In an era where much is lobbied on environmental concerns and safeguarding human rights, global corporate legal professionals need to keep a keen eye on landmark legal rulings. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has held Peru responsible for not protecting its citizens from mining pollution, shining a spotlight on the potential ramifications of such instances on corporate accountability.
Notably, Peru is renowned for being the second-largest worldwide producer of silver, copper, and zinc, and leading Latin American producer of highly sought-after resources such as gold, zinc, tin, lead, and molybdenum. Unfortunately, it’s been suggested that these positions have sometimes been achieved at the expense of human rights.
Among the cases in point is La Oroya, a city that ranked among the most polluted places worldwide in 2011. The 33,000 residents of this highland city have long sought justice, invoking numerous environmental, health, and life-rights violations over the past 20 years. Tragically, two children aged five and 14 have died while the battle for justice continues.
In a court ruling dated March 22, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has established that the Peruvian state has violated human rights, owing to air, water, soil pollution caused by the mining and metallurgical activities in the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex (CMLO). Of particular concern was the state’s failure in regulating and overseeing such activities.
Established in 1922, the CMLO is dedicated to smelting and refining polymetallic concentrates containing substantial amounts of lead, copper, zinc, silver, and gold. Its operation has seen multiple administrative changes, with Doe Run Perú S.R.L. the most recent acquirer in 1997.
It is worth noting that, before 1993, Peru didn’t have specific laws to regulate environmental control and pollution prevention in the mining-metallurgical sector. To address this gap, the Mining-Metallurgical Regulation was enacted, mandating an Environmental Adjustment and Management Program (PAMA) to control environmental impacts. Regretfully, this regulation wasn’t honored as mandated and was further marred by the setting of sulfur-dioxide air concentration limits that exceeded global standards.
Resulting heavy metals pollution led to environmental contamination, illnesses, death of vulnerable residents, and violation of access to justice, as highlighted by numerous cases of harassment of environmental defenders. Residents now hope that the Peruvian state will honor the court’s ruling, implementing a remediation plan and monitoring system promptly and effectively.
The precedent-setting ruling is particularly relevant for its recognition of environmental health as an autonomous right, intertwined with the rights to health, life, and personal integrity. It amplifies the call for states’ obligation to protect human rights, particularly for vulnerable populations. More information about this case can be found in the complete court dispatch.