abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb

هذه الصفحة غير متوفرة باللغة العربية وهي معروضة باللغة English

الدعوى القضائية

1 يناير 2020

Environmental Evaluation Service lawsuit (re Minera Los Pelambres copper mine, Chile)

الحالة: CLOSED

Date lawsuit was filed
1 يناير 2020
دقة التاريخ
السنة صحيحة
لا ينطبق
مجتمع, مدافع عن حقوق الإنسان
موقع رفع الدعوى: شيلي
موقع الحادثة: شيلي
نوع التقاضي: داخل البلد

الشركات

Grupo Luksic شيلي الأطعمة والمشروبات, التكتلات/الشركات المتنوعة, المؤسسات المالية والمصارف, المناجم, الموانىء البحرية, النقل: عامة, الطاقة
Mitsubishi Group اليابان الأطعمة والمشروبات, الكيماويات: عامة, الأدوات الكهربائية, المؤسسات المالية والمصارف, المناجم, تكنولوجيا، الإتصالات والألكترونيات, النقل: عامة
Mitsubishi Materials (part of Mitsubishi Group) اليابان المعادن والبلاستك والمواد الأساسية: عامة

Against other:

Government

المصادر

Snapshot: In 2020, the Caimanes Defense Committee, a group of residents from Caimanes, Chile, filed a lawsuit with the First Environmental Court against the Environmental Evaluation Service (SEA) against Antofacasta Minerals' Minera Los Pelambres copper mine. They alleged that they were not consulted during the Environmental Impact Assessment. The residents claimed that the project adversely affected their quality of life, posing a continuous threat to their right to live in an uncontaminated environment. They sought the invalidation of the SEA's approval of the Environmental Qualification Resolution (RCA) and challenged the rejection of their invalidation request. Additionally, they pointed out irregularities in the public participation process, asserting that the residents were not properly informed or given the opportunity to provide input on the project. The Court rejected the claim, citing the project complied with its obligations to public participation. The Committee filed an appeal against this decision. In 2021, the Committee withdrew its appeal after an agreement was reached between the parties. The case is closed.