This is the third part of an EarthRights series on criminalization.
Criminalization occurs when powerful politicians and business leaders weaponize the legal system to silence their critics. This can include passing laws that restrict free speech and peaceful protest, imposing harsh penalties for civil disobedience, and using baseless allegations to subject targets to costly and lengthy legal proceedings.
In Latin America, the misuse of the judicial system to unjustly persecute and punish those who speak out in defense of their territory and their rights is a daily reality. Defenders are persecuted for demanding that companies and governments avoid causing harm to the environment and their communities, and that, in the event that such harm occurs, they repair or mitigate it.
This phenomenon is commonly known as criminalization and typically occurs in two main contexts. The first occurs when defenders, particularly visible community leaders, are accused of crimes they did not commit as retaliation for their participation in peaceful protests. The second occurs when private companies and/or governments file complaints or lawsuits against defenders under the argument that they were defamed and/or harmed, to intimidate and exhaust those who defend their rights and land. This entire strategy aims to delegitimize the work of defenders, to turn the legitimate exercise of democratic rights into an illegal act, and to create fear to demobilize peaceful protests against development and extractivist projects.
These legal proceedings can drag on for years through lengthy trials and appeals, causing extreme stress, physical and mental health impacts, economic deterioration, and even social stigmatization for defenders, once their judicial situation becomes public.
Two significant cases that EarthRights International has litigated in Peru illustrate this phenomenon: the case against FENAMAD and the case against the community members of Urinsaya.
Criminalization of FENAMAD for Defending the Rights of the Mashco Piro Indigenous People
The Mashco Piro people, who live in voluntary isolation, depend on hunting and gathering activities for their survival due to their nomadic lifestyle. They live between the Peruvian and Brazilian border, including areas such as the Madre de Dios Territorial Reserve. Their situation is highly vulnerable: contact with the outside world exposes them to common illnesses that can be lethal for their health.
Similarly, encounters with outsiders have triggered conflicts that endanger their lives and those of the workers operating in the region. These are risks that FENAMAD, the Indigenous organization representing communities along the Madre de Dios River basin, has warned of before national and international bodies.
In 2020, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, FENAMAD issued a public statement demanding that the Peruvian State protect the integrity of the Mashco Piro people and halt extractive activities in the area. As a consequence, both FENAMAD and its then-president, Julio Cusurichi, were sued for defamation by a logging company.
The Judiciary of Madre de Dios ruled twice against FENAMAD, siding with the logging company. The rulings not only required the organization to pay $5,000 in civil damages to the company, but also forced it to publish a letter of self-incrimination drafted by the company itself.
In July 2025, thanks to a counterclaim (know in Peru as amparo contra amparo) that EarthRights filed in 2022 against the rulings issued by the Madre de Dios courts, the Supreme Court of Peru recognized that the fundamental rights of FENAMAD and Julio Cusurichi, specifically the rights to due process, and freedom of opinion, expression, and dissemination of opinions, had been violated, and ruled in their favor. The judgment emphasized that, under national and international standards, the judicial authorities in Madre de Dios failed to apply an intercultural or preventive approach, both essential in cases involving the protection of Indigenous peoples’ rights, and that they had also adopted an incorrect interpretation of the law.
Although this ruling represented a victory for FENAMAD and Indigenous organizations in Peru, the judicial persecution left wounds that the judgment cannot erase. The organization and its leaders faced stigmatization and public accusations, in addition to legal expenses, despite committing no wrongdoing. They endured emotional strain that generated fear and uncertainty throughout the process.
Urinsaya Community Members Declared Innocent After Peaceful Protest Against Mine
Urinsaya is a rural community of the Quechua Indigenous people located in Cusco, Peru, where most residents make their living from agriculture and livestock rearing. It lies within the area of influence of the MMG Las Bambas mine, one of the country’s largest copper producers, which uses the mining corridor to transport its minerals to ports for exportation.
More than 300 trucks travel daily along this corridor, which passes through several communities, including Urinsaya, raising dust particles and causing accidents and mineral spills that severely affect the health of residents, animals, and crops.
In January 2020, after years of ignored complaints about the mine’s environmental and social impacts, the community decided to exercise its right to peaceful protest and demanded an end to the contamination.
During the protest, demonstrators noticed a man recording and taking photographs of participants. When asked to identify himself, he claimed to be a livestock herder, but later said that he had previously worked for the security company hired by the Las Bambas mine. The next day, eight male community members and two women were accused of kidnapping. In 2021, EarthRights took on the defense of three of them. That same year, we succeeded in having the Espinar Preparatory Investigation Court dismiss the case; however, the Prosecutor’s Office appealed the decision and requested sentences of up to 20 years in prison for the accused.
The case went to oral trial in August 2024. Over the course of more than forty hearings, the Prosecutor’s Office failed to demonstrate any responsibility of the accused community members; on the contrary, serious contradictions came to light. One of the most revealing moments occurred when the supervisor of the supposed kidnapping victim testified before the judge that he had never filed the complaint, that at the time of the events, he was two hours away from Urinsaya, and that he did not recognize his signature on the police report. This testimony exposed what we have seen so many times in similar cases of criminalization: fabricated accusations aimed at persecuting those who dare to defend their territory.
Finally, on October 23, 2025, the Cusco Court issued a ruling declaring the ten community members innocent, noting that there was no evidence proving the crime of kidnapping and highlighting contradictions and deficiencies in the process. Although the Judicial Branch has yet to officially notify whether the Prosecutor’s Office appealed the decision, this ruling marks an important milestone by recognizing the innocence of the defenders.
“After five years of anguish for our families and the community, the judicial system finally recognizes our innocence. It is a triumph for the entire community,” said Roger Choqueccota Qquehue, a community member from Urinsaya.
The psychological and economic impact of this process has been profound for the Urinsaya community. However, this ruling represents a victory for truth and justice, and a message of hope for those who continue resisting abuses by powerful actors.
A Historic Legal Precedent for Defenders in Peru
These two cases represented a major challenge for EarthRights, not because it was difficult to prove the innocence of the accused, as the evidence was always on their side, but because, throughout the process, lawyers, prosecutors, and judges systematically violated the principle of objectivity.
However, when the cases reached impartial courts, the judges listened to the witnesses and reviewed the evidence; they saw that the defenders were innocent and that their rights had been violated.
More than five years had to pass before the Supreme Court and the Cusco Judiciary declared the innocence of the defenders and the violation of their rights. During that time, they and their families suffered physical and emotional harm, had to shoulder significant economic costs, and faced negative impacts that will never fully disappear.
While both cases remind us that justice can prevail over power, the FENAMAD ruling is emblematic because it establishes a precedent for other cases of judicial criminalization and for guaranteeing the rights to peaceful protest, freedom of expression, and the defense of territory in Peru. In Peru, according to data from the National Human Rights Coordinator, between 2000 and 2025, over 740 cases of criminalization against defenders were recorded.
These cases are not the exception but rather evidence of a growing phenomenon. For this reason, EarthRights remains committed to protecting the rights of defenders, shedding light on judicial criminalization strategies that seek to silence those who denounce harm to the environment, territory, and their rights.
