Caldas

Nariño

Caquetá

Norte de Santander

Casanare

Putumayo

Cauca

Quindío

Cesar

Risaralda

Chocó

Santander

Córdoba

San Andrés, Providencia y Santa Catalina

Cundinamarca

Sucre

Distrito Capital de Bogotá

Amazonas

Tolima

Guainía

Antioquia

Valle del Cauca

Guaviare

Arauca

Vaupés

Huila

Atlántico

Vichada

La Guajira

Bolívar

Magdalena

Boyacá

Colombia

Reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions by fifty-one percent (51%) with respect to the 2030 reference scenario of the NDC, which represents a maximum of country emissions of 169.44 million tCO2eq in 2030.

Declare by 2030, a minimum of thirty percent (30%) of the seas and continental areas under protection categories or complementary conservation strategies

Increase by 2030, by 100,000 hectares, the areas in the process of rehabilitation, recovery or restoration in the areas of the National Parks System and its zones of influence

Formulate or adjust to 2030, a minimum of one hundred thirty-five (135) Hydrographic Basin Planning and Management Plans (POMCA) incorporating considerations of variability and climate change, in accordance with the prioritization established by the Ministry of the Environment and Sustainable Development.

By 2030, at least ten percent (10%) of the companies in the prioritized sectors implement strategies, actions or projects to adapt to climate change, including small, medium and large companies, according to their vulnerability level.

By 2030, the country will reduce by 30% the areas affected by forest fires, compared to 2019, in an articulated and inter-institutional manner, operationalizing processes for the management, knowledge and risk reduction of forest fires and disaster management, through the seven strategies defined in the NDC on forest fires

By 2025, one hundred percent (100%) of the forests of Colombia will have environmental management plans in implementation

Formulate by 2030 adaptation actions in disease prevention and health promotion, which contribute to reducing the cases of climate-sensitive diseases in one hundred percent (100%) of the entities of the health sector at the departmental, district level and municipal. Additionally, by 2030 the actions will be implemented in forty percent (40%) of the aforementioned entities

Reuse by 2030 ten percent (10%) of the domestic wastewater treated by the providers of the public aqueduct service

Achieve sixty-eight percent (68%) of the treatment of domestic urban wastewater by 2030

Develop by 2030 protection and conservation actions in twenty-four (24) aqueduct supply basins in municipalities susceptible to shortages due to low rainfall and rainy seasons

Develop by 2030, structural and non-structural risk management actions for adaptation to climate change in thirty percent (30%) of the prioritized municipalities due to their susceptibility to shortages due to dry and rainy seasons

Reduce black carbon emissions by forty percent (40%) compared to 2014, which represents a maximum black carbon emission of 9,195 tons in 2030, excluding forest fires

As of 2035, at least one hundred (100) percent of the vehicles purchased.

As of 2033, at least eighty (80) percent of the vehicles purchased.

As of 2031, at least sixty (60) percent of the vehicles purchased be zero emissions or electric vehicles&nbsp;

Starting in 2029, at least forty (40) percent of the vehicles purchased shall be be zero emissions or electric vehicles&nbsp;

As of 2027, at least twenty (20) percent of the vehicles purchased shall be zero emissions or electric vehicles&nbsp;

As of 2025, at least ten (10) percent of the vehicles purchased must be zero emissions or electric vehicles

from December 1, 2025 and thereafter, the sulfur content will be a maximum of 10 ppm.

from January 1, 2023 to November 30, 2025, the sulfur content will be a maximum of 15 ppm.

from December 31, 2020, until December 31, 2022, the sulfur content shall be a maximum of 15 ppm.

As of the publication of this resolution, and until December 30, 2030, the sulfur content will be a maximum of 50 ppm.

In 2030, 32.4 Mton* of CO2 emissions eq emissions from avoided deforestation.

By 2030, Colombia will have a trade balance in the forestry sector trade balance.

To increase the protected terrestrial heritage from 12% to 17% and the marine heritage from 6% to 10%.

Halve the annual loss of natural forests by 2020, and strive to achieve zero deforestation by 2030. to achieve the goal of zero deforestation by 2030.

20% Emission Reduction below the projection made in the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) to 2030. Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) to 2030. The 30% reduction would be conditional on international cooperation.

1.71%  improvement in energy efficiency by 2022 against a 2017 baseline

1.13%  improvement in energy efficiency by 2022 against a 2017 baseline

0.73%  improvement in energy efficiency by 2022 against a 2017 baseline

Overall 9.05%, or 699,678 TJ  improvement in energy efficiency by 2022 against a 2017 baseline

5.45% improvement in energy efficiency by 2022 against a 2017 baseline

Reduction of 11.2 MTCO2 Eq in the energy mining sector by 2030 against a 2010 baseline

On May 9, 2023, a group of six citizens and three NGOs (Colectivo de Abogados José Alvear Restrepo, Censat Agua Viva and Polen Transiciones Justas) filed a lawsuit before the Adminsitrative Tribunal of Cundinamarca (the Tribunal) seeking the declaration of non- compliance by the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development and the Ministry of Mines and Energy of their obligations under Law 1931 of 2018 (art. 2 num. 7 and 8; art. 7 num. 1, 2, 3 and 5; art. 17, art. 18 and art. 31) and Law 2169 of 2021 (art. 6 num. 17; art. 13; art. 16).

On one hand, the 2018 climate action law, as it is also known, establishes guidelines for climate action in Colombia. The statute’s main goals are to put forth climate change adaptation measures, mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, reduce the population’s and ecosystem’s vulnerabilities and promote a just transition towards decarbonization. On the other, Law 2169 of 2021 establishes a baseline of minimum goals and measures of carbon neutrality and climate resilience with the aim of promoting a development low in carbon emissions.

Plaintiffs argue that both ministries have failed to promote the inclusion of climate and environmental-related impacts in management, development, planning and monitoring instruments of coal exploitation, extraction, transportation and burning, particularly large-scale mining projects. Similarly, ministries have failed to adopt the necessary measures to prevent risks generated by coal exploitation and to monitor the implementation of action programs, particularly those related to climate change action. Plaintiffs assert that there is a general lack of standards and compliance indexes that would allow to evaluate the efficacy of the measures taken by the government. They claim that the government has failed to gather crucial information regarding the increase of climate vulnerability and the quantification of emissions derived from the coal supply chain.

On July 6, 2023, the Tribunal decided to partially accept the plaintiffs’ claims. The Tribunal found that article 2 of Law 1931 of 2018 was outside the lawsuit’s scope, given that this article includes guiding principles and does not establish a concrete obligation or mandate susceptible of compliance. Moreover, the Tribunal found sufficient evidence that the Ministry of Mining and Energy had indeed complied with its obligations under articles 7 (num. 1 and 3) of Law 1931 of 2018, related to the creation of guidelines to ensure compliance of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction goals, as well as monitoring, within its functions, the development programs related to climate action. Finally, the Tribunal confirmed that the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development had complied with article 7 (num. 5), that concerns with updating the inventory of GHG and informing its progress.

However, the Tribunal declared the non-compliance by the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development of article 7 (num. 2 and 3), article 17 and article 31 of Law 1931 of 2018, as well as article 6 (num. 17), article 13 and article 16 of Law 2169 of 2021. As per the Ministry of Mining and Energy, the Tribunal declared the non-compliance of article 7 (num. 5). These articles refer to mechanisms and studies that were meant to be implemented since the issuance of the laws and have yet to be formulated, adopted and implemented, particularly those concerned with coal exploitation and supply chain. In particular, the Tribunal ordered the: (i) identification of climate impacts within the Environmental Impact Assessments of mining projects; (ii) information gathering to update GHG inventory by the Ministry of Mining and Energy; (iii) implementation and monitoring of climate action plans; (iv) creation of more specific control and monitoring processes to verify GHG emissions and its reductions; (v) inclusion in climate action plans of specific goals and measures to mitigate climate change; and (vi) mandatory report of GHG by public and private parties. The tribunal imposed a six-month deadline and ordered the defendants to submit monthly reports of the actions taken to comply.

Lastly, arguments against article 18 were dismissed due to res judicata, according to the precedent set in Office of the Inspector General and Others v. Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development and Others.

On July 13, 2023, both the plaintiffs and the defendants filed appeals. The case will now be heard by the Council of State.

In December 2022, twelve (12) members of the Indigenous community “Gran Cumbal” in Nariño, Colombia, learned of the existence of a contract between the Indigenous community’s authority and SVP Business SAS to purchase carbon credits related to the REDD+ project “Pachamama Cumbal”. Plaintiffs assert the contract was negotiated without their knowledge, despite the fact that it would impact Indigenous territory. They argue that the Indigenous authority overreached their functions and that no information was shared with the community. In June 2023, plaintiffs filed a tutela alleging that the private companies involved in the carbon credits contract and the associated REDD+ project failed to obtain their consent and violated their fundamental rights to free, prior and informed consultation, active and effective participation in decision making, territory as collective property, self-determination and environmental justice from an Indigenous perspective. 

On July 21, 2023, the Juzgado Promiscuo Municipal de Cumbal, Nariño (trial level) found that the defendants had violated the plaintiffs’ rights by failing to conduct the free, prior and informed consultation process with the entire community with regard to the carbon credits contract associated to the REDD+ project Pachamama Cumbal. The judge granted a temporary injunction against the REDD+ project and the carbon credit contract and ordered the defendants to conduct a free, prior and informed consultation process within the next six months, in accordance with the ILO Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention 169. 

The judge explicitly mentioned the benefits that REDD+ projects bring to climate action, particularly due to its prevention focus. The decision highlights the fact that these projects act as an incentive to forest protection and aid toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions. However, the lack of meaningful participation from the Indigenous community during the previous phases of the contract violated the plaintiffs` fundamental rights. More importantly, the judge underscored the blatant lack of information regarding the allocation of financial resources resulting from the purchase of carbon credits and asserted the Indigenous communities’ right to that information. Hence, the judge ordered defendants to hold a public hearing where they provide the Indigenous community with a detailed and clear financial report regarding resources from the REDD+ project and the purchase of carbon credits. 

Defendants appealed this decision and on August 23, 2023, the Juzgado Tercero Penal del Circuito de Ipiales, Nariño (appellate level) upheld the lower court’s decision. The appellate judge gave defendants two months to file the request for free, prior and informed consultation before the corresponding authority (Ministry of Interior). The Ministry then has six months to issue a decision on the matter. 

On July 24, 2023, a group of citizen members of two NGOs (Dejusticia and Ilex Acción Jurídica) filed a lawsuit against Article 57 of Law 99 of 1993. The article establishes the
definition and criteria of environmental impact assessments (EIA) in Colombia, which includes biotic, abiotic, and socioeconomic elements. Plaintiffs argue that, as it stands, this norm does not abide by the constitutional and international human rights standards, given the lack of consideration of climate change and human rights. Plaintiffs assert that even though climate
change-related standards only appeared after the law was issued, failing to update the interpretation of this legal provision results in unconstitutional restrictions and interpretation
issues that prevent EIA from complying with international commitments that have been ratified by Colombia and are part of the constitutional bloc.

The plaintiffs are not asking the Court to declare the unconstitutionality of the article since this would create a legal vacuum that could eventually derive in more significant violations of
constitutional rights. Instead, the plaintiffs asked the Court to order that the provision should be interpreted as to include climate change and human rights protection as part of the criteria to be considered when conducting an EIA. In so doing, the legal provision is updated to comply with the currently admissible constitutional standard, while its interpretation is clarified, avoiding unconstitutional applications.

The plaintiffs’ arguments were twofold: first, article 57 incurs in a lack of constitutional protection, violating articles 2, 79, 80, and 93.1 of the Colombian Constitution, as well as articles
1.1 and 2 of the American Convention on Human Rights, by failing to include impacts associated to climate change in the EIA criteria. Second, article 57 violates articles 7, 20, 74, 79, 80 and 334 of the Colombian Constitution, as well as articles 4.1, 5.1 and 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights by failing to include human rights violations in the EIA criteria. The plaintiffs claim that human rights and the environment are interconnected and that this should be reflected in the laws governing EIAs.

On January 12, 2024, the Constitutional Court declared the admissibility of the lawsuit, but only regarding the first argument supported in the alleged violation of articles 79 and 80 of the
Colombian Constitution. The arguments related to the violation of the legal provisions of the American Convention on Human Rights were dismissed. The Court also ordered several
governmental authorities, including the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, as well as NGOs such as Greenpeace Colombia, the Colombian Association of Oil and Gas, and others to provide written comments on the impacts of climate change in the interpretation of the right to a healthy environment and article 57 of Law 99 of 1993.

On July 11, 2024, the Constitutional Court found that article 57 of Law 99 of 1993 was constitutional insofar as it is understood that EIAs must include climate change among the evaluation criteria. The Court ordered the Congress to issue the necessary regulations to ensure climate change is considered when conducting activities that require EIA. The Court also ordered the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development to modify and update EIA's terms of reference. In the Court's opinion, failing to include climate change in EIA processes would amount to a violation of the Colombian Constitution and a failure to guarantee the protection of the right to a healthy environment and sustainable development.

Colombia

Recent cases