Transnational ecological and climate litigation: the transformative role of actors in shaping legal mechanisms

14–21 minutes

read

L.Lizarazo-Rodriguez (1;6)  ; M.C. Roa (2); C.Ituarte-Lima (3;6); D. Murcia (4); A.Rodriguez (5)

1. Brussels School of Governance- Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Bélgica

2. CIDER – Universidad de los Andes, Colombia

3. Raoul Wallenberg Institute on Human Rights and Humanitarian Law (RWI) ,

4. Universidad del Bosque, Colombia

5. Universidad Andina Simon Bolivar, Ecuador

6. Global Network on Human Rights and the Environment (GNHRE)

This blog summarises the main reflections on the fundamental issues related to actors seeking solutions to transnational ecological conflicts in courts and other dispute settlement mechanisms. The workshop was organised by the European Research Council (ERC)-funded Curiae Virides Research Project of the Brussels School of Governance (Vrije Universiteit Brussel – Belgium) and the Centro Interdisciplinario de Estudios sobre Desarrollo (CIDER) – Universidad de los Andes (Colombia), in collaboration with the Programa Andino de Derechos Humanos de la Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar (Ecuador), the Raoul Wallenberg Institute on Human Rights and Humanitarian Law (RWI) , the Center for Sustainability Studies (Lund University, Sweden) and the Global Network of Human Rights and the Environment (GNHRE).

 
 
 
ree

 

 

In recent years there has been a marked increase in litigation related to environmental damage, diverse visions of development and the resulting transformation of ecosystems and ancestral territories. These disputes are approached from a human rights perspective and, increasingly, from the perspective of the rights of rivers, mountains, and relational ontologies. Throughout the three days of presentations and discussions, multiple factors of the phenomenon were analysed from different perspectives. Academics, magistrates, social actors, NGOs, etc., delved into issues related to the effectiveness of litigation in achieving its objectives and whether these are effectively environmental justice and access to remedy mechanisms for people, ecosystems and territories affected or threatened by environmental degradation.

 
In addition, several advances in research and debates were presented on the identification, nature, motivations, and strategies of the actors involved in shaping and transforming environmental conflicts into legal disputes. Of particular interest was the analysis of the consequences of litigation for people, territories, and ecosystems. The legal frameworks or strategies used to bring these conflicts to court are a determining factor in the outcomes of these judicial or quasi-judicial processes.
 
An important achievement of the workshop was to facilitate knowledge exchange and collaboration between people working in different contexts, such as academia, civil society and the judiciary seeking to address the challenges and opportunities of using legal mechanisms to solve transnational conflicts around the protection of territories, ecosystems and human rights.
 
Although many topics were addressed, we have selected four aspects that connect to most of the presentations and discussions at the workshop:
 

Firstly, strategic litigation, which has progressively focused on the need to combat global warming and, in some cases, on the recognition of the rights of certain ecosystems. During the workshop, progress was made on the conceptualisation of “strategic” litigation and the outcomes it has for actors actually affected by transnational ecological conflicts. An important aspect is the extent to which strategic litigation is effective from the perspective of affected people, such as Indigenous peoples and local communities who depend directly on ecosystems for their livelihoods and well-being. Some discussions highlighted an emblematic case: the recognition of rights to the Amazon rainforest, where NGOs were claiming this together with representatives of future generations, personified by urban children and youth. Although some indigenous associations intervened as third parties, the lack of consultation with Indigenous and local people living in the Amazon region was highlighted. Following the ruling of the Colombian Supreme Court of Justice (STC4360-2018), the government has required some social actors to train the Amazonian population on the rights that have been recognised for the Amazon. This situation is just one example of how this ruling, driven from above (by the courts and citizens concerned about global warming), did not integrate the population living in the Amazon.

 
ree

 

 

Interactions between transnational NGOs, Latin American NGOs and affected populations were identified as relevant factors for a deeper understanding of strategic litigation, particularly climate litigation. These interactions have also been noticeable in the hearings that took place before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in the framework of the request for an advisory opinion submitted by Colombia and Chile. While no one doubts the urgency of combating global warming, it is important that civil society organisations operating at various scales recognise the role of affected populations. It is essential to consult with them before engaging in strategic litigation, especially on their behalf. It is even more important to support them when they take the initiative to initiate litigation, as their needs and worldviews are crucial for the proper design and implementation of public policies to address the global crisis.

These assumptions are essential for judicial decisions to respect and protect the human rights of individuals and groups affected by environmental harm. All branches of the state, including the judiciary, have more stringent obligations towards vulnerable groups. Similarly, non-state actors, such as businesses, and civil society organisations seeking to engage in strategic litigation, should consider and consult with affected groups who are often in situations of vulnerability.

A second issue is the sophisticated debate in Latin America on the recognition of rights to nature as a mechanism to protect ecosystems, biodiversity, and ancestral territories. Some nuances refer to its equating with the indigenous philosophy of mother earth (mainly in Ecuador), and the conceptualisation of biocultural rights, developed primarily by Colombian constitutional jurisprudence, which combines the protection of the collective rights of Indigenous peoples with both the individual and collective dimensions of the right to a healthy environment. Several theoretical and applied presentations on this topic show how Latin American courts and scholars play a significant role in the conceptualisation of these rights and have a growing influence at the global level. It is important to recognise these contributions at the global level to move towards epistemic justice, acknowledging innovations and perspectives from diverse parts of the world.

A third theme was the need to identify the actors involved in environmental litigation and their interests and motivations. The extent to which rights holders use the courts to protect their rights and obtain redress for damages, and the extent to which they are influenced by social and environmental movements or NGOs, was discussed. This aspect is related to strategic litigation, as in some cases certain issues seem to have more visibility precisely because they seek government action or direct attention against certain economic sectors, such as the coal and oil industries, although those who have been direct victims of environmental damage may not necessarily be direct actors in such litigation.
 
ree

The intervention of some actors, such as investors, was highlighted as a phenomenon that needs to be further analysed to understand the dynamics of certain value chains that may be involved in environmental damage. The role of investors in the (non-)resolution of certain ecological conflicts is an important and almost invisible issue for affected communities, who lack sufficient information on the activities and strategies of these actors, who generally act on a global scale, but may impact local communities in vulnerable situations.

A final theme to highlight is that of environmental democracy. It was addressed in several panels and sessions from various perspectives. The mechanisms of environmental democracy derived from Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration and particularly from the Aarhus Convention and the Escazú Agreement, recognise the right to a healthy environment for present and future generations, and seek to protect environmental procedural rights (access to information, public participation, including prior consultation, and access to justice). Several presentations highlighted the Escazú Agreement as a pioneering regional instrument at the global level in the recognition of the rights of  human rights and environmental defenders. However, there were also critical views. Several participants pointed out the risk that these procedural environmental rights transform the debate and concentrate on formal issues, forgetting the underlying problem, such as the prevention or mitigation of environmental risks that cannot be ignored simply because the population has been previously consulted on the implications of planned or implemented economic activities.

While individuals and organisations defending the biosphere use legal tools, including the procedural aspects of the right to a healthy environment, it is important to highlight the substantive outcomes they seek and the transformative changes their actions bring about. The procedural dimensions of this right to a healthy environment cannot be separated from its substantive elements, which include a safe climate, healthy ecosystems and biodiversity, clean water and sanitation, a non-toxic environment and sustainably produced food. The reason many of these people are vulnerable is not because they are passive objects of violence, but because they are active subjects of change towards just transitions: they fundamentally challenge economic systems that negatively affect the biodiversity and ecosystems on which the lives of humans and other living things depend, and present alternative forms of social, economic and natural relations. 

ree
 
The role of popular consultations on environmental issues was also highlighted as a mechanism more typical of the pre-Rio Declaration model of participatory democracy. The question was raised as to what extent certain legal models, such as state ownership of subsoil, and concepts such as public utility, distribution of competences between levels of government and constitutionality controls can limit this participatory democracy. Popular consultations could be a more democratic mechanism than court rulings or prior consultations for local communities to decide how to protect their territories and ecosystems. Popular consultations have been activated in several Latin American countries to build environmental peace in the face of the deepening and expansion of extractivism. The workshop analysed the limited understanding of the temporal and spatial dimensions of democracy by the courts.

There are several outstanding issues on the academic, judicial, and socio-ecological agendas. Most importantly, more attention needs to be paid to the role of courts in preventing ex ante human rights violations and adverse impacts on water, soil, air, and the biosphere, as many of these harms are irreversible.

The workshop presentations are available on the YouTube channel of the Universidad de los Andes (Please click on the title to access the videos)

First Day

PROGRAMME

  • Conferencia Inaugural – Magistrada Nadiezdha Natazha Henríquez Chacín – Sala de Reconocimiento de verdad, de responsabilidad y determinación de hechos y conductas. Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz – Colombia
  • Derechos de la naturaleza y bioculturalidad (ESP – Híbrido) Chair: Liliana Lizarazo Rodriguez
  • El poder de las garantías constitucionales a guardianes indígenas, negros y campesinos: 5 años de implementación de una sentencia que declara un río como sujeto de derechos. Juan Diego Espinosa, Business & Human Rights Resource Centre, Colombia.
  • Derechos de la naturaleza y litigio climático. Reflexiones desde la Ecología Política frente al caso de la Amazonia Colombiana. Valentina Lomanto Perdomo, Lund University Centre for Sustainability Studies, Sweden.
  • El derecho como herramienta de lucha de los defensores de los bosques de Quito. Viviana Morales Naranjo, Universidad de las Américas, Ecuador.
  • Elementos para una dogmática constitucional de los derechos bioculturales: hacia la creación de un test o juicio de bioculturalidad. Julián Gutiérrez- Martínez, Grupo de investigación PLEBIO, Universidad Nacional de Colombia y Dejusticia, y Gabriel Nemogá-Soto, grupo de investigación PLEBIO, Universidad Nacional de Colombia y University of Winnipeg, Canada.
  • Ecocentric and biocultural approaches (ENG – Online) | Chair: João Teixeira de Freitas
    • Unveiling nature’s rights and shaping the future of environmental peacebuilding. Britta Sjöstedt, Faculty of Law, Lund University, Sweden.
    • Challenges and opportunities of international criminal justice mechanisms in fostering environmental peacebuilding. Nicole Citeroni, Faculty of Law, Lund University, Sweden.
    • Navigating paradigms: exploring the emergence of an eco-centric approach in the jurisprudence of the IACtHR. Francesca Cerulli, Department of Legal Sciences, University of Florence, Italy.
  • Litigio climático y derechos humanos: el litigio estratégico como herramienta de cambio para enfrentar la emergencia climática. Dejusticia (ESP – Presencial) | Coordinadora: Maria Cecilia Roa
    • Apalancando la justicia ambiental y climática: desafíos y estrategias para la movilización legal desde abajo. Julián Gutiérrez, Investigador Línea de Justicia Económica, Dejusticia.
    • La deforestación, el cambio climático y las generaciones futuras. Sergio Pulido, Investigador Área de Litigio Estratégico, Dejusticia.
  • Litigio en desplazamiento climático. Cristina Annear, investigadora Área de Litigio Estratégico, Dejusticia.
  • Repensando el desarrollo: evaluación de impacto ambiental y cambio climático. Laura Santacoloma, investigadora Línea de Justicia Ambiental, Dejusticia.

Movimientos sociales y derechos de la naturaleza en Ecuador: memorias de militancias en el campo jurídico. Adriana Rodriguez, Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar, sede Ecuador.

Derechos de la naturaleza en las altas cortes de Ecuador. Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar, Ecuador (ESP – Presencial) | Coordinadora: Diana Murcia

Impacto de las Sentencias de la Corte Constitucional Ecuatoriana en los Derechos de la Naturaleza y los Pueblos Ancestrales. Alex Iván Valle Franco, Escuela de Derechos y Justicia del IAE, Universidad de Posgrados del Estado Ecuatoriano.

Estándares jurisprudenciales para la tutela de los derechos de la naturaleza: Una mirada analítica a las sentencias expedidas por la Corte Constitucional del Ecuador en los años 2008 a 2023. Jhoel Escudero Soliz, Universidad de las Américas y María José Narváez Alvarez, Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Ecuador.

La Sentencia Los Cedros y el litigio ecológico transnacional. Agustin Grijalva, Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar Sede Ecuador.

Second Day

PROGRAMME

  • Main Speaker | Conferencista Principal – Amanda Romero.
  • Desafíos y retos del litigio ambiental: Una mirada de movimientos sociales y defensores. Casos de estudio (ESP- Presencial) | Coordinadora: Adriana Rodriguez
  • Extractivismo para la transición energética: litigio estratégico para la defensa de la Amazonia sujeta de derechos en el municipio de Mocoa, Putumayo. Daniel Alejandro Paz Zambrano, Observatorio de Derecho Socioambiental y Derechos Humanos en la Amazonía, Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad Federal de Amazonas, Brasil.
  • La ecología política de las actuales crisis climáticas: conflictos ecológicos, caso del proyecto minero “La Colosa” y las Consultas Populares de Piedras y Cajamarca, Tolima. Jose Jiménez Patiño, Comité Ambiental en Defensa de la Vida del Tolima, Colombia.
  • Movimientos sociales, una transformación que permanece. María José Proaño Brito, Cabildo Popular por el Agua de Cuenca, Ecuador.
  • Defensa de los humedales y las zonas inundables en Bogotá: breviario de una defensa construida en estrados judiciales. Patricia Bohorquez, Colombia.
  • Eficacia del litigio: una visión crítica (POR-ESP – Online) | Coordinador: João Teixeira de Freitas
    • Reavaliando a Eficácia nos Litígios Climáticos: Explorando os Determinantes de Vitória e Derrota dos Processos Judiciais. Giovana Agutoli Pereira & Livia Cunha de Menezes, FGV Direito, Brasil (POR/Online).
    • La movilidad humana en contextos de cambio climático y desastres: Retos y oportunidades de protección de los derechos humanos en el Sistema Universal de Derechos Humanos. María Fernanda Herrera Burgos, candidata a Doctorado en Derecho Ambiental de la Universidad de Rovira I Virgili (ESP/Online).
  • Eficacia del litigio: una visión crítica II (ESP – Híbrido) | Coordinadora: Liliana Lizarazo Rodriguez – Video no disponible
    • La resistencia judicial indígena sobre territorios indígenas en Nepal, Guatemala y Colombia. Lieselotte Viaene, Universidad Carlos III Madrid, Spain. (ESP/Online).
    • San Isidro vs AMWAY Defensa del territorio vs Litigio: herramienta para la especulación. Eva Robles, Colectivo por la autonomía, México (ESP/Presencial).
    • Paradojas y riesgos del litigio ambiental: las trampas de los derechos de acceso (información, participación y justicia). Diana Milena Murcia Riaño, Universidad del Bosque, Colombia (ESP/Presencial).
    • Esperanza antiestratégica. Dora Lucy Arias, Abogada litigante, contextos, Colombia (ESP/Online).
  • Café del Mundo: From law to implementation of biosphere defender’s rights:  a spotlight on the Escazu Agreement and the Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework 
  • Chairs:

Claudia Ituarte-Lima, Raoul Wallenberg Institute, Sweden, Director Global Network for Human Rights and Environment

Liliana Lizarazo-Rodriguez, ERC Curiae Virides project – Brussels School of Governance- Vrije Universiteit Brussel – Belgium and Deputy Director Global Network for Human Rights and Environment

Various guiding questions were developed in small groups to enable interactive discussions. Participants were encouraged to review and comment the Discussion Paper on Biosphere Defenders in Latin America and the Caribbean.  Ahead of the Escazu Agreement 3rd Conference of the Parties in Santiago, Chile, this session advanced dialogue on the Escazú Agreement’s Regional Action Plan for environmental human rights defenders and Targets 22 and 23 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

Third Day- Part I

PROGRAMME

  • Actors in the transformation of ecological disputes (ENG-Hybrid) | Chair: Claudia Ituarte-Lima
    • The transformation of ecological disputes: a closer look at actors and their roles in Latin America and the Caribbean. Daniel Alejo, PhD candidate, ERC Curiae Virides project – Brussels School of Governance- Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium (ENG/ On-site).
    • The non-governmental actors steering and transforming the assassinations of Honduran environmental defenders into litigation before the IACtHR. Maria Jose Luque Macias, Ghent University, Belgium (ENG/ On-site).
    • Lawyering for the climate in South America: a dynamic and fluid picture. Carlotta Garofalo, University of Graz, Institute of Public Law and Political Sciences, Austria (ENG/ Online).
    • Social effects of an interjurisdictional ecological litigation in the Metropolitan Area of Buenos Aires: actors, collective actions and social representations in informal settlements of the Matanza Riachuelo river basin. Carla Fainstein, Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento – Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas de la Argentina (ENG/ Online).
  • Investor-state dispute mechanisms (ENG-ESP/Hybrid) | Chair: Maria Jose Luque Macias (Video no disponible)
  • Sustainable development in international investment arbitration – Breaking down the barriers of the ‘Fair and equitable treatment’ standard. Balazs Horvathy, HUN-REN CSS Institute for Legal Studies, Hungary (ENG/ Online).
  • Navigating climate policy challenges: the role of scientific knowledge in the interaction of energy transition and investor-state disputes. Marina-Elissavet Konstantinidi, Independent researcher, Belgium (ENG/ Online).
  • Desafíos y oportunidades de las disputas transnacionales inversionista-estado en el marco de la adopción e implementación de medidas ecológicas por parte de los estados. Pablo Gómez Moreno Consultor Independiente.
  • Universidad de los Andes y la Universidad El Bosque, Colombia (ESP/Online).
  • Transformación de conflictos ecológicos transnacionales en litigios en el siglo XXI: Los múltiples roles de los inversionistas. Liliana Lizarazo-Rodriguez, ERC Curiae Virides project – Brussels School of Governance- Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium (ESP/ENG On-site).

Exploring the intersection of climate change and human rights law: towards a rights-based and holistic approach to climate action. Sana Akhter, Law Department, Kinnaird College for Women, Pakistan.

International environmental law and regimes (ENG/Online) | Chair: Jérôme Vanwelde

Protect our Seas! Protect our climate: could ITLOS and ICJ correct our path? Neshan Gunasekera, Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, Sweden.

Environment, value chain due diligence and stakeholder engagement: an exploratory study on value chain due diligence requirements. João Teixeira de Freitas, PhD candidate, ERC Curiae Virides project – Brussels School of Governance- Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium.

The concept of public participation in international environmental law and negotiations – from the Aarhus Convention to the Escazú Agreement and beyond, a story at the intersection of human rights and the environment. Joanna Cornelius. Faculty of Law, Lund University, Sweden.

Third Day- Part II

PROGRAMME

  • Configurar las democracias desde abajo en el Antropoceno. CIDER (ESP/Presencial) | Coordinador: Daniel Alejo
    • Ambientalismo católico en la provincia de Vélez: una resistencia social impensada. Nicolas Figueroa Garcia Herreros, Universidad del Rosario, Colombia.
    • La lucha por la vida campesina en Falan Tolima en el ambiente de cierre democrático en asuntos minero-energéticos. Joaquin Antonio Garzon Vargas, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Colombia.
    • La desestabilización de los supuestos espaciales y de los habilitantes normativos del Servicio Geológico Colombiano como posibilidad para la resistencia y el litigio estratégico. María Carolina Olarte, Facultad de Derecho- Universidad de Los Andes, Colombia.
    • La democracia y la crisis de los vínculos. Jamie Shenk, University of Warwick, UK y María Cecilia Roa, CIDER – Universidad de Los Andes, Colombia.

Evento final | Closing event

  • Conferencista invitada | Invited speaker: Esperanza Martinez, Acción Ecológica, Ecuador
  • Litigios transnacionales climáticos y ecológicos: El papel transformador de los actores – Conclusiones de los organizadores
    • Maria Cecilia Roa, CIDER UNIANDES, Colombia
    • Diana Murcia, Universidad del Bosque, Colombia
    • Claudia Ituarte-Lima, Raoul Wallenberg Institute -Sweden
    • Adriana Rodriguez, Programa Andino de Derechos Humanos Universidad Andina Simón Bolívar, Ecuador
    • Liliana Lizarazo-Rodriguez y Daniel Alejo, ERC Curiae Virides Project – Brussels School of Governance – Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium

Discover more from Curiae Virides

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading