Human rights obligations cannot be subordinated to commercial seed monopolies by OHCHR, UN Working Group on Peasants   Dec. 2025   UN experts today welcomed a landmark ruling of the High Court of Kenya declaring unconstitutional provisions of the Seed and Plant Varieties Act that criminalised the saving, use, exchange and sale of Indigenous and farm-saved seeds.   “This judgment rightly recognises that seed sharing is not a crime, but a fundamental element of peasants’ identity, resilience and contribution to national food systems,” said the Working Group on Peasants and other people working in rural areas.   The High Court of Kenya found that the law, which granted exclusive marketing and property rights over seeds to breeders and seed companies and exposed farmers to potential imprisonment of up to two years for seed-saving and seed-sharing, violated farmers’ rights to life, livelihood and food.   The Court stressed that centuries-old practices of seed-sharing form the backbone of Kenya’s food security and cultural heritage.   “This decision is a significant affirmation that the human rights of peasants and the imperatives of food security and biodiversity must prevail over overly restrictive intellectual property regimes,” the Working Group said.   The experts noted that similar restrictive provisions, often modelled on the 1991 Act of the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV), have been incorporated into national laws in many countries – criminalising age-old practices in Indigenous and peasant agriculture.   “The Kenyan ruling sends a clear and timely message that human rights obligations cannot be subordinated to commercial seed monopolies or narrow interpretations of plant breeders’ rights,” the Working Group said.   The decision is consistent with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas (UNDROP), in particular article 19, which recognises the right to seeds, including the right to save, use, exchange and sell farm-saved seed or propagating material.   The experts recalled their Briefing Paper on the Right to Seeds, which clarifies that States must ensure that seed policies, certification schemes and intellectual property frameworks, are designed and applied in a manner that respects, protects and fulfils these rights, and that peasants-managed seed systems are legally recognised and actively supported.   “Courts play a critical role in ensuring that national laws comply with international human rights standards,” the Working Group said. “Where legislative frameworks have criminalised traditional seed systems or restricted peasants’ customary practices, judicial review offers an essential safeguard to restore the primacy of human rights and the right to food.”   The experts commended the courage and perseverance of Kenyan peasants, Indigenous Peoples and civil society actors who mobilised to secure seeds rights before the Court.   “Their determination offers inspiration to peasant movements worldwide and shows that when courts uphold human rights, they defend not only the livelihoods of small-scale farmers and Indigenous Peoples but also the future of diverse, resilient and sovereign food systems,” they said.   “Kenya’s ruling should inspire similar human-rights-based interpretations of seed laws and plant variety protection regimes in other jurisdictions,” the Working Group said.   http://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/12/kenyas-seed-sharing-ruling-milestone-peasants-rights-and-food-security-un   19 Dec. 2025   Domestic interpretations cannot override norms designed to protect humanity from the worst crimes. “Crimes against humanity are imprescriptible under international law.”   UN human rights experts today expressed grave concern over the content of Peru’s Constitutional Court ruling upholding the “impunity” law, which allows statutes of limitations for crimes against humanity.   “This ruling is a dangerous step backward,” the experts said. “Crimes against humanity are imprescriptible under international law.”   The majority decision of four judges upheld the constitutionality of Law 32107, arguing that the statute of limitations could apply to such crimes if committed prior to Peru’s ratification of the Rome Statute and the Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity. The Court further argued that treaty obligations were not self-executing due to an interpretative declaration, invoked legality and non-retroactivity principles, and cited lengthy proceedings.   “As a peremptory norm binding on all States, the prohibition of statutory limitations for crimes against humanity is not contingent on treaty ratification,” the experts said.   “The principle of legality does not shield perpetrators of atrocities that were criminal under international law at the time,” they said. “Neither can delays in proceedings justify impunity for grave violations.”   The UN experts recalled their previous opinions and the decisions of the Inter-American Court and Commission on Human Rights warning Peru about the illegality of the Act under international law.   “Peru is bound by the norms of general international law and by its international obligations. Domestic interpretations cannot override norms designed to protect humanity from the worst crimes,” they said.   The Court’s ruling also ordered the annulment of judicial decisions that disregard the constitutionality of the “impunity law”.   “This decision undermines judicial independence and introduces a risk of additional reprisals against justice operators who are already under attack for applying binding international standards,” the experts said.   They called on Peru to align its laws with international standards, ensure accountability, and protect judicial actors.   “Justice delayed must not become justice denied,” the experts said.   http://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/12/peru-un-experts-concerned-about-constitutional-court-ruling-impunity-law
	Investor-State dispute settlements have catastrophic consequences for human rights by Amazon Watch, Agencies   9 Dec. 2025   Amazon Watch expresses outrage at reports that the government of President Daniel Noboa has been directed and apparently intends to pay US $220 million to Chevron to honor an illegitimate Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) arbitration ruling.   Chevron has admitted in internal documents that it deliberately dumped billions of gallons of toxic waste into the Ecuadorian Amazon as a cost-saving measure. Ecuador’s courts, including the Constitutional Court, found Chevron guilty of one of the worst oil-related environmental crimes in history, issuing a $9.5 billion judgment in 2013 to clean up the contamination and provide relief for affected Indigenous and campesino communities.   By law, any Chevron assets in Ecuador should immediately be turned over to these communities to begin satisfying the debt Chevron owes.   Instead of complying, Chevron abandoned Ecuador, refused to pay, and turned to the ISDS system – a fundamentally undemocratic mechanism that allows corporations to bypass domestic courts, entirely exclude the affected communities, and use secretive arbitration panels stacked in their favor.   Chevron’s case relied on false testimony from a bribed witness and fabricated evidence. The Ecuadorian judgment remains legitimate and enforceable and is in no way invalidated by the Arbitration Panel’s award.   This entire process has been denounced worldwide as an abuse of law and an assault on the sovereignty of Ecuador and the rights of its people. It sets a dangerous precedent that corporations can poison communities, evade justice, and then profit from secret trade tribunals.   Ecuadorians themselves reject Ecuador’s participation in the flawed ISDS system. In 2024, a proposal to to include international arbitration mechanisms to resolve disputes was voted down by 64.8% of the Ecuadorian population. It is notable that as flawed as this process has been, the ISDS award was vastly lower than the US $3 billion Chevron sought.   Statement from Paul Paz y Mino, Amazon Watch Deputy Director:   “Let’s be clear: this illegitimate arbitration process is nothing more than Chevron abusing the law to escape accountability for one of the worst oil disasters in history. Ecuador’s courts ruled correctly and based largely on Chevron’s own evidence, that Chevron deliberately poisoned Indigenous and rural communities, leaving behind a mass cancer zone in the Amazon.   Adding insult to injury, the idea that Ecuador’s people should now pay a U.S. oil company that admitted to deliberate pollution is the epitome of environmental racism.   Noboa must not honor this ISDS award, and the international community must stand behind the victims of Chevron’s crimes and demand that the company clean up Ecuador once and for all.   “Amazon Watch stands with the affected Indigenous peoples and communities of the Ecuadorian Amazon. We urge President Noboa to reject this illegitimate award, disclose any negotiations with Chevron, and enforce Ecuadorian law by ensuring Chevron pays its debt to those it poisoned.”   Statement by the Union of Peoples Affected by Chevron-Texaco:   “Ecuador’s State Prosecutor’s Office celebrated the reduction of the ISDS award for Chevron to $220 million as if it was a success and an economic achievement. The reality is it is a defeat for justice. For 32 years, UDAPT has documented pollution, environmental crime, and lives broken by Chevron, proving what should be obvious: communities have not recovered, health has not been restored, clean water has not returned, and the territories that sustain life remain contaminated. A debt is not owed to Chevron. A debt is owed to the Amazonian families still waiting for truth, justice, and full reparation.”   Statement from human rights lawyer Steven Donziger:   “The decision by a so-called private corporate arbitration panel that claims to absolve Chevron of its massive pollution liability in Ecuador has no legitimacy and does not affect the historic $9.5 billion damages judgment won by Amazonian communities. That judgment still stands as the definitive public court ruling in the case. The private arbitral panel has no authority over the six public appellate courts, including the Supreme Courts of Ecuador and Canada, that issued unanimous decisions against Chevron and confirmed the extensive evidence that the company devastated local communities by deliberately dumping billions of gallons of cancer-causing oil waste into rivers and streams used by thousands of people for drinking, bathing, and fishing.   “I also strongly condemn President Daniel Noboa for his plans to betray his own people by agreeing to send $220 million from the public treasury to Chevron, a company that owes Ecuador billions under multiple court orders for poisoning vulnerable Indigenous peoples with toxic oil waste. Noboa would effectively grant Chevron a taxpayer-funded bailout financed by the same citizens who remain victims of the company’s pollution. This would be an outrageous dereliction of duty and a violation of his oath of office, warranting removal.“   http://amazonwatch.org/news/2025/1209-amazon-watch-responds-to-reports-that-ecuador-told-to-pay-220-million-to-chevron/ http://insideclimatenews.org/news/10122025/ecuador-to-pay-chevron-220-million-amazon-pollution http://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/10/investor-state-dispute-settlements-have-catastrophic-consequences http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/08/chevron-amazon-ecuador-steven-donziger-erin-brockovich http://news.mongabay.com/2018/08/chevron-must-pay-for-environmental-damage-in-ecuador-court-rules/   1 Dec. 2025   More than 150 faith-based organizations from 25 countries have launched an open letter supporting an El Salvadoran ban on metals mining that was overturned by President Nayib Bukele in 2024.   The original ban was passed by the country’s legislature in 2017 following years of study and the advocacy of El Salvador’s religious communities. The letter signatories, which include 153 global and regional groups from a wide range of traditions, stood with faith groups in El Salvador in calling both for no new mining and for an end to the political persecution of land and water defenders.   "Inspired by Christian teachings that recognize water and nature as a sacred gift from God, and reaffirmed by Pope Francis in Laudato Si, we echo the call of Salvadoran church leaders that the reintroduction of mining would exacerbate environmental and humanitarian threats. Mining would exacerbate the already dire water contamination in El Salvador, further polluting the Lempa River, which supplies water to over 60 percent of the population.   They remind us that access to water is a fundamental human right and that clean water is not a commodity, but a shared inheritance entrusted to all people by God. And they remind us that ending the mining ban is fueling egregious rights violations against those organizing to protect their water and land from destruction.."   http://ips-dc.org/statement-from-faith-organizations-in-25-countries-in-support-of-the-salvadoran-people-and-their-religious-leaders-and-institutions-ban-on-metals-mining http://www.hrw.org/news/2025/12/01/an-opportunity-to-address-mining-abuses-globally Visit the related web page
	View more stories