technical committee with a representative from the government, one representative
from the company, and three technical experts from academic institutions. The trust
cannot disappear unless the committee decides (Trevizo and López 2014). Furthermore, Grupo México obliged itself to take various measures, including the establishment of 28 water purification facilities for the filtration of heavy metals and the
construction of a clinic to treat those who suffered health problems (Estevez 2017).
In 2015 and 2016, 12 different complaints against government agencies were
filed under the 2013 law on the constitutional complaint mechanism (amparo) by the
municipalities concerned by the incident – not only for the various damages caused
by the spill but also for the denial of access to information about the incident (Business and Human Rights Support Center 2018). The legal entitlements referred to
violations of healthy environment, access to water, property, communities’ right to
work, as well as compensation for damages and participation in public affairs
(Trevizo and López 2014; Business and Human Rights Support Center 2018). The
lawsuits also concerned government failure to comply with environmental and safety
regulations and to realize remediation plans (Business and Human Rights Support
Center 2018). In order to help determine the cause of the spillage, the communities
had filed a petition under the Foreign Legal Assistance Status to the US District
Court in Arizona in April 2016, demanding information about the mine’s operations
and environmental practices from Buenavista del Cobre’s parent company, the
US-headquartered Southern Copper (Trevizo and López 2014).
Finally, in August 2016, Southern Copper provided the requested information by
court order. Two months later, several UN Special Rapporteurs pushed the Mexican
government to provide information about the actual implication of the spill and the
measures adopted to alleviate its consequences (Business and Human Rights Support Center 2018; Trevizo and López 2014). Half a year later, a UN Working Group
on business and human rights stated in its country visit report that the government
and Grupo México missed to perform their duties under the initial trust fund
agreement and that the Attorney General failed to open a criminal investigation (Business and Human Rights Support Center 2018). In August 2017, the First
Tribunal of the Sonora State district supported the plaintiffs in a lawsuit concerning
the government’s omission to take care of health problems caused by water pollution, whereas the Supreme Court of Justice dismissed a case with Buenavista del
Cobre as defendant for their failure to comply with environmental norms since the
company could generally not qualify as a responsible authority under the 2013
amparo law (Business and Human Rights Support Center 2018). In August 2017,
the trust fund had been closed, a decision vindicated by the government who claims
that the restoration and reimbursement plans had been fulfilled – an allegation
strongly disputed by the inflicted communities (Business and Human Rights Support
Center 2018; Trevizo and López 2014).
The court still has a decision to make if Fideicomiso Río Sonora as an entity
composed of both public and private actors can be sued in court for human rights
violations under the 2013 amparo law. On August 22, 2018, the Mexican Supreme
Court heard a constitutional complaint (amparo) from members of the rural community of Bacanuchi challenging the construction of a new backwater dam in the
2 Mining Environmental Disasters in North and South America: The. . .
23
from the company, and three technical experts from academic institutions. The trust
cannot disappear unless the committee decides (Trevizo and López 2014). Furthermore, Grupo México obliged itself to take various measures, including the establishment of 28 water purification facilities for the filtration of heavy metals and the
construction of a clinic to treat those who suffered health problems (Estevez 2017).
In 2015 and 2016, 12 different complaints against government agencies were
filed under the 2013 law on the constitutional complaint mechanism (amparo) by the
municipalities concerned by the incident – not only for the various damages caused
by the spill but also for the denial of access to information about the incident (Business and Human Rights Support Center 2018). The legal entitlements referred to
violations of healthy environment, access to water, property, communities’ right to
work, as well as compensation for damages and participation in public affairs
(Trevizo and López 2014; Business and Human Rights Support Center 2018). The
lawsuits also concerned government failure to comply with environmental and safety
regulations and to realize remediation plans (Business and Human Rights Support
Center 2018). In order to help determine the cause of the spillage, the communities
had filed a petition under the Foreign Legal Assistance Status to the US District
Court in Arizona in April 2016, demanding information about the mine’s operations
and environmental practices from Buenavista del Cobre’s parent company, the
US-headquartered Southern Copper (Trevizo and López 2014).
Finally, in August 2016, Southern Copper provided the requested information by
court order. Two months later, several UN Special Rapporteurs pushed the Mexican
government to provide information about the actual implication of the spill and the
measures adopted to alleviate its consequences (Business and Human Rights Support Center 2018; Trevizo and López 2014). Half a year later, a UN Working Group
on business and human rights stated in its country visit report that the government
and Grupo México missed to perform their duties under the initial trust fund
agreement and that the Attorney General failed to open a criminal investigation (Business and Human Rights Support Center 2018). In August 2017, the First
Tribunal of the Sonora State district supported the plaintiffs in a lawsuit concerning
the government’s omission to take care of health problems caused by water pollution, whereas the Supreme Court of Justice dismissed a case with Buenavista del
Cobre as defendant for their failure to comply with environmental norms since the
company could generally not qualify as a responsible authority under the 2013
amparo law (Business and Human Rights Support Center 2018). In August 2017,
the trust fund had been closed, a decision vindicated by the government who claims
that the restoration and reimbursement plans had been fulfilled – an allegation
strongly disputed by the inflicted communities (Business and Human Rights Support
Center 2018; Trevizo and López 2014).
The court still has a decision to make if Fideicomiso Río Sonora as an entity
composed of both public and private actors can be sued in court for human rights
violations under the 2013 amparo law. On August 22, 2018, the Mexican Supreme
Court heard a constitutional complaint (amparo) from members of the rural community of Bacanuchi challenging the construction of a new backwater dam in the
2 Mining Environmental Disasters in North and South America: The. . .
23