The amicus brief
As is usually the case with EDLC projects, the issues tackled by EDLC were of an international nature, leaving to the Peruvian lawyers the arguments based on national law.
The brief first documented the substantial increase in recent years in the number of undemocratic countries that have enacted laws of this type, suggesting to the court that this was not a group of which Peru would want to be a member. To show the risk in passing such a law, examples were provided of how these laws have in practice been implemented against civil society in other countries in ways that are clearly anti-democratic, thus showing the threat of misuse of such a law in any country.
Finally, the brief argued that the enactment of this law could contribute to the larger problem of the persecution of environmental defenders, pointing out that many defenders have faced defamation suits, fabricated criminal charges, or been attacked and even killed in retaliation for their activism, and that governments have been behind many of these acts. These attempts to silence "environmental speech" violate the rights of freedom of association and freedom of expression of environmental defenders and those whom they represent. Peru's new law could thus be used as yet another tool to attack environmental defenders and violate their human rights- as has in fact happened in some of the other countries that have enacted similar laws.
A victory for human rights and the environment
In a September 2007 decision, Peru’s Constitutional Tribunal struck down most of the provisions of the law. The decision was applauded by the international community, but the threat of similar laws of this type being enacted remains very real.
The restrictions imposed on NGO activity violate core values that are essential for robust debate and participation in matters of public concern, including environmental decision-making.
- Amicus curiae brief submitted by EDLC to Peru’s Constitutional Tribunal