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

这页面没有简体中文版本,现以English显示

法律诉讼

2020年1月1日

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

状态: CLOSED

提诉日期
2020年1月1日
日期准确度
年份正确
不适用
小区, 人权捍卫者
申诉地点: 智利
事发地点: 智利
诉讼类型: Domestic

企业

Grupo Luksic 智利 食品和饮料, 跨产业综合企业, 金融和银行业, 采矿, 港口, 运输:综合, 能源
Mitsubishi Group 日本 食品和饮料, 化学制品:综合, 电器, 金融和银行业, 采矿, 技术、电信和电子产品, 运输:综合
Mitsubishi Materials (part of Mitsubishi Group) 日本 金属/塑料/基本材料:一般

Against other:

Government

Sources

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.