A new judicial rejection of those who seek to take away our rights
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
Today, the First Administrative Contentious Chamber of the Province of Córdoba has confirmed the constitutionality of abortion by rejecting the unfounded injunction filed against the application of Law 27610 in our province. This decision makes it clear that legal proceedings should not be used as a tool to obstruct the exercise of human rights for women and individuals with the capacity to become pregnant.
Despite the futile attacks and the displeasure of groups seeking to roll back the acquired rights over our bodies, abortion is protected by law and enjoys broad legal and social consensus.
Key points from the court ruling:
The Chamber has decided to reject the injunction with the votes of two judges, Ángel Antonio Gutiez and Gabriela Cáceres. Judge Leonardo Massimino issued a dissenting opinion.
Judge Gutiez states that the action should be rejected outright because it is merely an expression of dissatisfaction with Law 27610, rather than a challenge to local legislation or public policy that would justify the injunction. However, due to the significance of the underlying issue and its various impacts on society, he addresses the plaintiff’s arguments.
Firstly, he affirms that Law 27610 is the result of balancing fundamental rights by the legislators of the National Congress in the legitimate exercise of their powers and as representatives of the whole society. These rights encompass those of the hypothetical human being in the womb and those of women and individuals with other gender identities who have the capacity to become pregnant.
Regarding the protection of the right to life, the ruling states that, contrary to the plaintiff’s claim of absolute protection of life from conception, “in our legal system, human life, since its beginning at conception, receives varying degrees of protection that increase as the fetus grows. If born alive, that ‘child’ obtains the full range of rights that protect an individual who can live independently outside the body that hosted them throughout their life until its end.” This gradual and incremental protection of the right to life arises from the American Convention on Human Rights and the interpretation made by the Inter-American Commission on Article 4 in the “Baby Boy” case. Therefore, legislation that allows exceptional cases that restrict the broad concept of the right to life, such as Law 27610, is respectful of this treaty.
Regarding the purpose of Law 27610, the judge asks why there was a need for a law on access to voluntary termination of pregnancy. The ruling states that the reasons why a woman wishes to have an abortion can be manifold, but they are all intimately personal, and it is her sole responsibility to assess them. The ruling emphasizes that it is the woman who will have to carry the result of conception in her body for nine months, with all the risks involved, and who will have to give birth, with all the pain and risks that entails, even with the advances in modern medicine. The ruling states that in a reality where abortions occur, whether legal or illegal, Law 27610 should only be seen as a measure of healthcare; nothing more than that. The law’s sole purpose is to ensure that women who decide to have an abortion, guided solely by their conscience, can do so under appropriate healthcare conditions, allowing them to terminate the pregnancy without the risk of death or permanent sterility, among other equally undesirable outcomes.
The ruling unequivocally affirms that “the law does not encourage the killing of children; the law does not promote abortions. The only thing the law does is to permit women who decide to have an abortion to do so in an environment where their health is protected. […] What a woman seeks through abortion is to free herself from the pregnancy itself and from the care of a child that may be born. Which of these reasons or others leads her to make that momentous decision belongs to her innermost sphere, and the State cannot, in order to protect a potential person, so severely restrict a woman’s will.”
Regarding the provincial and national competencies in health matters, the plaintiff argued that the national government exceeded its powers by enacting the law, and therefore, the province should not have applied it within its territory. However, the Chamber understands that the powers over health policy are concurrent between the Nation and the province of Córdoba, and it states that “issues related to health law and public health can be regulated by federal or national laws. Asserting the opposite would be tantamount to postulating the unconstitutionality of laws on organ transplants (24,193), sexual health (25,673), patient rights (26,529), mental health (26,657), vaccination (27,491), comprehensive health care during pregnancy and early childhood (27,611), among others.”
Regarding the lack of a specific case to trigger the constitutional review, the injunction requested the declaration of unconstitutionality of the law in the province. However, the Chamber understands that there is no concrete case on which to apply constitutional review. In this regard, it states that “the Argentine system of judicial control over norms with respect to the Constitution is diffuse, meaning that any court can exercise it in the case presented for its resolution. What cannot be done, not even by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, even if it issues a hundred identical judgments, is to universally repeal the application of a law enacted by the National Congress.”
Regarding the relevance of the Supreme Court precedent in the FAL case, the plaintiff requested the declaration of unconstitutionality of several articles of Law 27610, particularly focusing on Article 16. This article amends Article 86 of the Penal Code, which previously regulated abortions in exceptional cases. The Chamber notes that the Supreme Court already ruled on this issue in the FAL case in 2012, a discussion that the plaintiff seeks to reopen, and states that “all the tortuous imagination displayed by the plaintiff in imagining extreme and barbaric scenarios to try to validate his position has a response in the very Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation” which ruled on this matter in the FAL case.
Regarding the rights of women and individuals with the capacity to become pregnant, Judge Gutiez points out that the plaintiff completely disregards the rights granted to women and pregnant individuals by International Treaties, as well as the National and Provincial Constitutions. He notes that the plaintiff diminishes women as holders of their own rights, “treating them more as mere receptacles for unborn individuals.”
Finally, in concluding the ruling, the judge states that: “The era we live in our country has meant and means progress in recognizing the rights of women as such, demolishing barriers, preconceptions, stigmas, and prejudices; recognizing their unique and singular entity and identity. Among these essential rights is the simple right to choose; the right to choose whom to relate to and how; the right to choose to have or not to have children; the right to choose how far she wants to advance in her career, work, or profession, breaking any glass ceiling; the right to independently decide what to do with her body. Law No. 27,610 allows women to exercise one of these choices without interference from any other person, religious organization, or the State.”
With this ruling, the judiciary reaffirms that abortion is a right that all women and individuals with the capacity to become pregnant in the province of Córdoba can enjoy within frameworks of respect and dignity.
Therefore, today and always, we will continue raising our flags: throughout the country, abortion is legal.
Access the full ruling for more information.
Contact
Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org
Provincial justice confirms that abortion is law in Córdoba
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
Today, the First Administrative Contentious Chamber of the Province of Córdoba has confirmed the constitutionality of abortion by rejecting the unfounded injunction filed against the application of Law 27610 in our province. This decision makes it clear that legal proceedings should not be used as a tool to obstruct the exercise of human rights for women and individuals with the capacity to become pregnant.
Despite the futile attacks and the displeasure of groups seeking to roll back the acquired rights over our bodies, abortion is protected by law and enjoys broad legal and social consensus.
Key points from the court ruling:
The Chamber has decided to reject the injunction with the votes of two judges, Ángel Antonio Gutiez and Gabriela Cáceres. Judge Leonardo Massimino issued a dissenting opinion.
Judge Gutiez states that the action should be rejected outright because it is merely an expression of dissatisfaction with Law 27610, rather than a challenge to local legislation or public policy that would justify the injunction. However, due to the significance of the underlying issue and its various impacts on society, he addresses the plaintiff’s arguments.
Firstly, he affirms that Law 27610 is the result of balancing fundamental rights by the legislators of the National Congress in the legitimate exercise of their powers and as representatives of the whole society. These rights encompass those of the hypothetical human being in the womb and those of women and individuals with other gender identities who have the capacity to become pregnant.
Regarding the protection of the right to life, the ruling states that, contrary to the plaintiff’s claim of absolute protection of life from conception, “in our legal system, human life, since its beginning at conception, receives varying degrees of protection that increase as the fetus grows. If born alive, that ‘child’ obtains the full range of rights that protect an individual who can live independently outside the body that hosted them throughout their life until its end.” This gradual and incremental protection of the right to life arises from the American Convention on Human Rights and the interpretation made by the Inter-American Commission on Article 4 in the “Baby Boy” case. Therefore, legislation that allows exceptional cases that restrict the broad concept of the right to life, such as Law 27610, is respectful of this treaty.
Regarding the purpose of Law 27610, the judge asks why there was a need for a law on access to voluntary termination of pregnancy. The ruling states that the reasons why a woman wishes to have an abortion can be manifold, but they are all intimately personal, and it is her sole responsibility to assess them. The ruling emphasizes that it is the woman who will have to carry the result of conception in her body for nine months, with all the risks involved, and who will have to give birth, with all the pain and risks that entails, even with the advances in modern medicine. The ruling states that in a reality where abortions occur, whether legal or illegal, Law 27610 should only be seen as a measure of healthcare; nothing more than that. The law’s sole purpose is to ensure that women who decide to have an abortion, guided solely by their conscience, can do so under appropriate healthcare conditions, allowing them to terminate the pregnancy without the risk of death or permanent sterility, among other equally undesirable outcomes.
The ruling unequivocally affirms that “the law does not encourage the killing of children; the law does not promote abortions. The only thing the law does is to permit women who decide to have an abortion to do so in an environment where their health is protected. […] What a woman seeks through abortion is to free herself from the pregnancy itself and from the care of a child that may be born. Which of these reasons or others leads her to make that momentous decision belongs to her innermost sphere, and the State cannot, in order to protect a potential person, so severely restrict a woman’s will.”
Regarding the provincial and national competencies in health matters, the plaintiff argued that the national government exceeded its powers by enacting the law, and therefore, the province should not have applied it within its territory. However, the Chamber understands that the powers over health policy are concurrent between the Nation and the province of Córdoba, and it states that “issues related to health law and public health can be regulated by federal or national laws. Asserting the opposite would be tantamount to postulating the unconstitutionality of laws on organ transplants (24,193), sexual health (25,673), patient rights (26,529), mental health (26,657), vaccination (27,491), comprehensive health care during pregnancy and early childhood (27,611), among others.”
Regarding the lack of a specific case to trigger the constitutional review, the injunction requested the declaration of unconstitutionality of the law in the province. However, the Chamber understands that there is no concrete case on which to apply constitutional review. In this regard, it states that “the Argentine system of judicial control over norms with respect to the Constitution is diffuse, meaning that any court can exercise it in the case presented for its resolution. What cannot be done, not even by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, even if it issues a hundred identical judgments, is to universally repeal the application of a law enacted by the National Congress.”
Regarding the relevance of the Supreme Court precedent in the FAL case, the plaintiff requested the declaration of unconstitutionality of several articles of Law 27610, particularly focusing on Article 16. This article amends Article 86 of the Penal Code, which previously regulated abortions in exceptional cases. The Chamber notes that the Supreme Court already ruled on this issue in the FAL case in 2012, a discussion that the plaintiff seeks to reopen, and states that “all the tortuous imagination displayed by the plaintiff in imagining extreme and barbaric scenarios to try to validate his position has a response in the very Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation” which ruled on this matter in the FAL case.
Regarding the rights of women and individuals with the capacity to become pregnant, Judge Gutiez points out that the plaintiff completely disregards the rights granted to women and pregnant individuals by International Treaties, as well as the National and Provincial Constitutions. He notes that the plaintiff diminishes women as holders of their own rights, “treating them more as mere receptacles for unborn individuals.”
Finally, in concluding the ruling, the judge states that: “The era we live in our country has meant and means progress in recognizing the rights of women as such, demolishing barriers, preconceptions, stigmas, and prejudices; recognizing their unique and singular entity and identity. Among these essential rights is the simple right to choose; the right to choose whom to relate to and how; the right to choose to have or not to have children; the right to choose how far she wants to advance in her career, work, or profession, breaking any glass ceiling; the right to independently decide what to do with her body. Law No. 27,610 allows women to exercise one of these choices without interference from any other person, religious organization, or the State.”
With this ruling, the judiciary reaffirms that abortion is a right that all women and individuals with the capacity to become pregnant in the province of Córdoba can enjoy within frameworks of respect and dignity.
Therefore, today and always, we will continue raising our flags: throughout the country, abortion is legal.
Access the full ruling for more information.
Contact
Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org
Regulatory Map of Front Labeling in Argentina
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
Law No. 27,642 on the Promotion of Healthy Eating, known as the Labeling Law, was enacted on October 26, 2021 and regulated on March 22, 2022. As of this date, it is mandatory throughout the country. However, the adherence and/or the issuance of complementary regulations by the provinces and CABA is of utmost importance to ensure the full implementation of all the measures established by law, and thus effectively protect the health of the population.
The issuance of local, adhesion or complementary regulations by the 23 provinces and CABA:
In view of the importance of adhering to and enacting local regulations as fundamental elements to promote healthy eating throughout Argentina, Fundación Sanar and Fundeps present the Regulatory Map of Front Labeling in Argentina. This consultation and analysis tool is aimed at national and provincial public authorities responsible for promoting healthy eating policies and at civil society organizations, academia and the media that monitor the correct implementation of the PAS Law.
Consult the REGULATORY MAP: www.etiquetadoenargentina.org/
About the PAS Law:
The PAS Law seeks to promote healthy eating and guarantee the right to health and adequate nutrition. It includes measures such as placing warning seals on packaged foods and non-alcoholic beverages to provide clear and understandable nutritional information, encouraging more assertive decisions by consumers. It also regulates aspects such as school environments and nutritional food education, advertising, promotion and sponsorship of the food industry – with special focus on childhood and adolescence – as well as public purchases made by the State. These components contribute to a comprehensive approach to the regulations, strengthening their protective nature and their focus on rights.
Contact
Laura Fons, laurafons@fundeps.org
We present an Environmental Amparo for the contamination with pesticides in Colonia Tirolesa
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
Colonia Tirolesa is a town that is located in the Department of Colón in the province of Córdoba, 27 km from its capital. Its main economic activity is agriculture, focused on the production of soybeans, potatoes and corn. Due to this, for years, fumigations with pesticides have been constant, which has caused serious problems for the environment and health.
Despite the continuous demands by the population to control and regulate the spraying, since they still do not have their own ordinance that establishes distances according to the characteristics of the place, the Municipality of Colonia Tirolesa never responded.
For these reasons, last Monday, May 8, we presented an Environmental Amparo for the Justice of Córdoba to order the Municipality of Colonia Tirolesa:
In turn, we request as a precautionary measure, that is, prior to the resolution of the above request, that authorizations for applications for future fumigations and/or spraying with chemical or biological products for agricultural use be temporarily suspended. within the mentioned areas, among others. The purpose of this action is to safeguard and protect the rights of those who inhabit the town.
We hope that Justice, making use of the powers granted by environmental legislation, quickly order the Municipality of Colonia Tirolesa to adopt concrete and urgent measures to safeguard the community’s rights to life, health and a healthy environment. . These rights are constantly affected by the excessive use of pesticides.
Author
Ananda Lavayen
Contact
Maria Laura Carrizo, lauracarrizo@fundeps.org
*Photograph of UTELPa
We participated in COP2 of the Escazú Agreement
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
During those days, continuity was given to the work that had begun a year ago at COP1 in Santiago de Chile, where it was agreed to hold the extraordinary meeting of 2023 in order to reach certain “agreements” between the member countries that allow the effective application from Escazú as soon as possible. In this sense, different discussions took place around the existing challenges to strengthen access to information, public participation and access to justice in environmental matters.
The official Conference was held in the rooms of the Hotel Libertador and in parallel there were also a series of talks, workshops and meetings organized by the Ministry of the Environment and Sustainable Development of the Nation in conjunction with civil society organizations. civil. The parallel events were enriching since there were exchanges of experiences, knowledge and knowledge regarding the implementation of the Agreement in the different countries.
On the second day of the COP, the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) presented the Implementation Guide, which provides information, guidance and different options for States to carry out the Agreement. pointing out Secretary Carlos de Miguel pointed out that “Escazú must be interpreted in an integral way, with a holistic approach and in good faith.” Some States also presented their implementation plans, Argentina communicated the actions that are being developed within the framework of the Fifth National Action Plan for Open Government.
However, the most significant exchanges and interventions occurred when addressing the Action Plan for Environmental Defenders, an instrument that will allow progress towards the full and effective implementation of Article 9 of the Agreement, which establishes that each State party must guarantee a safe environment for people who defend rights in environmental matters. This is essential since Latin America and the Caribbean are more dangerous regions for environmental defenders. There, the original peoples were the protagonists by manifesting the entire path that remains to be traveled and the innumerable existing needs, among them, having effective participation in environmental protection and justice measures, according to their realities.
The defenders of the province of Córdoba were also able to express their claims through the voice of a neighbor who was a member of Vecinxs Unidxs del Barrio San Antonio, who expressed the serious situation of the defenders who were charged with the cause of the Punilla Highway and the conflict with the company Porta Hnos, among others.
In addition, the defenders put on the table the need for the Agreement to contain a gender perspective. In this sense, they stated that it is necessary to make visible the differentiated risks that women defenders have, to vindicate and make visible the role of women as defenders of life and the environment.
Regarding the election of the Support Committee for the Application and Compliance with the Treaty, the States Parties were in charge of electing the seven members of this new instance: Andrés María Napoli (Argentina), Guillermo Eduardo Acuña (Chile), Mariana Blengio Valdés (Uruguay), Rita Leonette Joseph-Olivetti (Granada), Patricia Madrigal Cordero (Costa Rica), Carole Denise Angela Stephens (Jamaica) and Félix Wing Solís (Panama). For the election, criteria of experience in the subject, geographical distribution, gender parity and legal trajectory were taken into account.
The preparation of an Action Plan that establishes protection standards for human rights defenders in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean was also presented. This plan is made available and considered through a Public Consultation available until June 21 on the ECLAC website.
It is essential to note that citizen participation, one of the strengths of the Escazú Agreement, has been a matter of discussion since the beginning of the conference, since many people could not participate in the event due to the accreditation system for official activities. We must express our annoyance and concern in this regard, given that many defenders were unable to enter the sessions even when there was space in the room. On the other hand, we welcome Brazil’s commitment to be part of the Agreement in the short term, and we urge the other States of the region to ratify it.
We highlight, once again, that Escazú constitutes an essential tool for the protection of the environment in the region, strengthens the work that local communities are carrying out and provides concrete tools to achieve the human right to a healthy environment. For these reasons, we consider it essential that spaces for discussion continue to be generated and fostered so that the Agreement is implemented as soon as possible in all the countries of the region.
More Information
Authors
Ananda Lavayén
Carrizo Maria Laura
Contact
lauracarrizo@fundeps.org
IDB Annual Meetings were held with limited civil society participation
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
Between March 16 and 19, the Annual Assembly of Governors of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and IDB Invest was held in Panama City. It is a debate forum in which the members of the institution, together with those who preside over the central banks and other high-level authorities, discuss and address issues on issues considered to be a priority.
In the opening speech, the current president of the IDB, Ilan Goldfajn, outlined some of the institution’s priorities, which revolve around social issues such as food security, poverty, inequality, health, and education. In turn, he emphasized the mitigation of climate change and adaptation to it, stressing the need to deal with the increasingly frequent natural disasters in the Latin American and Caribbean region. The importance of preserving the biodiversity through the elaboration of an Amazon Regional Program.
The Board of Governors commissioned the preparation of a capital increase proposal for IDB Invest in order to implement a new business model that increases its impact on development through the private sector. In addition, he reiterated the importance of preparing a new Institutional Strategy proposal for the IDB Group, whose approval is scheduled for the next annual meeting in 2024.
The limited participation of civil society
After repeated requests made by a group of civil society organizations, the Bank authorized their participation in the event, although in a limited manner and closed to those who received an invitation. In addition, it was possible to arrange a meeting with the president of the IDB on March 17. In said meeting, the need to generate spaces for dialogue and express the demands of civil society in relation to the bank was raised. Both the possibility of participating in the event and the possibility of meeting with the president represent positive developments, although it remains to be seen if these are real changes in the institution. For now, the bank has invited to continue the dialogue in the coming months to achieve a more effective participation in the annual meetings of 2024.
From Fundeps we have been following and participating in this process together with organizations in the region that make up the IDB Working Group, and we will continue actively in the dialogue processes proposed by the bank.
More Information
– Governors endorse the vision, priorities and plans for the IDB Group | IADB
– Open letter from civil society organizations to IDB President Ilan Goldfajn – Fundeps
– The Brazilian Ilan Goldfajn is the new president of the IDB – Fundeps
– Open letter to the IDB for the election of a new presidency – Fundeps
Authors
Candela Jauregui
Valentina Rasso
Contact
Gonzalo Roza – gon.roza@fundeps.org
We presented amicus curiae before the Inter-American Court in the case “Beatriz vs. The Savior”
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
Beatriz was 22 years old in 2013, when she demanded access to a therapeutic abortion before the courts of El Salvador, since her life was at risk due to having an anencephalic pregnancy (without a brain), with no chance of survival, added to a series of previous illnesses. The abortion request was finally denied by the Salvadoran courts.
Given this refusal from the Constitutional Chamber of that country, the organizations that accompanied the young woman took the case to the Inter-American Human Rights System, and both the Commission and the Court respectively granted precautionary and provisional measures. On June 3, Beatriz began labor, so she had to undergo a cesarean section. The anencephalic fetus died five hours later. The event had wide international repercussions due to the tragedy and violation of rights it meant.
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) determined that El Salvador was responsible for the violation of Beatriz’s rights and recommended that the State adopt measures to guarantee real access to abortion in situations where the fetus is not viable with extrauterine life. and risk to the health and life of the mother. In January 2022, the case was elevated to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.
One of the axes of our work is the promotion of the human rights of women and other identities, such as the right to health. In addition, we have actively participated through communication campaigns and political advocacy activities in the process of legislative discussion and subsequent sanction of the national Law 27,610 on Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy in Argentina.
Through our amicus, in addition to maintaining that there has been an impact on the human right to health in light of international law, we seek to contribute our experience as an organization that works on the issue in Argentina, maintaining that the criminalization of abortion is a form of violence against women, and that the criminalization of abortion is a deficient response by States. Therefore, there is a need to review the restrictive legislation that still exists in other countries in the region.
In this sense, it has been shown that laws that prohibit abortion do not reduce the number of abortions that are performed. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), nearly 6.5 million abortions are performed annually in Latin America and the Caribbean, despite the fact that in most countries in the region abortion is illegal or strongly restricted. . The criminalization of abortion only makes the procedures clandestine and unsafe, which puts women’s health and lives at risk.
The Inter-American Court has the opportunity to establish an important precedent in this case, confirming that the absolute criminalization of abortion is a violation of human rights and that States have the obligation to guarantee access to safe and legal abortion in certain circumstances. We hope that the Court gives rise to what was proposed by the Commission and sends a clear message to the States of the region about the need to protect the human rights of women and other identities with the capacity to bear children.
Access the complete Amicus
Author
Vanina Piccardo
Contact
Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org
Summary of the report ‘Business and Human Rights: Inter-American standards’
This document is a summary of the report “Businesses and Human Rights: Inter-American Standards” prepared by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) and the Office of the Special Rapporteur on Economic, Social, Cultural and Environmental Rights (REDESCA).
Lithium and Transparency in Argentina
Throughout this report we will discuss, first of all, a series of data on the current situation of Argentina in relation to lithium production that places it in a central role within the world concert. Then we will focus on the mining governance system, stating the laws that configure it, its main elements and those points that merit further analysis. Subsequently, we will address, from some indicators suggested by the Standard, the two projects that are in the lithium production stage in Argentina: the Fénix Project in the Hombre Muerto salt flat and Sales de Jujuy in the Olaroz-Cauchari salt flat. In particular, regarding whether or not to publicize their contracts, as a fundamental link in terms of publicity and transparency in the development of these projects.
Justice resolves a preventive measure for Lake San Roque
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
Background of the case:
In the month of November, Fundeps presented a collective environmental protection action before the Córdoba justice system requesting urgent and definitive measures to be taken regarding the serious situation that the Lake San Roque basin is going through.
The Administrative Litigation Chamber 3A Nomination, on 12/12/2022, summoned all the defendants (the municipalities and communes that make up the basin and the Province of Córdoba), and stated:
“That it is public knowledge of the delicate situation in which the San Roque Lake basin finds itself, whose degradation has been going on for a long time; worsening year after year, with pollution peaks in the summer periods (effect of high temperatures and lack of precipitation, among other causes); all of which is periodically made visible by the different provincial or local journalistic media that graphically portray the state of the water mirror that supplies a large part of the provincial population.
Given this, it summoned the province of Córdoba – through the competent areas or agencies – so that within a period of 15 judicial business days they report, among other issues, whether the Sustainable Development Committee of the Basin is current and operational. of Lake San Roque, if there is a sanitation plan, a Strategic Plan for Sewage Sanitation Works in the area and also requested the Legislative Branch of the Province to inform if there are bills related to the sanitation of the Lake San Roque Basin .
Among the responses provided by the Province, the Chamber highlights that the “Sustainable Development Committee of the San Roque Lake Basin” is not in operation, created by Law 7773, and that there is effectively no Sanitation Plan, but rather isolated measures are adopted from the different departments.
Resolution of the Chamber on the requested precautionary measure:
In this context, the Court, through Order Number 33, in its resolution yesterday considers that, as we had stated in the lawsuit, the remediation of the basin is not possible without a plan that, based on the diagnosis of the current situation, define means and mechanisms to achieve sanitation and sustainable management.
Thus the Chamber resolves, making use of the broad faculties and powers it has in this type of process where collective interests are at stake, to partially grant the requested precautionary measure and order within a period of sixty (60) business days. to the Province of Córdoba the preparation of the project of a “Sanitation Plan for Lake San Roque and Sustainable Development”.
Its main objective will be the sanitation of Lake San Roque associated with the sustainable development of its basin, and must contain, among various requirements:
A. Actions aimed at achieving the objective, with express mention of fire prevention, and the impact of anthropogenic activities in the basin, the territorial planning of the Basin as appropriate to each municipality or commune;
B. goals;
C. methodology;
D. deadlines with milestones with partial stages with times and measures;
E. proposal of different alternatives for the solution of the identified problems and their possible causes, in addition the Chamber requires that these alternatives must be considered in terms of their acceptability, effectiveness, efficiency and quality; The selection of the alternatives taken to solve the different aspects of the problem must be adequately justified;
F. definition of mitigation and remediation measures;
G. Audit systems;
H. among others.
The Plan must be prepared jointly by the Secretariat of Water Resources, the Secretariat of Public Services, the Secretariat of the Environment, the Provincial Administration of Water Resources, with the special participation in said task of the INA-CIRSA.
At Fundeps, we feel very optimistic about this resolution, appropriate and timely regarding the serious water crisis that we are experiencing and particularly the critical situation of the San Roque Lake basin. We consider that this is also an important precedent in environmental judicial matters, and a hopeful resolution for the group of people who defend the environment in the province of Córdoba.
More information
Presentamos un amparo ambiental por la contaminación del lago San Roque
Diagnóstico Situacional de los Recursos Hídricos de Córdoba: Río Suquía
Diagnóstico Situacional de los Recursos Hídricos de Córdoba: Lago Los Molinos y Dique San Roque
Autors
María Laura Carrizo Morales
Ananda Lavayen
Contacto
lauracarrizo@fundeps.org
*Photo taken from the digital newspaper El Independiente
What did we do in 2022 for human rights?
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
During 2022 we worked very hard to consolidate processes and our team of more than 75 members, including the Board of Directors, Coordination and Volunteering, which continue to grow alongside our advocacy actions.
We take on new challenges to continue promoting the activities in all the thematic agendas that we work on and Fundeps as an institution. We provide information and tools for citizens and for those who are guarantors of rights, we carry out investigations, promote political advocacy actions and judicial presentations, among other activities. In addition, we built networks with different civil society organizations, which allowed us to achieve great achievements. This year he also met us again. We held face-to-face events and meetings that allowed us to interact, exchange and share moments side by side.
Throughout 2022 we fight for the right to live in a healthy environment. To health and proper nutrition. For lives free of violence and for gender equality. For access to justice, public information and citizen participation in the problems and issues that affect us, with a special focus on groups in vulnerable situations.
In short, we go through challenges and collective learning, always motivated by the same vision: a more just, equitable and sustainable society.
We are very excited about the steps taken and the ones to come! We thank each organization, volunteer and partner for the shared efforts that allow us to strengthen each activity.
With great pride we share our 2022 Yearbook!
VIEW YEARBOOK
Workshops: How to access environmental rights? Escazú agreement for communities
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
At the end of last year, we developed the first stage of the project through monitoring and diagnosis of compliance with the rights provided for in the Escazú Agreement (rights of access to information, participation and justice) in our province. The results we obtained aroused great concern about the limited access, by communities, to the rights and tools that the Agreement grants.
Based on the above, the objective of this second stage is to advance in the promotion and consolidation of capacities of the local community, through a cycle of empowerment workshops on the tools provided by this agreement, which was incorporated into our legislation. Within this framework, we will develop four workshops in different strategic locations in the province, with the following schedule:
The content of the meetings is presented in 2 large modules:
The speaker will be the lawyer and university professor María Laura Foradori, who is also a specialist in environmental education and a master’s degree in environment and sustainable development, member of ACACIA, a network of environmental lawyers.
We believe that these meetings are very important for the construction of networks and collective knowledge from the territories in struggle against environmental conflicts in our province. We hope that all interested people can join!
Sign up here:bit.ly/TalleresDerechosAmbientales
This activity is supported by:
Mesa por el Agua y el Ambiente Alta Gracia – Feria Agroecológica Córdoba – Vecinos Unidos en Defensa de un Ambiente Seguro (Fuera Porta) – Vecinos autoconvocados por la salud y el ambiente Marcos Juárez – ACACIA Derecho Ambiental – RACC (Red de Abogacía Comunitaria) – Legal Empowerment Fund – Universidad Villa María – Universidad Siglo 21
More Information
Contact
Laura Carrizo, lauracarrizo@fundeps.org
We participated in a workshop: Beneficiaries of the extractive sector in Argentina
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
The workshop had among its objectives to raise awareness about the importance of public information of the final beneficiaries, and at the same time, provide resources and materials to increase research, projects and analysis within this field.
In this sense, the training was divided into three modules: first, content and information on final beneficiaries was presented, from the theoretical to the legal and also practical, both nationally and internationally. Those who spoke in this first module were: Andrés Knobel from the Tax Justice Network; María Eugenia Marano, specialist in corporate law; Pamela Morales, Undersecretary of Mining Development of the Government of the Nation; Gonzalo Fernández of the Ministry of Mining Development of the Nation; and Lucía Cirimello from the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI).
Secondly, civil society organizations had the opportunity to present their projects related to the theme. In this way, Edgardo Livitnoff (Red Ruido Coordinator) presented progress on the report “Lithium and transparency in Argentina” that we prepared together. For her part, Eugenia Rodríguez (Centro de Economía Política Argentina) shared details about the work of her organization: “The rich of Argentina”.
Finally, the third module consisted of a practical workshop given by Mariel Fitz Patricks, in which tools and resources were provided for approaching final beneficiaries. The journalist helped us, mainly, to access information and how, in this way, to enrich work carried out and to carry out on the subject.
This instance was very fruitful, not only in terms of knowledge and learning, but also in terms of the possibility of meeting peers from other civil society organizations, with whom one could work together in the near future.
More information:
Author
Maitén de los Milagros Fuma
Contact
Maria Victoria Sibilla, ninasibilla@fundeps.org