Blog
Inter-American Court of Human Rights decision on Right to a Healthy Environment
Inter-American Court of Human Rights holds Peru accountable for violating children's rights due to pollution from La Oroya Metallurgical Complex. Ruling emphasizes state's duty to protect children from environmental harm and sets precedent for prioritizing their rights in policymaking. Landmark decision underscores intersection of children's rights and environmental justice.
On March 22nd, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights delivered a landmark decision in the case of Habitants of La Oroya vs. Peru, addressing the detrimental effects of the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex's polluting activities on the human rights of the local population.
The Court declared the international responsibility of the State of Peru for the violation of rights to a healthy environment, health, personal integrity, dignified life, access to information, political participation, judicial guarantees, and judicial protection to the detriment of the 80 victims of the case; for the violation of the rights of children, to the detriment of 57 victims, and for the violation of the right to life, to the detriment of two victims. The Court also concluded that the State is responsible for the violation of the obligation of progressive development, in terms of Article 26 of the American Convention, due to the adoption of regressive measures in environmental protection. Furthermore, the Court argued that the right to a healthy environment constitutes a universal interest and is a fundamental right for the existence of humanity.
Of relevance to the Youth Climate Justice project, the Court highlighted the disproportionate impact of environmental pollution on children. It stressed the state's duty to implement special measures safeguarding children's environmental and health rights, aligning with the principles of the best interest of the child and intergenerational equity. In a significant aspect of the ruling, the Court held Peru accountable for failing to implement adequate preventive measures to protect children's right to life amidst environmental hazards. It noted the state's neglect in addressing the differentiated impact of environmental pollution on children, underscoring Peru's failure to fulfill its special duty of child protection.
This decision establishes a crucial precedent in recognizing children's rights to a healthy environment and the interconnectedness of children's rights with environmental justice. By holding Peru responsible for violating children's rights outlined in Article 19 of the American Convention, including the right to a healthy environment, health, personal integrity, and life, the Court emphasizes the paramount importance of considering children's best interests in environmental matters.
Furthermore, the Court's reference to General Comments No. 14, No. 15, No.16 and No. 26 of the Committee on the Rights of the Child underscores the urgency of addressing climate change as a threat to child health and well-being. The analysis presented in the case highlights the significant health and developmental risks children face from exposure to heavy metals, reinforcing the state's obligation to protect children from environmental harm.
In conclusion, the Inter-American Court's decision serves as a crucial step towards ensuring environmental justice and safeguarding children's rights in the face of environmental degradation. It underscores the imperative for states to prioritize children's well-being and human rights in environmental policymaking and enforcement.
Read a selection of fragments of the sentence translated into English.
Read the complete sentence in Spanish.