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

このページは 日本語 では利用できません。English で表示されています

訴訟

2020年1月1日

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

ステータス: CLOSED

Date lawsuit was filed
2020年1月1日
日付の精度
年が正しい
適用できません
コミュニティ, ヒューマンライツ・ディフェンダー
申立の提出場所: チリ
事件の発生場所: チリ
訴訟の種類: 国内

企業

Grupo Luksic チリ 食品及び飲料, 多角化/複合化, 金融及び銀行, 鉱業, 港湾, 輸送: 一般, エネルギー
Mitsubishi Group 日本 食品及び飲料, 化学物質 一般, 電気製品, 金融及び銀行, 鉱業, テクノロジー、テレコム、エレクトロニクス, 輸送: 一般
Mitsubishi Materials (part of Mitsubishi Group) 日本 金属/プラスチック/基礎材料: 一般

Against other:

Government

ソース

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.