Abstract

By ratifying the Aarhus Convention in 2005 the EU committed itself to guaranteeing broad access to justice in environmental matters both at the national and the EU level. Yet, in spite of the clear-cut obligations incumbent upon the EU, EU courts have consistently rebuked pleas for a softening of the standing requirements in the context of direct actions against EU acts that might have an impact on the environment and/or public health. In addition, the internal review procedure set out by the 2006 Aarhus Regulation has been interpreted so restrictively by the EU institutions that that its added value in the stride toward better access to courts in environmental matters remains ephemeral at best. This led the General Court to finding that the Aarhus Regulation, by excluding general EU acts from the scope of internal review, was in breach of Article 9(3) of the Aarhus Convention. In its recent rulings of 13 January 2015, however, the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) overruled the General Court by holding that the Aarhus Regulation could not be reviewed in light of the Aarhus Convention. With its refusal to use Article 9(3) of the Aarhus Convention as a reference criterion for the purpose of reviewing the EU’s compliance with the Aarhus Convention’s obligations, the CJEU avoided tackling the unsatisfactory level of judicial protection in environmental cases at the EU level. This paper argues that the rulings of the CJEU are to be qualified as a significant step backwards for judicial protection in environmental matters at the EU level. It is established that, instead of addressing the current failings of the EU with respect to access to justice in environmental cases, the CJEU’s hands-off approach paves the way for yet another decade of non-compliance by the EU in the realm of access to justice in environmental cases.

Highlights

  • Franz Kafka is renowned for depicting his characters trapped in a system of rules and laws that they know very little about

  • This paper argues that the rulings of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) are to be qualified as a significant step backwards for judicial protection in environmental matters at the EU level

  • The rulings of the EU courts in World Wildlife Fund UK, in which the annulment was sought of a Common Fisheries Policy (CFP)-regulation laying down quotas and total allowable catches for cod, aptly illustrate the limited impact the Aarhus Convention has had on the locus standi of environmental NGOs.[25]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Franz Kafka is renowned for depicting his characters trapped in a system of rules and laws that they know very little about. The doorkeeper replies that since the man is dying, he is going to close the door It is only a small step from K.’s frustration about not getting access to the Law to the futile attempts of environmental NGOs and other individuals to gain direct access to the EU courts in environmental matters. 7 Council Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies [2006] OJ L 264/13 (Aarhus Regulation). Access to Justice in Environmental Cases after the Rulings of the Court of Justice of 13 January 2015 legality review of the Aarhus Regulation in the light of the international obligations that are incumbent on the EU.[12]. This article reflects on the more fundamental question pertaining to the compatibility of the internal review procedure with the requirements of the Aarhus Convention and, subsequently, examines whether the reluctant stance of the CJEU merits reconsideration in the light of the recent international developments

The Bumpy Road to Environmental Justice at the EU Level
A Small Spark of Hope for Environmental Justice?
Back to Square One
The Unfortunate Legacy of the Rulings of 13 January 2015
Beyond the Aarhus Regulation?
Outlook
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.