abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeblueskyburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfilterflaggenderglobeglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphLinkedInlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptriangletwitteruniversalitywebwhatsappxIcons / Social / YouTube

这页面没有简体中文版本,现以English显示

法律诉讼

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

状态: CLOSED

提诉日期
2019年10月30日
不适用
小区, 人权捍卫者, Individual
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, 采矿, 跨产业综合企业, 金融和银行业, 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, 科技:电子、互联网与电信服务提供商, 运输:综合
Mitsubishi Materials (part of Mitsubishi Group) 日本 金属/塑料/基本材料:一般
Marubeni 日本 氢能, 食品和饮料, 化学制品:综合, 运输:综合, 能源, 核能

Against other:

Government

Sources

Snapshot: In October 2019, a group of residents from the town Caimanes, in the Coquimbo region in northern Chile, filed a lawsuit with the First Environmental Court against the Environmental Evaluation Service (SEA) over the approval of a project to install additional infrastructure in the Los Pelambres copper mine, operated by Antofagasta Minerals (part of Luksic Group). 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. In January 2020, the the Caimanes Defense Committee joined the proceedings. In October 2020, the Court rejected the claim, citing the project complied with its obligations to public participation. The claimants filed an appeal against this decision before the Supreme Court (Proceedings 132151-2020). In August 2021, the claimants withdrew their appeal after an agreement was reached between the parties. The case is closed.