Tag Archive for: Environmental Democracy

,

We participate in a hearing on climate change before the IACHR

Together with other non-governmental organizations, we participate in a thematic hearing before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. At this hearing we present a report on the impact of climate change on the enjoyment and enjoyment of 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.

In the framework of the 173 session of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) held in Washington DC, we participated in the hearing on climate change and the rights of women, children, indigenous and rural communities. Together with other Latin American non-governmental organizations – advocated for the protection of human rights and the environment – we present a report on climate change and its impact on human rights.

The report was prepared collaboratively together with Fundación Pachamama, Dejusticia, AIDA, IDL, Engajamundo, Earthrights International, Honduran Alliance on Climate Change, FIMA, CELS, DPLF, Conectas, FARN, CEMDA and the Climate Route. It was presented to the IACHR, it mainly addresses the differentiated impact caused by climate change on the populations and communities of Latin America. The following topics were addressed in this:

  1. Impacts of Climate Change on Rights
  2. Response Measures to Address Climate Change and its Implications with Human Rights
  3. Differentiated Impacts of Climate Change on the Rights of Vulnerable Groups
  4. Obligations of States and Responsibilities of Non-State Actors in the Context of Climate Change and Human Rights

It is important to point out that the tool for participation in thematic hearings of the IACHR allows the immediacy on the part of the regional body in those problems that afflict local communities, while providing tools to then urge the member states of the Organization of American States, to the fulfillment of respectful Human Rights policies.

Regarding the pressing problem of climate change, it is important that the IACHR recognizes the impacts that this phenomenon causes throughout Latin America, and accordingly demands that States deepen their prevention, regulation, mitigation and adaptation policies in pursuit of guarantee human and social development in healthy and balanced environmental conditions.

Authors

Valentina Castillo Barnetche

Aranza Ruiz

Contact

Juan Bautista Lopez, juanbautistalopez@fundeps.org

,

PreCOP Córdoba “Civil Society Collaboration”

On August 7, a parallel event was held within the framework of the Pre-COP Córdoba 2019, where we participated in the organization jointly with Fundación Tierravida, Córdoba Young Agency Ministry of Environment and Climate Change. The Side Event convened various sectors of civil society, NGOs, universities, native peoples, entrepreneurs and activists, involved in the theme of climate change.

“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”.

Given the cross-cutting nature of environmental management, which is why environmental problems must be considered and assumed comprehensively and cross-sectorally, a logic of horizontal, multisectoral and interdisciplinary participation was sustained throughout the day.

In the morning the event began with the dissertation of specialists in climate change and then in the afternoon, through various work tables, the participants discussed, discussed and contributed on an equal and transparent footing to write a Roadmap . The discussion, in addition to being linked to the PreCOP issues, was framed in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

In addition to the aforementioned, various projects and actions of NGOs against climate change were presented under the Pecha Kucha format, topics such as renewable energy, differentiated waste collection, community empowerment on climate change were discussed.

About the Roadmap

The Road Map was the central and final objective of the event, in which representatives of the Cordoba civil society left the actions to be followed. Specifically, it focused on what elements are necessary to achieve governance that guarantees and promotes the effective participation of all sectors in decision-making and in the allocation of resources for projects, plans and programs related to climate change.

The aforementioned document was presented, in its preliminary version, before the official PreCOP authorities and at COP 25 to be carried out in December 2019 in Chile. During the month of September, work will continue among the participating organizations of the Side Event to continue developing their content.

The Climate Summit (COP) this year will be held in Chile and is a great opportunity to reach our representatives the various voices embodied in a document that show what are the necessary actions to deal with climate change. The summit is attended by representatives from almost every country in the world, scientists, specialists and NGOs where they intend to set criteria for compliance with the Paris Agreement and improve gas reduction goals.

Authors 

Carolina Tamagnini

Ananda Lavayén

María Laura Carrizo

Contact

Juan Bautista López, juanbautistalopez@fundeps.org 

,

When in doubt, nature

After a long judicial process, a group of residents of the town of Gualeguaychu (Entre Ríos) managed to get the Supreme Court of Justice to rule in favor of their claim in an important precedent that recognized and applied novel principles of environmental law.

“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”.

Such course of action began with an action for environmental protection filed by a group of Gualeguaychu residents against a real estate project located near the river of the same name, demanding the cessation of works and the environmental recomposition. In the first instance, the action was accepted, although afterwards the Superior Court of Justice Entre Ríos (hereinafter STJER) annulled the judgment. Before this last pronouncement, the amparistas presented an extraordinary federal appeal, which, although it was rejected by the STJER, was admitted by the Supreme Court of Justice (hereinafter “The Court”), revoking in its resolution that resolved by the high provincial court.

Although the highest court in Argentina only overturned the ruling of his interlocutor paring the proceedings to the court of origin, the considerations for arriving at such a decision reaffirmed certain existing rules and principles in environmental law (procedural and substantial), at the same time that crystallized novel legal principles in the matter. In effect, the Court once again stressed the integral systemic nature of the watersheds and the importance of the protection of the wetlands (affected in this case) as integral and interdependent parts of the water system, citing as a normative instrument the Ramsar Convention (Relative Convention to Wetlands of International Importance, especially as Waterfowl Habitat).

Likewise, the Court assessed the application of the precautionary principle, and also introduced the novel application of the principles in dubio pro natura and in dubio pro aqua.

Regarding the principle in dubio pro natura, this establishes (in the words of the Court) that: “In case of doubt, all proceedings before courts, administrative bodies and other decision-makers must be resolved in such a way as to favor protection and conservation. of the environment, giving preference to less harmful alternatives. Actions will not be taken when their potential adverse effects are disproportionate or excessive in relation to the benefits derived from them.”

Regarding the principle in dubio pro aqua, he argued that: “In case of uncertainty, environmental and water disputes should be resolved in the courts, and application laws interpreted in the most favorable way to the protection and preservation of the resources of water and related ecosystems.”

In short, the Court revoked the decision of the STJER since it directly affected access to environmental justice (Article 32 of Law 25.675) and the principles in dubio pro natura and pro aqua, in the defined terms. Undoubtedly, the jurisprudential recognition of the highest judicial body means the incorporation of both guidelines to Argentine environmental law. They are welcome.

More information

Author

Juan Bautista Lopez, juanbautistalopez@fundeps.org

, ,

The Supreme Court rejected the action initiated by the mining company Barrick Gold against the Law of Glaciers

Within the framework of a declarative action of certainty initiated by Barrick Exploraciones Argentinas S.A and the Province of San Juan, the highest judicial organ of Argentina decided to reject the action. Although the arguments for such a resolution were related to the non-existence of a “judicial case”, in addition, the Court hinted at its position in the eventual proposal of unconstitutionality of the Law of Minimum Budgets for the Preservation of Glaciers and the Periglacial Environment.

“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 proposals of the mining company and the province of San Juan, focused on questioning: a) the legislative procedure for the enactment of Law 26,639 (of Glaciers); b) The unconstitutionality of the aforementioned regulations for advancing on regulatory competences specific to the Province as holder of the original domain of natural resources. The company Barrick and the province of San Juan converged on this last point arguing that the law in question, hypothetically, posed an affront to the possibilities of exploitation by the mining company and management of natural resources by the province.

In view of this situation, the Court analyzed whether the necessary requirements were met for the organ to enter into the analysis of the parties’ claims, that is, if there was a “judicial case” (subject that may be subject to a process). The conclusion reached was that there was no sufficient accredited legal interest, or a so-called “act in the making” (administrative act necessary to consider the existence of a judicial case) that endangers the rights of the parties. He also considered that the lack of completion of the Glacier Inventory (ordered to the Executive Branch by the glaciers law), necessarily implied the inexistence of the “act in the making”, since this inventory was a basic budget for the operation of the attacked law by the parties.

As a consequence of the inexistence of the justiciable case, the Supreme Court held that as regards the conflict between the provincial and national jurisdiction alleged by the province of San Juan, the judicial power should not intervene, while the environmental policy issues should be resolved by the federal dialogue before the intervention of the judges.

However, even though it was not necessary according to the conclusions regarding the inexistence of a justiciable “case”, the ministers of the Court held that the process by which the Glaciers Law had been sanctioned had been valid from the point of view constitutional, according to the background and regulations of the Chamber of Senators.

On the other hand, in a convincing “environmental” message, the Court expressed its opinion regarding the validity of the Glaciers Law, in the face of the arguments that raised its unconstitutionality, thus outlining its position regarding a future “judicial case”. Among some of the arguments offered by the high judicial body, the following can be highlighted:

  1. The clear rule that when there are rights of collective incidence pertaining to the protection of the environment – in the case of the Law of Glaciers the strategic resource Water – the hypothetical controversy can not be treated as the mere collision of subjective rights (individual lease). The characterization of the environment as a “collective good” changes the focus of the problem, which must not only address the claims of the parties.
  2. The interests that exceed the bilateral conflict must be considered (in the case between the Province of San Juan and the Barrick mining company against the provisions of the Glaciers Law), in order to have a polycentric vision, since there are numerous rights affected.
  3. The solution can not only be limited to solving the past, but, and fundamentally, to promoting a solution focused on future sustainability, for which a decision is required that foresees the consequences of such a decision.
  4. The environment is not according to the National Constitution, an object intended for the exclusive service of man, appropriable according to their needs.
  5. Access to drinking water is a right that must be regulated under an eco-centric, or systemic legal paradigm, which not only takes into account private or state interests, but also those of the same system, according to the General Environmental Law ( 25,675).
  6. This vision regarding access to drinking water is relevant as the regulation that protects the glaciers, has as an objective to preserve them as strategic reserves of water resources for human consumption; for agriculture; for the recharge of water basins; for the protection of biodiversity.
  7. Based on these objectives, the Glaciers Law protects this resource from the harmful effects that certain extractive processes (mining) can have on the preservation and conservation of glaciers. Such protection is part of the provisions of the Paris Agreement on global warming.
  8. Faced with the provisions of the Law of Glaciers that aim to protect rights of collective incidence, judges must consider that natural and legal persons can certainly be holders of subjective property rights. More must also consider that this individual right must be harmonized with the rights of collective incidence to ensure that the exercise of lawful industry is sustainable.
  9. The Court concludes that the constitutionality trial of a possible injurious act derived from the glacier law -if a judicial cause is proven- should be analyzed in the context of the weighing of the various rights and property involved.
  10. Likewise, the Court warns that such weighting will not be possible until the National Executive Power complies with the obligation to draw up the national inventory of glaciers.

In short, the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, rejected the action of Barrick Gold and the province of San Juan on the grounds that there was no “judicial case” and did not resolve the substantive claim on the constitutionality or otherwise of the Law of Glaciers. However, in a blunt message, he left his position before an eventual proposal of similar characteristics: Glaciers law, protects a supraindividual environmental good, which, faced with a conflict against an individual right, must be weighted based on criteria of sustainability , Intergenerationality, biodiversity, under an eco-centric or systemic paradigm (not anthropocentric). Between the lines, the Glaciers Law … is constitutional.

  • More information:

Read the full ruling of the Supreme Court of Justice

  • Author:

Juan Bautista Lopez, juanbautistalopez@fundeps.org

, ,

We urge the accession of Argentina to the Escazú Agreement

Through a letter addressed to the former Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development and another to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Worship, we request the signature and adhesion of the Argentine government to the Escazú Agreement. The agreement will be open for signature from September 27, 2018 and needs 11 countries in the region to sign and ratify to enter into force.

“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 Escazú Agreement is the “Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean,” adopted in Escazú, Costa Rica, on March 4, 2018 , by 24 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, including Argentina. After a negotiation process that formally began in 2012 at the Rio +20 Conference with the Declaration on the Application of Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean, it was adopted an agreement that seeks to guarantee the effective implementation of access rights: access to information, public participation and access to justice in environmental matters. It will be open for signature by the 33 countries of Latin America and the Caribbean at the United Nations headquarters in New York, from September 27, 2018 to September 26, 2020, and will be subject to subsequent ratification, acceptance or approval of the States that have signed it. At least 11 countries must sign and ratify it so that it can enter into force. In order to achieve the entry into force of the Escazú Agreement, we presented a letter addressed to the former Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development, Rabbi Sergio Bergman, and another letter to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship, Jorge Marcelo Faurie, requesting the signature and adhesion of the Argentine government to the regional agreement. At the same time, we urge you to support the efforts of the governments and civil society organizations of Latin America and the Caribbean to invite the other governments of the region to sign this important treaty. In the letter addressed to the national authorities we highlighted the importance of the regional agreement since it is the first treaty on environmental issues in Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as the first in the world to guarantee the protection and safety of people, groups and organizations defending human rights in environmental matters. We hope that Argentina, as well as the other countries of the region, will sign and ratify the regional agreement on Principle 10. In this way we will have an international instrument to reaffirm the right of all people to a healthy environment and sustainable development, the fight against inequality and discrimination, as well as ensuring the participation of citizens in decisions that affect their lives and environment.

 

More Information:

Writer: Ananda Lavayen

Coctact:

María Pérez Alsina: mariaperezalsina@fundeps.org

,

Advisory Opinion of the IACHR on the environment and human rights

Following a request made by the State of Colombia on March 14, 2016, for the first time the Inter-American Court developed the content of the right to a healthy environment in its Advisory Opinion OC-23/17 on “Environment and Human Rights”, notified on February 7.

“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”

In this document the Court recognized “the undeniable relationship between the protection of the environment and the realization of other human rights“, highlighting the interdependence and indivisibility that exists between human rights, the environment and sustainable development. Therefore, it understands that all rights are vulnerable to environmental degradation, and its full enjoyment depends on an appropriate environment.

In the inter-American human rights system, the right to a healthy environment is expressly enshrined in Article 11 of the Protocol of San Salvador, which establishes the right of everyone to live in a healthy environment and to have basic public services, and the consequent obligation of the States to promote the protection, preservation and improvement of the environment.

In addition, this right is also considered included among the economic, social and cultural rights protected by Article 26 of the American Convention.

The Court clarified that “the human right to a healthy environment has been understood as a right with both individual and collective connotations. In its collective dimension, [..] constitutes a universal interest, which is due both to present and future generations. However, […] it also has an individual dimension, insofar as its violation can have direct or indirect repercussions on people due to its connection with other rights, such as the right to health, personal integrity or life, among others. The degradation of the environment can cause irreparable damage to human beings, so a healthy environment is a fundamental right for the existence of humanity.”

The Advisory Opinion also determined the state obligations for the protection of the environment.

With respect to jurisdiction, States must respect and guarantee the human rights of all people and this may mean, depending on the case in particular and exceptionally, situations that go beyond their territorial limits. In the same sense, States have an obligation to avoid transboundary damage.

In particular, in order to respect and guarantee the rights to life and integrity, it determined that States must comply with the following obligations and principles:

Obligation of prevention: means to prevent significant environmental damage, inside or outside its territory, which implies that they must regulate, supervise and supervise the activities under their jurisdiction, carry out environmental impact studies, establish contingency plans and mitigate the damage that has occurred;

Principle of precaution: States must act in accordance with the precautionary principle against possible serious or irreversible damage to the environment that affects the rights to life and personal integrity, even in the absence of scientific certainty;

Obligation of cooperation: involves cooperation with other States in good faith for protection against significant environmental damage. From this are derived:

  • The obligation to notify potentially affected States of possible significant environmental damage caused by activities carried out under their jurisdiction;
  • The duty to consult and negotiate with the potentially affected States;
  • The duty to ensure the exchange of information between States;

Procedural Obligations: These are obligations that support a better formulation of environmental policies. Among them, States have to ensure:

  • Access to information: guarantee access to information on possible effects on the environment;
  • Public participation: guarantee the right to public participation of people, in making decisions and policies that may affect the environment.
  • Access to justice: guarantee access to justice, in relation to state obligations for the protection of the environment.

It is remarkable that the IACHR determines the content and scope of the procedural obligations, since they are in line with the provisions of Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. This principle seeks to ensure that everyone has access to information, participates in decision-making and accesses justice in environmental matters, in order to guarantee the right to a healthy and sustainable environment for present and future generations. In this sense, FUNDEPS, together with several civil society organizations, actively participates in the negotiation process to obtain a Regional Agreement on Principle 10, considering that its concretion will allow strengthening capacities to deal with environmental challenges in the region. .

This Advisory Opinion arose because of Colombia’s concern regarding the “risk” that new major infrastructure projects will seriously affect the marine environment in the region. Everything provided by the Court will allow Colombia to continue advancing in the effective protection of the environment in the Greater Caribbean and the rights and interests of Colombians.

Beyond the effects that the document may have for the State that requested the Opinion, we understand that it constitutes a significant advance in terms of environmental protection for all American States, as it provides interpretative guidelines and completes the sense of the rights contained in the Covenant.

More information

– See the full resolution

Author

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

, ,

One of lime and one of sand in the case against Porta Hnos.

“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”

 

On Monday, August 7, we attended the public hearing convened by Federal Court No. 3 by Dr. Hugo Vaca Narvaja in the amparo promoted by neighbors Barrio Ne Antonio and Inaudi against the Ministry of Energy and Mining of the Nation And the company Porta Hnos. They had the opportunity to speak on behalf of the Public Prosecutor’s Office representing the interests of children and the State Attorney’s Office.

The amparo involving more than 25 neighbors and residents of San Antonio and other people of the Citizens’ Assembly “NEIGHBORHOODS IN DEFENSE OF A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT – VUDAS” was filed against the Ministry of Energy and Mining of the Nation Of Hydrocarbon Resources) requesting the closure and final closure of the bioethanol plant of Porta Hnos SA They base their claim by stating that the company does not have the legal authorization to prepare biofuel (bioethanol) which should have been granted by the said secretariat and for not having concluded, prior to its entry into operation, the Environmental Impact Assessment process. Subsidiarily, amparists request the cessation of environmental pollution that the activity produces and irreparably affects the environment and the health of neighbors.

It is inexplicable the absence by the State in its different levels of government: national, provincial and municipal, both at the time of urban planning, to ensure compliance with current environmental standards and at the public hearing to listen to the parties and express Your position. But more inexplicable is that it was not the first time. At the end of April of 2015 the local group came to be chained in the headquarters of the Municipality of Cordova to obtain an audience with the intendant Ramón Mestre. They were forced to extreme acts to fulfill their right to be heard and to go to the authorities. Again an absent state.

But not everything has been unfortunate. We had the opportunity to accompany neighbors in this unprecedented audience for Cordoba. Initially, a conciliation hearing was scheduled under the federal law with the characteristic that it was going to be public. The judge then changed the character of the hearing to an information type imitating the proceedings of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation in the “Mendoza” case on environmental pollution of the Matanza – Riachuelo River. Having even arranged a mechanism for the participation of third persons, from FUNDEPS we register to take the floor. Finally, between roosters and midnight the judge again changed the character of the hearing to a conciliation so we could only participate as a public.

We emphasize the need to guarantee the right to information, participation and dialogue between the parties involved with the authorities with competence in urban planning, environmental territorial management, control of anthropic activities, setting and control of standards and norms. We also emphasize the importance of taking into account the hazards of this type of industry in light of the precautionary principle and prevention that governs environmental matters (article 4 LGA), because it is located in a residential neighborhood.

At the hearing, where the judge had broad powers to direct it, neighbors had the opportunity to tell the before and after that involved the installation and expansion of the company Porta Hnos and the consequences it brought in its health and quality of life. Then the lawyers, the Public Ministry of Defense and the Prosecutor’s Office were given the floor for fifteen minutes. We consider this instance to be very valuable as it strengthens transparency, citizen participation and public dissemination of this socio-environmental conflict antecedent to Cordoba as the possibility given by the Court to the neighbors.

We believe that it is important to emphasize in these cases the role of the judges in order to guarantee the fundamental rights of present generations and future generations. This is an ideal case to carry out a model of dialogic justice, to seek a structural solution to the conflict, through. The court has the opportunity to establish clear judicial guidelines that address the protection of fundamental rights, such as the human right to a healthy environment, to the health and life of the neighbors of Barrio San Antonio and Inaudi. We trust that this instance allows the claim of neighbors to be effectively heard and that the State, at its different levels, recognize, investigate and solve a complex socio-environmental situation.

Author
Victoria Gerbaldo, <victoriagerbaldo@fundeps.org>
Contact
Juan Carballo, <juanmcarballo@fundeps.org>
,

Argentina hosts the 7th Meeting of Negotiation of the Regional Agreement on Principle 10

“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”

July 31 was the first day of meeting in which governmental authorities from 24 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, international experts and representatives of civil society resumed negotiations on the regional agreement on Principle 10.

The event was inaugurated by representatives of the government of Argentina, representatives of the public, the Deputy Minister of Environment of Costa Rica – a country that co-chairs the process with the government of Chile – and the Director of the Division of Sustainable Development and Human Settlements of ECLAC .

We emphasize that, from the Argentine government, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship, Jorge Faurie said that “Argentina supports this initiative and invites all countries of Latin America and the Caribbean to join this process of negotiation so that, With the collaboration of each one – States parties and civil society -, an agreement will be reached that will benefit the region and all its inhabitants.” We welcome the words expressed by the representative of Argentina as he affirms the need to work together with representatives of civil society and to concretize this agreement whose process began in 2012.

In addition, public representatives – Andrés Napoli and Danielle – pointed out that “effective access to environmental information, participation and justice is essential for democracy and natural resource governance, and characterized as solid the process and negotiations reached until the moment.”

This seventh negotiating meeting is scheduled to discuss capacity building for the implementation of the future agreement (Article 10), national actions undertaken by countries signatory to the Declaration on the implementation of Principle 10 and activities carried out by the Technical Secretariat; And the continuation of pending negotiations between them, the administrative, financial and budgetary implications (articles 11 to 25).

As representatives of civil society, we believe that the adoption of a regional agreement, which establishes essential standards in access rights, will strengthen capacities to deal with environmental challenges in the region, and will provide greater equality and environmental sustainability for Latin America and the Caribbean. Caribbean.

Follow the meeting live

More information

– We support the declaration of Principle 10 and the objectives of sustainable development | FUNDEPS

– Seventh Meeting of the Negotiating Committee | Principle 10

Contact

Male Martínez

malemartinez@fundeps.org

,

Youth committed to the environment

“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”

Within the framework of the Environmental Leaders program, the objective is to generate a discussion area in order to promote representative spaces of the Cordovan youth committed against climate change and environmental themes.

This table of dialog each of the representatives of civil society organizations share opinions, ideas and proposals for the city and province of Cordoba that make up the current concerns and themes of the environmental agenda; And joint activities were designed to work together.

We emphasize that the objectives of this initiative are: to promote a space of positioning with regard to conjunctural themes with a view of participation and particularly young; And to build capacity building among youth, Young Córdoba Agency and the Secretariat of Environment and Climate Change of the province of Cordoba.

We celebrate and support the realization of this type of initiative, as they reflect the opportunity for articulating different proposals, activities and actions of civil society organizations together with spheres of government in pursuit of the construction of guidelines for more sustainable public policies In environmental matters, as well as the strengthening of a participatory democracy open to dialogue, listening and working together.

Authors

María Elena Martínez Espeche

Juan Bautista López

Contact

María Elena Martínez Espeche – malemartinez@fundeps.org

Participation in the public hearing for the expansion of the Bajo Grande sewage plant

On Wednesday, December 7, the government of the province of Córdoba called a public hearing to announce the Environmental Impact Study (EIA) corresponding to the expansion of the current Sewage Treatment Plant (WWTP) And the construction of new main collectors. The participation of FUNDEPS included the presentation of a technical-legal report that marked certain inconsistencies identified when analyzing the EIA and knowing the antecedents of strong impacts in the zone.

“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”

With only three people registered, on Wednesday, December 7, 2016, a public hearing was held, convened by the Secretariat of the Environment and Climate Change of the province of Córdoba, whose purpose was to publicize the Environmental Impact Study (EIA) On the expansion of the Sewage Treatment Plant in the city of Córdoba. It should be noted that this process had little diffusion and was carried out very far from the area of ​​influence more significant and more affected by the project (Barrio Chacras de la Merced). This fact violates the provisions of Art. 63 of Provincial Law 10.208 of Environmental Policy which establishes that these instances of participation must be carried out in the area most closely linked to the public decision in question.

The Bajo Grande Wastewater Treatment Plant (EDAR) plant was built at the end of the 1960s, on the banks of the Suquía River, and is located in the 2 ½ km of the road called Chacras de la Merced, at the eastern end of the City of Córdoba. It was inaugurated in 1987, being under the control and control of the Municipality of Cordoba in the year 1990. From the end of the nineties, the operation of the plant of Low Good EDAR was deteriorating, obtaining that today, the It has a limited capacity in the treatment of sewage, which generates a constant focus of contamination.

The problem of contamination of this plant is public knowledge by the presentation of complaints, lawsuits, news reports and even formal acknowledgments by officials of the province and the municipality of Cordoba. At a technical level, expert reports by the National University of Cordoba have determined that the treatment of cloacal liquids of Bajo Grande has important faults, both in the processing and in the operation of the equipment that it owns. This results in high contamination rates of the Suquía river, which directly receives the effluents generated by these deficiencies in the treatment. For some time, together with the organization Las Omas, we have been claiming for public information on health and environmental indicators that allow us to assess (and correct) this pollution situation.

From the above it is understood the need to invest in the current plant and to make the situation capable of being reversed. However, following the reading and presentation of the EIA, certain inconsistencies arise that, if not taken into account, far from improving the current situation of the plant, could aggravate the existing negative environmental impacts.

  • In our brief presented during the hearing we emphasize some points:
  • Inconsistencies regarding the treatment capacity of the plant.
  • Inadequate treatment of environmental risks, in an area that has historically suffered the consequences of river pollution.
  • Failure to strengthen control bodies in the city to facilitate the work of the Bajo Grande WWTP plant.
  • Absence of plan for monitoring the work and mitigation of impacts.

Also during the hearing could be heard phrases such as: “… close to the sewage plant there are no stable populations,” calling into question the real commitment of government authorities to the residents of Chacras de la Merced and the problems In which they are immersed as a result of the malfunction of the plant.

From FUNDEPS, we consider that a thorough evaluation by the Ministry of the Environment as a comptroller of the present project is crucial, noting all the considerations set out during the hearing. Likewise, the necessary mechanisms must be available to comply with the expected legal and environmental parameters in order to protect the fundamental rights of the inhabitants of the city of Cordoba and in particular those of the district of Chacras de las Merced.

More information

Contact

Agustina Palencia, agustinapalencia@fundeps.org

We support the declaration of Principle 10 and the objectives of sustainable development

The Forum of Latin American and Caribbean Countries for Sustainable Development in Mexico City met for the first time in April. It presented the progress of the negotiation process of the Regional Agreement by Principle 10.

“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”

FUNDEPS together with several civil society organizations signed a declaration that supports the fundamental alliance between sustainable development objectives and principle 10, as we understand that:

“There will be no sustainable development without the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (ODS) nor without the rights of access to information, access to justice and participation on environmental issues, known as access rights.”

Within the framework of the first meeting of the Forum of Latin American and Caribbean Countries for Sustainable Development, it was claimed that there can be no real sustainable development if there is no real access to information and justice, as well as As an authentic participation of the citizens. In this regard, the Vice Minister of Environment of Costa Rica, Patricia Madrigal stressed that “Principle 10 redefines the traditional concept of development for its inclusive, transparent and participatory nature.”

Hence the importance of this Forum, which presents the ideal opportunity for the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development, which proposes 17 Sustainable Development Objectives, and the Regional agreement for Principle 10 to be implemented and can be addressed in an integral way to In order to strengthen each other.

FUNDEPS as an organization that promotes the construction of sustainable public policies participates actively in the negotiation process Regional Agreement on Principle 10, as well as publicly supports the Sustainable Development Objectives (ODS) of the United Nations Agenda 2030, recognizing the importance of access rights in the implementation of real sustainable development policies.

More information

Declaration that supports the P10 and the ODS-Signers

First Meeting Forum of the Latin American and Caribbean Countries for Sustainable Development

Author

María Perez Alsina

Contact

Male Martínez Espeche – malemartinez@fundeps.org

, ,

Studies show environmental degradation and government neglect in Chacras de la Merced

During the month of December 2016, the Foundation for the Development of Sustainable Policies decided to carry out a survey process in the neighborhood of Chacras de la Merced, in order to obtain accurate information about the state of situation of the community there.

“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”

Since 2015, FUNDEPS has been working with the recently mentioned neighborhood of the City of Cordoba, in relation to the problems of the sewage treatment plant (WWTP). The proven malfunction of the plant, located in the area since 1984, has caused numerous problems in the nearby population, as well as in the ecosystem there.

The purpose of this survey process was to be able to discover the perception of the neighbors of the neighborhood with respect to the plant, as well as of other problems that they could identify as an emergency. The instrument used was intended to compile the perception of the community of Chacras de la Merced about the operation of the sewage treatment plant, the environmental situation of the area, the performance of the government authorities towards the neighborhood and its interest Engage in control activities.

In this sense, within the results obtained, below are presented those of greater relevance.

An 83% (44 families) does not feel calm with the environmental situation of the district Chacras de la Merced.

Five issues were mentioned and respondents were asked to prioritize among themselves, establishing from 1 to 5 the urgency with which they believed they should be addressed by government authorities. Of the total families surveyed, 34 (64%) of them gave the number 1 priority and urgency to the pollution caused by the sewage treatment plant.

The respondents were then asked whether or not they knew the work that EDAR does, and 58.8% said they did not know with certainty the work and operation of the WWTP. 50.9% said he was very badly informed about the issues that relate to the operation of the plant. Consistent with this, 79.2% of neighbors said they do not trust the information provided by the municipality of Cordoba on the operation of the plant.

Notwithstanding the lack of knowledge, 86% consider that the plant is not functioning properly; And opined in reference to the factor considered to cause malfunction. 37.2% of the respondents said that the plant does not work properly due to lack of municipal controls that verify the correct functioning. Likewise, 46.5% consider that the malfunction of the plant causes the immediate contamination of the river.

He wondered about the confidence that respondents had in certain institutions and organizations. Entrepreneurs, the provincial government, the municipal government, the police, the legislature, the judiciary, political parties, trade unions and the national government receive nothing from the neighbors of Chacras de la Merced. Private and public universities; Environmental organizations, social organizations, religious institutions, and the media are receptive to the trust of neighbors. The neighbors opined, undoubtedly with 77% (41 families), who do not trust EDAR.

It is important to note that 76.9% of the neighbors do not have / had information about the bidding process carried out by the province for the expansion of the sewage treatment plant. Likewise, with regard to the opinion about the expansion of the plant, it is surprising that despite the declared distrust of the authorities and the information they provide; 58.5% of the residents are confident that the work will improve the quality of life of the community.

88.7% of the respondents believe that they should (people from the neighborhood with civil society organizations) participate in monitoring spaces to the actions of the state in the area of ​​environmental control. It was also consulted about the inclination towards participation in monitoring spaces of the actions of the municipality and the province in the process of construction of the new plant. 56.6% expressed that they would be willing to participate in these spaces if they arose.

The survey also aimed to know about the health history of the neighbors, consulting about symptoms and diseases they have had, their frequency, the diagnosis provided and the treatment indicated. In this regard, 69% said they had suffered from one of the listed symptoms.

The results of the survey process show that the community of Chacras de la Merced is in a serious situation of vulnerability due to the confluence of numerous factors that lead to the violation of their most basic rights. Álida Weht, director of the Las Omas grassroots organization whose objective is to improve the quality of life of the neighbors, has stated that: “the results constitute the visibility of a pollution situation that dates back several decades and a community Which has been immersed in an immediacy of problems for the same time.

In the context of the recent events related to the overturning of the Suquía River, both from company waste and from raw sewage, it is necessary to highlight the emergency in which the Chacras de la Merced neighborhood is located.

Full survey report

More information

Contact

Agustina Palencia – agustinapalencia@fundeps.org