Tag Archive for: Global Governance

,

What the G20 summit in Argentina left us

After a year of meetings and activities, between November 30 and December 1, the G20 Summit was held in the City of Buenos Aires, the first held in South America. It counted with the presence of the main world leaders; and although it was considered a logistical success by the national government, it did not produce great results in multilateral terms.

“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 G-20 leaders summit organized this year by Argentina as president “pro tempore” of the forum took place in a context marked mainly by the trade war between the United States and China; and the internal difficulties that a large part of the leaders of the countries that make up the group are facing. Among them, undoubtedly highlight the civil protests that check the government of Emmanuel Macron in France, the accusations against Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman for the death of a journalist; and even the economic crisis facing the national government in Argentina, to which were added also the internal and external doubts regarding the capacity of the government of Mauricio Macri to organize an event of the magnitude of the G-20.

In any case, once the summit was concluded, the organization of the summit was considered a success by the government, and a final document was even signed (although its commitments are very lukewarm) despite the few probabilities that existed of achieving a consensus among member countries. The Declaration of the G20 2018 leaders emphasizes equitable and sustainable development as a challenge that all States face. Among the issues mentioned in the Declaration are the pillars on which the summit worked on a priority basis this year, at the decision of the Argentine government itself, namely: the Future of Work, Infrastructure for Development, Food Security and a perspective gender mainstreaming that covered the entire G20 agenda. The Declaration also mentions in certain passages certain international commitments regarding Climate Change and the Paris Agreement (although the United States expressed in the Declaration its decision to withdraw from the Agreement); international financial institutions and the need to strengthen the IMF and the World Bank; gender equality and access to health, among others. Regarding Infrastructure, the Declaration states: “In order to address the persistent infrastructure financing gap, we reaffirm our commitment to attract private capital for investment in infrastructure. To achieve this, we endorsed the Roadmap to Infrastructure As an Asset Class “

Recall that the G20 is an international forum that is composed of 19 states and the European Union: Germany, Saudi Arabia, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, South Korea, the United States, France, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan , Mexico, Russia, United Kingdom, South Africa and Turkey. Spain is a permanent guest. In addition, the country that chairs the forum elects other guests, and for this year Argentina invited Chile and the Netherlands.

The work areas of the G-20 are: finance, agriculture, anticorruption, trade and investment, development, digital economy, education, employment, health, climate sustainability and energy transitions.

Although the Summit in Buenos Aires did not produce resonant agreements at the multilateral level, the event was without doubt positive for the national government, which comes out strengthened by the organization without major inconveniences of the event; and above all, by the agenda of meetings and bilateral agreements with other nations that took place in the framework of the Summit. Thus, the government of Cambiemos managed several bilateral meetings and closed a series of investment and commercial agreements with the purpose of promoting the country’s economic development. Thus, of the 17 bilateral meetings that the government carried out and the more than 50 agreements signed, the following stand out:

  • 30 commercial agreements between China and Argentina that represent around 5000 million dollars. The Joint Action Plan signed covers issues related to investments, infrastructure, railways, thermal energy, solar, wind, mining, health, transportation and education, among others. They include the commercial contract to reactivate the San Martín Cargas railroad, whose initial investment will be 1089 million dollars and will be in charge of the Chinese company CRCC (China Railway Construction Corporation Limited); and the signing of protocols for the entry of standing equines, sheep and goats from Patagonia to China and a sanitary protocol to export Argentine cherries.

  • In turn, with China, investment agreements were also signed for projects of Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) in the area of ​​energy and transport (routes); and it was agreed to expand the swap (exchange) of currencies in the amount of 60 billion yuan (equivalent to 8,600 million dollars) that will be used to strengthen the reserves of the Central Bank.

  • With the United States, the most relevant agreement was reached with the letters of intent signed with the investment agency of the United States, Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), which is expected to mobilize more than 3 billion dollars. Some of these letters of intent with the OPIC contemplate the financial backing for the PPP project of the C Corridor section (Buenos Aires-Mendoza); and projects on solar energy (the Ullum I, II and III projects); wind energy (North Chubut III and IV); wind energy (Cañadón León wind farm in Santa Cruz); and works for a gas pipeline in Vaca Muerta.

  • With France, a financing agreement for 360 million dollars was made to recover the capacity of maritime naval patrols, and agreements in the cultural and educational field.

  • With the European Investment Bank, it was agreed to finance expansion and improvement works in potable water services for the metropolitan area and the suburbs of Buenos Aires; and the consolidation of the Integral Management of Residues and Energy Valorization in Jujuy.

  • The Heads of State of Japan and Argentina signed a Bilateral Investment Treaty between both countries, which aims to encourage Japanese investments in various sectors of the Argentine economy.

  • With the Russian Federation, a Fisheries and Aquaculture Agreement and a strategic document on the cooperation between Argentina and Russia in the field of the peaceful use of nuclear energy were signed.

Beyond the Summit

It is worth remembering that the Summit held in Buenos Aires was just the end of a much more extensive process that began at the end of November 2017 when Argentina assumed the “pro tempore” presidency of the G-20 at the end of November 2017 and culminated with the transfer of it to Japan. During the course of this year numerous meetings and events were held within the framework of the G20, as well as intense work in each of the affinity groups of the forum: Business 20 (B20, which encompasses the private sector); Civil 20 (C20, which includes civil society); Labor 20 (L20, which includes unions and workers); Science 20 (S20, which encompasses the scientific community) Think 20 (T20, which includes Think Tanks and the academic community); Women 20 (W20, which includes women) and Youth 20 (Y-20, which includes young people).

In the case of FUNDEPS, we actively participate in Civil 20, where we co-coordinate, together with Eurodad, one of the 8 working groups of the C20 for this year: the Investment and Infrastructure group. During the course of the year the group worked virtually and even met twice, both for the meeting of working groups and for the Summit of the C-20 held in Buenos Aires in April and August respectively. The result of the work of the working groups of the C20 was reflected in a document with policy recommendations, which was delivered to President Macri during the C20 Summit and constituted an input from civil society for the discussions that took place in the frame of the G-20.

More information

Declaración de Líderes del G20. Construyendo consenso para un desarrollo equitativo y sostenible

Página oficial del G-20

Página Oficial del C20

Policy Pack: Recomendaciones del C20 al G20 de 2018

Documento del sub-grupo sobre Financiamiento de Infraestructura

Documento del sub-grupo sobre Conducta Empresarial Responsable

La sociedad civil presenta recomendaciones al G20 en la Cumbre del Civil-20 – FUNDEPS – 15/08/2018

La sociedad civil se reunió en el C20 – FUNDEPS – 17/04/2018

G20 dejó acuerdos con intención de inversiones por u$s 8.000 millones – ámbito.com

Expectativa y realidad de los acuerdos económicos de Argentina en el G20 – Noticias

Authors

Macarena Mustafá – Sofía Brocanelli

Contact

Gonzalo Roza / Coordinador del Área de Gobernabilidad Global
gon.roza@fundeps.org

, , , , ,

Report on the human rights situation in Argentina before the IACHR

On October 30, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) published a communiqué inviting civil society organizations and other interested social actors of the Organization of American States (OAS) to send information on the situation. of human rights in the region. This information will be used for the preparation of chapter IV A of the annual report of the IACHR corresponding to the year 2018 that will be presented to the General Assembly of the OAS.

“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”.

Descargar Documento / Download File
, , , , ,

We present a report on the human rights situation in Argentina before the IACHR

On October 30, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) published a communiqué inviting civil society organizations and other interested social actors of the Organization of American States (OAS) to send information on the situation. of human rights in the region. This information will be used for the preparation of chapter IV A of the annual report of the IACHR corresponding to the year 2018 that will be presented to the General Assembly of the OAS.

“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”.

Each year, the Commission produces an annual report on the human rights situation in the region, reflecting the trends, challenges, advances and good practices that have occurred in the area of ​​human rights in the OAS member states during the year.

For the Annual Report of 2018, the Commission will emphasize the following axes: Democratic Institutionalization, Institutionality in Human Rights, Access to Justice, Citizen Security and Right to the Environment.

Together with lawyers and lawyers from the Argentine Northwest on Human Rights and Social Studies (ANDHES) we present a report on these axes in the areas we work on:

Institutionality in human rights

1. Hierarchical reduction of National Ministries of Environment, Culture, Health, Labor and Modernization and Communication
2. National Budget 2019
3. Comprehensive Sexual Education Law in danger

Access to justice

1. Preoccupation with the draft bill on collective processes
2. Access to the right to abortion in Argentina – Delay of justice in the case of Portal de Belén (by non-punishable abortion protocol in the province of Córdoba)
3. Access to justice for the elderly

Citizen security

1. Institutional Violence in Tucumán
2. Absence of mechanisms to prevent torture in Tucumán

Right to the Environment

1. Affectations to the right to health caused by the use of agrochemicals
2. Concern over project to amend the seed law
3. Failure to comply with the consultation and free, prior and informed consent of provincial law No. 5,915 to the detriment of the environment and the right to life and territory of indigenous communities in Jujuy.
4. Chinchillas Mining Project and the Pozuelos Lagoon in Jujuy
5. The indigenous community of Solco Yampa and the indiscriminate felling of trees in the province of Tucumán
6. Murder of Javier Chocobar in Tucumán

The cases presented in this report give an account of a general situation of regression of the fulfillment of human rights by the Argentine State. The exposed situations of vulnerability are particularly worrisome because they are part of a regional socio-political crisis context. In order to avoid the impact of cuts, the noncompliance with international standards and the promotion of public policies that do not attack the roots of structural inequality impact fully on the populations that are already in a situation of vulnerability, we ask the IACHR to publicly express concern about the state of compliance with human rights in the country.

More information

Contact

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

, ,

Business activity and women’s rights in the United Nations agenda

We participated in the call of the Working Group on the Gender Perspective in the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, in order to comment from our experience on the relationship between business activities and women’s 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”.

The Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other companies, operating within the framework of the United Nations, made a call for civil society organizations to send their comments on the relevant issues regarding impact. of business activity in the human rights of women. For this, we elaborate comments from the point of view of our work agendas, to comment on the situation of health impacts, on the participation of women in companies, and on women and the media.

First, we address how women experience the impact of human rights abuses related to companies differently and disproportionate, exposing the cases of the tobacco industry and breast milk substitutes. Both industries, with their particularities, have aggressive marketing strategies. The tobacco industry especially targets young women in cigarette consumption through strategies such as flavored cigarettes or “light” or sponsorship of fashion events. On the side of the breast-milk substitution industry, they also operate with misleading marketing and labeling strategies on the characteristics of the products, as well as having great interference in public policies – in a situation of conflict of interest – discouraging breastfeeding. maternal and its replacement by the formula from an early age.

On the other hand, financing for development provided by international financial institutions to the private sector also has environmental, social, health, access to infrastructure and housing, and indigenous rights, which affect women in particular. The IFIs in general have difficulties and failures in the implementation of their policies, and particularly in the design and application of gender policies. We emphasize then that policies in general, and particularly those on gender, should be strengthened so that they establish clear guidelines for clients (especially companies and other private entities) to apply differentiated impact assessments, and also strengthen accountability mechanisms to give effective remedies when there are negative impacts.

Finally, we also exposed all the difficulties and barriers that women face to participate in jobs in the private sector, with information obtained through our research on equal opportunities for women and LGTTBIQ + people in companies, unions and universities. We also send recommendations on how media and advertising industries could fight against gender stereotypes and the disempowerment of women.
More information:
Carolina Tamagnini – carotamagnini@fundeps.org

 

 

 

 

,

The 4th session for the discussion of a binding treaty on companies and human rights ended.

During the week of October 15 to 19, the sessions of the Intergovernmental Working Group of the Human Rights Council of the United Nations took place. This group meets for the fourth time, and the discussions around a draft for the adoption of a binding treaty that seeks to regulate the activity of transnational corporations and their effects on 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”

A draft text for the ‘Binding Treaty on Business and Human Rights’ was finally submitted in mid July. This document was launched in Geneva, within the framework of the mandate of the Intergovernmental Working Group on Business and Human Rights, which indicated that a binding treaty on this matter should be developed. The sessions in October, took as a starting point for the debate, that ‘Zero Draft’.

The immediate antecedent of this draft was the document known as “Elements of the Treaty” that circulated at the end of 2017 and was discussed at the third session of the Intergovernmental Group in October of that same year. Subsequently, these ‘Elements’ were submitted for public consultation and comments were received until February 2018. Once the process was closed, the construction of a text for the 4th session was left.

About the ‘Zero Draft’

At first glance, the essential difference between both documents (the treaty and the elements), is the disappearance of the term ‘other companies’ when it refers to the subjects susceptible of judicial responsibility. The debate over the inclusion of other companies besides those of a transnational nature was strongly opposed. This, since it was considered that this treaty should only focus on those companies that have activities in two or more national jurisdictions because those that only acted in one State, were subject to national regulatory regimes. However, it should be noted that Article 4 of the draft defines ‘transnational business activities’ as any productive or commercial activity that takes place in two or more national jurisdictions. This reference could also be interpreted for those business activities carried out in a single State but that could be transnationalized due to their inclusion in a value chain.

Likewise, the preamble of the document does not include in its entirety what had been proposed in the draft elements of the treaty. The document published at the end of last year mentioned, among other things, the importance of referencing the Guiding Principles, the rules on the responsibility of transnational corporations and the pressing situation regarding the negative impacts of business activity on human rights. The draft treaty, in its preamble, fails to recognize all the elements that frame the process of creating this binding instrument.

In a second instance, it is important to mention that the draft text highlights the responsibility of the State as the first and only protector of Fundamental Rights in the face of corporate actions, although it ignores the possible damage caused to the commercial activity of nations. In this sense, those commercial activities that are supported by the States (generally public private investments) do not have a reception in this treaty.

The draft also surprises because of the relevance given to the remediation of damages and the rights of the victims, given the urgent need to prevent companies from violating human rights. This disparity between the remedy and prevention was noted by civil society in the ‘Elements’ document, and criticized as it is necessary that the damages caused by business activity be prevented in the same way as the provision of compensation to the victims.

Despite the strong focus on the ‘effective remedy’, the draft adopts an article on prevention; in which it is important to mention the obligation to establish legislation that obliges companies to take due diligence actions. Including environmental and human rights assessments to analyze their activities and take the necessary actions to prevent damage.

Now, it is clear that the draft proposes a binding component for the States, in the sense that it forces them to adopt legislation that ensures respect for Human Rights against business activity. However, the text does not evidence the responsibility of the companies and this is because the treaty will not make them obligated subjects but through the laws that the States will implement. In this regard, the possibility of creating a ‘tribunal’ or another similar institution that has the capacity to judge and penalize the actions of transnational companies disappears.

The draft of the treaty did not include the chapter on ‘Obligations of companies’ that was found in the ‘Elements’; nor were the obligations of international organizations included.

An important element that appears in the draft is the ‘International Fund for Victims’, whose objective is to collaborate with the effective remediation to the damages caused by the business activity.

About the 4th session

After the 4th session of the Intergovernmental Working Group, the polarization of opinions between the countries of the ‘north’ and the global ‘south’ has become evident. The countries belonging to the BRICS block, together with most of the African continents and Latin American; have shown a positive response to the initiative of a legally binding instrument. However, representatives of the European Union, the United States of America, Japan, Australia and Canada, in addition to not having been present at the negotiations, have made clear their refusal to endorse the creation of the aforementioned treaty.

This polarization has relevant effects on the effective force that an instrument of these characteristics can have. Since most of the transnational corporations that would be forced by this text, stay in the States that today pronounce themselves in a manner opposite to the treaty, the protection of human rights against the activity of transnational corporations would not be completely insured .

There are still no certainties about how the process will continue after this fourth session and it is also not clear how civil society will be included in it. According to the ‘Global Campaign to Stop Corporate Impunity’, the following are the points recommended to the Intergovernmental Group, to give continuity to the negotiations:

  1. The future treaty should be aimed at Transnational Corporations (TNCs) and other companies with transnational activities, in accordance with the mandate given to the Intergovernmental Working Group in resolution 26/9.
  2. The future treaty must contain direct obligations for NCDs. It must also establish the joint and several liability of the parent companies with the entities throughout its global production chain (subsidiaries, subcontractors, suppliers, etc.).
  3. The future treaty should provide for an international enforcement mechanism with effective and binding enforcement powers. In this regard, the Global Campaign proposes the creation of an International Court to prosecute TNCs that commit human rights violations and an International Monitoring Center for TNCs.
  4. The future treaty must clearly establish the primacy of human rights obligations over trade or investment agreements.
  5. The future treaty should include concrete measures against the influence of TNCs in the process of formulating public policies at the international and national levels.
  6. The effective participation of civil society in all stages of negotiations on the draft treaty and the safeguarding of the process of influence of TNCs and their representatives.

Writer:

Agustina Palencia

Contacts:

More Information:

We present comments on the draft treaty on business and human rights.

Advancing towards a binding treaty on transnational corporations and human rights.

Zero Draft Binding Treaty

,

We participate in the Public Consultation on the review of the Access to Information Policy of the IDB Invest in Buenos Aires

On August 10, IDB Invest carried out in Buenos Aires a public face-to-face consultation on the draft for its new Access to Public Information policy. This event is part of the virtual consultation currently open that BID Invest began in May of this year. The day was carried out in order to receive comments from civil society organizations.

“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 May of this year, IDB Invest, the private investment arm of the IDB Group, opened an instance of public consultation to evaluate the draft document of what will be its new Access to Information Policy. In this framework, the institution decided to hold some face-to-face meetings to receive comments and to hear the opinion of civil society organizations.

On August 10, BID Invest called a face-to-face consultation in Argentina, in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires; and FUNDEPS participated. The day lasted a couple of hours and the central axes of discussion rested on: the information to be published before the approval of a project, the information to be published during the execution of a project and the list of exceptions to the policy. From the institution, the comments made were received and it was made explicit that after the consultation process was finished, a new document would be created taking into account both the virtual consultation and the face-to-face instance. Likewise, it was pointed out that if any of the comments are not incorporated, the reason for said decision will be justified.

Regarding the call to this meeting, there are some doubts about the selection process of the organizations that were invited. 12 organizations participated and FUNDEPS was the only one from the interior of the country. In this line, the low call makes us think that the information was not circulated with the necessary precedence and it was not foreseen that several organizations and communities could not attend being that they are very far from Buenos Aires.

From FUNDEPS we recognize in a positive way the implementation of face-to-face instances for the consultation. This allows us to clarify doubts and comments about the draft in real time, while at the same time it allowed us to know the intention of the institution when it comes to re-thinking its policy. In this regard, BID Invest explained that considering the relevance of the private investment portfolio of the IDB Group, it was necessary to modernize the Access to Information policy.

In general terms the draft in question has advanced positively on the previous policy. It has improved in key instances but there are still elements to polish. Special emphasis was placed on them by civil society and comments are expected to be incorporated. In addition to the suggestions and comments we made in the framework of the face-to-face consultation, from FUNDEPS, and together with other organizations in the country and the region, we will be sending a document with written comments to contribute to the process of reviewing the Policy.

More information:

Actual Política de Disponibilidad de Información (vigente desde el 2005)

Contact:

Gonzalo Roza – gon.roza@fundeps.org

Agustina Palencia – agustinapalencia@fundeps.org

,

New analysis on regulations in development institutions present in Latin America

Together with the rest of the organizations that make up GREFI, we publish a comparative analysis of the regulatory frameworks of the main institutions that finance development in Latin America, with a focus on the similarities and differences between traditional, emerging and chinese banking institutions.

“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 Regional Group on Financing and Infrastructure (GREFI), made up of FUNDEPS, DAR, Ambiente y Sociedad and Fundar, recently published its latest research paper on the regulations of international financial institutions (IFIs): Comparative Analysis of IFIs regulations Present in Latin America This is a comparative analysis that takes as an object of study the operational policies of different institutions: the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the World Bank (WB), the Inter-American Investment Corporation (IIC), the Corporation Financiera Internacional (CFI), the Development Bank of Brazil (BNDES), the Development Bank of Latin America (CAF), the Development Bank of China (BDC) and the Chinese Bank of Exports and Imports (ExIm Bank). The essential objective was to be able to achieve a comparison between those traditional institutions, new development institutions and Chinese institutions. The anchoring of this study is given by the number of new actors that today are part of the financial and investment scenario in Latin America.

The analysis was carried out on four axes: access to information, citizen participation, indigenous peoples and social and environmental safeguards. The indicators for these categories were obtained from the best international practices in each of these subjects (the OAS model law on access to information, ILO Convention 169, among others). Each category was divided into different elements that received a score. The product of this work is presented in a statistical way, expressing at what level (percentage) the policies of the institutions achieve the highest standards.

The main results obtained in the study report that two banks categorized as traditional IBRD-BM (86%) and CFI (64%), in addition to an emerging CAF bank (62%), obtain the highest ratings. Among institutions rated less than 50% are two traditional IDB banks (45%) and CII (26%), one emerging bank BNDES (17%) and two Chinese banks BEIC (8%) and BDC (0%). An interesting finding is that only in the categories of traditional banking and emerging banking institutions with relatively high rating are observed. In contrast, Chinese banks stand out with the lowest evaluations according to the proportion of estimated adequacy. This is partly explained by the BDC bank, which does not obtain a qualification in any thematic axis, since, due to lack of access to its regulations, these are not known. (See the specific chapter on CDB).

More information:

Full publication Comparative analysis of the regulations of IFIs present in Latin America

Contact:

Agustina Palencia: agustinapalencia@fundeps.org

, ,

HLAC presented a report to the IACHR on HR and companies

Report prepared by the Healthy Latin American Coalition (CLAS) was presented in the framework of a public consultation opened by the Special Rapporteurship on Economic, Social, Cultural and Environmental Rights (REDESCA) of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (CIDH), with the to prepare a thematic report on inter-American standards in the area of ​​business and 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”.

The growing number of cases of human rights abuses and violations committed by companies has led to the treatment of the problem by the international community for some years now. In this context and within the framework of the inter-American system, the IACHR considered gathering information from different interested parties for the purpose of preparing a report that considers the regional reality, and that analyzes and systematizes the inter-American obligations and standards, in order to finally make recommendations on the matter.

Report presented by CLAS, a network that groups around 300 organizations in Latin America of which FUNDEPS is a part, focuses specifically on analyzing the link between companies and chronic noncommunicable diseases (NCDs).

Thus, first, the report provides information on the impact of these diseases in the region, with special mention to the involvement of vulnerable groups. Secondly, the power of influence of companies in the process of formulation of norms and public policies is analyzed, as an obstacle when adopting, executing and advancing in health policies to prevent and reduce the impact of chronic noncommunicable diseases. . In this regard, the cases of the tobacco industry, the food industry and the alcoholic beverage industry are cited as examples.

The document also warns that the current regulations and action plans sanctioned by governments focus on the prevention of the risk factors of these diseases, without including a more general perspective on human rights and companies. It observes that only some countries have made slight progress in this regard, despite the fact that international evidence shows that the most effective measures to reduce the consumption of unhealthy products are those that control the actions of the companies that manufacture and promote these products; especially in relation to marketing and promotion strategies.

Beyond the efforts of Latin American governments to move forward with legislation for the prevention of NCDs, the intervention of companies in the design and implementation of public policies, as well as the lobby of the industry, constitute a great obstacle to effective implementation of norms that prevent the population from the health consequences of consuming unhealthy products.

Currently, at the international level, there are non-binding instruments and mechanisms that aim to protect human rights from the irresponsible actions of companies. These include: the United Nations (UN) Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the OECD guidelines and the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights. Similarly, the work of the IACHR has focused on the search for the prevalence of fundamental rights against the power of corporations; and that is why this thematic report takes on a fundamental character. In this context, also, in the last three years, at the initiative of some States, it has begun to debate the possibility of having an international treaty that effectively forces companies to comply with and guarantee respect for human rights. We believe that an instrument with these characteristics would reinforce the existing regulations, while at the same time ending the abuses perpetrated.

More information

Report presented by CLAS

Contact

Agustina Mozzoni, <agustinamozzoni@fundeps.org>

,

Situation status of the “Villa Carlos Paz Environmental Center”

This publication presents an analysis of the Urban Solid Waste Management project implemented for the town of Villa Carlos Paz.

Descargar Documento / Download File
, ,

Concern and uncertainty regarding the progress of the works of the Villa Carlos Paz Environmental Center

The works of the Environmental Center of Villa Carlos Paz show an advance of 90% and estimate that in 30 days it will be in operation. Meanwhile, the concern of the residents of Malagueño continues asking for concrete measures to make effective the differentiated collection of waste as well as awareness campaigns.

“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 project “Environmental Center of Villa Carlos Paz” is being developed in a municipal area located near the National Route 20, which links it with the city of Córdoba, where the current open-air dump is currently operating. It will process the garbage of more than 100.00 inhabitants of the region that includes Villa Carlos Paz and neighboring localities (Villa Rio Icho Cruz, Mayu Sumaj, Cuesta Blanca, Tala Huasi, Cabalango and Malagueño).

In Centro Ambiental, it is integrated by three works: a sanitary landfill for the disposal of solid urban waste, a separation and treatment plant for leachates (toxic residual waste liquid) and the closure of the existing open-air dump for more than 50 years. years.

The works with a total investment of 188,403,896 pesos are being financed through the Environmental Management Program of Tourist Municipalities, executed by the Ministry of Tourism of the Nation with funds from the IDB (Inter-American Development Bank) and the National State.

The construction of the Environmental Center began in mid-2017 and according to Horacio Pedrone, Secretary of Environmental Urban Development of the Municipality of Carlos Paz: “We think that by the second half of this year, we will have the new Environmental Treatment Center in operation of urban solid waste “.

While the works are advancing rapidly and the authorities of Carlos Paz announce that at the end of August the differentiated waste collection will begin in the city, in charge of the company Cotreco, in Malagueño there is uncertainty and concern.

In this regard, it is stated that although the Municipality of Carlos Paz has announced communication and awareness campaigns to the community on how to proceed when separating and collecting garbage, no concrete measures have yet been observed. The Malagueño authorities for their part say nothing about it, and taking into account that the Environmental Center will be inaugurated soon, the residents of Villa San Nicolás (Malagueño) fear that the place will become a new landfill.

The project foresees that once the construction of the Environmental Center is completed, the definitive closure of the existing open-air dump would begin, solving a problem that takes 58 years. Until recently, even the fire sources in the same one continued, affecting the smoke and the toxic gases emanating from the landfill to the San Nicolás neighborhood and other neighborhoods near the highway.

In addition, during the last months of December and January, the landfill was burning for more than 80 days, and therefore self-appointed neighbors organized protests calling for an environmental emergency to be declared as a result of the toxicity generated by the smoke from the burning garbage.

In short, the environmental damage affects the air that neighbors breathe, and due to the rains – which increase during the summer and tourist seasons – the ashes end in the San Roque dam that supplies water to 70% of the city ​​of Córdoba.

From FUNDEPS we follow this process and accompany the community of Villa San Nicolás to ensure respect for their rights to a healthy environment, health and access to information and citizen participation. Likewise, and as we have been saying for some time, we consider questionable the location of the Environmental Center next to the La Calera Defense Nature Reserve, and meters from San Roque Lake in areas that may have a higher filtration or percolation propensity towards the Napa of water.

More information

http://www.eldiariodecarlospaz.com.ar/sociedad/2018/6/14/en-agosto-comenzaria-la-recoleccion-diferenciada-de-residuos-52986.html

http://www.eldiariodecarlospaz.com.ar/sociedad/2018/5/15/asi-es-el-centro-ambiental-donde-se-procesara-la-basura-de-punilla-51764.html

https://lmdiario.com.ar/noticia/43262/malagueno-denuncian-problemas-respiratorios-por-los-incendios-del-basural

Contact

María Pérez Alsina – mariaperezalsina@fundeps.org

Gonzalo Roza – gon.roza@fundeps.org

,

Civil society met in the C20

We were participating in the C20 meeting, a civil society affinity group for the G20 process. In it, we coordinated the discussions of the investment and infrastructure work group, and participated in meetings with authorities.

“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 the occasion of the Argentine presidency of the G20 -which brings together the governments of the 20 largest economies in the world-, the meeting of the civil society group, called C20, took place on April 4 and 5 in Buenos Aires. It is organized into 8 working groups that address the following agendas: anti-corruption; architecture of the international financial system; education, employment and inclusion; environment, climate and energy; gender; global local; global health; and investment and infrastructure.

Within the working group of investment and infrastructure, the discussion was oriented to elaborate recommendations for the G20 governments, especially for the Argentine government for being leading the forum during 2018. Thus, issues concerning responsible investments were debated, with a focus in the impact of business activity on human rights, and different aspects related to infrastructure projects -financial, environmental, accountability, participation, among others-. These discussions began in March, through the online forum of the working group, and will continue in the same way for the elaboration of the conclusions as a group.

Likewise, during the second day, we participated in a meeting with Matías Mondino, Infrastructure Director of the Ministry of Finance and representative before the G20 infrastructure group. During the meeting, in addition to knowing about the government’s agenda for its G20 presidency on investments, the concerns of the organizations present in this regard were expressed about investments in infrastructure and public-private partnerships.

The result of the discussions held during the two days, will be reflected in a working document to be presented at the C20 summit to be held on August 6 and 7 in Buenos Aires. It is expected that the recommendations made by civil society will be taken by governments and reflected within the commitments of the G20. The purpose of the C20 process is to promote economic and financial policies that are attentive to the duties of the states in the area of ​​human rights, including in their agenda transparency and accountability.

More information

Contact

Gonzalo Roza – gon.roza@fundeps.org

Carolina Tamagnini – carotamagnini@fundeps.org

,

Leased opportunity: Program and Communication Officer

The Coalition for Human Rights in Development is making a call to fill the post of Program and Communication Officer, under the supervision of FUNDEPS. This position is full-time and will be responsible for providing support to the coordination and advocacy activities of the Coalition, while at the same time coordinating the institutional communication of the Coalition.

For this position, we are looking for a person in Communication, International Relations, Political Science, Advocacy or related careers who have experience in the field of human rights and in institutional communication. The person must have excellent oral and written command of English since communications with the Coalition are conducted in that language.

The post will have a contract with FUNDEPS and the Coalition for a year, starting in April this year, and with the possibility of renewing later, with fees set by the Coalition.

Those who apply should send the following documentation IN ENGLISH:

• Presentation letter
• Curriculum vitae
• Short sample of a written piece.

The documentation should be sent to info@fundeps.org with the subject “Program and Communications Associate” until Monday, March 5 inclusive. Applications in Spanish will be rejected.

To read the full call, click here.

Contact
Gonzalo Roza, gon.roza@fundeps.org