Human Rights and the Environment: Meeting on Activities Related to 61st Session of the Human Rights Council

About this Session

Environmental issues are present in various agenda items of each session of the Human Rights Council (HRC) and their side events.

The right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is the usual main environmental theme of the Council’s March sessions, with the Special Rapporteur’s annual Report to the HRC. Human rights defenders, the right to food, and cultural rights are also issues in this session related to the environment that will be presented by their respective United Nations Special Procedures, also in interactive dialogues with States, international organizations, human rights national institutions and NGOs.

In order to develop more synergies among stakeholders and a better outreach on the environmental agenda of HRC61, including the activities taking place in parallel to the Council’s session, the Geneva Environment Network and its partners convened an information-sharing session. This event discussed and shared information on planned environment-related activities at and around HRC61, such as in person and online events, publications or exhibitions, among others, and exchange on possible synergies. They feed the GEN page on HRC61 which will provide an updated calendar of these environment-related events. → Share information on your activity!

Speakers

By order of intervention.

Benjamin SCHACHTER

Coordinator, Environment and Climate Change Team, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

Viktoria ABERG

Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (Mandate of SR on human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment)

Mylène BIDAULT

Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (Mandate of SR on cultural rights)

Lilit NIKOGHOSYAN

Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (Mandate of SR on right to food)

Angela KARIUKI

Legal Officer and Head of InforMEA a.i., Collective Intelligence Unit, Law Division, UN Environment Programme

Jan Harvey PARAFINA

Research and Communications Consultant, Geneva Environment Network

Diana RIZZOLIO

Coordinator, Geneva Environment Network | Moderator

Highlights

Share Information on your Event @ HRC61

Information shared will be placed in our update “Environment @ 61st Session of the UN Human Rights Council”.

Video

Live from International Environment House

Summary

Human Rights and the Environmental Agenda

Benjamin SCHACHTER | Coordinator, Environment and Climate Change Team, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

• Since HRC60, UNFCCC COP 30 took place from 10 to 21 November in Belém where there were some very positive results and also some challenging ones. The outcomes reflected a continuation of incremental progress where we need ambitious transformative change.
• There were some positive results, particularly on just transition. The just transition decision contains multiple references to human rights in operative text, using the language of respect, protect and fulfill rather than respect, promote and consider.
  • It commits to establishing a new mechanism or process on just transition, with ongoing discussion foreseen.
  • It includes a standalone paragraph on the rights of Indigenous Peoples. This is some of the strongest human rights language seen in operative text of a UNFCCC decision.
• From the perspective of ambition and reflecting the state of law and science today, there continues to be governments that challenge for example the introduction of a reference on the ICJ advisory opinion that challenged in weakened language related to science and the work of the IPCC.
  • There was no repetition of previous language on phasing out fossil fuels.
  • The absence of references to the ICJ advisory opinion and to transitioning away from fossil fuels in the main COP 30 decision is problematic because these reflect what needs to happen from a human rights perspective and the human rights obligations of states
• Overall, there were some positive outcomes from a human rights standpoint. However there was not enough progress overall and there were some challenging and problematic issues that are the same ones we’ve had for many years with respect to things like phasing out fossil fuels, and new ones in the sense of this was the first negotiation since the ICJ advisory opinion and we would have really liked to see that referenced.
• The seventh session of the UN Environment Assembly was even more challenging and concerning. Negotiations were very difficult.
  • While a number of resolutions were adopted, none of them referenced human rights.
  • At UNEA-6, six resolutions referenced human rights, including the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment and resolution 76/300.
  • At UNEA-7, references to human rights, gender equality, the rights of Indigenous Peoples, and children’s rights were systematically stripped by a small group of states from all resolutions. This reflects a broader challenge, particularly in the context of ongoing UN efforts to promote coherence, such as UN80.
  • There seems to be an effort by some states to silo environmental work away from human rights and human rights work away from the environment, which is contradictory and a challenge we need to be aware of and confront.
  • The right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment provides a framework to address this challenge by bringing together elements of environmental and human rights law.
• There are a lot of other major meetings that took place with some more positive developments.
• Looking back at COP30, OHCHR’s Assistant Secretary General for Human Rights was there. Together with the Brazilian Ministry of Human Rights and Citizenship, the COP 30 Presidency Special Envoy on Human Rights and Just Transition, and the COP 30 Presidency Special Envoy on Peripheries, a new initiative was launched: the Sumaúma Pledging Tree for Human Rights-Based Climate Action.
  • Work on this initiative will continue throughout the year, including at the margins of upcoming Human Rights Council sessions, to seek commitments from states and other actors to rights-based climate action.
• Turning to the upcoming 61st session of the Human Rights Council, despite challenges in environmental spaces, the Council itself continues to address environmental issues and is doing so more frequently.
  • Last year saw more references to the environment and climate change than in any previous year. A new resolution on sea level rise was adopted.
• At HRC61, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights will present the High Commissioner’s first report on human rights and biodiversity, mandated by resolution 57/28.
  • The report outlines human rights elements in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF) and outcomes from CBD COP 16 and explores and outlines some of the ways to advance a human rights-based approach to biodiversity action in line with the KMBGF.
  • The timing of the report is intended to support ongoing processes leading toward CBD COP 17 in Armenia later this year.
• There was also an expectation to submit the summary report of the panel discussion on climate change to the Council. However, due to financial constraints and lack of capacity, an information note was submitted instead. The panel discussion itself is available as archived footage, with the concept note and statements accessible online.

Special Rapporteurs with Environment-related Activities Reporting to HRC61

Viktoria ABERG | Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (Mandate of SR on human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment)

• The Special Rapporteur on the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment will be in Geneva from 5 to 12 March. There will be no specific resolution on the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment at this session, but the Special Rapporteur will present her annual report.
• The final title of the report is “Priority actions towards breathing clean air, protecting public health and ensuring a healthy environment.”
  • The report follows up on the topic of clean air, which was previously addressed by David Boyd a few years ago as the first time this substantive element of the right to a healthy environment was examined for the first time.
  • The report deepens the understanding of the impacts of air pollution on human rights.
  • Most people do not enjoy clean air due to a lack of health and environmental protections.
  • There is extensive and conclusive scientific evidence on the health risks posed by air pollution, which affects all organs of the human body throughout our lives, including in utero.
  • Children are the most vulnerable, along with older persons, pregnant people, people with pre-existing health conditions, and members of marginalized groups, particularly those living in abandoned areas.
  • Air pollution is currently linked to around eight million premature deaths annually worldwide and causes or worsen multiple health harms.
  • The report highlights the severity of the situation, especially in low- and middle-income countries, and contrasts this with the existence of solutions and actions that need to be improved and implemented.
• As with the Special Rapporteur’s other reports, it concludes with recommendations grounded in a human rights–based approach, recognizing the severe risks and harms air pollution poses to health, prioritizing effective action, and applying an intersectional perspective that responds to the needs of the most vulnerable and ensures their protection.
• The report was prepared in collaboration with the Clean Air Fund, WHO and UNICEF, and is considered highly welcome as out of a number of large complicated and difficult situations in the world, air pollution just keeps getting worse.
• A side event linked to the report will take place on 9 March at Palais des Nations, in Room IX (moved from room XIII). The event will feature speakers from other UN agencies, and the core group of the mandate will be involved. Slovenia is co-organizing, and other members of the core group are expected to participate as they traditionally do.
• During the week in Geneva, the Special Rapporteur will also participate in several joint events, including a side event on fossil fuels and a screening, likely on 10 or 11 March (TBC).
• On 9 March, the same day as the side event on the report, there will also be a panel and a screening of Yurlu | Country organized with FIDH and other partners.
• The Special Rapporteur will also present a report on her country visit to Singapore.
  • The visit took place in May and was the first visit of the mandate to an ASEAN member state, as well as the first visit to Singapore by a Special Rapporteur in over ten years.
  • The visit was very interesting and constructive, and the resulting report is technical in nature.
  • The report will be made public on 10 February, together with a substantial addendum from Singapore, which reflects the seriousness with which the authorities engaged in the process. The report will be discussed during the interactive dialogue.
• Elisa Morgera will also be in Geneva for two days, on 5 and 6 March. Although she is not reporting to this session, she will be present in connection with her upcoming report on food systems, which is linked to climate change under her mandate.

Mylène BIDAULT | Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (Mandate of SR on cultural rights)

• The Special Rapporteur on Cultural Rights, Alexandra Kantaki, is preparing a report to the Human Rights Council this year focusing on the relationship between nature conservation and cultural rights.
• The report is still under preparation, following the circulation of a questionnaire to which many stakeholders have contributed, and the presentation outlined the main concerns and approach guiding the report.
• The report is grounded in the assessment that nature conservation agendas often fail to fully consider cultural rights and, in some cases, are pursued at the expense of those rights or used to justify cultural violations. Conservation policies can enable land grabbing and assimilation policies targeting vulnerable groups, particularly Indigenous Peoples.
• The report positions nature and culture as intertwined, emphasizing that the protection of one cannot occur without the protection of the other. It challenges what is described as a pseudo-dilemma that frames a choice between protecting nature or protecting cultural rights, or between the right to a clean environment and cultural rights.
• Attention is drawn to structural inequalities: in the name of nature conservation, the cultural practices of vulnerable groups are targeted, while the resource-intensive cultural practices of dominant groups, including consumption patterns, mobility trends, and technological developments, are not subject to the same scrutiny.
• A cultural rights-based approach is presented as a useful framework, grounded in the principles of non-discrimination, universality, and equality.
• The report recognizes that cultural practices may be limited when they cause environmental harm, but stresses that any limitations on cultural rights must follow established safeguards under international law, particularly those set out in article 4 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
• The report provides an overview of the relevant legal framework, including environmental law, human rights law, and the protection of cultural heritage.
• Reference is made to the UNESCO Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage and to UNESCO guidelines that address the consideration of cultural practices, including in the nomination of sites to the World Heritage List.
• Several key issues are expected to inform the report’s recommendations. These include:
  • Acknowledging the diversity of definitions and narratives regarding nature and nature conservation and recognizing that different communities have different understandings of the relationship between humans and nature.
  • The dominance of narratives that place humans outside of nature, rather than within ecosystems, is identified as damaging and in need of critical examination.
• The report is also likely to emphasize strengthening the link between cultural diversity and biodiversity, integrating cultural rights into nature conservation agendas, and conducting human rights impact assessments that adequately include cultural rights.
• Further recommendations are expected to include guaranteeing the participation of local communities, ensuring the right to participate in scientific endeavors related to nature conservation, and promoting a more diverse understanding of science. This includes recognition of Indigenous science, not only traditional knowledge, as part of scientific diversity.
• The report is also expected to call for strengthening legal frameworks, particularly at the domestic level, and for ensuring that standards governing the limitation of cultural rights are fully respected.
• The Special Rapporteur will present her report on the afternoon of 3 March 2026.

Lilit NIKOGHOSYAN | Human Rights Officer, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (Mandate of SR on right to food)

• The current Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Michael Fakhri, will be in Geneva from 5 to 7 March. This will be his last Human Rights Council session and his last report as Special Rapporteur, which gives the report particular significance, as it is intended to bring together and reflect the main themes he has worked on throughout his mandate.
• The Special Rapporteur will present his report to the Council on the afternoon of 5 March.
• On 6 March, FIAN International has requested a slot for a side event, which is not yet confirmed, but if confirmed, the Special Rapporteur will participate.
• No other events are confirmed at this stage, although additional engagements on 7 March remain possible.
• The final report is dedicated to land and the right to food, approached specifically from the perspective of the right to food mandate.
• While the Special Rapporteur on housing has recently presented a thematic report on land to the General Assembly, it is not exactly from the same perspective of what the Special Rapporteur on food is doing.
• There will be another report on related issues is expected from the Working Group on peasants and Indigenous peoples on a related subject, but we do not know yet on exactly what. Having this report will help them see what is not addressed from the perspective of peasants and small-scale farmers.
• The report comes at a crucial moment, ahead of the International Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ICARRD+20) taking place in Colombia in February.
  • The first conference, held twenty years ago, committed to values of fair land redistribution and agrarian reform, but is widely regarded as having failed to meet its objectives.
  • 20 years later the second conference is taking place and many constituents and people in the community have very high hopes for it because of the link between fair land distribution and the right to food.
  • Hence, the idea of this report is to feed into the conference on agrarian reform.
• The Special Rapporteur is expected to participate in the conference in Cartagena and to present the report there.
• Importantly, he also intends to bring key takeaways from the conference back to the Human Rights Council, using his final address to reflect on what constituents now expect States to do following the conference outcomes.
• In this report, the Special Rapporteur examines the relationship between food security, hunger and land ownership.
  • One of the main takeaway of this report is that land cannot be treated merely as an asset or an investment, as this approach generates food insecurity and hunger.
  • Land, from his perspective, is a living organism, deeply connected to culture, habits, to the sense of belonging, to livelihoods, to community life, to sharing and many other human rights.
  • The report addresses soil degradation and what results in soil degradation and identifies unfair land distribution as a major driver, noting the high level of corporate concentration in land ownership.
  • It highlights that around one percent of farms globally controls approximately seventy percent of agricultural land, leading to monocropping, soil degradation, biodiversity loss, water depletion and increased pesticide use. Soil degradation is therefore closely linked to land tenure rights.
  • The report also examines neutrality policies, including carbon neutrality and biodiversity offsets. While not opposing these approaches in principle, it stresses the need for caution when compensating neutrality for examples with degraded land somewhere can be replaced by a restoration project elsewhere.
  • From a human rights perspective, there is no such thing as empty land. There is never land that can easily be replaced because land is often used by pastoralists, small-scale farmers or Indigenous peoples.
  • Anytime you look at degraded land and you want to restore it or offset it, it is critical to remember that there is often people using this land and remove these people counts as displacement, loss of livelihood and loss of right to food.
  • Similar concerns are raised in relation to buffer zones, which can isolate or displace communities if implemented without regard to existing land use and rights.
• Two major anchors structure the report.
• The first is the relationship between the UN Convention to Combat Desertification and the upcoming ICARRD.
  • The report argues that desertification should not be treated solely as a technical environmental issue, but as a human rights concern.
  • Alone, this convention is not enough to protect land degradation if it is not backed up by tenure rights reform.
  • For him, the agrarian reform conference is as a historic change to give a bone to strengthen the implementation of the desertification convention by clarifying who is using the land, how it is used, and who is responsible for land degradation.
• The second major focus is the environmental destruction of land as a means of war.
  • The report examines this issue in depth through the situation in Gaza, building previous work on starvation as a method of warfare.
  • It moves one step further to show how land destruction and environmental degradation can be used deliberately as tools of deliberate destruction.
• The report concludes with a strong message to the ICARRD – we should all be looking at who uses land, how land is used not only treated and we should move away from restoration buffer zones desertification mentality to seeing land as an organic thing in conjunction with the communities who use it, share it and who profit from the land, and emphasizes land tenure rights, and reinforce fair distribution of land.
• The report will be made public soon.

UNEP’s Engagement with HRC

Angela KARIUKI | Legal Officer and Head of InforMEA a.i., Collective Intelligence Unit, Law Division, UNEP

• From UNEP’s perspective and with the challenges in which we are operating as a system, really calls for even closer dialogue between the environmental and human rights communities, especially given the broader challenges facing the UN system.
  • This dialogue needs to be supported by evidence and practical experience, which has long been the basis of UNEP’s engagement with OHCHR, Member States and partners.
• Several recent developments illustrate the direction of this work since the last Human Rights Council session.
  • On courts and legal interpretation, UNEP recently published The Right to a Healthy Environment in Practice, which reviews more than 100 judicial decisions across 30 jurisdictions and shows how courts are giving real content to the right so by clarifying State obligations and addressing environmental harm linked to climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution, and also increasingly drawing on international standards.
  • This trend is mirrored in climate litigation, with the fourth edition of Climate Change in the Courtroom released last month which has more than 3,000 climate-related cases filed globally as of June 2025, including landmark opinions from international and regional bodies.
  • Together, these developments point to a maturing legal landscape in which environmental rights are becoming operational and enforceable.
• Beyond tracking these trends, there is a strong focus on making them usable in practice.
  • Together with NYU, UNEP has developed the Right to a Healthy Environment Toolkit, an online practical resource designed to support judges, policymakers and legal practitioners by bringing together jurisprudence, policy examples and implementation pathways in one platform, helping translate legal recognition into concrete guidance.
• At the intergovernmental level, UNEA-7 presented challenges, as it did not advance the right to a healthy environment through a dedicated resolution or implementation framework, which was a missed opportunity.
  • At the same time, the right was not absent. It appears in the ministerial declaration and in UNEP’s medium-term strategy, particularly under environmental law and governance, with a clear mandate linked to General Assembly resolution 76/300.
  • Other resolutions also addressed key environmental drivers affecting the enjoyment of the right, even when not framed explicitly in rights-based terms, which provides a basis to build on during the Council session.
• Indigenous peoples were highly visible and actively engaged at UNEA-7, including through the first-ever high-level special dialogue dedicated to Indigenous peoples.
  • However, Indigenous peoples’ rights were not explicitly advanced in the resolutions themselves.
  • This points to an area where future UNEAs could go further. The next phase should be less about reopening recognition debates but more about implementation, coherence and accountability, including ensuring Indigenous peoples are engaged not only as stakeholders but as rights holders across UNEP processes, particularly in strengthening implementation of the right to a healthy environment.
• UNEA-7 also highlighted strong interest in more integrated approaches.
  • A second Multilateral Environmental Agreements Day was convened, following UNEA-6, and a resolution on synergies and cooperation among MEAs was adopted.
  • This is an area where right-based perspectives are becoming increasingly relevant and requested by member states.
• At the regional level, an important milestone was the adoption of the ASEAN Declaration on the right to a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment last October, supported by UNEP’s regional office in Bangkok.
• This is the first regional instrument in Southeast Asia articulating the right in alignment with General Assembly resolution 76/300 and represents an important step in translating global recognition into regional norms.

Tour de Table of Participants

Frederique BOURQUE | Associate Human Rights Officer, OHCHR | Supporting the mandate of SR on human rights and climate change

• The Special Rapporteur on human rights and climate change will not be reporting formally to this session of the Human Rights Council, but she will be in Geneva from 5 to 6 March to participate in several activities.
• Her programme is still being finalized. She is currently preparing her next report to the Human Rights Council, which will focus on food systems.
• The call for inputs for this report is open until 30 January.
• The report is titled Transforming food systems to protect human rights and prevent climate harm.
• Participants are encouraged to reach out for further information regarding her visit or the report.

Sybille DIRREN | FIAN International

• FIAN International has registered a side event for 6 March at 1:00 p.m., pending final confirmation.
• The event will focus on food, land and agrarian reform and will feature the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Michael Fakhri.
• The main aim of this event is to allow the Special Rapporteur to present the main outcomes of his report and to link them to the International Conference on Agrarian Reform taking place in Colombia the week before.
• The aim is to bring the discussion on redistributive agrarian reform to the Human Rights Council in Geneva, given its strong connection to the right to food and other human rights, as well as its relevance as an effective climate policy.
• The event seeks to bring different rights holders, including fisher people, indigenous people and peasants who have attended the conference in Colombia, to Geneva so they can report directly on outcomes and ensure follow-up.

Francesca MINGRONE | Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL)

• CIEL has requested a side event, pending confirmation, focusing on the human rights obligations that underpin a just transition.
• We know how difficult the conversation at the council is still on just transition and on fossil fuels in particular and so we want to continue the conversation.
• The event will highlight the role of human rights institutions and international courts, including the International Court of Justice, and explore linkages with the first international conference on transitioning away from fossil fuels, to be hosted by Colombia in late April.
• The Special Rapporteur on the right to a healthy environment is expected to attend in person. The tentative date is 10 March at 1:00 p.m., subject to confirmation.

Walter SCHULDT | Permanent Mission of Ecuador

• Ecuador, together with Luxembourg and the rest of the core group, will present a new draft version of the triennial resolution on human rights and the 2030 Agenda.
• This resolution aims to gather input from States, stakeholders, civil society organizations and other in Geneva to feed into the High-Level Political Forum.
• This year because to the liquidity crisis, the international meeting could not take place this year.
• The new draft resolution seeks to provide a mandate for the coming years, feeding into the 2027, 2028 and 2029 HLPFs and aligning with the SDGs under review.
• The intention is to reinforce balance across the three dimensions of sustainable development, including the environmental dimension, and to strengthen implementation of the human rights and environmental agendas.
• Informal consultations will be announced in due course.

Adeel Mumtaz KHOKHAR | Permanent Mission of Pakistan

• Question to Benjamin regarding why does he think there were very few mentions of human rights in UNEA-7 and much less compared to at UNEA-6 and whether this reflects broader geopolitical trends or a sidelining of the human rights agenda.

A: Benjamin SCHACHTER | Coordinator, Environment and Climate Change Team, UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

• At UNEA-7, the ministerial declaration and UNEP’s medium-term strategy did reference the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, but none of the resolutions adopted did so, unlike at UNEA-6 where six out of sixteen resolutions included human rights language.
• Human rights were discussed during negotiations and included in earlier drafts, but this language was removed during negotiations.This does somewhat reflects current geopolitical dynamics and the challenges of consensus-based decision-making at UNEA.
• It may also be linked to the timing immediately following UNFCC COP30, where a number of very difficult conversations, including around human rights language, references to the ICJ advisory opinion and related issues. It may have caught people somewhat flat-footed, and there was not as much pushback as I would have like to see.
• We will be working to push for more substantive and ambitious outcomes at UNEA-8 including with human rights language.
• There’s a real challenge at UNEA and in other spaces related to consensus, the reality is at UNEA small group of states or even one state can block the resolution or agenda because there’s practice of consensus.
• The rules of procedure actually allow for voting and for the first time there was discussion around UNEA about whether we need to change the way we are doing things and move towards exercising this voting possibility because consensus forced the withdrawal of multiple resolutions on deep seabed mining, on environmental crimes. This resulted in resolutions that were adopted not including some of the stronger language and outcomes that many states but not all supported.
• At the Human Rights Council, however, there has not yet been a similar rollback, and the number of resolutions linking human rights and the environment continues to grow.

David Julían JARA MORENO | Permanent Mission of Colombia

• Colombia is a penholder, together with Costa Rica, of the resolution on biodiversity and human rights and are interested in the forthcoming OHCHR report, especially following Colombia’s hosting of CBD COP16.
• With regard to the mandate and the annual report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment that will be presented during the upcoming session of the Council, this is seen as a good opportunity to highlight the advisory opinion issued by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights at the request of Colombia and Chile, in which the Court recognized the right to a healthy and clean environment.
• Regarding the report of the Special Rapporteur on cultural rights, Colombia shares the belief that there cannot be a separation between culture and nature, particularly from the perspective of Indigenous peoples and people of African descent.
  • Land cannot be considered only as private property, asset or investment because land is a source of identity for many of these people.
  • This report is therefore being followed with great interest, especially as it will also analyze cultural heritage, which is a priority for them in the council.
• There is strong hope that the Special Rapporteur on the right to food will be able to participate in the International Conference on Agrarian Reform.
  • There has already been contact with Frederique, and there is hope that the Special Rapporteur, Elisa Morgera, will be able to participate.
• There has also been engagement with the Working Group on the rights of peasants, who are expected to attend.
  • Discussions are ongoing this week with the WG to provide further details on the conference.
  • This conference is one of Colombia’s major foreign policy priorities, with expected participation from around 65 countries and with an agenda that places strong emphasis on social movements.
• Further details are expected to be shared in the coming week.

Yves LADOR | Representative of Earthjustice to the UN in Geneva

• Regarding the discussions which took place on UNEA-7, I fully share the view that this was a somewhat unpleasant development.
• When we look at the trajectory of previous sessions, which were moving forward quite clearly, there was a sense of a pause, or even a step back. It could be described as a shift from explicit references to human rights to more implicit one
• As previously mentioned, human rights references are still there, but they are no longer as explicit as before.
• This is unfortunate, because while the references have not disappeared, they need to be clearly stated and articulated if we want to move forward. This is also very important for people reading these resolutions around the world, as implicit language does not help in understanding what these resolutions actually mean.
• As mentioned earlier, the Special Rapporteur will be involved at an evening event on 9 March at the International Human Rights Film Festival in Genva.
• This is a very important event, featuring the screening of the film Yulru, an award-winning film that has received an impressive number of international awards.
• The film documents the situation and struggle of an Aboriginal community in Australia that continues to be severely affected by contamination of its lands and cultural sites caused by a former asbestos mine.
• Although the mine was closed decades ago, it was never cleaned up, and the area remains a sacrifice zone. Some areas can only be accessed with protective suits, otherwise visits are dangerous. It is a tragic situation.
• This site was previously visited by the Special Rapporteur on toxics and human rights, Marcos Orellana, and thanks to GEN there was already a discussion on this situation during a previous Human Rights Council session.
• At that time, it was possible to hear directly from affected community members about what they are experiencing and living through.
• The upcoming event in Geneva offers an opportunity, this time at a broader level, to revisit this situation and open discussions with Australia.
• Australia recognizes the situation, so that is not the issue. The real question is how such a site can be cleaned up, given the extremely high costs involved. We are talking about a highly developed country that nevertheless states it lacks the capacity to clean up this contamination.
• When we consider the current global context, where mining activities are expanding, often justified by the need to support environmental transitions, we see a fundamental contradiction.
• In order to protect the environment, more mining is undertaken, which in turn causes further environmental destruction. This raises serious questions about the direction we are taking and the next steps.
• The issue of sacrifice zones has already been addressed in reports by the former Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment, David Boyd, as well as by Marcos Orellana. This remains an issue that needs to be examined much more deeply, because at its core it concerns human rights, and ultimately the right to life itself.
• On 9 March, subject to confirmation from the Council secretariat, following the side event organized by the Special Rapporteur, there is also the possibility of continuing the discussion with a specific presentation by the Special Rapporteur focused on the film.
• This would serve as a kind of introduction to the human rights dimensions presented in the film and would allow participants to engage with the screening and the subsequent debate at the festival with a deeper understanding.
• That debate will include the Special Rapporteur, the filmmaker, and representatives of the affected community.

Budi Tjajhono | Franciscans International

• Franciscans International is going to have defenders working on the right to healthy environment and climate change to participate in presession of the UPR. From the Solomon Islands, Namibia and Mozambique.
• We are going to organize an informal discussion with them on the Friday 13 February in the morning. The invitation will be sent very soon.
• We are also thinking about having some informal dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on climate change and the right to a healthy environment with regards to the preparations for the conference in Colombia on just transitions.

Photo Gallery

Links

• 61st Regular Session of the Human Rights Council
• Human Rights and the Environment

GEN Updates on Human Rights and Environment

Human Rights and the Environment

Human Rights, Climate Change, and the Role of Geneva

Human Rights, Biodiversity, and the Role of Geneva

Human Rights, Hazardous Substances, and the Role of Geneva

The Ocean, Human Rights, and the Role of Geneva

Environmental Human Rights Defenders and the Role of Geneva

Indigenous Peoples and the Role of Geneva

Business and Human Rights, Environment, and the Role of Geneva