Inclusive Development International condemns this decision, which denies the overwhelming scientific consensus about the human costs of climate change and the lived experience of communities in the United States and around the world who have already suffered its impacts in the form of deadly storms, flooding, wildfires and droughts.

“This is nothing short of ecocide by the Trump Administration,” said David Pred, Executive Director of Inclusive Development International. “As the world’s biggest historic emitter of greenhouse gases, the United States bears the largest responsibility for halting the climate crisis, but this wanton deregulatory action hits the gas in reverse, with full knowledge of the severe and widespread damage that it will do to the planet and its ability to sustain current and future generations.”  

Inclusive Development International has been working with communities around the world to stop harmful fossil fuel projects for years. Our focus has been on preventing the local health and environmental impacts of fossil fuel extraction and use, as well as the long-term, global impacts of climate change, which fall disproportionately on communities and countries that have contributed the least to the problem. 

This misguided move by the E.P.A. will rightfully face immediate legal challenges, but its direct implications on U.S. policy, and the example it sets for governments and multilateral institutions around the world, will make it much harder to expedite the clean energy transition that is our only hope for maintaining a liveable planet. This only strengthens our resolve to continue fighting fossil fuel expansion and defending the right of all peoples to live in a safe and healthy environment now and into the future.

The post The Trump Administration is Endangering the Future of Life on Earth appeared first on Inclusive Development International.

The proposal notes that while a rapid shift to renewable energy use is urgently needed, transition mineral mining, large-scale renewable energy infrastructure and other projects being pursued are enormously land-intensive, and current approaches to land acquisition for such projects routinely lead to forced displacement and other rights violations.  

“Unless the major industries involved—including mining companies, their downstream buyers and the development banks and other financial institutions backing them—adopt a fundamentally different approach to how communities are treated when their land is needed for investment projects, we will replicate the injustices of the extractive, fossil economy we are trying to leave behind,” said David Pred, executive director of Inclusive Development International.   

Proposal for a just alternative to development-forced displacement 

The proposed new approach puts forward a framework for shifting policy and practice away from the prevailing paradigm that accepts forced displacement of communities “in the way of development,” towards a new approach to engaging project-affected people that is rooted in respect for their dignity, knowledge and capabilities to make their own development choices.  Core principles include:  

1. Communities should have access to independent technical and legal support to conduct mapping and baseline studies of their land and resources, assess the impacts of project design options, and shape the development benefits they wish to attain from the project. 

2. Designs that avoid displacement and other significant community impacts to the maximum extent possible should be prioritized—only after fully exploring avoidance options should unavoidable impacts be addressed, with a focus on minimizing their duration and maximizing restoration and return of land.  

3. Rights-based mediation that addresses power imbalances should be used to forge fair and equitable agreements that prevent harm to communities and provide compensation and development benefits that sustainably improve their living standards and well-being.  

4. Involuntary resettlement should only be carried out in the most exceptional circumstances, in strict accordance with international human rights law principles—any invocation by governments of “public interest” to justify expropriation and override community objections must be subject to a rigorous human rights assessment. In the case of Indigenous Peoples, expropriation should not proceed without their Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC).  

5. Community-company agreements should be legally binding and enforceable by communities themselves—with the support of legal counsel—through courts, human rights-compliant arbitration, such as under the Hague Rules on Business and Human Rights Arbitration, or other accessible and effective enforcement mechanisms.   

6. Development finance institutions, commercial lenders, investors and buyers should enable this approach by contributing resources for independent technical and legal support for communities and by offering mediation services for upfront agreement making, and they should use their leverage to ensure that obligations to communities are met throughout the project cycle. 

As the leading private sector standard setter on environmental and social issues, the IFC’s adoption of a just approach to community engagement would have a catalytic effect. More than 150 organizations, including financial institutions that are signatories to the Equator Principles, export credit agencies, and Development Finance Institutions rely on the IFC’s Performance Standards, and many individual corporations commit to their implementation in their operations. In April 2025 the IFC commenced a multi-year update of its Sustainability Framework, including the Performance Standards, offering a critical opportunity for change.  

“This moment requires more than tinkering on the edges of the IFC Sustainability Framework. It calls for a wholesale new approach that starts by recognizing affected communities—not as passive stakeholders as they are currently treated—but as rights-holders with the capability and the power to exercise agency over decisions that may fundamentally alter their lives,” said Natalie Bugalski, senior legal and policy director at Inclusive Development International, and the lead author of the proposal.  

“This is not actually a radical proposition—it just means incorporating concrete measures into the Performance Standards that will give effect to the commitment that the IFC and other institutions already make to realizing broad community support for their projects.” 

The post Rights Groups Call for an End to Forced Displacement to Advance a Just Energy Transition  appeared first on Inclusive Development International.

These ‘coal banks’ are the focus of a new campaign and website launched by the coalition today. The website lists all 98 banks and spotlights the ‘dirty dozen’ banks their research suggests could end up backing the highest number of new coal power projects. These include State Bank of India, Bank of India, Mizuho Financial Group, Bank of Baroda, Bank of China, Union Bank of India, DBS Bank, CTBC Bank, Maybank, Indian Bank, Canara Bank, and ICBC.

Inclusive Development International’s research identified 44 coal power projects that have been announced or proposed in India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Laos, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Mongolia, Pakistan, and Thailand. If developed, the projects would expand coal power capacity in these countries by 10%,[1] adding nearly 40GW of new coal capacity, more than Germany or Russia’s operating coal power capacity. 

The group also identified 98 global commercial banks likely to be approached to finance these projects, based on their banking relationships with project developers and their past financing for coal plants in the region. When approached by the End Coal Finance coalition on their potential involvement in financing these 44 coal expansion projects, only 23 banks responded, with only 16 banks committing not to provide direct finance for any of the projects. However, none of the 98 banks offered evidence of having internal policies in place that would prevent financing companies expanding their coal activities, opening the possibility of indirectly financing these projects.

Some of the announced projects, like Udupi power station and Udangudi Super Critical Thermal Power Project in India, or Ha Tinh Formosa Plastics Steel Complex power station in Vietnam, aim at expanding operational coal power stations that have already received backlash and opposition for the severe impacts on the livelihoods of local communities and the environment. Other projects concern the development of greenfield coal-fired power stations, and projects like MP Adani power station or JSW Utkal Steel power station have already experienced strong local resistance.

“The willingness of so many commercial banks to continue to finance coal is disheartening, when the science is clear that, to curb the climate crisis, all coal expansion should be immediately stopped. If we also consider the adverse impacts on local communities and the environment that many of these projects are set to cause, the picture becomes even more grim. Crucially, these 44 projects will not materialise without the support of financial institutions and we won’t stop until these banks rule out their involvement,” said Camilla Perotti, Banks and Coal Campaigner at BankTrack.

“This massive new wave of coal power expansion threatens to derail the efforts made across Asia, and globally, to wean the world off coal. These banks must commit to stop financing coal projects and their developers, so that the harm done by coal to communities, livelihoods and the planet can be brought to an end,” said Daniel Willis, Coal Finance Campaigner at Recourse. 

“While many large multinational banks have pledged to stop financing coal in recent years, our research shines a light on the regional and national banks that continue to fund coal in Asia. These banks have slipped under the radar for too long. They must stop providing a lifeline to an industry that has caused such harm globally and to the people of Asia.” Dustin Roasa, Research Director at Inclusive Development International, said.

“The persistence of coal financing by banks will overshadow efforts to achieve Indonesia’s Paris Agreement commitments amid efforts to end this addiction. Furthermore, this financing would only exacerbate the destruction of living space due to extraction activities and further make Indonesia’s existing climate issue worse.” Novita Indri, Fossil Fuels Energy Campaigner at Trend Asia, said.

More details regarding the projects and the banks that may be involved in their financing, as well as the banks’ positions on coal expansion, can be found on the End Coal Finance website, launched today.

Notes to editors:

[1] The project focused on coal power projects identified in South- and Southeast Asia, with the exclusion of China. 

The post Major ‘coal banks’ refuse to stop financing coal power boom in Asia appeared first on Inclusive Development International.

• Germany’s OECD National Contact Point for Responsible Business Conduct has issued a statement responding to complaints over Heidelberg Materials’ controversial plans to construct a cement mine and factory in Central Java.  
• Local and Indigenous communities oppose the planned mine, which could threaten critical ecosystems and water supplies for an entire region.
• In its statement, the National Contact Point calls on Heidelberg Materials to provide the affected communities with the environmental and social impact assessment for the project.  

Germany’s OECD National Contact Point for Responsible Business Conduct (NCP) has published a final statement in response to a complaint filed against Heidelberg Materials regarding the company’s controversial plans to build a cement mine and factory in Central Java. Community groups and ​​​​the Indonesian government have warned that mining in the area would do irreparable harm to Indigenous and other local populations. The complaint states that the project jeopardizes the water supply and agriculture of at least 35,000 people and threatens sites of spiritual importance to the Indigenous Samin people. The project also threatens the sensitive local karst system, which acts as a natural ​​carbon sink and prevents soil erosion and landslides in the area. In its final statement, the NCP calls on Heidelberg Materials to provide the affected communities with its environmental and social impact assessment, as recommended by the OECD Guidelines. 

The statement follows a nearly four-year process facilitated by the NCP, including an attempt at mediation between the company and complainants that ultimately failed to progress due to the company’s insistence on excessive confidentiality requirements. “The secrecy demanded by the company would have prevented the community representatives involved from freely consulting those affected about the process. Such excessive confidentiality rules are not only unnecessary, they also threaten to destroy trust and solidarity within the communities during a potentially lengthy mediation process,” says Mathias Pfeifer from FIAN Germany. 

“[The mediation] was only ended because we couldn’t agree on the issue of confidentiality. During the mediation, we actually wanted to explain the situation on site, the problematic consultation process and much more to Heidelberg Materials. We were unable to convey all of this because the process had to be ended prematurely,” says community spokesperson Bambang, who was involved in the mediation. 

Heidelberg Materials, one of the world’s largest cement manufacturers, has faced strong public pressure to cancel the Central Java project. This has included numerous protests in Indonesia and at Heidelberg’s annual general meetings in Germany, and a lawsuit in Indonesian courts. The company, formerly known as HeidelbergCement, is currently trying to raise its profile in the areas of environmental and social responsibility. Its activities in Central Java and other problematic projects call its commitments into question. 

“Heidelberg Materials has a responsibility under international human rights law to disclose the project impact assessment to affected communities and explain how they would be affected by the project. These communities have a right to participate in decision making, including on whether such a high risk project should proceed,” said Natalie Bugalski, senior legal and policy director at Inclusive Development International, which has been serving as one of the advisors to communities in Central Java impacted by the project.  “In failing to take these steps, Heidelberg Materials is failing in its human rights and environmental due diligence responsibilities and risks material harm to future operations should the project be developed.” 

Inclusive Development International and FIAN Germany supported the community representatives in the complaints process. Together with the Heinrich Böll Foundation, Watch Indonesia!, Rettet den Regenwald and the Stiftung Asienhaus, they will continue to support the affected communities. “We will continue our fight to prevent the construction of the cement factory in our village. The land is a legacy of our ancestors. It is for agriculture to feed our children and grandchildren. The Kendeng Mountains are also an important water reservoir, and limestone mining will damage this water reservoir. If there is a water shortage, we women will be the first to be affected,” explains Suparmi, a community representative from the village of Tambakromo. 

“The project in Pati would disrupt access to water and threaten the food security for thousands of people. This would be a clear violation of the German Supply Chain Act,” adds Mathias Pfeifer from FIAN Germany. Heidelberg Materials and its subsidiaries are subject to the German Supply Chain Act, which came into force in January 2023. 

Further information:  

• The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, a set of principles and standards for responsible business conduct, require OECD member states to establish a National Contact Point to deal with complaints against multinational enterprises that do not comply with the regulations.  
• The final report of the NCP is available at: https://www.bmwk.de/Redaktion/DE/Beschwerdefaelle-NKS/Abschliessende-Erklaerung/kendeng-gebirge-gegen-heidelberg-cement-ag.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=13
• The OECD complaint is available at: https://www.inclusivedevelopment.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Complaint-to-German-NCP-Regarding-HeidelbergCement_9Sept2020_Redacted-for-pub.pdf
• More information on the importance of karst systems in mitigating climate change and natural disasters can be found at: https://th.boell.org/en/2021/03/03/why-we-should-protect-karst-landscapes 
• A 2017 ​​special impact assessment by the Indonesian Presidential Office and Ministry of Environment and Forestry outlines significant risks posed by mining in this region, including stating that “several rare, protected animals will face further degradation or even become extinct” if development in the Kendeng Mountains continues.
• Heidelberg Materials’ social and environmental record has been in the spotlight before, including: 
  • In 2016, Human Rights Watch released a report detailing how the company’s quarry in the occupied Palestinian territories is contributing to violations of international humanitarian law and human rights abuses.  
  • For years, Western Sahara Resource Watch has raised concerns regarding the company’s operations in Western Sahara potentially contributing to illegal military occupation.  
  • Local communities in South Wales, UK, are also seeking to challenge the expansion of a quarry by a Heidelberg subsidiary that they allege threatens local wildlife, homes, and public health.

The post German government calls on Heidelberg Materials to disclose environmental and social risk assessment for Indonesia mine appeared first on Inclusive Development International.

As the joint civil society recommendations note, the world urgently needs to transition away from fossil fuels and to renewable energy sources, but the transition must be pursued in a way that advances justice, equity, and human rights. The joint civil society recommendations are meant to help guide the UN Secretary-General’s Panel toward a transformative approach to increasing transition mineral supply while contributing to a more just global energy system.

Key principles outlined in our recommendations include the importance of ensuring human rights and environmental protections in the mineral supply chain and pursuing equitable reductions in energy and mineral demand.

The post Joint Civil Society Recommendations to the UN Secretary-General’s Panel on Critical Energy Transition Minerals appeared first on Inclusive Development International.

• The International Finance Corporation (the World Bank Group’s private lending arm) has indirectly financed captive coal development in Indonesia, finds a new report released today by climate and human rights organizations. 
• The report highlights the cases of two coal-powered nickel refineries on Obi Island in Indonesia, which are funded by the IFC’s financial intermediary clients. The IFC has indirectly financed at least one of these projects.
• ‘Captive’ coal units [1] are often constructed to power the processing of metals, such as nickel or steel, deemed critical to decarbonisation efforts.
• While nickel processing plants play a role in electric vehicle supply chains, their use of captive coal is undermining energy transition efforts and causing harm to communities. 
• The report argues that the publicly-funded Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) are at risk of funding a boom in climate-busting ‘captive’ coal, despite commitments to end coal funding and align with global efforts to phase out fossil fuels. 

A new analysis, published today by Recourse, Trend Asia and Inclusive Development International, demonstrates that publicly-funded Multilateral Development Banks are at risk of funding a wave of ‘captive’ coal expansion in climate-vulnerable countries, despite commitments to shift funds from fossil fuels to renewable energy.

Loopholes in existing policy commitments to end coal funding from the World Bank and the International Finance Corporation (the Bank’s private sector arm) mean that these institutions can still fund ‘captive’ coal units designed to support industrial processes [2]. The report highlights two examples of captive coal projects in Indonesia that have been financed by Hana Bank Indonesia and OCBC NISP, financial intermediary clients of the IFC, and argues that the IFC has indirectly financed at least one of these projects.

Captive coal units, usually constructed to support industrial processes such as metal smelting or cement production, are set to become more common in the coming decade. For example, in Indonesia, while the government has committed (under its Just Energy Transition Partnership Plan) to reduce grid-connected coal capacity by almost half between 2030 and 2045, it is set to more than double its captive coal capacity (from 14.2 GW to 32.7 GW) to power its burgeoning transition minerals industry [3]. As a result, captive coal expansion will lead to an overall increase in Indonesia’s coal capacity up until 2045, undermining any reductions in greenhouse emissions achieved through coal decommissioning. 

Daniel Willis, finance campaigner at Recourse, said: “At present, the World Bank Group is blind to the risks that captive coal poses to people and planet. It would be a great irony if, in the name of financing the production of materials needed for the renewable energy transition, multilateral development banks also financed the rapid expansion of climate-busting captive coal. The World Bank Group must focus on supporting climate projects that do no harm, and that accelerate, rather than hold back, the decarbonization of industry.”

The report is published alongside a case study [4] on the impacts of nickel processing and captive coal development on Obi Island in Indonesia, which include air pollution, health problems, biodiversity loss and exacerbated poverty. As the case study details, the IFC has indirectly financed at least one of these projects via a financial intermediary client. Another financial intermediary, which the IFC has funded to invest in climate-friendly projects, has also funded a separate coal-powered nickel facility on the island. 

Novita Indri, energy campaigner at Trend Asia, said: “An energy transition process that still leaves room for coal use is not appropriate or equitable. More coal use will only bring us to the brink of failing to achieve the Paris Agreement goals and will exacerbate the damage and suffering of the environment and people living around Indonesia.”

The report calls on the World Bank Group to close loopholes in its existing policies to ensure that it does support projects related to captive coal, and that it instead supports renewable energy alternatives that do no harm for powering industries. Campaigners are also calling on all Multilateral Development Banks to improve the transparency of financial intermediary investments, and on investors that have supported coal projects to provide remedial action for affected communities. 

David Pred, Executive Director of Inclusive Development International, said:“Captive coal power is still coal power, whatever it’s used for, and comes with the same human and environmental costs. Neither the plants nor the projects that depend on them can be called green and they shouldn’t be getting backing–directly or indirectly–from the World Bank or any institution that is committed to sustainable development.”

END

Photo: Captive coal power plant behind a school on Obi Island. Credit: Esa Setiawan/Trend Asia.

Notes

1. ‘Captive’ coal units are coal-fired power plants that exclusively serve industrial facilities, rather than providing energy to the grid.
2. For example, the IFC’s Green Equity Approach explicitly states that its definition of coal-related projects “excludes captive coal-fired power plants used for industrial applications”. See Page 9: https://www.ifc.org/content/dam/ifc/doc/2023-delta/ifc-approach-to-greening-equity-investments-in-financial-institutions.pdf
3. Just Energy Transition Partnership. (2023). Comprehensive Investment and Policy Plan 2023, p.84. https://jetp-id.org/storage/official-jetp-cipp-2023-vshare_f_en-1700532655.pdf.
4. The two coal-powered nickel smelters in question are the PT Halmahera Jaya Feronikel ferronickel smelter and the PT Halmahera Persada Lygend HPAL nickel refinery.

The post Policy gaps allow World Bank Group to indirectly finance captive coal appeared first on Inclusive Development International.

Key Points:

• According to a complaint filed with the UK government by human rights and environmental advocates this week, Standard Chartered violated international guidelines for responsible business conduct by co-financing four coal-fired power plants that have devastated local communities in the Philippines.
• The complaint was filed with the UK National Contact Point for Responsible Business Conduct, a government office tasked with investigating breaches of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.
• Local communities have reported increased respiratory and skin disease, land disposession, eviction and impoverishment directly resulting from the construction of the power plants.
• The affected communities and NGOs are calling on Standard Chartered to contribute to the remediation process and strengthen its policy on remediation.

Human rights and environmental advocates filed a formal complaint with the UK government this week accusing Standard Chartered bank of contributing to human rights violations and failing to provide remediation for harms caused by four coal plants it co-financed in the Philippines. The complaint was filed with the OECD’s National Contact Point for Responsible Business Conduct (NCP) in the UK, a government office tasked with investigating breaches of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.

The Philippine Movement for Climate Justice (PMCJ), Inclusive Development International (IDI), Recourse and BankTrack submitted the complaint on behalf of local communities that have suffered a wide range of adverse human rights impacts as a result of the development of coal plants, including forced eviction and loss of livelihoods, air- and water pollution-related  respiratory and skin diseases, and intimidation and violence.  

Attn. Aaron Pedrosa, Lead Counsel and Head of the Philippine Movement for Climate Justice (PMCJ) Legal Team, said: “Standard Chartered which professes to adhere to core human rights and business principles must live up to its commitment. Where a higher degree of care is expected for high risk investments, SC must not be allowed to get away with murder by funding polluting and environmentally destructive coal plants without being held to account for harms caused to lives, livelihoods, environment, climate and human rights.”

The complainants argue that Standard Chartered contributed to these harms through its irresponsible financing of the plants—specifically, by failing to identify and prevent the harms through effective due diligence and failing to cooperate in the remediation of harms that arose as a result—in violation of its responsibilities under the OECD Guidelines. As the complaint alleges, the bank therefore has a responsibility to contribute to remedy, for example by providing medical assistance, livelihood support and compensation for lost income, and using its leverage with the coal companies it finances to stop and/or mitigate ongoing air, noise and water pollution.

Kate Geary, Co-Director at Recourse, said: “Banks that are prepared to profit from high risk investments must also be prepared to remedy the harms caused to health, livelihoods and the environment by those investments, as Standard Chartered’s own policies says it will. Communities have articulated a clear vision of how those harms can start to be repaired, it is now up to Standard Chartered, and the other financiers of these coal plants, to step up.”

Will O’Sullivan, climate campaigner at BankTrack, said: “After years seeking a healthy return on these dirty investments, Standard Chartered now wants to wash its hands of them. But the bank invested hundreds of millions of dollars to build these four plants, which will dump millions of tonnes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere over their lifetime. The people living in these coastal areas deserve to be compensated by Standard Chartered and all the other financial institutions that supported the projects for years.”

David Pred, Executive Director of Inclusive Development International, said: “Standard Chartered knew or ought to have known that these coal plants would wreck the environment and cause serious harm to local communities, but it financed them anyway and then  ignored our repeated requests to contribute to remediation efforts. In its Human Rights position statement, Standard Chartered claims to provide remedy or cooperate in remediation processes when it contributes to adverse impacts—now is the time for the bank to live up to those words with action.”  

Opposition to the coal plants is longstanding and the harm they have caused has been well-established. Standard Chartered has already been made aware of the harms these coal plants have caused. PMCJ has led climate marches that protest the health burden and climate damage resulting from the developments, and nonviolent Greenpeace protesters have been assaulted by guards protecting the Masinloc plant, among those co-financed by Standard Chartered. Tragically, the high-profile murder of Filipino land defender Gloria Capitan occurred after her opposition to coal projects subcontracted by San Miguel Corporation, one of the developers of the coal power plants in this complaint. Standard Chartered has a close financial relationship to San Miguel Corporation, including underwriting multiple bond issuances by the company which are still outstanding. Standard Chartered is the longest established international bank in the Philippines. 

It is also not the first complaint that these communities have filed to seek recourse for the harms they have suffered in relation to the plants. An investigation prompted by a 2017 complaint to the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman of the International Finance Corporation (an IFC financial intermediary client was also among the plants’ co-financiers) concluded that the coal plants Standard Chartered helped finance likely caused a range of harms that were “of a significant nature,” including adverse health impacts due to coal ash pollution of the air and contamination of water; impacts on livelihoods due to coal ash contamination; displacement and resettlement related impacts; threats against and intimidation of community activists and inadequate stakeholder engagement and consultation.

Additional Resources:

Our complaint to the UK NCP against Standard Chartered: https://www.inclusivedevelopment.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/complaint_to_uk_ncp_standard_chartered.pdf

Joint complaint to the CAO filed against IFC in 2017: https://www.inclusivedevelopment.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Letter-of-Complaint-to-CAO_Phillippines-Coal-final.pdf

The post UK’s Standard Chartered assailed for financing Philippines coal boom appeared first on Inclusive Development International.

MUFG’s withdrawal follows that of Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group (SMBC Group), reinforcing the growing opposition to the pipeline. The StopEACOP campaign welcomes MUFG’s decision, underscoring the need for financial institutions like Standard Bank to follow suit and withdraw support for the project. With all three Japanese megabanks distancing themselves from EACOP, the spotlight now turns to Chinese lenders considering involvement in the project. Read the full press statement here.

The post Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Joins Growing List of Banks Distancing Themselves from East African Crude Oil Pipeline appeared first on Inclusive Development International.

We, the undersigned climate justice and human rights advocates worldwide, call for the immediate release of prominent environmental lawyer, Dang Dinh Bach, who is serving a five year prison sentence in Vietnam on trumped-up tax evasion charges after advocating for the country’s movement away from coal.

Bach has declared that on June 24, 2023 – the two-year anniversary of his arrest – he will go on a hunger strike to the death in defense of his innocence. In his own spirit of nonviolent and peaceful protest, we are launching in solidarity with him a relay hunger strike” joining him in solidarity in a relay hunger strike from May 24 through June 24, to raise awareness about this extreme injustice and call for his release.

We are running out of time to address the climate crisis. Action is urgent, and across the world, steps are being taken to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and mitigate the impacts of climate change for future generations. The Vietnamese government itself has committed to net zero emissions by 2050 and accepted a $15.5 billion deal to support a just transition to clean energy. But this cannot succeed with climate leaders like Bach in jail.

Bach is one of four members of the Vietnam Sustainable Energy Alliance who were imprisoned in Vietnam, despite playing an instrumental role in the country’s ambitious climate commitments, indicating an ongoing and highly concerning trend.

Bach has dedicated his life to improving the health and well-being of marginalized communities throughout Vietnam and worked tirelessly to limit pollutants such as plastic, asbestos, and coal. “I have witnessed so many painful stories of poverty and terrible diseases that weigh on abused communities in Vietnam,” said Bach in a recent statement from prison. “They are deprived of their land and livelihoods and do not have opportunities to speak out for justice and the right to be human in the face of environmental pollution, especially in places with coal-fired power plants across the country. In order to conceal the truth and threaten the voices of people, the Vietnamese authorities have arrested, convicted and unjustly detained environmental and human rights activists in defiance of national and international law.”

This is why we, the global community, stand in solidarity with Bach through peaceful protest and call for his release, as well as an end to retaliation against government and civil society actors in Vietnam and around the world pushing for human rights and environmental justice.

We urge all governments, multilateral institutions and others invested in a just energy transition for Vietnam to 1) insist on Bach’s release; and 2) demand that civil society in Vietnam is welcome to participate meaningfully in this process that is so crucial for the future of the region and the planet.

We must act now to safeguard Bach’s life, as well as Vietnam’s ability to successfully transition away from coal and mitigate the impacts of climate change.

Sincerely,

ACAT Germany (Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture)

Accountability Counsel

Abibinsroma Foundation

Africa Coal Network Agency for Turkana Development Initiatives (ATUDIS)

Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)

Alliance for Empowering Rural Communities ACAT Belgium (Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture)

Asian Peoples Movement on Debt and Development

Both ENDS

Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers Association

The Bretton Woods Project

BALKANKA

Building and Wood Workers International (BWI)

Community Resource Centre Center for Constitutional Rights

Climate Action Network Australia

Community Empowerment and Social Justice Network (CEMSOJ)

Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL)

Clean Air Action Network of Glens Falls

CIVICUS

Center for Energy, Ecology and Development (CEED)

Climate Action Network

Southeast Asia Environmental Defender Law Center

EarthRights International

Equitable Cambodia

ENLAWTHAI Foundation (EnLAW)

Ecosistemas

EcoAlbania

Earthlife Africa

Friends Against Dictatorship (FAD)

Forum Umwelt und Entwicklung

FIDH (International Federation for Human Rights), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

Federal Association of Vietnamese Refugees in the Federal Republic of Germany

Friends of the Earth Japan

Friends of the Earth United States

Friends of the Earth Asia Pacific

Focus on the Global South

GongGam Human Rights Law Foundation

Grassroots Foundation (Germany)

GegenStrömung

groundWork, Friends of the Earth, SA

Global Witness

Global Network of Movement Lawyers at Movement Law Lab

Indonesia Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI)

International Rivers

Inclusive Development International

International Service for Human Rights

Indigenous and Local Communities for the Sustainable Management of Forest Ecosystems in Central Africa (REPALEAC)

Indigenous Peoples Partnership International Accountability Project

Indigenous Women Legal Awareness Group (INWOLAG)

Indus Consortium for Humanitarian Environment and Development Initiatives

Jamaa Resource Initiatives

Just Ground

Japan Center for a Sustainable Environment and Society (JACSES)

Kiko Network

KRuHA

Manushya Foundation

Mekong Watch

Market Forces

Malaysian Youth Delegation

NGO Forum on ADB

Not1More

Oil Change International

Oyu Tolgoi Watch

Observatori DESC

PowerShift e.V.

Protection International (PI)

policy research institute for Equitable Development

Programme Intégré pour le Développement du Peuple Pygmée au Kivu (PIPD)

Project on Organizing, Development, Education, and Research (PODER)

Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum

Pro Public

Palestinian Environmental NGOs Network PENGON-Friends of the Earth Palestine

Quê Me: Vietnam Committee for Human Rights (VCHR)

Rivers without Boundaries Coalition Reality of Aid-Asia Pacific

Recourse Rivers without Boudaries Mongolia

RAPEN environtment protection associations and nature network

Sierra Leone Land Alliance

Sustainable Development Institute

Transitional Justice Working Group (TJWG)

The Bretton Woods Project

Urgewald

World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

The post Organizational Sign-On Letter Calling for the Release of Dang Dinh Bach and Support of Civil Society in Vietnam’s Just Energy Transition appeared first on Inclusive Development International.

This announcement is huge because SMBC also served as a financial advisor on EACOP. The coalition urges the remaining financial advisors, Standard Bank and ICBC, to emulate SMBC and disassociate themselves from the controversial pipeline. The StopEACOP coalition emphasizes the need for financial institutions to align their investments with sustainable and responsible solutions while advocating for transparency and a shift towards renewable energy alternatives. Read the full press release here.

The post SMBC Ends Involvement as EACOP Financial Advisor, Taking a Stance Against Controversial Project appeared first on Inclusive Development International.