Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Se está descargando tu SlideShare. ×

Principles Of IEL1.pptx

Cargando en…3

Eche un vistazo a continuación

1 de 75 Anuncio

Más Contenido Relacionado

Similares a Principles Of IEL1.pptx (20)

Más reciente (20)


Principles Of IEL1.pptx

  1. 1. Overview  Introduction  Emerging Principles of Environmental Law  Current Status and Issues with these Principles  Conclusion
  2. 2. Introduction  The 1992 "Earth Summit" pronounces a catalogue of concepts which it calls principles.  Aim to determine the direction of state and actors in IEL activity  Two Kinds of Principles can be identified  General principles of international law, as applied to environmental issues.  Principles of international environmental law in the strict sense.
  3. 3. Foundations & USE of Principles  Principles provide a framework for negotiating and implementing new and existing agreements  Some principles provide the rules of decision for resolving transboundary environmental disputes.  Some principles provide a framework for the development and convergence of national and subnational environmental laws.  Some principles assist in the integration of international environmental law with other fields such as international trade or human right
  4. 4. General principles of International law  State Sovereignty  State Sovereignty over Natural resources  Common Heritage of Humankind  State Responsibility
  5. 5. State Sovereignty  State sovereignty: at the core of international law.  It implies both “territorial sovereignty” and “territorial integrity” The two aspects are reflected in Rio principle 2 (Stockholm principle 21):  “States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental and developmental policies, and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.”  However: The sovereign right to exploit the natural resources is limited and conditioned by customary law, treaty law and other principles of international environmental law. 
  6. 6. PERMANENT SOVEREIGNTY OVER NATURAL RESOURCES  The concept of permanent sovereignty over natural resources, though subsumed under the broader principle of territorial sovereignty, is of a relatively recent origin.  The United Nations General Assembly declared,, that the right of peoples and nations to permanent sovereignty over their natural wealth and resources must be exercised in the interest of their national development and of the well- being of the people of the States concerned.  Ardently Desired by the Developing nations.
  7. 7. COMMON HERITAGE OF HUMANKIND  The global commons refers to those areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction such as the high seas, the sea-bed, Antarctica, outer space, or the ozone layer.  For resources in these areas, the concept of permanent sovereignty is generally not applicable. although the rules of cooperation and equitable use that apply to shared resources also apply to global commons resources,  Law of the Sea Conference perceived a need to generate a new conceptual framework for addressing these resources.  common heritage of humankind (Developing Nations)
  8. 8. STATE RESPONSIBILITY  The basic rule of State responsibility in the context of environmental protection  States are responsible for injuries caused to the environment of another State or the global commons resulting from violations of a generally accepted international rule or standard.  Principle 21 of the Stockholm Declaration:  States have ... the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction
  9. 9. STATE RESPONSIBILITY  Requirements  The environmental damage must result from a violation of international law. Problematic due to soft law  difficult questions of proof.  A state is responsible both for its own activities and for activities of private corporations or individuals under its jurisdiction or control.  Under this rule, States may be responsible for not enacting or enforcing necessary environmental laws,  There must be no justifying circumstances, such as consent by the affected State or an intervening cause, such as an act of God.  (iv) The damage must be "significant," which can present serious problems of proof and quantification.
  10. 10. ADMINISTRATIVE AND JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS  Central to the issues of compensation for environmental harm is the emerging trend toward equal access to administrative and judicial proceedings.  Under the equal access principle, affected parties in one State should be provided the same access to remedies and redress as would be provided to affected parties in the State where the polluting activities are located.  The principle extends both to planning processes, such as the environmental impact assessment provisions, and to issues of liability and compensation
  11. 11. General principle of International Environmental Law  Sustainable Development  Intergenerational Equity  Common But Differentiated Responsibilities  Obligation Not to Cause Environmental Harm  The Precautionary Principle  The Polluter and User Pays Principle  Subsidiarity , M. Good Neighborliness and the Duty to Cooperate  N. Duties to Provide Prior Notification and to Consult in Good Faith  Environment Impact Assessment
  12. 12. Status of Emerging Environmental Principles  The current interest in the principles of international environmental law stems to a large extent from a need to define and give content to the notion of sustainable development
  13. 13. Sustainable development  The international law of sustainable Development is contained within a series of United Nations (UN) General Assembly (GA) facilitated global summits
  14. 14. conceptualization of sustainable development  Until 1972 multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) had focussed on first generation environmental problems  1972 linkage between economic and environment and development became prominent  Stockholm Declaration, a statement of 26 principles calling upon governments and peoples to exert common efforts for the preservation and improvement of the human environment.  Principle 1 of the Declaration at least implicitly suggested that there was a human right to a healthy environment. Second, Principle 21strikes a balance between a State’s sovereignty and its obligation not to cause harm
  15. 15. Conceptualisation and origin Continues  World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) to investigate the state of the global environment. The outcome of the Commission’s work was its 1987 seminal report, ‘Our Common Future’. 
  16. 16. Modern Definition Begins in the former science  Our Common Future (1987), defined sustainable development as "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs," which has become the accepted standard definition.  three components to sustainable development: economic growth, environmental protection, and social equity
  17. 17. Components Expanded  Patricia Birnie and Alan Boyle, identifies Following Components  the environmental needs of future generations;  environmental protection to be an integral part of development;  common but differentiated responsibilities; reduction of unsustainable patterns of production and consumption;  enactment of effective environmental laws;  recognition of the precautionary principle;  internalization of environmental costs and the use of economic instruments.
  18. 18. Components further detailed  Delhi Declaration (2002) ILA  The duty of States to ensure sustainable use of natural resources;  The principle of equity and the eradication of poverty;  The principle of common but differentiated responsibilities;  The principle of the precautionary approach to human health, natural resources and ecosystems;  The principle of public participation and access to information and justice;  The principle of good governance;  The principle of integration and interrelationship, in particular inrelation to human rights and social, economic and environmental objectives.
  19. 19. Elaboration Sustainable Principle in Documents  the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (Rio Declaration) and the associated agenda 21 reiterated SD  Principle 3 incorporates The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet developmental and environmental needs of present and future generations. States and people should cooperate in spirit of partnership in the fulfilmet of principles embodies in the declaration and in the development of international law in the field of sustainable development
  20. 20. Rio Declaration on Components of Sustainable development  Principle 4 In order to achieve sustainable development, environmental protection shall constitute an integral part of the development process and cannot be considered in isolation from it.  Principle 7 In view of the different contributions to global environmental degradation, States have common but differentiated responsibilities  Principle 8 States should reduce and eliminate unsustainable patterns of production and consumption and promote appropriate demographic policies.  Principle 11 States shall enact effective environmental legislation. Environmental standards, management objectives and priorities should reflect the environmental and development context to which they apply. Standards applied by some countries may be inappropriate and of unwarranted economic and social cost to other countries, in particular developing countries.
  21. 21. Rio Declaration on Components of Sustainable development  Principle 16 Rio National authorities should endeavour to promote the internalization of environmental costs and the use of economic instruments, taking into account the approach that the polluter should, in principle, bear the cost of pollution,  PRINCIPLE 17 Environmental impact assessment, as a national instrument, shall be undertaken for proposed activities that are likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment and are subject to a decision of a competent national authority.
  22. 22. RIO  Principle 27  States and people shall cooperate in good faith and in a spirit of partnership in the fulfilment of the principles embodied in this Declaration and in the further development of international law in the field of sustainable development.
  23. 23. Elaboration OF SD Post RIO  The 2002 Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD or World Summit) is the most recent of the GA sponsored sustainable development initiatives.  Three instruments were adopted: the  Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development (Johannesburg Declaration);  the Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Plan of Implementation); and the Statement Regarding the Use of Renewable Energy  The Declaration speaks generally about poverty eradication and sustainable development  To achieve our goals of sustainable development, we need more effective, democratic and accountable international and multilateral institutions.
  24. 24. Sustainable development Current Status and Problems  No Clear cut definition and ambiguous nature  not clear whether procedural or substantive  FOR IUCN Legal term which refers to processes, principles and objectives as well as to a large body of international agreements on environmental , economic , civil and political rights (IUCN Report on the consultation on sustainable development the challenge to international law
  25. 25. Sustainable development Current Status and Problems SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS A CONCEPT OR PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW?  Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia) (1997)  This ICJ case concerned a system of dams on the Danube River designed to produce electrical energy and improve the “navigability of the Danube, flood control and regulation of ice-discharge, and the protection of the environment.”
  26. 26. Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia) (1997
  27. 27. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS A CONCEPT OR PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW?  Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia) (1997)  The International Court of Justice judgment, included the following paragraph “risks for mankind – for present and future generations,” and the “concept of sustainable development”:  “This need to reconcile economic development with protection of the environment is aptly expressed in the concept of sustainable development “
  28. 28. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS A CONCEPT OR PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW?  Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia) in 1997, the ICJ explained the “concept” of sustainable development, though a dissenting opinion argued that sustainable development is a “principle of international law
  29. 29. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS A CONCEPT OR PRINCIPLE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW? Weeraramtry, opined The Court has referred to it as a concept in paragraph 140 of its Judgment. However, I consider it to be more than a mere concept, but as a principle with normative value….” “There are plentiful indications …to that degree of ‘general recognition among states of a certain practice as obligatory’ to give the principle of sustainable development the nature of customary law
  30. 30. Other Judicial Bodies on SD  Shrimp case (WTO) USA against India, Malaysia ,Pakistan and Thailand  Contention Extraterritoriality of conservation laws  Article XX exhaustible natural resources whether extend to Shrimps also.  Decision Exxtra territorial possible, But unjustifiable discrimination Appears to be arbitrary because of identical demand No negotiation and co-0peperation as require din Rio and CBD (Procedural requirement too exist in SD)  Case recognise sustainable development but does not recognise the status as custom or General principles
  31. 31. Academic writings  Boyle AE, “The Gabčikovo-Nagymaros Case: New Law in Old Bottles” (1997) 8 Yearbook of Int’l Envtl Law 13, argued that the Gabčikovo-Nagymaros case endorsed sustainable development as having a role in reconciling the competing interests of development and environmental protection  Lowe V, “Sustainable Development and Unsustainable Arguments”, no consistent state practice The State practice of sustainable development’s environmental principles although abundant lacks the requisite uniformity for customary incorporation
  32. 32. State Practice  At the same time many States have incorporated sustainable development’s environmental principles into domestic planning and environmental legislation. Are these international and domestic initiatives sufficient to reflect State acceptance and a rule of customary international law  It demonstrates varying levels of State acceptance of the separate Difficult to determine whether a custom under Int Law
  33. 33. S D Elaborated recently  The concept of “environmental services” has also become linked with sustainable development. According to the 2002 Antigua Convention  services provided by the functions of nature itself, such as the protection of soil by trees, the natural filtration and purification of water, and the protection of habitat for biodiversity (Art. 3(1)(c)).
  34. 34. Conclusion  The central message of sustainable development is that we need to use natural resources at rates where the resources replenish themselves coupled with moral obligation to safeguard the environmental needs of current and future generations.
  35. 35. Intergenerational Equity
  36. 36. INTER-GENERATIONAL AND INTRA- GENERATIONAL EQUITY  Fundamental underpinning of sustainable development “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”  UNFCC, Article 3.(i) refers to inter-generational equity  CBC , Preamble  UNCCD  Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants
  37. 37.  The theory of intergenerational equity is closely linked to the notion of sustainable development.  The theory of equity between generations relies on the "inherent relationship that each generation has to other generations, past and future,  Intergenerational equity emphasizes the temporal aspect of the concept, meaning that it relies on the rights and obligations that each generation has toward the others. The intragenerational aspect can be addressed as a morespatial matter, because it prevents the rights and obligations deriving from the intergenerational aspect from being allocated to only one portion of the international community. Conceptualisation
  38. 38.  Developments in Int law in temporal matter started with Human Rights genocide etc  UDHR Preamble indirectly recognises this Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,  In public international law, Judge Huber enunciated the intertemporal doctrine in the Island of Palmas Arbitration, which involved a dispute between the United States and the Netherlands over sovereignty of the small Pacific island. Development
  39. 39.  Principle 2 Stockholm states that "the natural resources of the earth ( ... ) must be safeguarded for the benefit of present and future generations  Rio Principle 3 The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet developmental and environmental needs of present and future generations. Elaboration of Intergenerational Equity in Int Law
  40. 40.  The basic concept is that all generations are partners caring for and using the Earth. This leads to three principles of intergenerational equity: options, quality, and access.  The first, comparable options, means conserving the diversity of the natural resource base so that future generations can use it to satisfy their own values.  The second principle, comparable quality, means ensuring the quality of the environment on balance is comparable between generations.  The third one, comparable access, means non-discriminatory access among generations to the Earth and its resources. These three principles engender planetary rights and planetary obligations. Components of Intergenerational Equity (Propounded By WEISS)
  41. 41.  The first boundary consists of the preservationist model, where "the present generation does not consume anything; rather it saves aIl resources for future generations and preserves the same level of quality in aIl aspects of the environment  The second boundary is made of the opulent model, "in which the present generation consumes aIl that it wants today and generates as much wealth as it can, either because there is no certainty that future generations will exist or because maximizing consumption today is the best way to maximize wealth for future generations,,. Approaches and Models in Application of Intergenerational Equity
  42. 42.  Judge Weeramantry, ICJ  In the case of Denmark v Norway case the International Court of Justice considered the question of delimitation of the Continental Shelf between the islands of Greenland and Jan Mayen. Judge Weeramantry gave a separate concurring opinion which he based on the right to Interganarational Equity. He noted, "[T]he concept of wise stewardship [of natural resources]...and their conservation for the benefit of future generations”  Again in the 1995 Nuclear Tests Case, he observed,  The case before the court raises, as no case before the court has done, the principle of intergenerational equity - an important and rapidly developing principle of contemporary environmental law...The court has not thus far had occasion to make any pronouncement on this rapidly developing field...[The case]...raises in pointed form the possibility of damage to generations yet unborn” Judicial Appoaches
  43. 43.  Judge Weeramantry  Gabcíkovo- Nagymaros decision that modern formulations of environmental law encompass “the principle of trusteeship of earth resources [and] the principle of intergenerational rights.” In a different opinion, he described the court as a “trustee of those rights.” Judicial Approaches continues
  44. 44.  Article 38 is the reference point for sources in international law. Can we thus conclude that equity is a source of international law?  For the IC], an application of equity can only be made possible if the parties explicitly require it.  Intergenerational Equity a Rule of Principle  While a rule is practical and binding, a principle "expresses a general truth, which guides our action, serve as a theoretical basis for the various acts of our life, and the application of which to reality produces a given consequence". Normative Problem with the concept of Equity
  45. 45.  According to Alexandre Kiss and Jean-Pierre Beurier, intergenerational equity cannot be considered as a principle of international law; it must be viewed as a concept.  Weiss While principles consist of concrete legal norms, from which rules can derive, such as the principle of international cooperation or the precautionary principle, concepts are considered as abstract representations of the objectives that the society wants to reach  Shows lack of consensus on the problem Normative Problem with the concept of Equity Continues
  46. 46.  WEISS  Limitations on the present generation should be applied very narrowly, lest the rights of future generations develop into an all-purpose club to beat down any and all proposals for change. But surely long-term environmental damage is a good place to begin. Future generations really do have the right to be assured that we will not pollute ground water, load lake bottoms with toxic wastes, extinguish habitats and species or change the world’s climate dramatically—all long-term effects that are difficult or impossible to reverse—unless there are extremely compelling reasons to do so, reasons that go beyond mere profitability. Conclusion
  47. 47.  Scientific uncertainty regarding the evidence of a link between human activity (as a cause) and its impact on the environment (as a consequence) has been an enormous obstacle for law making in the area of environmental protection.  The Federal Republic of Germany has been a pioneer in the area of the “precautionary approach” towards the environment: they formulated the principle of precaution (Vorsorgeprinzip) in their domestic law in 1974. “Vorsorge.” PRECAUTION PRINCIPLE Origin
  48. 48.  An indirect reference to the precautionary principle was made in a non-binding international document– the Bremen Ministerial Declaration of the International Conference on the Protection of the North Sea.  But it remained ill-defined, and its philosophical reputation is low. Beginning of Precautionary principle internationally
  49. 49. PrecautionaryPrinciple:  Rio Declaration. Principle 15 of the Declaration states that “in order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall be not used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation
  50. 50.  According to D. Vanderzwaag, about 14 different definitions of the precautionary principle exist in Int law  Currently, the precautionary principle is used in more than 90 international declarations and agreements  UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992),  Third North Sea Conference (1990)  Ozone Layer Protocol (1987).  UN Environment Program (1989),  EU environment policy (1994)  US President’s Council on Sustainable Development (1996)  Stockholm decllration Elaboration of Precautionary Principles in Documents
  51. 51.  Carol Raffensberger and Joel Tickner suggest:  In its simplest formulation, the precautionary principle has a dual trigger: If there is a potential for harm from an activity and if there is uncertainty about the magnitude of impacts or causality, then anticipatory action should be taken to avoid harm.  The dual trigger characterization suggests that the precautionary principle has  three important components:  • Threat of harm  • Uncertainty of impact and causality  • Precautionary response Issues Involved in Application of Precautionary Principle
  52. 52.  what level of scientific evidence is required to trigger application of the precautionary principle? Under the Rio Declaration’s formulation, the threshold for triggering the principle appears to be the existence of identifiable threats of serious or irreversible damage  What counts as a threat of harm? Is any potential harm, no matter how small, sufficient to trigger the precautionary principle?  • How does uncertainty figure into this? Is any level of uncertainty sufficient to trigger the principle, or only a high level? Is there any level of uncertainty which would be so great that the principle would be unreasonable?  • What counts as a precautionary measure? Crossing one’s fingers? Warning people of the threat? Taking measures to reduce impact of the effects? Problems Elaborated
  53. 53.  Ultraconservative Precautionary Principle (UCPP): Ban any activity that one has any reason whatsoever to suspect might pose any harm whatsoever.  Ultraminimal Precautionary Principle (UMPP): We accept the need to act in a precautionary manner in exactly one case: we should cross our fingers (or just worry) in the situation where there is a probability of 99.9% that the world is going to end immediately due to this experiment. Theoretical Approaches To solving this problems
  54. 54.  RIO Principle 15, suggests that policy actions should  be ‘‘cost-effective’’ in preventing environmental damage. Thus, the principle offers governments wide flexibility in selecting appropriate policy measures once taking some measures is deemed appropriate. In most instances, the precautionary principle has been used to allow or authorize, but not to require, policy measures. In some instances, proposed activities are simply delayed until further scientific evidence  Application problem  Convention on Biological Diversity–has a more abstract definition Article 6, uses such formulas as “in accordance with its particular conditions and capabilities” and “as far as possible and as appropriate  These approaches clearly suggests a lack of concensus Approaches in Int Documents
  55. 55.  European Union argues that the precautionary principle is a part of customary international law. The United States insists that the precautionary principle has no legal status, but is only an ‘‘approach’’ that can be used in certain narrow circumstances. Controversy Over precautionary Principle between EU and USA
  56. 56.  Europe invoked the precautionary principle as a justification for its decision to regulate genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food, even in the admitted absence of scientific evidence that GMOs are harmful to human health or the environment. The United States argued that the EU’s actions were not scientifically based as required under the WTO rules. The EU, in turn, argued that environmental policy should be ‘‘based on the precautionary principle.’’ Case on GMO and Precautionary Principe
  57. 57.  In EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones) (Beef Hormones)  Canada, in the EC Hormones case, took a middle position between the EC and the US. On the one hand, Canada declared that the “precautionary approach” is “an emerging principle of law” which may crystallize in the future into one of the “general principles of law recognized by civilized nations” within the meaning of Article 38(1)(c) of the Statute of the International Court of Justice.  On the other hand, Canada agreed that the precautionary principle has not yet been incorporated into the corpus of public international law.  WTO did not need to declare on the precautionary principle’s customary international law status. It determined that an EC ban on the import of US beef treated with artificial growth hormones could not be justified by application of the precautionary principle. The particular risk in question could not be established with sufficient specificity as it was not clearly scientifically proven: there was not a “rational relationship between the trade measure and the risk assessment.” EC Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones)
  58. 58.  In MOX Plant (Ireland v United Kingdom), Provisional Measures (MOX Plant case)  Facts ITLOS considered protection of the Irish Sea from radioactive pollution from a proposed power plant on the English coast. Ireland claimed that the activities of the power plant required proper assessment of environmental effects of the plant’s operations in accordance with the precautionary principle as espoused by the Rio Declaration.  The ITLOS denied Ireland’s request for provisional measures as it did not agree there was any urgency in the matter and implicitly rejected Ireland’s claim that the precautionary principle was applicable to the dispute.  The case suggests that the precautionary principle, even though a legal principle, is not incorporated into Part XII of the LOSC as it had not yet crystallized into customary international law. (Judge Wolfrum ) Precautionary Principle under Law of Sea Convention
  59. 59.  There is significant debate as to whether precaution is a principle overarching all policy and decision-making or whether it is merely an approach to be utilized in cases of hazardous or ultra-hazardous activities..  In Southern Bluefin Tuna (New Zealand v Japan; Australia v Japan; Australia and New Zealand v Japan) (Southern Bluefin Tuna cases) Australia and New Zealand claimed that Japan was in violation of its duty to protect and preserve an optimal level of exploitation of southern bluefin tuna thus failing to satisfy a precautionary obligation under the LOSC.  Judge Laing stated that “adopting an approach, rather than a principle imports a certain degree of flexibility and tends, though not dispositevely, to underscore reticence about making premature pronouncements about desirable normative structures”. Judge also associates the term “principle” with legally binding, customary status. Precautionary Principle or Approach
  60. 60.  This tendency of the ICJ to rely on the precautionary principle as a rule of customary law remains still. In 2008, the ICJ received an application from the state of Ecuador.  Facts Ecuador complained about the aerial spraying of coca and poppy crops with chemical herbicides carried out by Colombia at locations near, at and across its border with Ecuador. Ecuador claimed that toxic herbicides have caused damage to human health, property and the environment, and therefore Colombia has violated principle of precaution and prevention of Ecuador’s rights under customary and conventional international law:  Such a reference to the precautionary principle as a rule of customary law and current developments in international law could indicate that in this case the ICJ might express its attitude towards the status of this principle. ICJ and Precautionary Principle
  61. 61.  In 2005, the principle was incorporated into the Preamble of the Constitution of France and is now part of the “Environmental charter” of the Constitution the precautionary principle is treated as a constitutional , which claims to be on the same level as the principles of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen. State practice
  62. 62.  principle should be, inter alia:  proportional to the chosen level of protection,  non-discriminatory in their application,  consistent with similar measures already taken,  based on an examination of the potential benefits and costs of action or  lack of action (including, where appropriate and feasible, an economic cost/benefit analysis),  subject to review, in the light of new scientific data, and capable of assigning responsibility for producing the scientific evidence necessary for a more comprehensive risk assessment. EU Guideline son Precautionary Principle in support of Precautionary
  63. 63.  So intense is the controversy in the United States, that the precautionary  principle may be the first and only international environmental principle to warrant its own advertisement in the New York Times. Exxon Mobil  Unbalanced Caution, On the face of it, this is a reasonable principle. Business and government share a common goal to exercise appropriate caution to ensure that new products and business operations do not pose unwarranted risks to public health or the environment. Where risks to public health or the environment exist, cost-effective steps to manage and reduce these risks should be taken.  Enormous benefits come from scientific research, innovative technology and new developments. That is why governments must avoid the utopian pursuit of a risk-free world and, instead, exercise common sense in applying the precautionary principle. Above all, we should rely on science-based risk assessment and management, Arguments against Precautionary Principle USA
  64. 64. PolluterPaysPrinciple:  The Polluter Pays Principle was first conceptualized by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) nations in their economic policy for environmental harm in the 1970s. It was the responsibility of the polluters of environment to pay for remedial measures and to keep the environment unharmed.  This was done through internalization of environmental harm by the imposition of green taxes or, if an environmental harm occurred, then wrongdoer had to pay damages.  However, this principle failed to gain the status of a legal norm due to the limited membership of countries in OECD.  Liability can be seen as a mechanism implementing the PPP. The concept has evolved to embrace liability  Rio Declaration, Principle 16  POP Convention, Preamble
  65. 65. 7. Principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibility  Recognition of the special needs of developing countries  Requires all concerned states to participate in international response measures according to historical responsibilities  As one practical consequence of their greater responsibilities and opportunities, developed countries have pledged to assist developing countries in making the shift toward sustainable development.  Virtually allmajor environmental treaties in recent years have included important provisions providing financing, technical assistance, or technology transfers to developing countries. New funding mechanisms, such as the Global Environment Facility and the Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund, have been established to assist developing countries
  66. 66. THE GENERAL DUTY TO PREVENT ENVIRONMENTAL HARM  It is a widely accepted principle of international environmental law that States are required to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not damage the environment of other states or the commons.  Principle 21 of the Stockholm Declaration Principle 2 of the Rio Declaration) states:  States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, ... the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.  This principle is often associated with the Trail Smelter Arbitration.
  67. 67. THE DUTY TO COOPERATE  Much of international environmental law relates to a general obligation of States to cooperate in investigating, identifying, and avoiding environmental harms. Within the obligation to cooperate are more specific duties relating, for example, to the exchange of information, the need to notify and consult with potentially affected States, and the requirement to coordinate international scientific research.  Virtually every international environmental treaty has general provisionsrequiring cooperation in generating and exchanging relevant information.
  68. 68. PRIOR INFORMED CONSENT  When one State wants to act in the territory of another State, simple notification and consultation has not been deemed sufficient; most treaties now require the acting State to obtain the other State's prior informed consent.  Basel Convention  Cartagena Protocol
  69. 69. NOTIFICATION IN THE CASE OF AN EMERGENCY  One of the most important aspects of international cooperation in the environmental sphere is the obligation to notify affected parties in the case of an emergency that has trans boundary effects.  Stockcholm and Rio Rio Declaration  States shall immediately notify other States of any natural disasters or other emergencies that are likely to produce sudden harmful effects on the environment of those States.
  70. 70. PRINCIPLE OF EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE  Although there is not yet an affirmative obligation to provide emergency assistance the importance of mutual assistance in emergencies has been frequently reiterated in international legal instruments.
  71. 71. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT  Many international instruments, international institutions and over sixty countries now require some form of environmental impact assessment(EIA).  EIA is a process for examining, analyzing and assessing proposed activities in order to maximize the potential for environmentally sound and sustainable development.  The EIA process is designed to ensure that (i) the appropriate government authorities have fully identified and considered the environmental effects of proposed activities, as well as alternatives that avoid or mitigate the environmental effects,
  72. 72. TRANSPARENCY, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION AND REMEDIES  Transparency and access to information important to public participation  Right to know what decisions are being contemplated, the factual basis proposed and accomplished governmental action, etc.  Right to appropriate, comprehensible and timely information  Public participation is essential to good governance – responsive, transparent and accountability  Empowerment: access to effective judicial and administrative proceedings  Rio Declaration, Principle 10  UNFCC, Article 4  UNCCD, Article 3  CBD , Articles 13, 14
  73. 73. Conclusion  The growing understanding of the planet's ecological constraints has led to the rapid development of international environmental law.  International law of sustainable development and environmental protection has emerged as a major area of international law and policymaking.  Recognizing and understanding the international environmental principles discussed here is a first step in effectively reconciling the goals, policies and principles of environmental protection and economic growth..
  74. 74. Think global, act local