Aarhus Convention Research Articles

ENHANCING ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPARENCY IN UZBEKISTAN: LEGAL PERSPECTIVES FROM THE AARHUS CONVENTION FRAMEWORK

This article examines the potential of the Aarhus Convention as a framework for enhancing transparency and upholding human rights in Uzbekistan. As Uzbekistan faces pressing environmental challenges, including pollution and climate-related risks, transparency in environmental governance is critical. Through policy analysis and legal review, this study assesses how Uzbekistan’s current legislation aligns with the Convention’s requirements on information access, with Kazakhstan’s experience serving as a comparative example. Findings reveal significant gaps in Uzbekistan’s transparency framework, particularly in timely access to data, public engagement, and legal accountability, underscoring the importance of adopting the Aarhus Convention. The study provides recommendations for Uzbekistan to bridge these gaps, aiming to strengthen transparency, enhance environmental data availability, and foster public trust in environmental decision-making.

Renewal of an active substance found in an insecticide: How to articulate risk assessment and risk management?

In Pesticide Action Network Europe v Commission (Case T-536/22), Pesticide Action Network Europe (PAN Europe) contested the renewal by the European Commission of the active substance cypermethrin. This substance is used or is marketed as an insecticide in large-scale commercial agricultural applications as well as in consumer products for domestic purposes (ant and cockroach killer). PAN Europe sought the annulment of the European Commission's decision of 23 June 2022 by which the latter rejected the request for internal review made by PAN Europe in accordance with Regulation (EC) No. 1367/2006 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. The applicant argued, in essence, that where a risk is established with sufficient certainty by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the Commission could not disregard the conclusions of the scientific assessment by relying on its powers as risk manager. In stressing the discretion enjoyed by the Commission, the General Court dismissed the action of PAN Europe. This casenote suggests that the General Court applied the precautionary principle too formally.

The impact of the right of access to information on sustainable development goals under the Aarhus Convention

Access to information is a critical tool for citizen oversight of environmental issues. This right is enshrined in the Aarhus Convention. Recognizing the importance of sustainability for present and future generations, Turkey has embraced the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and actively pursued related initiatives. This study focuses on the environmental SDGs most relevant to Turkey, examining the role of access to information in achieving them. Fifteen expert interviews in Turkey were conducted and analyzed using MAXQDA 24 software. The findings, primarily contextualized within Turkey, reveal important, albeit incomplete, progress in access to information rights. This right is seen as essential for realizing the SDGs, yet challenges remain. Limited public awareness emerges as the biggest obstacle, as an effective information access system hinges on societal engagement.

Access to information and public participation: evaluating the implementation of the Aarhus Convention in Europe

ABSTRACT The ‘Aarhus Convention’ – regulating access to environmental information, public participation and justice in environmental decision−making – is a key international agreement with a long history and a considerable number of signatory countries. While implementation has been studied nationally, there is little comparative research at the transnational level. Based on ten criteria, we analysed national implementation reports of the 2014, 2017 and 2021 reporting cycles in terms of how 33 countries in Europe have implemented the access to information and public participation pillars, and identified obstacles they encountered. We also studied similarities and differences supra-nationally. Overall, countries are quite successfully fulfilling the obligations of the two pillars. Most obstacles reported concern four criteria: access to information, information provision, interaction, and trust. Implementation practices have changed little from 2014 to 2021. However, East- and South-European countries report more, and more persistent or repetitive obstacles, compared to Northern and Western European countries. The national democratic context seems to affect the quality of implementation. The Convention’s compliance bodies and national agencies responsible for coordinating the implementation are encouraged to interact more closely, to account for the differences and leverage implementation.

Human Right to a Clean Environment: General Reflections

Abstract This article examines the substantive and procedural right to a clean environment. The universal right (based on the 2022 Resolution of the UNGA) is critically analysed from the point of view of its universality in the context of Global North and Global South. The procedural environmental right is less controversial. In this article is analysed within the context of the ECHR and the Aarhus Convention. Environmental Impact Assessment is dealt with from the points of view of environmental information and public participation in environmental matters.

Legal means of protection against abuse of the right of public participation in the decision-making process in environmental matters – current situation in the Slovak Republic

The Aarhus Convention guarantees several procedural rights which the concerned public can actively use as long as it is involved in the environmental impact assessment procedure. This international treaty assumes that the affected public uses its procedural rights with the intention of ensuring the protection of the environment. In practice, however, this may not be the case. Using a specific example from Slovakia, the author points to a case where there was a suspicion that a non-governmental organization was using its subjective rights pursuing a goal other than it is required by the Aarhus Convention. The administrative authorities believed that such behavior could be an abuse of the procedural rights guaranteed by the Convention and therefore they sought legal tools within the administrative law, the use of which would not be in conflict with the Aarhus Convention. This article addresses the issue of legal limits that prevent parties from restricting the procedural rights of the concerned public guaranteed by the Aarhus Convention.

What law does not understand about public participation

Public participation plays a vital role in developing and implementing climate policies. However, in practice, it is challenging to organise public participation effectively. In this paper, we compare three main regulatory approaches to public participation, the Aarhus Convention, the Escazú Agreement and the Impact and Benefits Agreements, in light of their ability to implement social sciences insights on effective public participation. By linking the social sciences and law, our analysis shows that the shortcomings of each regime, when individually taken, potentially explain why public participation practices face difficulty fulfilling the envisaged goals.

Aarhus Convention in the Formation of the Ecological Civilization Concept

Aarhus Convention in the Formation of the Ecological Civilization Concept

Access to Environmental Justice under the Aarhus Convention: Evaluating the Contemporary Hurdles for ENGOs in Challenging State Aid Decisions under EU Law

Access to Environmental Justice under the Aarhus Convention: Evaluating the Contemporary Hurdles for ENGOs in Challenging State Aid Decisions under EU Law

The Role of UNCLOS 1982 in Maintaining and Protecting the International Marine Environment

The disposal of nuclear waste in the Sea of Japan is a complex and controversial issue where it involves aspects of international law and the international environment. Japan, as one of the largest nuclear waste-producing countries, has faced pressure to manage that waste in a way that complies with international legal principles and environmental norms. International law, such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), provides a framework for the management of marine resources, including waste disposal issues. However, the lack of clarity in international regulations regarding nuclear waste creates challenges in determining the limits of state responsibility and obligations. From an international environmental perspective, nuclear waste disposal can have long-term detrimental impacts on marine ecosystems and human health. Sustainability and sustainability of marine ecology must be a primary consideration in decisions regarding nuclear waste disposal. Meanwhile, various international conventions and agreements such as the Espoo Convention and the Aarhus Convention emphasize the importance of public participation in environmental decision-making. Therefore, the involvement of civil society in the decision process regarding the disposal of nuclear waste in the Sea of Japan is essential to ensure representation of public interests and concerns. This research aims to find out and analyze Japan's actions in dumping nuclear waste into the Pacific Ocean. The problem formulation in this research is: what is the role of UNCLOS 1982 in maintaining and protecting the international marine environment? This research was written using the normative juridical research type, which includes examining legal conflicts, legal vacancies, or vague norms.

In search of a sustainable future: A comparative assessment of climate change regimes in Nigeria and Kenya

AbstractClimate change has caused significant hardship in sub‐Saharan Africa. As a result, Kenya and Nigeria now have statutes that focus on climate change mitigation and adaptation. Both countries are also parties to the Paris Agreement. The Kenyan Climate Change Act (2016) and the Nigerian Climate Change Act (2021) are similar in terms of their design and overarching aims. Meanwhile, certain pivotal statutory provisions in both statutes are inconsistent with their overarching aims of enhancing appropriate responses to climate change. There is considerable scope for access to justice to be enhanced in the Kenyan and Nigerian statutes. Further, despite their similarities, the divergent approaches of the statutes undermine regional coherence. Such coherence is critical to effectively addressing climate change because both regional powers face similar vulnerabilities with respect to climate change and socio‐economic challenges. This article, therefore, undertakes a comparative analysis of the Kenyan and Nigerian legal regimes in two key respects, namely, (1) institutional structures and how they impact corruption and (2) accessing justice in the context of climate litigation. The Nigerian regime is behind that of Kenya in both regards. The article concludes by examining how the Aarhus Convention and the International Access to Justice Convention can help to fill any statutory gaps concerning access to justice.

Energy Access in Mountain Arba Hill, Jango Village From The Perspective of Community Environmental Justice

Environmental justice from the perspective of public participation in the development of natural resources is a national program where the government is starting to switch from fossil energy to green energy, which means that in the future the government will no longer hope for energy such as coal, oil and gas, etc. This is a very strategic step taken by the government. Centralized policies are the antithesis of the increasing pressure to decentralize regional government, including regarding the management of natural resources (SDA) in the mining and oil and gas sectors, To ensure that this program runs well, of course the community is involved in monitoring it. Community participation in sustainable development is indeed weak, including in terms of policy making, even though the laws and regulations also stipulate that the community has rights as explained in the Aarhus Convention, where parties have an obligation to guarantee the rights of access to information, community participation in decision making, and access to justice in environmental matters in accordance with the provisions of the convention. Then in Law No. 32 of 2009 concerning Environmental Protection and Management, it is intended, among other things, 1) to provide information to the government, 2) to increase the public's willingness to accept government decisions. 3) Helps with legal protection. and 4) Democratize decision making. From the above basis, it further strengthens the community so that it can participate actively in the development of natural resources in this country.

The Aarhus Convention and the Latent Right to a Healthy Environment

Abstract The Aarhus Convention is an ambitious environmental agreement that recognises the right to a healthy environment in its opening article. However, the ambiguous language surrounding this right gives the impression that it is ornamentation and not something requiring serious legal attention. At the same time, the procedural environmental rights which are the centrepiece of the Convention are being eroded, either by design on the part of Contracting Parties or because of a broader malaise about the value of public participation in environmental decision-making. This contribution suggests that closer attention to the legal significance of the substantive right contained in the Convention can help to reinvigorate the procedural Aarhus rights. In so doing, it draws attention to the radical vision of the Aarhus Convention to protect the right of present and future generations to live in an environment adequate to human health and well-being.

Just Pathways to Sustainability: From Environmental Human Rights Defenders to Biosphere Defenders

People form part of the biosphere - the biosphere being the whole intertwined network of life on Earth. While there is convergence on the need for societal change for just sustainability and a healthy biosphere, the pathways to achieve these transformations remain relatively unclear. Through legal interpretation, conceptual and thematic analysis of academic and grey literature, we seek to answer the following two questions: (a) how does the concept of Biosphere Defender enable a deeper and distinct understanding of who environmental defenders are and their role in just sustainability transformations? and (b) how does international human rights law contribute to specify the content of biosphere defenders’ rights? To address these questions, we first critically review the scope and limitations of the notion of Environmental Human Rights Defenders (EHRD) in human rights narratives in international law and policy. We examine how understandings of EHRD portray those defending their land and environment and what limitations this concept has in terms of possibilities for reflecting on transformations towards just sustainability. Second, we propose an alternative and/or complementary understanding of EHRD by using the concept of Biosphere Defenders. We also develop the Defend-Biosphere Framework to analyse the role of these actors as agents of change in pathways towards just sustainability. Third, to empirically illustrate the role of Biosphere Defenders, and the use of the Defend-Biosphere Framework we present two case studies from Latin America analyzing initiatives catalyzed by rural people who are defending their lands and territories while generating new ways to relate to socio-ecological systems and engage with the State and the economy. In both case studies, we find that relational values of solidarity, responsibility, and care (between human and other living beings) are central in understanding Biosphere Defenders’ initiatives creating pathways towards just sustainability. The findings of this article are of particular relevance to the implementation of the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment in the context of the Escazu Agreement on access to information, public participation and access to justice in environmental matters in Latin America and the Caribbean, the Aarhus Convention on access to information, public participation and access to justice in environmental matters and the Montreal-Kunming Global Biodiversity Framework in particular Target 22 (access to information, participation, access to justice and environmental defenders) and Target 23 (gender equality).

Energy Access in the Village of Gunung Arba, Jango Village from the Perspective of Environmental Justice in Central Lombok District Community

Environmental justice from the perspective of public participation in the development of natural resources is a national program where the government is starting to switch from fossil energy to green energy, which means that in the future the government will no longer hope for energy such as coal, oil and gas, etc. This is a very strategic step taken by the government. Centralized is the antithesis of the increasing pressure to decentralize regional government, including regarding the management of natural resources (SDA) policies in the mining and oil and gas sectors, To ensure that this program runs well, of course the community is involved in monitoring it. Community participation in sustainable development is indeed weak, including in terms of policy making, even though the laws and regulations also stipulate that the community has rights as explained in the Aarhus Convention, where parties have an obligation to guarantee the right of access to information, community participation in decision making, and access to justice in environmental matters in accordance with the provisions of the convention. Then in Law No. 32 of 2009 concerning Environmental Protection and Management, it is intended, among other things, 1) to provide information to the government, 2) to increase the public's willingness to accept government decisions. 3) Helps with legal protection. and 4) Democratize decision making. From the above basis, it further strengthens the community so that it can participate actively in the development of natural resources in this country.

Ecosystem approaches in the practice of national enforcement

The article is devoted to current problems of ecology and enforcement. Ukraine is not a member of the EU, which makes it impossible to directly apply EU norms in national enforcement practice. However, having been ratified the Association Agreement between the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community and their member states, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part is a full-fledged part of the national legal order, which outlines a range of key issues, in particular, the standards that appear before national legislation as a challenge to cooperation on environmental protection issues, and adaptation to EU legislation. The agreement envisages the strengthening of environmental protection activities through the improvement of the health care system, the preservation of natural resources, the improvement of economic and environmental protection efficiency, the integration of environmental policy into other areas of state policy, as well as the increase of the level of production thanks to modern technologies, which will have positive consequences for citizens and enterprises in Ukraine and the EU. As well as the issue of harmonization of legislation on environmental protection, including the implementation of the UNECE Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention), which provides for the involvement of the public in the decision-making process on environmental issues and guarantees access to justice for person and public organizations when environmental legislation and/or provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights are violate.
 The need to analyze domestic judicial practice on environmental legal relations in various jurisdictions is extremely urgent. The application of international ratified documents, in particular the Aarhus Convention, is precisely the source of law that, firstly, opens wide public access to appeal procedures; secondly, it is the legal basis for resolving disputes about compensation for damage to the environment; thirdly, it makes impossible the limited interpretation of the current national legislation of Ukraine, regarding the right to appeal to the court for the protection of an interest protected by law in the sphere of guaranteeing environmental safety; fourthly, guarantees the right to appeal to the court of an unlimited number of persons (can be exercised by citizens personally or jointly through the association of citizens), and the resolution of disputed environmental-legal relations, i.e. those are public; fifth, guarantees the subject of the law access to the court without discrimination based on his actual location or actual center of activity; sixth, it affects the formation of established legal practice in environmental disputes.

Historical and legal overview of Public Interest Litigation as an institute of Administrative Justice

The article provides a historical and legal characterization of the institution of a Public Interest Litigation in general and in the context of administrative proceedings. The author reveals the historical origins of this institute from the time of Roman law, where it was called “actio popularis”. Some of the most common constructions of such claims in Roman law are highlighted. The author emphasizes the public benefit of filing such claims despite their private law nature. The author emphasizes the dualism between private and public interests in law, which is particularly evident in the institution of a Public Interest Litigation. The terminology used in different legal systems to describe the institution of a public interest action or its individual varieties is revealed: “actio popularis”, “Public Interest Litigation”, “Public Interest Law”, “Social Interest Litigation”. The author outlines the main areas in which Public Interest Litigation is most often applied: environmental protection, anti-discrimination, etc. The author analyzes the reasons for the low interest in the institution of public interest litigation in previous historical periods in Ukraine. On the other hand, it is suggested that there has been a significant increase in interest in such lawsuits in recent years, which is due to certain factors. These include: the development of civil society and the increased interest of legislators in this institution, as well as the ratification by Ukraine of the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention). The last point was important in the context of the further adoption by the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of the decision of 11.12.2018 in case No. 910/8122/17, which stated the right of environmental associations to file lawsuits in the public interest on these matters. The article concludes with the emphasis on the prospects for further research into the application of actio popularis in foreign jurisdictions with a view to exploring the possibilities for expanding the number of legal relations in which such claims may be filed in Ukraine.

The substantive right to environment and the procedural environmental rights under the Aarhus Convention – Part I

Niniejszy artykuł stanowi część I artykułu, którego celem jest zbadanie wzajemnych relacji między materialnymi i proceduralnymi prawami do środowiska na tle typologii materialnych praw do środowiska i wyzwań napotykanych przy projektowaniu prawa do zdrowego środowiska. Część I zawiera analizę kontekstu w tym zakresie. Przedstawiono w niej pochodzenie terminu "prawo do środowiska" oraz różne podejścia do jego znaczenia, w szczególności różnice pomiędzy "prawem do dostępu do środowiska naturalnego" a "prawem do zdrowego środowiska". Następnie przedstawiono dwa możliwe podejścia do znaczenia terminu "prawo do zdrowego środowiska" i ich konsekwencje. Na tej podstawie artykuł przedstawia trzy główne metody rozwiązywania problemów dotyczących jakości środowiska w ramach systemu praw człowieka oraz relację między podejściem antropocentrycznym i ekocentrycznym. Następnie w artykule przedstawiono główne wyzwania napotykane przy tworzeniu "prawa do zdrowego środowiska", w szczególności kwestię dopasowania tego prawa do istniejącego systemu ochrony praw człowieka oraz ograniczenia związane z "zazielenianiem" innych praw człowieka. Niniejszy artykuł zawiera też krótki przegląd rozwoju odpowiednich przepisów prawnych dotyczących praw środowiskowych, w tym zarówno praw człowieka, jak i praw przyrody. Część I kończy się kilkoma uwagami na temat tendencji do rozwijania proceduralnych praw środowiskowych i oczekiwań wobec Konwencji EKG ONZ z Aarhus oraz jej roli w ochronie materialnych praw środowiskowych i demokracji uczestniczącej - co jest łącznikiem z częścią II, w której szczegółowo omówiono te kwestie i stwierdzono, że przepisy dotyczące dostępu do wymiaru sprawiedliwości w ramach Konwencji z Aarhus ani nie zapewniają wystarczających środków ochrony praw środowiskowych, ani - w świetle koncepcji leżących u podstaw Konwencji - nie powinny być traktowane jako pełniące jedynie taką rolę.

Public Information and Participation in Climate Decision-Making Process: The Case of the Italian NECP from the Perspective of the Aarhus Convention

Public Information and Participation in Climate Decision-Making Process: The Case of the Italian NECP from the Perspective of the Aarhus Convention

The Belgian Climate Case: From Federalism Idiosyncrasies to Arboreal Novelties

Abstract VZW Klimaatzaak v Kingdom of Belgium & Others is a climate lawsuit brought in Belgium in 2015. It was modelled on the famous Dutch Urgenda case. In this groundbreaking judicial procedure, over 60,000 plaintiffs argued that Belgian public authorities have undertaken insufficient climate action and called for its enhancement. On June 17, 2021, the Tribunal of First Instance of Brussels rendered its decision in partial favour of the plaintiffs, consolidating a climate ‘duty of care’ for public authorities. This article puts forward a succinct summary of the complaint introduced by the NGO Klimaatzaak and the main findings of the Tribunal. In doing so, it attempts to make the idiosyncrasies of Belgian federalism intelligible to an international audience. It also highlights a number of notable features of the case, including the Tribunal’s reliance on the Aarhus Convention to interpret broadly the provisions on legal standing for environmental NGOs, and a third-party intervention request introduced on behalf of over a hundred trees with long lifespans. Finally, the article focuses on an apparent flaw in the reasoning of the Tribunal in its 2021 judgment and points out what to look out for in the appeal proceedings that are ongoing at the time of writing.