Jump to content

Aarhus Convention

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Addbot (talk | contribs) at 16:42, 25 February 2013 (Bot: Migrating 14 interwiki links, now provided by Wikidata on d:q301336 (Report Errors)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The UNECE Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, usually known as the Aarhus Convention, was signed on June 25, 1998 in the Danish city of Aarhus. It entered into force on 30 October 2001. As of July 2009, it had been signed by 40 (primarily European and Central Asian) countries and the European Union and ratified by 41 countries. It had also been ratified by the European Community, which has begun applying Aarhus-type principles in its legislation, notably the Water Framework Directive (Directive 2000/60/EC).

The Aarhus Convention grants the public rights regarding access to information, public participation and access to justice, in governmental decision-making processes on matters concerning the local, national and transboundary environment. It focuses on interactions between the public and public authorities.

Content

The Aarhus Convention is a multilateral environmental agreement through which the opportunities for citizens to access environmental information are increased and transparent and reliable regulation procedure is secured.[1][2] It is a way of enhancing the environmental governance network, introducing a reactive and trustworthy relationship between civil society and governments and adding the novelty of a mechanism created to empower the value of public participation in the decision making process and guarantee access to justice: a "governance-by-disclosure" that leads a shift toward an environmentally responsible society.[3] The Aarhus Convention was drafted by governments, with the highly required participation of NGOs, and is legally binding for all the States who ratified it becoming Parties. Among the latter is included the EC, who therefore has the task to ensure compliance not only within the member States but also for its institutions, all those bodies who carry out public administrative duties.[4] Each Party has the commitment to promote the principles contained in the convention and to fill out a national report, always embracing a consultative and transparent process[5]

General features

The Aarhus Convention is a rights-based approach: the public, both in the present and in future generations, have the right to know and to live in a healthy environment.

A distinction is made between "the public", all the civil society's actors, and the "public concerned" precisely, those persons or organisations affected or interested in environmental decision-making (e.g. environmental NGOs).[6] "Public authorities" are the addressees of the convention, namely, governments, international institutions, and privatized bodies that have public responsibilities or act under the control of public bodies. The private sector, for which information disclosure depends on voluntary, non- mandatory practices, and bodies acting in a judicial or legislative capacity, are excluded.[7]

Other significant provisions are the "non-discrimination" principle (all the information has to be provided without taking account of the nationality or citizenship of the applicant), the international nature of the convention,[8][9] and the importance attributed to the promotion of environmental education of the public.

The Three Pillars

  1. Access to information: any citizen should have the right to get a wide and easy access to environmental information. Public authorities must provide all the information required and collect and disseminate them and in a timely and transparent manner. They can refuse to do it only under particular situations (such as national defence);[10][11] UNECE, 2006)
  2. Public participation in decision making: the public must be informed over all the relevant projects and it has to have the chance to participate during the decision-making and legislative process. Decision makers can take advantage from people's knowledge and expertise; this contribution is a strong opportunity to improve the quality of the environmental decisions, outcomes and to guarantee procedural legitimacy [12][13]
  3. Access to justice: the public has the right to judicial or administrative recourse procedures in case a Party violates or fails to adhere to environmental law and the convention's principles.[14][15]

Further Reflections

The Aarhus convention is a "proceduralisation of the environmental regulation"[16],;[17] it focuses more on setting and listing procedures rather than establishing standards and specifying outcomes, permitting the parties involved to interpret and implement the convention on the systems and circumstances that characterize their nation. This model embodies a perfect example of a multi-level governance.

The risk could lay in a loss of time and resources that should be otherwise invested in defining the outcomes,[18] notwithstanding the fact that it renders the convention vague, weak and open to more than one interpretation.[19] Other critiques could be done to the fact that private bodies are excluded from this mandatory procedures(Mason, 2010), moreover we can also doubt that NGOs involved are actually representing anybody,[20][21] ordinary citizens often do not have the financial possibility to participate effectively and are therefore represented by this organisations. The differences between the participants and social groups' resource inequalities can suggest the possibility of an unequal environmental protection.[22]

Compliance Committee

The Convention has a unique Compliance Review Mechanism, which can be triggered in four ways:

  1. a Party makes a submission concerning its own compliance,
  2. a Party makes a submission concerning another Party's compliance,
  3. the Convention Secretariat makes a referral to the Committee, or
  4. a member of the public makes a communication concerning the compliance of a party.

The Compliance mechanism is unique in international environmental law, as it allows members of the public to communicate concerns about a Party's compliance directly to a committee of international legal experts empowered to examine the merits of the case (the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee). Nonetheless, the Compliance Committee cannot issue binding decisions, but rather makes recommendations to the full Meeting of the Parties (MoP). However, in practise, as MoPs occur infrequently, Parties attempt to comply with the recommendations of the Compliance Committee. As of August 2009, 41 communication from the public - many originating with non-governmental organizations - and 1 submission from Party had been lodged with the Convention's Compliance Committee.[23]

Pollutant Release Protocol

The Kiev Protocol on Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers to the Aarhus Convention was adopted at an extraordinary meeting of the Parties on 21 May 2003, in Kiev, Ukraine. 36 States and the European Community signed the Protocol. As of July 2009, 18 countries had ratified the Protocol. The European Community had also ratified the Protocol, leading to the expectation that the other 25 EU member States would follow suit.

The Kiev Protocol is the first legally binding international instrument on Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers (PRTRs). PRTRs are inventories of pollution from industrial sites and other sources such as agriculture and transport. The objective of the Protocol is "to enhance public access to information through the establishment of coherent, nationwide pollutant release and transfer registers (PRTRs)." The Protocol places indirect obligations on private enterprises to report annually to their national governments on their releases and transfers of pollutants.

Parties to the Protocol need not be Parties to the Convention. The Protocol is in this sense a free-standing, international agreement. The Kiev Protocol on PRTRs will enter into force 90 days after the sixteenth State ratifies or accedes to the agreement.

An amendment to the Aarhus Convention on "Public Participation in Decisions on Deliberate Release into the Environment and Placing on the Market of Genetically Modified Organisms" was adopted at the Second Meeting of the Parties on 27 May 2005, in Almaty, Kazakhstan. As of August 2009, it had been ratified by 21 countries. The GMO amendment will enter into force 90 days after at least three-quarters of the Parties to the Aarhus Convention ratify it.[24]

United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan (1997–2006) has said, "Although regional in scope, the significance of the Aarhus Convention is global. It is by far the most impressive elaboration of principle 10 of the Rio Declaration, which stresses the need for citizens' participation in environmental issues and for access to information on the environment held by public authorities. As such it is the most ambitious venture in the area of environmental democracy so far undertaken under the auspices of the United Nations."

The influence of the Aarhus Convention also extends beyond the environmental field. At the 2nd Internet Governance Forum, held on 12–15 May 2007, in Rio de Janeiro, the Convention was presented as a model of public participation and transparency in the operation of international forums.

See also

References

  1. ^ Aarti, Gupta (2008). "Transparency under scrutiny: Information disclosure in Global Environmental Governance". Global Environmental Politics. 8 (2): 1–7.
  2. ^ Rodenhoff, Vera (2003). "The Aarhus convention and its implications for the 'Institutions' of the European Community". Review of European Community and International Environmental Law. 11 (3): 343–357.
  3. ^ Aarti, 2008, p.2
  4. ^ Rodehoff, 2003, p.350
  5. ^ Kravchenko, S (2007). "The Aarhus convention and innovations in compliance with multilateral environmental law and Policy". Colorado journal of International Environmental Law and Policy. 18 (1): 1–50.
  6. ^ Mason, M. "Information disclosure and environmental rights: The Aarhus Convention". Global Environmental Politics. 10 (3): 10–31.
  7. ^ Rodenhoff, 2003, p. 345
  8. ^ Wates, S (2005). "The Aarhus convention: a driving force for environmental democracy". Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law. 2 (1): 1–11.
  9. ^ Margera, E. "An Update on the Aarhus Convention and its continued global relevance". Review of European Community and International Law. 14 (2): 138–147.
  10. ^ Rodenhoff, 2003, p.345
  11. ^ UNECE (2006). Your right to a healthy environment: a simplified guide to the Aarhus convention on access to information, public participation in decision making and access to justice in environmental matters. New York: Geneva:United Nations.
  12. ^ Rodenhoff, 2003, p.346
  13. ^ UNECE, 2006
  14. ^ Rodehoff, 2003, p.348
  15. ^ UNECE, 2006
  16. ^ Aarti, 2008, p.3-4
  17. ^ Lee, M. "The usual suspects? Public participation under the Aarhus convention". The Modern Law Review. 66 (1): 80–108. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  18. ^ Aarti, 2008, p. 4
  19. ^ Lee, M.; Abbot, C., 2003, p.100
  20. ^ Bell, D.R. (2004). Barry, J. (ed.). Europe, globalization and sustainable development. New York: Routledge.
  21. ^ Lee, M.; Abbot, C., 2003, p.89
  22. ^ Bell, 2004
  23. ^ Aarhus Convention - Public Participation
  24. ^ Aarhus Convention - Public Participation
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aarhus_Convention&oldid=540292432"