Geneva, August 14, 2025 - As the United Nations’ negotiations to forge a legally binding global treaty to “end plastic pollution” enter their final days in Geneva, a growing coalition of legal experts, environmental groups, and policymakers is making one point clear: plastic pollution is not only an environmental crisis - it is a human rights issue.
This shift in framing follows a landmark 2021 report by Marcos Orellana, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on toxics and human rights, which detailed how plastics threaten human rights at every stage of their life cycle from fossil fuel extraction to production, use, and disposal - through toxic chemical exposure and environmental contamination. Orellana warned that without decisive action, future generations’ right to a “toxic-free environment conducive to a life with dignity” is in jeopardy.
The draft treaty under discussion makes some mention of human rights, but experts say it falls short. Advocates are calling for explicit references to human rights in the preamble, objectives, and operational articles, along with strong principles such as the “polluter pays” framework and guarantees for a “just transition” for workers whose livelihoods may be affected by the shift away from plastics.
Recent developments have strengthened this argument. In July, the International Court of Justice affirmed the human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment as essential to the enjoyment of all other rights - a decision many legal scholars say applies directly to plastics. From microplastics in seafood threatening food security to chemicals in packaging linked to preterm births, the impacts are broad and deeply personal.
Civil society voices, including Indigenous leaders, environmental justice organizations, and public health advocates, have emphasized that the treaty must protect vulnerable communities disproportionately affected by petrochemical production and plastic waste. A new study by the International Pollutants Elimination Network revealed that delegates, U.N. officials, and waste workers alike carried multiple plastic-related chemicals in their bodies, underscoring the scale and universality of exposure.
However, progress is hampered by resistance from a small but influential bloc of nations - including China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Kuwait - which have opposed explicit human rights language and binding production limits, often invoking the “right to development” to justify ongoing plastic production.
Orellana cautioned that without firm commitments to reduce plastic production and address toxic chemicals, the treaty risks becoming “toothless.” For advocates, the question is no longer whether to defend human rights in the plastics crisis, but how - and whether world leaders will seize this moment to embed those rights at the core of a global solution.
