The United States is blocking human, environmental and freedom of information rights from being enshrined in the earth summit's plan of action in order to protect multinational companies from litigation and protests by the poor.

You can see where the administration is coming from - putting the private interest of big corporations before the public interest.

Chip Pitts US human rights lawyer

The EU and developing countries such as Thailand, Uganda and Indonesia believe that giving communities the right to take on companies that pollute their environment and damage their health is fundamental to the aims of the summit.

But as well as concern about a potential rash of court cases from environmental and community groups, the White House believes the freedom of information and human rights clauses could be used to obtain documents and fight security measures taken following the September 11 attacks.

Some key developing countries such as India and China are also nervous about giving citizens' groups the right to take on industry. Both have heavily contaminated industrial areas which cause illness and even premature death in local people.

In a briefing yesterday, the UK was careful not to point the finger of blame but said: "If people can exercise their civil and political rights, such as freedom of expression, they can demand cleaner air and water. And poor environmental protection can constitute an obstacle to the full realization of some human rights, such as the right to health and in extreme cases, the right to life. Environmental justice also fights to redress current patterns of concentrating toxic industries in poorer neighborhoods and countries, hurting the most vulnerable."

Chip Pitts, a US human rights lawyer, said: "This is all about the US fearing restrictions on its freedom of action in third world countries. In part, it is a way of protecting big corporations' vested interests but partly fear of interference with the war on terrorism, giving Islamic groups a forum to have a go at the White House."

Indonesia is keen on the issue because action by community groups has been instrumental in stopping illegal logging and environmental destruction.

Mr Pitts pointed to a court case in Washington where Exxon, the US oil giant, is being sued by the International Labor Organization on behalf of people from Aceh in Sumatra, where Exxon is extracting gas.

The allegation is that Exxon hired local police to protect their plant against protests of people who had not been consulted before it was built. As a result, it is claimed, local people were injured and are seeking redress in the federal court. Exxon appealed to the US government for help; the State Department this week filed a legal opinion that the court had no jurisdiction and the case was "an interference in the foreign affairs of the US".

Mr Pitts said: "You can see where the administration is coming from - putting the private interest of big corporations before the public interest."

Two recent UK examples of where freedom of information, environmental and human rights would help protesters are the night flights issue at Heathrow and the Ilisu dam in Turkey.

The issue at Heathrow is whether residents have the right to a night's sleep or whether this is overridden by the airline's desire for a 24-hour operation, an issue still undecided. In the Ilisu dam case, if Balfour Beatty had not pulled out of the construction, the British government would have found itself in court for violating the rights of those whose homes would be taken by the building of the dam.

© Guardian Newspapers Limited 2002

###