Pesticides News reports regularly on pesticide health and environmental problems in developing countries and community struggles to tackle these. Three recent cases in Latin America won important legal victories[1].

Paraguay death
Since 2004, the Talavera Villasboa family in Paraguay has been fighting for justice over the death of their 11 year old son Silvino, poisoned by pesticide sprayed by neighbouring large-scale soya growers [PN65 p9, PN 74 pp6-7]. After a series of court rulings and counter appeals, the country’s Supreme Court of Justice rejected the last appeal of the defendants Laustenlager and Schlender in November 2006. A verdict of culpable homicide was reinstated and both men were sentenced to two years imprisonment. The vast majority of poisoning cases receive no publicity and are immune from legal recourse and so this set an important precedent in Paraguay as the first legal case on pesticide poisoning. It signalled that, with support from peasant farmer organisations and from health, development and human rights organisations, it was possible for a poor campesino family to win against powerful landowners. However, in February 2007, supporters of the Justice for Silvino Talavera campaign in Paraguay were outraged to hear that a judge has unconstitutionally suspended the jail sentences of the two farmers convicted. Instead they will merely be given community service tasks. Overturning the sentence will allow those culpable of actions that harm and kill nearby communities to spray with impunity. The Talavera Villasboa family and supporters will be appealing. More information on the campaign is available at www.silvinotalavera.phy.ca

Costa Rica aerial spraying
In Costa Rica, communities whose health and livestock have been affected by aerial spraying by banana companies [PN67 p11] achieved legal success. In December 2006, the Supreme Court accepted an appeal against the Ministry of Health, submitted two years earlier by Sr. Levy, natural resources inspector in Limon district, on behalf of a group of workers, farmers and residents suffering chronic dermatitis and respiratory problems. Although the banana plantation, crop-spraying company and the Health Minister have denied causing harm or conducting aerial application in contravention of national regulations (or permitting them), the Court tribunal ruled in favour of the appeal. Inspections of the spray zones showed beyond doubt that the distance between the plantations and houses was insufficient and that strong winds would carry drift directly onto them. Testimonial evidence from workers on long-term health impacts in relation to exposure was also influential. The Court partially accepted the claimants’ case that current aerial application regulation is not adequate to guarantee citizens’ constitutional rights to a healthy living environment. The Ministry of Health is charged with paying costs related to health and environmental damage caused in the Bananito Sur community and the Minister could face fines or a jail sentence if the Ministry does not improve its conduct.

Chile farmworker illness
In Chile, a group of 22 farm workers fell ill following pesticide exposure in 2004, including several women suffering severe skin burning, leaving two permanently scarred [PN71 p16]. The farmer responsible for the spraying and for allowing harvest teams to enter sprayed fields appealed against the sentence and fine for non-compliance with workplace health and safety regulations. In late 2006, Chile’s Supreme Court upheld the sentence imposed by the Maule regional court on Sr. Navarette Rojas. However, the affected workers, PAN groups and women’s organisations stress that the recent ruling does not address all the issues raised by this case. The state agency for agricultural services only collected plant samples 10 days after the poisoning incident, while the women workers continue to press for state compensation for damage to their health and livelihoods. Inhuman and illegal working conditions remain the reality for many of Chile’s seasonal farm workers. Others who have suffered pesticide-related harm are too scared to speak out, following threats that they will lose their jobs. (SW)