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

這頁面沒有繁體中文版本,現以English顯示

法律訴訟

2020年1月1日

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

狀態: CLOSED

提訴日期
2020年1月1日
日期準確度
年份正確
不適用
社區, 人權維護人士
申訴地點: 智利
事發地點: 智利
訴訟類型: Domestic

企業

Grupo Luksic 智利 食品和飲料, 跨產業綜合企業, 金融和銀行業, 採礦, 港口, 運輸:綜合, 能源
Mitsubishi Group 日本 食品和飲料, 化學製品:綜合, 電器, 金融和銀行業, 採礦, 技術、電信和電子產品, 運輸:綜合
Mitsubishi Materials (part of Mitsubishi Group) 日本 金屬/塑膠/基本材料:綜合

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.