Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T00:24:53.892Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rights Holders’ Participation and Access to Remedies: Lessons Learned from the Doce River Dam Disaster

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2018

Joana NABUCO  and
Leticia ALEIXO
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Keywords

Doce rivereffective remediesgovernancepublic participationsettlement agreement
Type
Developments in the Field
Information
Business and Human Rights Journal , Volume 4 , Issue 1: Special Issue: Business, Human Rights and Security , January 2019 , pp. 147 - 153
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See, e.g., Ministério Público de Minas Gerais et al, ‘Atingidos: um olhar sobre a atuação das comunidades e do Ministério Público de Minas Gerais após o desastre de Mariana’ (2016), https://issuu.com/guilhermedesameneghin1/docs/livro_atingidos (accessed 11 September 2018); and Ramboll, ‘Avaliação do Programa de Reparação Integral da Bacia do Rio Doce’ (2017), http://www.mpf.mp.br/para-o-cidadao/caso-mariana/documentos/relatorio-ramboll (accessed 4 September 2018).

2 Ibid.

3 UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment, UN Special Rapporteur human rights and hazardous substances and wastes, ‘Brazilian Mine Disaster: “This is not the Time for Defensive Posturing” – UN rights experts’ (25 November 2015), https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=16803&LangID=E (accessed 11 September 2018).

4 UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation, ‘Brazil Mine Disaster: UN Human Rights Expert Calls for Urgent Access to Safe Drinking Water’, 8 December 2015, https://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=16855&LangID=E#sthash.06dkiKNK.dp (accessed 11 September 2018).

5 Federal Union et al v Samarco et al. Proceeding no. 0060017-58.2015.4.01.3800. 12th Federal Court of Minas Gerais.

6 The State Governments of Minas Gerais and Espírito Santo, the Brazilian Institute of the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA), Chico Mendes Institute for Biodiversity Conservation (ICMBIO), National Water Agency (ANA), National Department of Mineral Production (DNPM), National Indian Foundation (FUNAI), Forests State Institute of Minas Gerais (IEF), Institute of Water Management of Minas Gerais (IGAM), State of Minas Gerais Environment Foundation (FEAM), Espírito Santo Institute of Environment and Water Resources (IEMA), Espírito Santo Institute of Agriculture and Forest Defense (IDAF), and State Agency for Water Resources (AGERH).

7 Officially known as the Terms of Transaction and Conduct Adjustment (TTAC). The English version is available at: https://www.samarco.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/ACORDO-FINAL-CONSOLIDADO-Translated-into-English-Clean-Version.pdf (accessed 4 September 2018).

8 UN General Assembly, ‘Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises’, A/72/162 (18 July 2017), p 8.

9 Human Rights Council, ‘Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework’, A/HRC/17/31 (21 March 2011).

10 UN General Assembly, note 4, p 8.

11 Brazilian Federal Government, as well as the state governments of Minas Gerais and Espírito Santo.

12 See, e.g., Conectas Human Rights et al, ‘Federal Court Ratification of the Settlement Agreement between Samarco/Vale/BHP Billiton and Brazilian Public Authorities Violates the UN Guiding Principles on Business and International Human Rights and Environmental Law’, urgent appeal presented to the UN Special Procedures (13 May 2016), http://www.conectas.org/arquivos/editor/files/Urgent%20Appeal%20-%20Settlement%20Agreement%20Mariana%20Doce%20River%2005_13_2016.pdf (accessed 4 September 2018).

13 Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office v Samarco et al. Proceeding no. 0023863-07.2016.4.01.3800, 12th Federal Court of Minas Gerais.

14 See, e.g., Conectas Human Rights et al, ‘Update after the Two and a Half-Year Anniversary of the Doce River Dam Disaster’, urgent appeal presented to the UN Special Procedures (10 April 2018), http://www.conectas.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Doce-river-Two-and-a-half-year-anniversary-update-10042018.pdf (accessed 4 September 2018).

15 Renova Foundation, Integrated Form, http://www.fundacaorenova.org/relatorio/formulario-integrado-cadastro-dos-impactados/ (accessed 5 September 2018).

16 The obligation to produce evidence may be impossible to meet. For example, those whose homes were destroyed, were required to prove the existence of their personal belongings by presenting either purchase receipts or photographs of their homes – even though these documents were located in the premises flooded by the residues.

17 The compensation for deprivation of safe drinking water, for example, is around US$240, which is not enough to cover the expenses of buying bottled water for the entire period in which the river water will not be suitable for human consumption.

18 This list makes no reference to remedies for immaterial and collective damages either to continued or subsequent damages (experienced during the period between the collapse of the dam and the restoration of lifestyles).

19 The first of the 2017 agreements was signed in January 2017 and it is officially known as Preliminary Agreement. Available only in Portuguese at: http://www.mpf.mp.br/mg/sala-de-imprensa/docs/termo-de-acordo-preliminar-caso-samarco (accessed 11 September 2018). The second of the 2017 agreements was signed in November 2017 amending the Preliminary Agreement. It is officially known as the Amendment Agreement. Available only in Portuguese at: http://www.mpf.mp.br/mg/sala-de-imprensa/docs/aditivoTAP.pdf (accessed 11 September 2018).

20 Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office v Samarco et al. Proceeding no. 0023863-07.2016.4.01.3800, 12th Federal Court of Minas Gerais.

21 Ramboll, ‘Avaliação do Programa de Reparação Integral da Bacia do Rio Doce’ (2017), http://www.mpf.mp.br/para-o-cidadao/caso-mariana/documentos/relatorio-ramboll (accessed 4 September 2018).

22 Ibid.