On Wednesday, October 23, Bill No. 04645/2019-PE was filed that proposed the ratification of the Escazú Agreement in the Foreign Relations Commission by 9 votes in favor and 3 against. The Predictment does not present sufficient support for its file and on some occasions, it is based on false arguments regarding the scope of the Agreement to justify this decision. Despite having favorable opinions from the Executive Branch entities, some congressmen and various civil society organizations, the Foreign Relations Commission shelved the draft legislative resolution.
In front of them, Congressmen Alberto de Belaunde, Guillermo Aliaga and Absalón Montoya drew up a proposal for an alternative opinion for discussion in the Commission. In this document, the congressmen deny the arguments of the Archive Prediction and acknowledge that the Escazú Agreement seeks to guarantee the full and effective implementation of access rights in environmental matters.
From our perspective, as the Institute for Climate Policies, an analysis was carried out to verify the veracity of the arguments shown in the Prediction. It was concluded, like the congressmen mentioned previously, that there are various fallacies mentioned in the Prediction.
Among the findings, it is evident that the Escazú Agreement does not cause a loss of sovereignty of the Peruvian State and its focus is much broader than just providing greater protection to environmental defenders. Additionally, this treaty needs to be ratified since it establishes environmental standards that complement national legislation that is still insufficient.
To see the text of the alternative Opinion: https://bit.ly/3dMOaVA