HRW Submits to UN Rapporteur on Toxics, Rights

Human Rights Watch welcomes the opportunity to provide information to the Special Rapporteur on toxics and human rights on access to justice and effective remedies, to inform his report to the United Nations Human Rights Council in September 2025. This submission provides examples based on Human Rights Watch's research on toxics in Zambia, Ethiopia, Peru, Bangladesh, Panama, and Brazil.

Kabwe, Zambia

Kabwe is one of the world's worst pollution hotspots because of contamination from a former lead and zinc mine established during the British colonial period.[1] The mine was closed in 1994, but toxic waste remains. Decades of mining and smelting operations have resulted in an estimated 6.4 million tons of lead-bearing waste piles.[2] Up to now, lead dust from the former mine's large, uncovered waste dumps blows across nearby residential areas and contaminates homes, yards, schools, and roads, exposing up to 200,000 people.[3] Medical researchers estimate that over 95 percent of children living near the former mine have elevated lead levels in their blood, and that about half of these children urgently require medical treatment.[4] No significant remediation has taken place since the mine's closure in 1994.

The Alliance for Lead-Free Kabwe, a coalition of international and Zambian civil society organizations, as well as Zambian youth activists have called for a comprehensive cleanup of the former mine.[5]

In 2020, lawyers from South Africa and the United Kingdom filed a class action lawsuit in a South African court on behalf of affected children and women of childbearing age in Kabwe.[6] The lawsuit sought compensation, a lead-screening system for children and pregnant women, and remediation of the area. The lawsuit contends that between 1925 and 1974, the mining company Anglo American "played a key role in controlling, managing, supervising and advising on technical, medical and safety aspects of the operations of the [m]ine."[7] Anglo American argued that it did not own or operate the mine, but only provided technical advice and was involved "via an indirect minority shareholding (of ±10%)."[8] In December 2023, the South African High Court dismissed the claimants' application to certify the class action, describing it as an "unmanageable claim that would set a grave precedent."[9] However, in April 2024, lawyers for the claimants won permission to appeal this decision.[10] At this stage, it is unknown whether this case will proceed to a hearing on its merits.

To date, there has been no lawsuit over the lead contamination in Kabwe in Zambian courts. There are no legal provisions on cumulative environmental impacts in Zambian environmental law, and Zambia does not have an environmental court.[11]

With a World Bank loan, Zambia's government has undertaken some limited efforts to address the contamination in Kabwe.[12] It has tested and treated some children and cleaned up a small number of homes and a highly polluted canal, but it has failed to clean up the source of the contamination.[13] As long as the waste dumps are not cleaned up, other measures are unsustainable, and progress made could be quickly reversed. Moreover, the government has licensed further mining and reprocessing activities that pose additional health risks to children.[14]

The government has recognized the need for broader cleanup,[15] but the government's pronouncements of concern have so far not been followed by effective and sustained action.

In March 2022, following meetings with civil society organizations, President Hakainde Hichilema instructed the Ministry of Green Economy and Environment to establish a technical committee to "address and lead the process of comprehensive remediation" in Kabwe.[16] However, the body was never formally set up by the cabinet and is therefore not functional.

In 2023, the Ministry of Green Economy and Environment announced its intention to make Kabwe a "Green City" in which economic development takes place on top of "buried lead" surfaces.[17] The ministry has since secured World Bank funding for a feasibility study to "aid and direct the implementation of green investments" in Kabwe, but the project does not appear to include remediation of the former mine waste. [18] The ministry's National Green Growth Strategy 2024-2030 includes a plan for the "restoration of mine wastelands," mentioning Kabwe as an example.[19] This strategy should be put into practice in Kabwe as soon as possible.

In April 2024, President Hichilema again took up the problems in Kabwe and announced the creation of an interministerial committee to address the contamination.[20] Yet, the interministerial committee has not been officially established.

Lega Dembi, Ethiopia

Human Rights Watch research on the Lega Dembi gold mine in Ethiopia showcases barriers faced by affected communities in accessing effective remedies. Pregnant women, postpartum women, and parents of children living with disability have been unable to access appropriate government action, including non-repetition and other remedy for reproductive and other harms.

For years, residents living near the mine complained of ill-health and disabilities, particularly in newborn children. The Ethiopian company operating the Lega Dembi gold mine, Midroc Investment Group, and Argor-Heraeus, the Swiss refinery that sourced its gold until 2018, took no action despite media reports about pollution from the mine. Environmental testing by Addis Ababa University in 2018 found high levels of arsenic in water samples taken downstream from the mine area, and high levels of nickel, chromium, and arsenic in soil samples outside the mine.[21]

That same year, the Ethiopian government suspended Midroc's license following local protests over pollution from the mine and its health impacts. Human Rights Watch research found that the mine recommenced operations around March 2021, apparently with a license from the government, but did not publicly demonstrate that sufficient steps had been taken to ensure the chemicals from the mine no longer pose a threat.[22]

At a community meeting in March 2021, local government officials announced that compensation would be paid to people whose health had been affected but did not provide information about the criteria for compensation. Officials also mentioned remediation but did not provide details. Several community members said the authorities paid compensation to some, but not all, affected people. According to a letter sent by Midroc in June 2023 in response to Human Rights Watch's report and requests for information, Midroc said that 827 people received funds for "livelihood restoration" and medical purposes. Human Rights Watch has not been able to independently determine the number of people compensated or the criteria for compensation.

An Ethiopian government report released in July 2021 stated that Oromia regional authorities and Midroc signed a memorandum of understanding with an action plan for the "resolution of social, health, and environmental impacts."[23] The steps included voluntary relocation of affected community members, payment of compensation, support to the local administration, and the creation of a "mechanism" to require transparency and accountability from the mining company. The report does not mention environmental remediation measures. The memorandum of understanding has not been made public, and Human Rights Watch has not been able to obtain a copy.

La Oroya, Peru

In 2024, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights found the Peruvian government responsible for violating the right to a healthy environment, among other rights, of residents of La Oroya, a town exposed to toxic pollution from a mine and smelter complex, the first ruling of its kind before the Court.[24]

The families who initiated the case included 80 residents, 57 of which were children, who had been exposed to extreme levels of toxic lead and other metals. The court found that the government was responsible for allowing serious health harms caused by mining and smelting, particularly in children, and the deaths of two residents, one of whom was 17 years old.[25] It also found that the affected families did not receive adequate health care and ruled that the government had failed to investigate harassment and threats against victims who had publicly denounced the contamination.

In its ruling, the court referred to General Comment 26, issued by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child last year, on the rights of children affected by environmental crises.[26]

The court ordered Peru to provide free health care for victims; pay compensation for the harms they experienced; assess and clean up the contaminated areas; and continue to monitor air, ground, and water quality, among other measures.

Bangladesh

In 2024 shipbreaking workers in Bangladesh dismantled more end-of-life ships than any other country. In Bangladesh, ships are taken apart directly on the sand, dumping toxic chemicals, oil, heavy metals, and other pollutants straight onto the sand and the sea while gasses and dangerous particles pollute the air, impacting workers, nearby communities and agriculture, as well as biodiversity and coastal habitats. Shipbreaking workers and surrounding communities are frequently exposed to toxic materials in the air they breathe, the water they drink, and the food they grow and eat, impacting health and livelihood.

Workers interviewed by Human Rights Watch consistently said that they were not provided with adequate protective equipment, training, or tools to safely do their jobs. Without respirators and other recommended protective equipment, workers described wrapping their shirts around their mouths to avoid inhaling toxic fumes.

Asbestos is one of the most common toxic materials found in older ships.[27] Inhalation can lead to asbestosis, a form of pulmonary fibrosis which causes difficulty breathing, can lead to cardiovascular disease, and significantly increases risk of mesothelioma and lung cancer.[28] A 2017 study by the Bangladesh Occupational Safety, Health, and Environment Foundation found that more than one third of the shipbreaking workers surveyed suffered preventable health complications from asbestos exposure.[29] Some workers suffering from asbestosis have formed an Asbestos Victims Rights Network and have held seminars and a peaceful protest calling on their employers to pay for the treatment and lost wages related to the disease, but they have received no response. Some former workers with asbestosis said they were no longer able to work because it was too difficult to breathe and maintain stamina. As a result, their children had to drop out of school to help make ends meet. Ali, 42, said that his 16-year-old daughter had to leave school to work in a garment factory. "She was a student, but her education stopped now because I cannot work," he said.[30]

The 2011 Shipbreaking and Recycling Rules as well as the 2006 Labour Act require employers to pay for treatment of workplace injuries, to cover wages up to a year during recovery, and to pay compensation in case of injury or death, including for longer-term health impacts from toxics exposure such as asbestosis and cancer. The medicine and Inhaler required to ease symptoms costs about 11,000 BDT per month (US$118), but workers say their employers have refused to cover medical costs, despite their legal obligation to do so under the Bangladesh Shipbreaking and Recycling Rules, 2011 and the mandated medical stipend included in the minimum wage legislation for shipbreaking workers.[31] None of the workers interviewed received the medical care stipend required by the Ministry of Labour and Employment.

Global shipowners who send their ships to be dismantled in Bangladesh, where there are inadequate environmental or labor protections to ensure the safe management hazardous materials, should also be responsible for remedies. However, a lack of transparency in beneficial ownership of ships going for scrap makes it extremely difficult for shipbreaking workers and local communities to hold ships' original owners and operators accountable for deaths and illness resulting from exposure to toxic waste in the ships. Global shipping companies frequently use international scrap dealers called "cash buyers" to avoid selling end-of-life ships directly to a Bangladeshi shipbreaking yard and, in many cases, the cash buyer will use a shell company as the new registered owner of the ship during its sale to scrapyards in Bangladesh, making it extremely difficult to trace the actual owner of a ship before it is sold for scrap. Additionally, workers explained that many of the ships imported to the yards have the name either painted over or removed as soon as it enters the yard.

Brazil

Brazil is among the world's top importers and consumers of pesticides.[32] Those living nearby industrial farms face toxic exposures from pesticide applications that frequently occur in close proximity to their homes, schools, and workplaces.[33] On average, a person dies every three days from pesticide poisoning in Brazil.[34] However, these numbers are likely a low estimate because of major barriers to reporting, ultimately also deterring efforts to seek remedy.[35]

Human Rights Watch has researched and reported on the health and human rights impacts of pesticides in Brazil since 2018, documenting repeated accounts of acute pesticide poisoning as well as the negative impact on communities' ability to practice ecological farming and to share and cultivate indigenous seeds, crops, and medicinal plants.[36] Some Quilombola and Indigenous leaders also reported that the health effects of pesticides sprayed by nearby industrial farms effectively forced them to move from their land.[37]

Heavy political influence and lobbying by agribusiness and agrochemical industries not only results in deregulation of existing standards, but also makes it difficult to obtain remedy for health impacts as well as loss of land, seeds, and livelihood because of pesticides sprayed on nearby farms in Brazil.[38] Agribusiness lobbying and political influence led to the passage of amendments and new pesticide regulation, watering down the underlying safeguards that could be used to prevent health harms and seek remedies.

Those pursuing justice or remedy are often faced with threats and intimidation.[39] In 2010, a rural farmer and anti-pesticide activist, Jose Maria Filho, was shot 25 times, after multiple threats in response to his efforts to push the local municipal government to ban aerial spraying of pesticides. In 2013, a teacher received numerous threats after pushing for health care for his students after they were sprayed with pesticides, including an ominous telephone call telling him "You can hide, I will kill you."[40]

Remedy for health and other impacts of pesticide exposure can be difficult due to an emphasis on direct proof of causality of harm which disregards the precautionary principle, coupled with an overemphasis on Western scientific knowledge systems, undermining Indigenous knowledge and lived experiences.[41] Those conducting research that might contribute such scientific evidence also come under threat or are removed from their positions. Researchers studying the health impact of pesticide use in 2024 told Human Rights Watch that landowners threatened them during their investigations.[42] Multiple academics described being fired from their academic positions after publishing research demonstrating the harms of certain pesticides. [43] Larissa Bombardi, an academic researching the impact of pesticides, has been living in exile for three years, after she felt forced to leave the country following multiple threats, including from those in agribusiness.[44]

Panama

Multinational companies have initiated investment arbitration disputes against Panama, claiming that they are entitled to compensation for the impacts of government policies or court decisions that the say caused them financial harm. These claims, which would ultimately be heard by arbitration panels beyond the influence or control of Panamanian authorities, demand a cumulative total of over US$25 billion in damages.[45] These claims followed two significant legal developments in the country: the Panamanian parliament's adoption of a new law in 2023 introducing a mining moratorium and a Supreme Court ruling in 2023 (which reiterated parts of 2017 ruling) holding unconstitutional the mining concessions awarded to the companies involved with the Petaquilla concession. The 2023 Supreme Court decision also examined numerous constitutionally protected rights, including the right to environment, and held that the concession was in violation of these constitutionally protected safeguards.[46] These disputes reveal how the investment arbitration system threatens regulatory space and risks undermining domestic legal measures used for access to justice and remedy for communities, including Indigenous Peoples.