 |
|  |
|
World Day Against Pesticide Use. Argentina's Agrochemical Balance Sheet That act remains unpunished, and those who survived developed a wide range of chronic and debilitating diseases caused by exposure to the gas, including respiratory conditions, eye diseases, impaired immune system, neurological and neuromuscular damage, cancer, gynecological disorders and mental health problems, in addition to miscarriages and the birth of children with congenital malformations. An Amnesty International report estimated that more than 22,000 people have died as a direct result of exposure to the leak, and exposure-related deaths continue to occur. More than half a million people suffer some degree of permanent injury. Toxic cloud over Ezeiza and silences In our country, on November 14th, this model based on agrochemicals, and its inherent dangers, were once again laid bare. In an open area within the Spegazzini industrial park in Ezeiza, the warehouse of the company Logischem SA caught fire. The subsequent explosion at the facility spread the blaze to several neighboring factories and created a large toxic cloud. Logischem SA possessed an environmental suitability certificate issued by the authorities of the province of Buenos Aires. However, to date, neither the Buenos Aires Ministry of the Environment nor the municipal permitting authorities have provided public information about the substances declared there that combusted in the air, despite assuring that "the cloud did not represent any threat to health," after the initial hours when the recommendation was to "stay indoors" and "close the windows." Silvia Olivero Ghietto, Master in Chemistry and Environment, in a column published by Tierra Viva, points out that, according to the Interactive Air Quality Platforms for Cities (IQAir) developed by the World Meteorological Organization and the World Health Organization, air pollution with PM 2.5 particulate matter—considered the most harmful according to scientific literature—exceeded healthy limits on the night of November 14 and the hours that followed. Pollution is measured in micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3), and the maximum level to avoid health problems is 15 µg/m3; with the chemical explosion in Ezeiza, the level reached 52 µg/m3. Subsequent information, reported in various media outlets, based on statements allegedly made by one of the company's owners to the Judiciary, indicates the use of dangerous pesticides, including those restricted due to their extreme toxicity, such as methyl bromide. Logischem SA does not have any permits for this substance registered with SENASA (the National Agri-Food Health and Quality Service). Nor has any information been received from any national environmental authority. The flames, with active hotspots for more than a week, and the dense smoke after the explosion—images that multiplied on television and cell phone screens and achieved centrality in the agendas of hegemonic media—attracted great attention for a couple of days, although not enough for the authorities to report which pesticides were involved. From Logischem to Atanor and Sigma Agro, a model that exploits The fire in Spegazzini, now under investigation by the Ezeiza Prosecutor's Office (UFI 1), brought to mind other environmental crimes involving agrochemical factories, also in Buenos Aires province. These include the explosion at Atanor in San Nicolás on March 20, 2024, and the fire and explosion at Sigma Agro in Mercedes on September 27, 2019. Fabián Maggi, the lawyer in both cases, told Tierra Viva that this year there has been positive progress in the pursuit of environmental justice and the conviction of those responsible for these two incidents, despite the delays and all the difficulties encountered. In the Atanor case, the UFI No. 1 of San Nicolás summoned managers and a legal representative of the company for questioning regarding the crimes of aggravated negligent pollution, endangering public health, and violating the Hazardous Waste Law (Law 24.051) and the General Environmental Law (Law 25.675). The Environmental Forum Civil Association (FOMEA), which spearheaded the case, asserted that this decision represents a key step toward holding those who led the company criminally accountable. The company had already been convicted of irreversibly polluting the Paraná River. In the Sigma Agro case, in which a worker lost his life and one million liters of agrochemicals were spilled, Judge Patricio Arrieta ordered the criminal case against company executives Gustavo Ruffa and Jerónimo Araujo Muller to proceed to trial. The judge's decision was made on October 2nd, and the start date for the trial is still unknown. Agrochemicals in the dock The end of 2025 was expected to bring a significant milestone for those seeking to prosecute those responsible for agrochemical contamination. The legal case against three agribusiness owners, brought by Sabrina Ortiz, a resident affected by the fumigation, the plaintiff, and her lawyer, for contamination in Pergamino, was scheduled to begin its oral trial on December 3rd. The defendants were expected to be businessmen Fernando Cortese, Víctor Hugo Tiribó, and Mario Reinerio Roces, and, in a historic development, the public officials who were responsible for monitoring the fumigations but failed to do so. The next hearings were scheduled for the 4th, 16th, and 17th of this month, with the trial concluding in February. However, it was announced this Monday that Federal Oral Court No. 2 granted a request from the defendants to postpone the start of the oral trial. The trial will now begin in February. “It’s a very emotional moment, full of anticipation and hope. After going through so much pain as a mother and as someone affected, I long for justice,” Sabrina Ortiz told Tierra Viva. “Justice, not only for me and my children, but justice for those who lost their lives to poisoning, for those of us who remain, and especially for those who will come after us, for what we can leave for them, from our humble place.” In early November, within the framework of the same case, the Federal Oral Court No. 2 rejected the request to lift the precautionary measure requested by the Municipality of Pergamino and maintained the prohibition of fumigating with agrochemicals by land and air less than 1095 and 3000 meters, respectively, from the urban center of the city. In June of this year, the Supreme Court of Buenos Aires Province also reaffirmed the restriction on pesticide spraying within 1,000 meters of populated areas in the Municipality of General Pueyrredón and acknowledged the "repeated violations" by the local government in a legal action initiated twelve years ago by the Stop Fumigating Us Mar del Plata Assembly. The ruling ratifies the "preventive and precautionary" principle enshrined in the Environmental Law and recognizes that the underlying objective is "the preservation of human health and quality of life." Meanwhile, in Santa Fe, in April of this year, the province's judiciary recognized that agrochemicals cause genetic damage in people and upheld the ban on spraying within 1,000 meters of homes in the Piamonte district. The ruling states that the provincial law is outdated (regarding agrochemicals) and sets an important legal precedent. Diputóxicos Meanwhile, contrary to the jurisprudence itself and the scientific evidence that supports these precautionary measures, in the Agriculture and Livestock Commission of the Chamber of Deputies, the deputies Atilio Benedetti (UCR – Entre Ríos) and Maximiliano Ferraro (Civic Coalition – CABA) presented in October, a bill of minimum environmental protection budgets (PMPA) —File: 5621-D-2025—, which seeks to regulate fumigations with agrochemicals throughout the country. The draft text was prepared in conjunction with the Network of Good Agricultural Practices (RedBPA), comprised of agribusiness institutions and business chambers. The proposed buffer zone is only ten meters for ground spraying with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), remotely piloted aircraft, or drones; and 45 meters for aerial spraying . According to lawyer Darío Ávila, the text violates and threatens the human right to live in a healthy environment, free from any activity that puts at risk the health, life and integrity of people and non-human beings, and so that productive activities do not compromise future generations (Article 41 of the National Constitution), the right of access to drinking water and adequate food. Furthermore, Ávila points out the proposal is contrary to the environmental principle of progressivity and non-regression, which states that environmental objectives must be achieved gradually and that, once a certain environmental status has been reached, it should not be reduced. This bill – Ávila pointed out – ignores the collective legal framework developed over the last 20 years from the territories of fumigated communities, which has received favorable reception in the most recent provincial and national jurisprudence, based on scientific criteria, which has determined that fumigation cannot be carried out less than 1,095 meters from urban homes, rural school establishments, rivers, streams, and water wells. A similar text was approved in December 2024 and came into effect as provincial law in Entre Ríos, despite opposition and the "Tuesday Rounds," protests against agrochemicals and in defense of health, organized by environmental groups united in the Coordinator for a Life Without Agrochemicals in Entre Ríos - Enough is Enough. Legal action in that province was inevitable. And that happened in November of this year. Following a legal challenge, Judge Adriana Acevedo, a member of the Administrative Court of Paraná (Entre Ríos), ordered the suspension of fumigation with unmanned aerial vehicles, drones, in fields adjacent to a family home in Aldea Salto, in the Diamante department. The judge confirmed the existence of genetic damage in a 12-year-old girl, the plaintiff's daughter, and that this damage is linked to continuous exposure to agrochemicals. She also found that the requirements for drone use—registration and authorization—were not implemented in the province, rendering their use illegal. The injunction will remain in effect until the merits of the case are resolved: establishing "protection zones in accordance with scientific and constitutional standards" for agrochemical spraying; prohibiting drone spraying within 3,000 meters of these zones; and declaring unconstitutional the articles of the "Good Practices in Phytosanitary Matters" Law (No. 11,178) that establish the distances that violate "the right to health, the right to a healthy environment, the rights of children and adolescents, and the principle of progressivity/non-regression." Milei: More GMOs and fewer controls on agrochemicals Looking at the last three decades, the relationship between agricultural production and pesticide use reveals an exponential increase in the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and sprayed biocides in our country. The area sown with cereals and oilseeds increased from 19,000 hectares in 1990 to 41,182,000 (117%) in 2023, explains Javier Souza Casadinho, coordinator of the Latin American Network for Action on Pesticides and Alternatives (RAPAL). He also adds that pesticide use during the same period increased from 35 to 580 million kg/L, representing a 1,657 percent increase. Current policies further entrench the toxic, dependent, hegemonic model. “I see setbacks in every sense. One of them is the record approval of GMOs. That means more cocktails of associated poisons,” explains Marcos Filardi, a lawyer specializing in food sovereignty. “The Milei government is the government that has approved the most GMOs in this period and publicly boasts about it,” he adds. “These approvals reflect the national government’s commitment to developing technologies that enhance agricultural production, providing producers with new tools to face productive and environmental challenges, and consolidating Argentina’s leadership in agricultural biotechnology,” reads the argument from the Secretariat of Agriculture regarding the recent provisions to authorize new transgenic events. Filardi also points out other unfavorable situations: the promotion and approval of transgenic microorganisms (it went from one to more than twenty approved by the current administration) and the relaxation of the authorization, registration and import processes of agrochemicals by Senasa. “The new regulations introduced by the government further deregulate the entry, import, and manufacture of agrochemicals. Authorizations are granted based on sworn statements from the manufacturers themselves or automatically because the product is already approved in another country, for example, the United States, and incorporate a new preferential regime for the entry of products,” among other changes. “All of this falls within the framework of national policies with a very clear focus on favoring agribusiness and concentrated sectors. From lower export taxes and the promotion of the RIGI (Integrated Agricultural Production Regime), to legislative advances such as Representative Benedetti's bill or the deregulation of drone use in May of this year. This progress, at the expense of general environmental policy regulations, is all driven by the same logic: to eliminate anything the concentrated sector perceives as an obstacle to maximizing its profits,” Filardi states. Impacts on food sovereignty and health damage Among the consequences of these policies is the loss of food sovereignty. The Network of Free Chairs of Food Sovereignty and related groups (Red CALISAS) brings together more than 60 spaces established in public universities, higher education institutions, and social organizations committed to healthy, safe, tasty, and sovereign food. In their latest Annual Report on the Situation of Food Sovereignty in Argentina (Iassa) 2024, the first on the administration of Javier Milei, they warn that “the concentration of land, the predominance of monoculture and dependence on international trade affect autonomy in the provision of food” and that “the defunding or elimination of public policies, both those aimed at production and food assistance, is a common denominator.” In that vein, the report warns that “in relation to public policies aimed at agroecology and peasant and indigenous agriculture, the budget is insignificant compared to that allocated to promoting sectors of the agribusiness model. The resulting policy is clearly favorable to concentrated groups, if one analyzes the sectors with the highest economic growth and the rates of poverty, extreme poverty, and unemployment in the population.” Further scientific evidence of the devastating effects of the pesticide-dependent model on the land was published in August, with the release of the results of a European scientific study that was censored in Argentina. This study, titled "Sustainable Transition of Plant Protection ( SPRINT )," involved sampling in Argentina, specifically in the southeastern part of Buenos Aires province. All participants tested had glyphosate in their bodies (both those living in rural areas and those in urban areas). Regarding concentrations, Argentine soils have a higher average level of pesticides than those in Europe , as do samples taken from plants, air, and water. Regarding the levels found in humans, pesticides in the fecal matter of samples from Argentina were much higher . The agrochemicals found in our country included glyphosate, its metabolite AMPA, atrazine, metolachlor, 2,4-D, and chlorpyrifos. Insecticides such as fipronil, imidacloprid, and cypermethrin were also present, as well as fungicides like tebuconazole, among other dangerous substances that pose a risk to health and the environment. Experts concluded that reducing pesticide use is urgent. This December 3rd, that global call against agrochemicals is renewed, demanding it once again, for the health of communities and territories. https://www.laizquierdadiario.com/El-balance-agrotoxico-de-la-Argentina-funcionarios-complices-y-pueblos-que-piden-basta-de-venenos? Back *This article was originally published in Agencia Tierra Viva-> https://agenciatierraviva.com.ar/el-balance-agrotoxico-de-la-argentina-funcionarios-complices-y-pueblos-que-piden-basta-de-venenos/ ]. |
|
||||||
|
|||||||
