Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
The Danube environment did not benefi t from the Court decision but the
Court did give signifi cant statements of sustainable development as the 'concept'
(objective) guiding industrial projects. Its implementation should take develop-
ing international environmental law into account. The Court also corroborated
once again that the no-harm principle is legally binding on all the states in the
world and added that it included the obligation of states to undertake environ-
mental impact assessments (EIAs) prior to authorizing projects that could harm
the environments of other states.
On the other hand, the court expressly avoided committing itself on the legal
status of certain principles. Even when Hungary claimed that the Danube dam
project violated the precautionary principle, the UN International Court of Jus-
tice did not make any clear determination one way or another.
While the International Court of Justice did not protect the Danube environ-
ment, it confi rmed the current legal status of the no-harm principle and the duty
to conduct an EIA. In the light of this case, foreign ministries around the world
have begun to take the principle of no-harm more seriously.
Questions and research tasks
1 Select a prominent case of environmental protection which has been decided
by the ICJ, and comment on how the judgment has clarifi ed the content and
status of an international environmental law principle, such as the precaution-
ary principle or the obligation to undertake environmental impact assessment
of activities with the potential for signifi cant effects on the environment.
2 Customary law develops as a result of the practices of states. Refl ect how
civic organizations and other non-governmental actors can infl uence the
development of customary law.
3
Find the home page of an international environmental agreement's imple-
mentation/compliance committee, and one of its decisions. Has it attempted
to assist a party state or to punish it for violation of the agreement? Try and
fi nd one article or book that criticizes the implementation committees for
not punishing states more actively.
Notes
From the legal perspective, the Ministry could have argued that they were only
acting on the basis of customary law of treaties as codifi ed by the Vienna
Convention, Article 18(2). A state is obliged to refrain from acts that would defeat
the object and purpose of a treaty which it has signed. But the Ministry did not
invoke this legal argument since Article 18(2) very likely does not require a signa-
tory to the Espoo Convention to commence a procedure on the basis of the
Espoo Convention.
There has been discussion about whether and how individuals, indigenous peo-
ples, liberation movements, corporations or non-governmental organizations
could be considered to have the status of legal subject.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search