The legal standing in environmental litigation before regional international courts in Africa and Latin America

• Authors: Sonja Kahl

Title variants

PL

Stan prawny w sporze środowiskowym przed regionalnymi międzynarodowymi sądami w Afryce i Ameryce Łacińskiej

Abstracts

PL

Artykuł porównuje regulacje sytuacji prawnej w sprawach przed wybranymi regionalnymi międzynarodowymi organami sądowymi lub quasi-sądowymi działającymi w Afryce i Ameryce Łacińskiej, z perspektywy sporów środowiskowych. Autorka skupia się na aktywnej sytuacji prawnej prywatnych jednostek w spornych sprawach wnoszonych przeciwko państwu. Artykuł systematyzuje reguły rządzące stanem prawnym w dwóch szerokich kategoriach: sporu subiektywnego (opartego na prawach) oraz obiektywnego konfliktu interesów. Następnie, podejście każdego z sądów zostaje przeanalizowane na podstawie jego reguł proceduralnych i orzecznictwa. Można wyróżnić kilka trendów, włącznie ze skłanianiem się sądów praw człowieka w stronę traktowania takich spraw jako obiektywnego konfliktu interesów, trendem udzielania organizacjom pozarządowym uprzywilejowanej pozycji wszczynania sporów środowiskowych, oraz wzmacnianiem podejścia opartego na prawach społeczności przez sądy w celu regionalnej integracji ekonomicznej, które mogą stać się istotne w przyszłości.

EN

This article compares the rules governing the legal standing before selected regional international judicial and quasi-judicial bodies in Africa and Latin America from the perspective of environmental litigation. The focus is on active legal standing of private entities in contentious proceedings against states. The article sytematizes the rules governing the legal standing into two broad categories: subjective (rights based) litigation and objective interest litigation. Subsequently, the approach of each court will be analyzed on the basis of its procedural rules and jurisprudence. Several trends can be identified, including a tendency of human rights courts to move towards objective interest litigation, a trend to grant non-governmental organizations a privileged position to initiate environmental litigation, and the development of community rights based approach by courts for regional economic integration that could become relevant in the future.

Keywords

EN

environmental litigation; comparative law; legal standing; Africa; Latin America

PL

spór środowiskowy; komparatystyka prawnicza; stan prawny; Afryka; Ameryka Łacińska

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Opolski
• Journal: Opolskie Studia Administracyjno-Prawne
• Year: 2022
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 63-86

Dates

published

2022

Contributors

author

Sonja Kahl

• University of Freiburg, Germany

References

• African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (27.06.1981) 26363 UNTS 1520.
• American Convention on Human Rights (22.11.1969) 17955 UNTS 1144.
• American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man (02.05.1948) Res. XXX of the Ninth International Conference of American States, OEA/Ser. L/V/l.50 Doc. 6, Rev. 1.
• Consolidated Version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (25.03.1957) OJ C 326 of 26.10.2012.
• Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention) (25.06.1998) 2161 UNTS 37770.
• Convention on the Statute of the Central American Court of Justice (10.12.1992) 31191 UNTS 1821.
• Decisión 472, Treaty Creating the Court of Justice of the Cartagena Agreement (16.09.1999) GOAC No 483 of 17.09.1999.
• Protocol A/P.L/7/91 on the Community Court of Justice (06.07.1991) 14843 UNTS 2375, as amended by the Supplementary Protocol A/SP.1/01/05 (19.01.2005).
• Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (10.06.1998) (unreported).
• Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean (Escazú Agreement) (04.03.2018) UNTS 56654.
• Report of the First Meeting of the Parties, Addendum, Decision I/7 on Compliance Review (02.04.2002) ECE/MP.PP/2/Add.8.
• Report of the First Meeting of the Parties, Decision I/3 on Rules Relating to the Structure and Functions of the Committee to Support Implementation and Compliance Review (22.04.2022) 22-00344.
• Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas Establishing the Caribbean Community Including the CARICOM Single Market and Economy (05.07.2001) 40269 UNTS 2259.
• Rules of Procedure of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (2020) (unreported).
• Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community (30.11.1999) 37437 UNTS 2144.
• Hungary ACCC/C/2004/04. Aarhus Compliance Committee, 18.02.2005.
• Union Interafricaine Des Droits De L’homme and others v Angola. ACmHPR, 11.11.1997, 159/96.
• Malawi African Association and others v Mauritania. ACmHPR, 11.05.2000, 54/91, 61/91, 98/93, 164/97, 196/97, 210/98.
• Social and Economic Rights Action Center (SERAC) and Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) v Nigeria (Ogoniland). ACmHPR, 27.10.2001, 155/96.
• Democratic Republic of Congo v Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda. ACmHPR, 29.05.2003, 227/99.
• Gunme v Cameroon. ACmHPR, 27.05.2009, 266/2003.
• Haregewoin Gabre-Selassie and IHRDA (on behalf of former Dergue Officials) v Ethiopia. ACmHPR, 12.10.2013, 301/05.
• Spilg and others v Botswana. ACmHPR, 12.10.2013, 277/2003.
• Centre for Independence of Judges and Lawyers v Algeria. ACmHPR, 13.07.2017, 104/94; 109/94; 126/94.
• Secretary General of SIECA. CACJ, 11.04.1997, 1-1-3-1997.
• XYZ v Benin. ACtHPR, 27.11.2020, 010/2020.
• Pérez Campos and Succari v Panama. CACJ, 18.02.2010, 1-18-2-2010.
• Asociación Foro Nacional De Reciclaje (FONARE) and Fundación Nicaragüense Para El Desarrollo Sostenible (FUNDENIC) v Costa Rica. CACJ, 21.06.2012, 12-06-12-2011.
• Trinidad Cement Limited v Guyana. CCJ, 15.01.2009, [2009] CCJ 1 (OJ).
• AG of Tanzania v Africa Network for Animal Welfare (ANAW). EACJ Division of Appeal, 29.07.2014, Appeal No 3 of 2014.
• Anyang’ Nyong’o and other v AG of Kenya and Others. EACJ First Instance Division, 29.03.2007, Ref No 1 of 2006.
• Katabazi and others v Secretary General of the EAC and Uganda. EACJ First Instance Division, 31.10.2007, Ref 1 of 2007.
• East African Law Society and others v AG of Kenya and Others. EACJ First Instance Division, 31.08.2008, Ref No 3/2007.
• Africa Network for Animal Welfare (ANAW) v AG of Tanzania. EACJ First Instance Division, 20.06.2014, Ref No 9 of 2010.
• Registered Trustees of the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) v Nigeria and Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC). ECOWAS CJ, 27.10.2009, ECW/CCJ/APP/0808.
• Registered Trustees of the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) v Nigeria (Ogoniland). ECOWAS CJ, 10.12.2010, ECW/CCJ/APP/07/10.
• Osaghae and others v Nigeria. ECOWAS CJ, 10.10.2017, ECW/CCJ/JUD/03/17.
• Dexter Oil Limited v Liberia. ECOWAS CJ, 06.02.2019, ECW/CCJ/APP/24/17.
• Reverend Mfa and others v Nigeria and others (Fulani Herdsmen). ECOWAS CJ, 26.02.2019, ECW/CCJ/JUD/06/19.
• Registered Trustees of the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) v Nigeria. ECOWAS CJ, 26.04.2021, ECW/CCJ/JUD/08/21.
• Diaz and others v Colombia. IACmHR, 12.03.1997, Petition 11.227.
• Mevopal Sociedad Anónima v Argentina. IACmHR, 11.03.1999.
• Constitutional Court v Peru. IACmHR, 24.09.1999, Series C No 55.
• Yakye Axa Indigenous Community of the Enxet-Lengua People v Paraguay. IACmHR, 27.02.2002, Petition 12.313.
• Panama Metropolitan Reserve v Panama. IACmHR, 22.10.2003, Petition 11.533.
• Maya Indigenous Communities of the Toledo District v Belize. IACmHR, 12.10.2004, Petition 12.053.
• Community of San Mateo De Huanchor and its Members v Peru. IACmHR, 15.10.2004, Petition 504-03.
• Chang Bravo v Guatemala. IACmHR, 24.07.2008, Petition 283-06.
• Community of La Oroya v Peru. IACmHR, 05.09.2009, Petition 1473-06.
• Inhabitants of the „Barão De Mauá” Residential Complex v Brazil. IACmHR, 12.07.2012, Petition 1073-05.
• Navarro Pizarro and others v Colombia. IACmHR, 01.12.2021, Petition 638-12.
• Saramaka People v Suriname. IACtHR, 28.11.2007, Series C No 172.
• Advisory Opinion on the Environment and Human Rights (State Obligations in Relation to the Environment in the Context of the Protection and Guarantee of the Rights to Life and to Personal Integrity) (OC-23/17). IACtHR, 15.11.2017, Series A No 23.
• Indigenous Communities of the Lhaka Honhat (Our Land) Association v Argentina. IACtHR, 06.02.2020, Series C No 400.
• Moyano Bonilla v Commission of the Andean Community. TJAC, 01.02.2002, 14-AN-2001. GOAC 991.
• Moyano Bonilla v Colombia. TJAC, 29.05.2002, 75-AI-2001. GOAC, No 825.
• Farmagro SA and Others v Peru. TJAC, 27.01.2009, 05-AI-2008. GOAC 1824.
• Bayer Sociedad Anónima and others v Peru. TJAC, 22.06.2011, 02-AI-2010. GOAC 1973.
• Farmex Sociedad Anónima and others v Peru. TJAC, 19.07.2012, 01-AI-2011. GOAC 2086.
• Farmex Sociedad Anónima and others v Peru. TJAC, 26.07.2013, 01-AI-2012. GOAC 2265.
• Asociación Colombiana de la Industria de Grasas y Aceites Comestibles v Commission of the Andean Community. TJAC, 19.05.2016, 01-RO-2015.
• Vélez Escalón v Colombia. TJAC, 07.07.2017, 01-AI-2015. GOAC 3100.
• Flores Maravilla Sociedad Anónima v Colombia. TJAC, 03.10.2017, 03-AI-2017. GOAC 3143.
• Flores Maravilla Sociedad Anónima v Colombia (Recurso De Consideración). TJAC, 17.11.2017, 03-AI-2017. GOAC, No 3143.
• Aceves, William. 2003. Actio Popularis – the Class Action in International Law. University of Chicago Legal Forum (1): 353–402.
• Alter, Karen. 2014. The Multiplication of International Court and Tribunals After the End of the Cold War. In: The Oxford Handbook of International Adjudication, (eds.) Cesare Romano and Karen Alter, Yuval Shany 68-89. Oxford/New York: OUP.
• Alter, Karen. 2014. The New Terrain of International Law: Courts, Politics, Rights. Princeton/Oxford: PUP.
• Alter, Karen and Liesbet Hooghe. 2016. Regional Dispute Settlement. In: The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Regionalism, (eds.) Tanja Börzel, Thomas Risse, 538–58. Oxford: OUP.
• Alter, Karen and Laurence Helfer, Mikael Rask Madsen, eds. 2018. International Court Authority. Oxford: OUP.
• Börzel, Tanja and Thomas Risse, eds. 2016. The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Regionalism. Oxford: OUP.
• Eliantonio, Mariolina, and Haakon Roer-Eide. 2014. Regional Courts and Locus Standi for Private Parties: Can the CJEU Learn Something from the Others? Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals 13(1): 27–53.
• Faúndez Ledesma, Héctor. 2008. The Inter-American System for the Protection of Human Rights: Institutional and Procedural Aspects. 3rd ed. San José: IIDH.
• Peel, Jacqueline and Jolene Lin. 2019. Transnational Climate Litigation: The Contribution of the Global South. In: American Journal of International Law 113(4): 679–726.
• General Secretariat of the Andean Community. Derechos Del Ciudadano Andino. https://www.comunidadandina.org/StaticFiles/2011225165851derechos_CAN.pdf (accessed 13.07.2022).
• Graaf, Kars de and Bert Marseille, Sacha Prechal, Rob Widdershoven, Heinrich Winter, eds. 2021. Grensoverstijgende Rechtsbeoefening. Zutphen: Uitgeverij Paris.
• Grande Salazar and César Ernesto, Enrique N. Ulate Chacón. 2013. Manual De Derecho Comunitario Centroamericano. 2nd ed. San Salvador: Imprenta y Offset Ricaldone.
• Grant, Evadne. 2015. International Human Rights Courts and Environmental Human Rights: Re-Imagining Adjudicative Paradigms. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment 6(2): 156–176.
• Grotius, Hugo. 2005. The Rights of War and Peace (1625). In: Natural Law and Enlightenment Classics, (eds.) Knud Haakonssen and Richard Tuck 1. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
• Haakonssen, Knud and Béla Kapossy, Richard Whatmore, eds. 2008. Natural Law and Enlightenment Classics. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
• Haakonssen, Knud and Richard Tuck, eds. 2005. Natural Law and Enlightenment Classics. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
• Hirschl, Ran. 2006. The New Constitutionalism and the Judicialization of Pure Politics Worldwide. Fordham Law Review (75): 721–754.
• Hoeffner, Werner. 2016. L’accès de l’individu à la Cour Africaine des Droits de l’Homme et des Peuples. Revista Jurídica del Centro Universitario Curitiba 43(2): 825–883.
• Jans, Jan. 2003. EU Environmental Policy and the Civil Society. In: The European Convention and the Future of European Environmental Law, (ed.) Jan Jans, 55–67. Groningen: Europa Law Publishing.
• Jans, Jan. Ed. 2003. The European Convention and the Future of European Environmental Law. Groningen: Europa Law Publishing.
• Jendrośka, Jerzy. 2021. Procedural Environmental Rights: Observations on the Escazú Agreement as compared with the Aarhus Convention. In: Grensoverstijgende Rechtsbeoefening, (eds.) Kars de Graaf, Bert Marseille, Sacha Prechal, Rob Widdershoven, Heinrich Winter, 345–53. Zutphen: Uitgeverij Paris.
• Kruger, Thalia. 2008. Regional Organisations and their Dispute Settlement Bodies. De Jure 41 (2): 305–319.
• Lindblom, Anna-Karin. 2009. Non-Governmental Organisations in International Law. New York: CUP.
• Lukic, Sebastian. The Rise of International Environmental Law in Litigation and Arbitration. https://www.schoenherr.eu/content/the-rise-of-international-environmental-lawin-litigation-and-arbitration/ (accessed 12.08.2022).
• Martin, Claudia. 2006. The Moiwana Village Case: A New Trend in Approaching the Rights of Ethnic Groups in the Inter-American System. Leiden Journal of International Law 19(2): 491–504.
• Meijknecht, Anna. 2015. The Contribution of the Inter-American Human Rights System to Sustainable Development. In: Regional Environmental Law – Transregional Comparative Lessons in Pursuit of Sustainable Development, (eds.) Werner Scholtz, Jonathan Verschuuren, 177–219. Cheltenham: Elgar.
• Milej, Tomasz. 2018. Human Rights Protection by International Courts – What Role for the East African Court of Justice. African Journal of International and Comparative Law 26(1): 108–129.
• Onoria, Henry. 2010. Locus Standi of Individuals and Non-State Entities Before Regional Economic Integration Judicial Bodies in Africa. African Journal of International and Comparative Law 18(2): 143–169.
• Parlett, Kate. 2011. The Individual in the International Legal System: Continuity and Change in International Law. New York: CUP.
• Pasqualucci, Jo. 2013. The Practice and Procedure of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. 2nd ed. New York: CUP.
• Pedersen, Morten. 2006. Standing and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights. African Human Rights Law Journal 6(2): 407–422.
• Romano, Cesare and Karen Alter, Yuval Shany, eds. 2014. The Oxford Handbook of International Adjudication. Oxford/New York: OUP.
• Schall, Christian. 2008. Public Interest Litigation Concerning Environmental Matters Before Human Rights Courts: A Promising Future Concept? Journal of Environmental Law 20(3): 417–454.
• Scholtz, Werner and Jonathan Verschuuren, eds. 2015. Regional Environmental Law – Transregional Comparative Lessons in Pursuit of Sustainable Development. Cheltenham: Elgar.
• Shelton, Dinah. 2015. Legitimate and Necessary: Adjudicating Human Rights Violations Related to Activities Causing Environmental Harm or Risk. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment 6(2): 139–155.
• Stec, Stephen and Jerzy Jendrośka. 2019. The Escazú Agreement and the Regional Approach to Rio Principle 10: Process, Innovation, and Shortcomings. Journal of Environmental Law: 1–13.
• UN Economic Council for Europe. The Aarhus Convention – an Implementation Guide. https://unece.org/environment-policy/publications/aarhus-convention-implementationguide-second-edition (accessed 24.08.2022).
• Vattel, Emer de. 2008. The Law of Nations, Or, Principles of the Law of Nature, Applied to the Conduct and Affairs of Nations and Sovereigns (1758). In: Natural Law and Enlightenment Classics, (eds.) Knud Haakonssen, Béla Kapossy and Richard Whatmore. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
• Yk, Briang S. 2011. Friends, Persons, Citizens: Comparative Perspectives on Locus Standi and the Access of Private Applicants to Sub-Regional Trade Judiciaries in Africa. Oregon Review of International Law 13(2): 355–394.

Identifiers

DOI

10.25167/osap.4872

Biblioteka Nauki

2179590