Authors: Bruno Villalobos & Carmen Piorno
In recent years, the crime of Ecocide, defined as “unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there is a substantial likelihood of severe and either widespread or long-term damage to the environment being caused by those acts”, has reemerged as a focal point within international legal, environmental, and ethical debates. The urgency of this discourse is acutely reflected in the Peruvian Amazon, where extractive industries, deforestation, and state-led development initiatives have radically transformed ecological systems and disrupted the lives and territories of local populations. Central to both resistance and resilience in these contexts are Indigenous communities, whose ancestral knowledge, territorial governance structures, and sustained political advocacy illuminate both the consequences of ecological destruction and the possibilities for alternative, justice-oriented environmental futures.
Meet Alicia Abanto and Valeria Portugal
Alicia Abanto, former Deputy Ombudsperson of the Peruvian Ombudsman’s Office, brings extensive expertise in environmental governance, human rights, and the defense of Indigenous peoples’ rights. Notably, she contributed to the development and implementation of Peru’s landmark Law of Prior Consultation (2011). Alicia Abanto began working on environmental justice issues in 2000 while at the Ombudsman’s Office in Cajamarca, shortly after a major mercury spill caused by the Yanacocha mining company. This pivotal case shaped her career and anchored her long-term commitment to socio-environmental justice.
Valeria Portugal is a law graduate whose recent thesis addresses the legal and normative imperatives for recognizing ecocide as a crime in Peru. Valeria Portugal’s interest in environmental issues began early in her legal studies, shaped by a strong academic focus on human rights and social justice. She became particularly drawn to the impact of large-scale pollution from extractive industries on vulnerable populations, especially Indigenous communities in Peru. This concern has guided her research and continues to define her commitment to environmental protection and the defense of affected communities.
We at United Rising are honored to have had the pleasure of interviewing these two esteemed individuals, as together they offer critical insights into the legal, social, and ecological dimensions of ecocide and the vital role of Indigenous actors in shaping the future of environmental justice.
Implementing Prior Consultation in Peru: Reflections on Legal Progress and Indigenous Rights
The Law of Prior Consultation in Peru refers to the legal requirement that the government must consult with Indigenous peoples before implementing any projects or legislation that may affect their rights, territories, or way of life. The law aims to protect Indigenous rights, safeguard cultural heritage, and promote sustainable development while respecting their autonomy and traditional knowledge.
Alicia Abanto offered a detailed account of the legal and political processes that led to the creation of Peru’s Law of Prior Consultation, framing it as a pivotal advancement for both social and environmental justice in the country. Her involvement began in 2008, when she assumed leadership of the Indigenous Peoples’ Program at the Ombudsman’s Office amid escalating socio-environmental conflicts. These tensions, she noted, were rooted in long-standing structural inequalities: “Poverty and extreme poverty in Peru have an Indigenous name and surname,” she observed, emphasizing that the majority of natural resource extraction occurs on Indigenous lands. That same year, the Baguazo conflict erupted in response to legislative decrees affecting Indigenous land and forest rights, culminating in a violent confrontation that left 33 people dead and one person missing.
Against this backdrop, Abanto coordinated the drafting of a legislative proposal to institutionalize a procedure for prior consultation (‘the Bill’), a right already recognized under ILO Convention 169, which Peru had ratified in 1993. However, as she explained, the absence of a defined procedural mechanism led to the systematic evasion of this obligation by public authorities. The Bill, developed under her direction, sought to remedy this by establishing a clear framework for dialogue between the State and Indigenous communities. Despite strong political resistance at the time, the Bill eventually served as the basis for the Law of Prior Consultation, passed by Congress in 2011. Abanto remained actively involved in the law’s implementation and regulatory development, underscoring the ongoing challenges of institutional resistance and the continued need for vigilance in upholding Indigenous rights.
Prior Consultation and Social Conflict in Mining Projects
We asked Alicia Abanto about how prior consultation applies to controversial mining projects like Conga and Tía María, and why these cases have generated so much social resistance.
Alicia Abanto explained that “the right to prior consultation derived from ILO Convention 169 is a collective right for Indigenous peoples,” and not all rural populations qualify. However, she emphasized that non-Indigenous communities still have rights: “it is not that they do not have the right to be taken into account … but there are other mechanisms,” like participation and access to information. The problem, she said, is that participation “is not a mere informative act,” but authorities often treat it that way, leading to “great discontent among the population.”
This has caused many to seek prior consultation because it “sounds like a stronger right,” involving face-to-face dialogue and binding agreements: “a process of dialogue where the aspects that concern the population are addressed.” “While the law is strong, its application is flawed. In mining, for example, it is being applied at an inappropriate time … after the approval of the environmental certification,” which undermines its purpose.
In cases like Conga and Tía María, Alicia Abanto noted that “no Indigenous population belonging to these 55 Indigenous peoples has been identified,” but still, “the mechanisms for citizen participation in Peru are not sufficient and are not adequate for the protection of rights.” She concluded: “What is central … is to really take into account the opinions and concerns of the population, ensuring their protection.
Aligning Prior Consultation with Environmental Assessments
Alicia Abanto was asked how the process of prior consultation could be better aligned with the stages of investment projects, particularly in mining and hydrocarbons.
She stated that “the crucial moment of any investment project is the environmental impact assessment,” which should also include the social dimension, what she calls a “socio-environmental impact assessment” because “the social aspect is not sufficiently taken into account.”
Alicia Abanto explained that this phase is key for integrating “informative processes, participatory processes,” and, if applicable, “prior consultation … a process of face-to-face dialogue where both parties [the government and indigenous communities] have to seek agreements to protect rights.” All projects: “mining, oil, transportation, etc.” require this assessment, making it the best stage to align these efforts.
Unlike countries like Colombia or Chile, Peru has misaligned the process: “in mining it is done after, and in hydrocarbons it is done before” the environmental impact assessment. The issue, she said, lies not in the law but in lower-level decrees that “have finally distorted the prior consultation.” The solution, according to Alicia Abanto, is clear: “issuing new decrees” that integrate all three mechanisms during the environmental assessment stage.
Illegal Activities, Political Power, and the Fight Against Ecocide
Illegal activities like unregulated mining and logging are among the main drivers of environmental destruction in Peru. We asked Alicia Abanto and Valeria Portugal how these activities are tied to broader political dynamics and what role legal tools such as ecocide legislation could play in addressing them.
According to Alicia, illegal mining in Peru has surged dramatically in the past two decades, becoming “one of the greatest socio-environmental tragedies” in the country. The root causes, she explained, go beyond state inaction: “the Peruvian State does not have the capacity to stop illegal mining,” and high international gold prices serve as a “very strong perverse incentive.”
More alarmingly, she described how these activities are embedded in political structures: “illegal mining is financing political parties,” and as a result, “many of the decisions made to enact laws are no longer designed to protect the population and the common good, but rather to protect certain areas of economic exploitation.”
Valeria reinforced this point, noting that “mafias have entered political power,” worsening the country’s legal vulnerability. Illegal mining, drug trafficking, and human trafficking operate together, making the crisis even harder to control. She added that “Indigenous communities are often displaced from their territories” by illegal operations, and emphasized that even legal companies are part of the problem. Between 1997 and 2023, “there had been 1,462 emergencies due to oil spills alone,” showcasing how state oversight is failing across the board.
From Bills to Action: The Legislative Push to Criminalize Ecocide in Peru
As Peru faces mounting environmental crises, some lawmakers have begun pushing for legal reforms that could reshape how the country deals with large-scale environmental harm. Valeria and Alicia discuss recent legislative initiatives that propose recognizing ecocide as a criminal offense. What do these proposals entail, and could they meaningfully shift how environmental accountability is enforced?
Valeria outlined three active bills (7866, 7941, and 8274), two from Peru Libre (a Marxist political party) and one from Congresswoman Ruth Luque. All cite severe environmental cases like La Oroya and the Ventanilla oil spill. “These are incidents where damage remains unremediated,” Valeria noted, emphasizing the need to define ecocide as involving “serious, long-lasting, and widespread harm.”
She also stressed that the bills expand accountability beyond technical staff to company leadership. “Executives must be held responsible for systemic failures,” Valeria said, arguing that punishment must be proportional to the scale of harm.
Alicia added that the bills have made unusual progress in Congress. The Justice and Human Rights Committee issued a favorable report in late 2024, and the proposal, which includes a new Article 305-A in the Penal Code, is now on the agenda for a plenary vote. “Many bills stall for years, but this one has moved quickly,” she explained.
The proposal includes prison terms of 10 to 15 years and fines, whilst it updates existing laws to allow legal action against corporations. However, Alicia warned that political resistance remains: “Congress tends to hesitate on anything that strongly affects the business sector.”
Learning from Global Ecocide Legislation: A Path for Peru?
What lessons can Peru learn from the international community in addressing ecocide? We asked Valeria to explore the legislative progress in other countries and how Peru can create its own approach.
Valeria explained that while few countries explicitly legislate ecocide, Chile addresses serious environmental damage without using the term. She highlighted Russia’s response to the Chernobyl disaster as a clear example of ecocide, where lasting environmental harm led to legal recognition.
France, she noted, has ecocide legislation following incidents like the Garonne River pollution, and Tajikistan has also regulated ecocide due to mining damage.
She emphasized the global push by the Stop Ecocide Foundation to have ecocide recognized by the International Criminal Court. “If the ICC recognizes ecocide, it would give it the importance it deserves,” she said, stressing the impact of oil spills in Peru, particularly on vulnerable populations.
Valeria concluded that while Peru can learn from other countries, it needs to create a law tailored to its own context, “designed for Peruvians, for the future of our country.”
The Role of Civil Society and NGOs in Ecocide Legislation
We asked Alicia and Valeria about the role of civil society, NGOs, and ordinary people in ensuring the enactment of ecocide legislation.
Alicia emphasized that civil society plays a crucial role in building environmental institutions in Peru. She highlighted how civil society helped establish the Ministry of the Environment over the last two decades. However, she also pointed out that there is still a gap between laws and enforcement. “Civil society must generate knowledge, raise awareness, and ensure the state enforces environmental regulations,” she said.
She expressed concern about recent challenges, like the Peruvian government’s new law restricting NGO activities, which could harm environmental defenders. “Civil society is under attack,” Alicia said, stressing the need for public support to defend rights and democracy.
Valeria agreed, suggesting that empowering civil organizations and raising awareness, especially among younger generations, is key. “Education is vital to building environmental awareness,” she said. She also noted that Peru’s rich natural resources and cultural diversity should be highlighted in environmental education, especially beyond Lima.
Final thoughts: building the future of environmental justice
The conversation with Alicia and Valeria sheds light on the urgent need for ecocide legislation in Peru, highlighting the critical role that civil society, NGOs, and individuals play in driving meaningful change. While challenges persist, such as gaps in enforcement and the limitations placed on civil society, their reflections remind us that progress is possible through collective action and determination. The hope lies in the potential for a robust legal framework that not only prevents future environmental devastation but also ensures accountability for those responsible for such crimes.
By learning from global examples and embracing the power of education and grassroots mobilization (organizing and engaging ordinary citizens to take action), Peru can be a beacon of change in the fight against ecocide. With the engagement of future generations, the strengthening of environmental institutions, and the unwavering commitment to justice, there is a real opportunity to protect both the environment and the rights of vulnerable populations for years to come. This is a fight worth pursuing, not just for the present, but for the generations to come.