years after taking the case, AIDA succeeded in presenting their case before the international court and demonstrating the Peruvian government's responsibility in the violation of their rights. The eventual ruling is a historic opportunity to establish a key precedent upholding the right to a healthy environment in Latin America. LEARN MORE 2. DIGITAL PLATFORM STRENGTHENS CLIMATE LITIGATION IN LATIN AMERICA Climate litigation has the power to accelerate corporate and government ability in the face of the climate crisis, and push actions to protect communities and ecosystems. To strengthen this growing movement, we created the Climate Litigation Platform for Latin America and the Caribbean, which currently displays more than 50 legal cases involving climate arguments. It is our contribution to facilitating the exchange of strategies and arguments among those who use the courts to defend the planet. LEARN MORE 3. INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT CONTRIBUTES TO OCEAN RESILIENCE AIDA was part of the efforts of organizations, governments, academia and the private sector to reach a binding agreement at the World Trade Organization to curb harmful fisheries subsidies, including those that encourage illegal, overfished and unregulated fishing on the high seas. This will help reduce threats to the ocean, a key ally in addressing the climate crisis due to its ability to absorb the planet's excess heat and carbon dioxide emissions. LEARN MORE 4. REGIONAL ALLIANCE ELEVATES THE VOICE OF THE CLIMATE JUSTICE MOVEMENT In response to the need to change the narrative about the climate crisis and strengthen the voice of the movement for a just energy transition in the region, Presentes was born, an alliance coordinated by AIDA that brings together organizations, communities and environmental advocates. We ed together to communicate more strategically and reach more people through the exchange of knowledge and experiences, pedagogy, the use of digital tools and internal capacity building LEARN MORE   We invite you to learn more about these achievements and AIDA's work during the year in our 2022 Annual Report  

Read more
Oceans

Ambition and urgency needed as high seas treaty negotiations near end

New York: With only one week to go in the negotiations for a new Treaty to protect two thirds of the ocean - the High Seas - civil society is raising alarm about the level of urgency and ambition towards a robust outcome for the ocean. A number of States have made public commitments to secure an ambitious Treaty at this final scheduled session, but there is concern that this is not being fully reflected in the formal negotiating room. The High Seas Alliance (HSA) expects more ambition to be shown by the United Kingdom, the European Union, Canada and the United States which have been public champions for the ocean, including at the recent UN Ocean Conference. These delegations some progressive positions within the Treaty negotiations, but too many appear to be maintaining positions that will not result in the transformation we need for a healthy and productive ocean for current and future generations. Some states and groups are pushing for a strong outcome. CARICOM, (the Caribbean Community), the Pacific Small Islands Developing States, New Zealand, Costa Rica and Monaco are setting the pace for a speedy and effective outcome. This round of negotiations, known as IGC5, is the fifth and final scheduled meeting convened by the UN General Assembly. It is tasked with concluding a Treaty to protect Biodiversity in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, which includes the High Seas, and which makes up half the planet, two thirds of the ocean. For decades, the international community has struggled to reach this agreement during which time climate change and biodiversity loss have escalated. The HSA recognises that the “package” of elements under negotiation are intrinsically linked and critical to successful completion of the negotiations. “The greatest opportunity of our generation to show we are serious about protecting the global ocean is now. A strong High Seas Treaty is in reach but more ambition is needed. Governments must stick to their commitment to deliver a truly ambitious Treaty this week and finally move to taking action that will allow the ocean to recover and thrive; for marine biodiversity, Earth’s climate and the well-being of generations to come. There is no more time to waste. - Sofia Tsenikli, Senior Strategic Advisor to the HSA. QUOTES FROM MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS CANADA Susanna Fuller, VP Operations and Projects, Oceans North: "With the longest coastline in the world and as a self-declared ocean champion, Canada plays a vital role in achieving a strong Treaty. We are hoping to see Canada’s ambitions meet the urgent need for biodiversity protection and responsible management for 50% of the planet. With climate change impacts accelerating and biodiversity loss increasing, finalizing and implementing this Treaty cannot come fast enough."   LATIN AMERICA Gladys Martínez de Lemos, Executive Director,  AIDA (Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense): "Most Latin American countries have publicly stated their commitment to increase marine protected areas by 30% by 2030. This cannot be achieved without an ambitious High Seas Treaty. In addition, 70% of the areas that would not be protected need a high-level environmental impact assessment process with capacity and implementation. During all the negotiations Costa Rica has shown its commitment to a robust and ambitious Treaty. We thanked Costa Rica for its exemplary championship along these years."   SOUTH KOREA Jihyun Lee, High Seas Alliance Youth Ambassador and undergraduate student at Yonsei University, South Korea: "Youth and future generations demand a strong and meaningful High Seas Treaty that will effectively protect the ocean. We are calling in unified for world governments to finally take bold action for our ocean."   US Lisa Speer, NRDC: “We applaud the more progressive approach of the United States, which has been a strong advocate for concluding the negotiations in a timely fashion, and for strengthening environmental assessment. However, we need the US to show more leadership to ensure that the new Treaty will result in the creation of a science-based network of fully protected areas in all areas of the High Seas, which scientists tell us is essential to reversing the decline of the ocean."   EU + UK Laura Meller, Protect the Oceans campaign, Greenpeace: "It’s deeply concerning that the European Union and UK continue to insist on maintaining a broken status quo when it comes to creating ocean sanctuaries on the High Seas at this round of negotiations. The bloc and the UK must raise their ambition in the last days of negotiations if they truly want to be global ocean champions, and ensure that a strong Treaty which has the power to create properly protected ocean sanctuaries on the High Seas is finalised this week. If they don’t, their fine words in the run up to these negotiations will be little more than empty rhetoric. The oceans are in crisis. We need ambitious, urgent, action before it’s too late."   PSID + CARICOM Travis Aten, Programme Officer, HSA: "We continue to applaud the Pacific Small Island Developing States (PSIDS) and the Caribbean Community’s (CARICOM) continued leadership during this negotiation process, notably through their of robust and ambitious conservation positions. As islands that are surrounded by the ocean, it is clear to them that this Treaty must move beyond the current status quo and implement real change on how we manage biodiversity of the High Seas."   Fabienne McLellan, Managing Director, OceanCare: “It is encouraging to see that there is an increased spirit of urgency in the room. Many negotiators are rolling up their sleeves, aware that the world is watching to judge if the rhetoric on ocean commitments made in the lead up to this conference is translating into the Treaty text. While unfortunately some of the Treaty text elements are being watered down, it is not yet too late to make a turn around. Cementing the status-quo and the lowest common denominator is not good enough. We need an ambitious and implementable Treaty. The state of emergency of the ocean demands nothing less. NOTES Covering nearly half of the world’s surface, the High Seas—a true global commons—is only protected by a loose patchwork of poorly enforced rules that are ill-suited to address a growing onslaught of pressures to the water column and seabed below, including climate change, pollution, fishing, and emerging activities like deep-sea mining and bioprospecting. The negotiations began in 2018 and have since benefited from increased scientific and political awareness of High Seas marine life and habitats, as well as the dangers they face from human activities. For instance, until relatively recently, “High Seas” were considered to be largely devoid of life or too remote to face serious threats from overexploitation. Today, scientists have shown that they marine systems that are vital to the global food supply, terrestrial ecology, and stability of the climate system. SPOKESPEOPLE Latin America Mariamalia Chavez (Spanish, English), [email protected] Gladys Martínez de Lemos (Spanish, English), AIDA, [email protected]  

Read more
Coral reefs, Capacity Building, Oceans

From the seabed to the high seas: How international negotiations can save the ocean's future

This event aimed to present the general characteristics of ongoing international negotiations that seek to improve the conservation and sustainable use of the oceans and their resources. Through a discussion, the event highlighted the obstacles, developments and expectations of negotiations related to ocean mining, fisheries subsidies, and protection of the high seas. istsErnesto Fernández Monge, The Pew Charitable Trusts: Fishing subsidies.Matthew Gianni, Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (DSCC): Deep-sea mining.Mariamalia Rodríguez, High Seas Alliance: High seas treaty.Facilitator: María José Gonzalez-Bernat, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). Recording Presentations1. Ernesto Fernández Monge, The Pew Charitable Trusts: 2. Matthew Gianni, Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (DSCC): 3. Mariamalia Rodríguez, High Seas Alliance: 

Read more
Oceans, Human Rights

AIDA celebrates WTO agreement to curb harmful fisheries subsidies

We consider the agreement a "crucial step" for the sustainability of fishery resources in the short, medium and long term, as well as for ensuring food security and the livelihoods of coastal communities.   Geneva, Switzerland. As an environmental organization that has closely followed the negotiations to limit global fisheries subsidies, the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) applauds that member countries of the World Trade Organization (WTO) reached, after more than two decades, a binding agreement to curb some harmful fisheries subsidies. It represents a fundamental step toward achieving the effective management of our fisheries resources, as well as toward ensuring global food security and the livelihoods of coastal communities. "This is a crucial step towards ensuring the sustainability of fishery resources in the short, medium and long term," said Gladys Martinez de Lemos, executive director of AIDA. "We urge the 164 member countries of the WTO to ratify the agreement as soon as possible, and to implement the necessary changes derived from it to contribute significantly to the health of marine life and the well-being of those who depend on it." It is estimated that, each year, governments spend approximately $22 billion in negative subsidies to offset costs for fuel, fishing gear and vessel improvements, among others. As a result of that , 63 percent of fish stocks worldwide must be rebuilt and 34 percent are fished at "biologically unsustainable" levels, according to recent data. The agreement reached at the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference, held June 12-16, provides for the creation of a global framework to reduce subsidies for illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; subsidies for fishing overexploited stocks; and subsidies for vessels fishing on the unregulated high seas. The high seas fishing provisions represent an achievement for Latin America, a region whose fishing industry is severely threatened by aggressive foreign fleets fishing inside and outside of national jurisdictions. The agreement also includes measures aimed at greater transparency and ability in the way governments their fisheries sector. The countries agreed to continue negotiating rules to curb subsidies that promote fishing in other countries' waters, overfishing and the overcapacity of a fleet to catch more fish than is sustainable. "This agreement is one part of the movement we need at the international level to contribute to the health of the ocean," explained Magie Rodríguez, AIDA attorney. "We have three more to go: the high seas treaty, more ambitious and rigorous standards for ocean mining, and recognition of the key role the ocean plays in the climate crisis. We will continue to work with our allies to achieve these goals.” Although negotiations on fisheries subsidies officially began in 2001, it was not until the 2017 WTO Ministerial Conference that countries committed to taking action to reach an agreement at the next conference—which was to take place in December 2020, but was suspended due to the pandemic. This commitment also responds to the fulfillment of target 14.6 of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. In 2021, the Ministerial Conference failed to reach an agreement, but it did reach a draft text. "This year's achievement would not have been possible without the t efforts of many different organizations, academia, governments and the private sector," said Martinez. press Victor Quintanilla (Mexico), [email protected], +525570522107  

Read more
Oceans, Human Rights

Latin American fisheries are at risk

By Magie Rodríguez (AIDA) and Ernesto Fernández Monge (The Pew Charitable Trusts)   Fishing is fundamental to the Latin American economy and, for of our region’s people, their way of life. It’s a centuries-old industry at risk. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the region produces 21.5 million metric tons of fish each year, a quarter of the world's annual production. Roughly 2.3 million people are involved in fishing activities. However, the industry is losing out to aggressive foreign fleets, mostly from Europe and Asia, fishing within Latin America's exclusive economic zones (EEZs) and in areas just outside them. Unlike domestic vessels, these fleets often benefit from substantial funding from their home governments, which allows them to fish outside their own countries' waters. These fishing subsidies, intended to increase capacity, are harmful. They pay for fuel and other expenses, artificially reduce the cost of fishing, and allow fleets to fish in areas where it would otherwise be unprofitable to do so. After more than two decades of talks, the 164 member governments of the World Trade Organization (WTO) are closer than ever to agreeing on a new globally binding treaty that would curb harmful subsidies that allow fleets to fish both in other countries' waters and on the high seas. Fishing offshore, on the periphery of another nation's waters, can harm a country's fisheries in part because it allows foreign vessels to catch migratory species, such as tuna or billfish, before they enter the EEZ. As trade ministers prepare to meet in Geneva for a WTO ministerial conference June 12-15, Latin American leaders must push for a fisheries subsidies agreement that will help their countries' fishermen better compete with foreign fleets. To do so, the agreement should eliminate all capacity-enhancing subsidies that prop up so-called distant-water fishing and allow more fishing than the market would otherwise sustain. Each year, governments around the world dole out $22 billion in harmful subsidies to fisheries and, of that amount, nearly two-thirds comes from just six countries and the European Union. About one-third of that amount, $7.2 billion, is targeted to help countries fish in other nations' EEZs and offshore at the edge of those territorial waters, according to a new research-based tool developed by scientists at the University of California, Santa Barbara, with funding from The Pew Charitable Trusts. The increase in distant-water fishing is driven by a sad reality: having depleted fish stocks in their own waters, major fishing nations are looking elsewhere to fill their nets. Ecuador's Galapagos Islands made headlines last year when research revealed that in just one month, 300 Chinese vessels spent 73 thousand hours fishing off the EEZ surrounding the Galapagos. In addition, the tool shows that, for example, 180 vessels from just four countries (China, South Korea, Chinese Taipei and Spain) spent a total of 84 thousand hours fishing in Argentina's EEZ in 2018. That's the equivalent of 9.6 years on the water. That undertaking was made possible by nearly $92 million in harmful subsidies. Encouragingly, leaders across the region have long ed reducing subsidies in distant waters: Argentina, Chile and Uruguay co-sponsored a WTO proposal in 2019 to ban such subsidies and, in July 2021, Uruguay's foreign minister stated that such a ban would have "enormous potential to have a significant impact on the state of the oceans and the livelihoods of fishing communities." However, major fishing nations are seeking to water down the text of the potential WTO agreement so that they can continue fishing in other countries' waters. That’s why Latin American trade ministers must continue to push for the elimination of subsidies in distant waters, helping to ensure that fish from their waters primarily reach their vessels, restore competitive advantage to the region's fishermen, and sustain a vital industry—and livelihood—across the continent.  

Read more
Oceans, Human Rights

In Chile, progress for indigenous participation in decisions affecting their territories

In January, Chile’s Supreme Court ruled that indigenous communities have the right to be informed of and participate in decisions affecting their territory and way of life. The high court ordered industrial salmon farmer Nova Austral to engage in public participation processes prior to authorizing the relocation of four farms into the Kawésqar National Reserve. The government's Environmental Evaluation Service had authorized the relocation of those farms without implementing mechanisms for consultation with the Kawésqar communities, and later rejecting their requests for public participation. It did so by arguing that the farms posed no harmful environmental impacts. The case at hand Since 2018, AIDA has been working in strategic alliance with Greenpeace Chile and FIMA to exclude industrial salmon farming from protected areas in the Magallanes Region, in the heart of Chilean Patagonia, and to defend the rights of the Kawésqar peoples, ancestral inhabitants of the area's canals and fjords. By approving the relocation, the environmental authority ignored the effects that salmon farms have had in the Los Lagos region, in the extreme north of Patagonia, demonstrating the serious risks posed by the industry's expansion into the extreme south of Patagonia, still a pristine natural area. These effects include biological contamination from the introduction of exotic species, the indiscriminate use of antibiotics, and frequent mass salmon escapes, as well as the accumulation of food and feces on the seabed, generating total or partial loss of oxygen and red tides. The environmental agency also overlooked the fact that salmon farming is incompatible with the protection objectives of the Kawésqar National Reserve, one of which is "to comply with the fundamental demands of the Kawésqar people." In fact, when the reserve was created in 2018, an indigenous consultation process chose to exclude industrial aquaculture, considering the fragility of the ecosystems of the area and the indigenous cultural legacy, closely linked to the sea. An appeal for improvement Faced with the government’s authorization of salmon farming in their territory, Kawésqar communities—with the of the coalition formed by AIDA, Greenpeace Chile and FIMA—filed an appeal before the Supreme Court for the protection of constitutional guarantees. The judgment in favor of public participation was significant due to the fact that Chile has often been questioned for its low standard of compliance with ILO Convention 169, the most important international instrument for guaranteeing indigenous rights, including the right to prior consultation. One of the main criticisms is that the regulation for incorporating indigenous consultation into the environmental assessment encourages this not to take place. This is particularly relevant in projects evaluated by Environmental Impact Statements, for which a consultative mechanism of lesser incidence is applied and which is subject to a great deal of discretion on the part of the authority to be carried out. Moreover, in precisely those cases—including the relocation of salmon farms— public participation is not mandatory, as it is for projects evaluated by environmental impact studies. This further diminishes the possibility for communities to have their voices heard in this type of procedure. The future of participation in Chile The Supreme Court’s decision in this case is a contribution to the deepening of public participation as a tool to improve environmental decision-making. It highlights the voice of indigenous communities in matters affecting their ancestral territory. It also broadens the geographic scope of citizen participation by recognizing that these communities exercise a legitimate interest in environmental conservation, thus breaking with the idea that direct involvement depends only on their proximity to where people live. We hope that this is the first step to completely rejecting the installation of salmon farms in the Kawésqar National Reserve, in any protected area and, in general, in the seas of Chilean Patagonia.  

Read more
Coral reefs, Oceans, Human Rights

Reaffirming the legitimate protection of the right to a healthy environment

In December 2016, two women from Veracruz decided to defend the Veracruz Reef System in court. They sought to protect the largest coral ecosystem in the Gulf of Mexico from the expansion of the port of Veracruz, which would cause serious and irreversible impacts on the reef’s biodiversity and, by extension, the local population.  Residents of the Veracruz metropolitan area, represented by the Centro Mexicano de Derecho Ambiental (CEMDA), filed an injunction against the project because its environmental permit resulted from a fragmented impact assessment that did not consider the full range of risks to the reefs. AIDA ed our partners at CEMDA by filing an amicus brief with detailed information on the important services the reefs provide: sequestering carbon, generating oxygen, producing food, and protecting coastal areas from storms and hurricanes, among others. In April 2017, the court that heard the case rejected the injunction and, with it, the request to suspend work on the port expansion. The court argued that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the project had "a real and relevant impact" on their rights and that they lacked a "legitimate interest" in the case. Legitimate interest—also known as legal standing—refers to a person’s capacity to claim damages before a court of law, in any scope. In a traffic accident, for example, only you have the legitimate interest to claim the damages your vehicle may have suffered, which must be individual and quantifiable. However, in matters of environmental damage, the situation is more complex. The degradation of an ecosystem affects more than one person and even transcends generations.  The residents of Veracruz appealed the judicial setback and their case arrived before Mexico’s highest court, the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation. Given the lower court’s limitations in recognizing in its ruling the right of all people to equal access to justice in environmental matters, AIDA and Earthjustice filed a second legal brief before the Supreme Court, requesting an expansion of the requirements for legitimate interest. We provided legal and technical evidence regarding the human right to a healthy environment and access to justice, enshrined in international law. These rights mean that the Mexican government must ensure that anyone whose fundamental rights are threatened by environmental degradation has the possibility of achieving justice, regardless of whether their connection to the threatened ecosystem is indirect or remote. The Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide also contributed a brief that analyzes court decisions from various jurisdictions recognizing the right of any person, civil society organization, or local resident to file lawsuits against projects and decisions that may negatively affect the environment. Finally, on February 9, 2022, more than five years after the original lawsuit was filed, the residents of Veracruz won an important victory for the area’s reefs. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court found that government authorities violated the right to a healthy environment of the people of Veracruz by authorizing the port’s expansion. Since it was unopposed, the ruling creates a binding precedent for all courts of the nation. The Veracruz decision is a landmark ruling, valuable for not just Mexico but for the entire region because it: Ratifies that proximity to a project does not define who the affected people are or who can claim protection of their right to a healthy environment before the courts. Reaffirms that it is not necessary to prove quantifiable and individualized damage in order to have access to environmental justice; it is sufficient to demonstrate that a project or activity, by degrading an ecosystem, damages or threatens to cause damage (economic, social, cultural, health, etc.) to a community. Recognizes an expanded legitimate interest, as well as the collective nature of the right to a healthy environment and public participation in environmental assessment processes. Sets a precedent with the capacity to transform the way in which environmental impact assessments are carried out in Mexico, incorporating the principles of prevention and precaution. Points to Mexico's international obligations, including those acquired under the Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean (Escazú Agreement). As an organization and individuals, we are celebrating this important step toward strengthening the defense of the right to a healthy environment in the region. We are proud to have contributed to this achievement, and hopeful that the implementation of the ruling will be carried out according to the highest standards.  

Read more
Coral reefs, Oceans, Human Rights

Supreme Court orders protection of Veracruz's reefs and wetlands

Mexico’s high court unanimously ruled that authorities violated the right to a healthy environment by authorizing the expansion of the Port of Veracruz. Environmental authorities failed to use the best scientific information, analyze the port expansion in a comprehensive manner, and consider all of its impacts. The ruling implies that the project’s approvals are unfounded and that its impacts must be re-evaluated, this time in a comprehensive manner, to determine the viability of the project.   Mexico City, Mexico — On February 9, residents of Veracruz won a victory before the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation in a legal injunction filed to defend the Veracruz Reef System (SAV) and its environmental services against the expansion of the Port of Veracruz. The justices of the Court unanimously voted in favor of the draft ruling that protects the reefs of Veracruz and transforms the way the Environmental Impact Assessment procedure operates throughout the country. This decision underpins the protection of the right to a healthy environment, and it sets a new precedent that will change the way officials determine how projects are assessed by their environmental impact. The Court held that "the protection of wetlands is a national and international priority that has led our country to issue a strict regulation of this ecosystem and… any analysis made in relation to wetlands must be guided by a criterion of maximum precaution and prevention." The ruling pointed out that the Secretariat of Environment and Natural Resources (Semarnat) violated the right to a healthy environment by authorizing the expansion project of the Port of Veracruz, since "it did not take into the best scientific information available; it did not analyze or evaluate in a complete manner each one of the different environmental impacts that the project and its modification could cause, in addition to the fact that the project and the works related to it were analyzed in a fragmented manner." The Supreme Court’s ruling annuls the authorization for the port’s expansion and orders a complete reevaluation of the project’s environmental impacts and determination of the consequent viability of the project. "CEMDA filed this injunction, together with the community, to protect and contribute to the conservation of the Veracruz Reef System, as well as the reefs and the services they provide, since they are key to the well-being of the people living in the Veracruz-Boca del Río-Medellín conurbation," explained Xavier Martínez Esponda, CEMDA's Operational Director. The case sets a precedent that will transform the way in which Semarnat and state authorities conduct Environmental Impact Assessments in the country. Martinez Esponda pointed out that, "with this decision, the principles of prevention and precaution will have to become much more ingrained in the decision-making process. Likewise, authorities and investors should learn the lesson that it is more expensive, in all senses, not to present their projects in a complete manner, than to comply in time and form with the Environmental Impact Assessment." Background The Veracruz Reef System is a National Park and a wetland of international importance according to the Ramsar Convention. It has great environmental value as the largest reef system in the central region of the Gulf of Mexico. This reef system hosts the greatest biodiversity of species in the western Gulf of Mexico and is also home to several protected species, such as the critically endangered hawksbill turtle. The SAV also helps mitigate the impact of storm surges and hurricanes, which have increased in frequency and intensity as a result of climate change. The Port of Veracruz expansion project was proposed in the late 1990s and its implementation included plans for new breakwater works, access and navigation channels, land access, terminals, and port facilities. These works will damage reefs and seagrasses in the area, as they will be impacted by the increased sedimentation caused by the construction works. Due to the importance of the case, international environmental protection organizations ed the process.  Earthjustice and the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) delivered a t amicus brief to the Supreme Court in of CEMDA’s filing with the court. Sandra Moguel, AIDA's attorney, emphasized that "it is not the proximity of a project that determines who are the affected people and who should have access to justice to defend their right to a healthy environment." In its brief, AIDA explains that international law obliges the Mexican government to allow anyone whose fundamental rights are threatened by environmental harm to access judicial remedies, even if their connection to the threatened ecosystem is indirect or remote. Guillermo Zuñiga, an attorney with Earthjustice, emphasized that his ties to this reef are important and personal: "I grew up in Veracruz.  I am a Xalapeño. That area gave birth to me, and I grew up swimming in the rivers and beaches of Veracruz with my family. I want the children of Veracruz to have the opportunity to enjoy the richness of its biodiversity as I did." Alejandra Serrano Pavón, a lawyer with the international organization Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (ELAW), was interested in the case because of the opportunity to encourage the Court to broadly interpret the right to access to justice in defense of the environment. ELAW presented an amicus brief that ed the filing, through which is provided examples from various countries around the world that recognize a broad interpretation of this right, which allows "any civil society organization or, at least residents of a place, to initiate a legal action to protect the environment." We widely celebrate this decision of the First Chamber of the Supreme Court, and we hope that in the process of executing the judgment, the Secretariat of Environment and Natural Resources complies with what it has been ordered to do under the highest standard of protection enshrined in the Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean, known as the Escazú Agreement. Underwritten by: AIDA Earthjustice ELAW CEMDA press s: Ricardo Ruiz, CEMDA, [email protected], 5559644162 Victor Quintanilla, AIDA, [email protected], 5570522107  

Read more
Oceans, Mining

Reaction: IUCN Congress votes yes to a moratorium on deep-sea mining

Marseille, - A motion calling for a moratorium on deep-sea mining was adopted with overwhelming by the IUCN World Conservation Congress today. Among government and government agencies 81 voted for the moratorium with 18 against and 28 abstentions. Among NGOs and civil society organization the vote was 577 for, 32 against and 35 abstentions, sending a strong message to governments that there is global opposition to deep-sea mining. “We are very pleased to see so many governments, agencies and NGOs voting for a moratorium on deep-sea mining; the has been overwhelming” said Matthew Gianni Co-Founder of the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (DSCC).  “Member countries of the ISA, including which hosted this Congress, need to wake up and act on behalf of civil society and the environment now, and take action in of a moratorium”. Scientists have warned that deep-sea mining will cause large-scale, irreversible biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation if permitted to occur, particularly in the international areas of the world’s ocean. The International Seabed Authority (ISA), a multilateral regulatory body established under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1994, is debating whether to begin licensing commercial deep-sea mining in as little as two years. 167 countries plus the EU are of the ISA. The German Environment Ministry, the government of Fiji and many other government agencies voted to motion 069. Nauru has triggered a so-called Two Year rule at the ISA which it expects will result in the Authority issuing a commercial license to mine. 47 African countries have challenged the trigger and Sian Owen, Director of the DSCC says: "Hopefully the vote in Marseille will translate into a vote at the ISA to adopt a moratorium on deep sea mining." Motion 069 - Protection of deep-ocean ecosystems and biodiversity through a moratorium on seabed mining was sponsored by Fauna and Flora International and co-sponsored by Fundación MarViva (Costa Rica), Natural Resources Defense Council (USA), Sylvia Earle Alliance/Mission Blue (USA), Synchronicity Earth (UK), Wildlands Conservation Trust (South Africa), World Wide Fund for Nature – International. For further information Matthew Gianni, IUCN, 31 646 168 899 Sian Owen, IUCN, 31 648 502 659 Patricia Roy, 34 696 905 907  

Read more