access to justice

Understanding the Democracy-Environment Interface by Achim Halpaap Environmental 324 Policy and Law, 38/6 (2008) © 2008 IOS Press How can democracy and environmentally sustainable development be made compatible and mutually supportive?  This question was at the centre of discussions at the UNITAR-Yale Conference on Environmental Governance and Democracy. Institutions, public participation and environmental sustainability: Bridging research and capacity development, at Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, at the margins of the sixteenth Session of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD). Some 150 environmental governance scholars and practitioners from more than 65 developed, developing and transition countries met to discuss the topic, reflecting the growing demand for research, teaching and capacity building in the field of democratic environmental overnance. Conference Overview Speaking on the theme of international environmental governance during the opening session, James Gustave Speth, Dean of the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies and former Administrator of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) observed that “while civil society frequently enjoys participation opportunities in national and local level processes, mechanisms for meaningful stakeholder engagement at the international level, as well as knowledge about their effectiveness is lacking”. Carlos Lopes, Executive Director of UNITAR, emphasised that although democratic participation in environmental governance has become an internationally agreed principle, “it is the socio-economic context and local capacities which essentially determine how civic participation can effectively contribute to good governance and environmental sustainability”. Daniel Esty, Director of the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, highlighted that public participation can foster transparency, accountability and sound environmental outcomes, citing pollution reduction along the Mexican-American border as a case in point. He also encouraged participants to identify best practices. Susan Rose-Ackerman, Henry R. Luce Professor of Law and Political Science, Yale Law School, discussed the diverse nature of national administrative cultures and the challenge this creates for conducting comparative research on the democracy-environment interface. In a subsequent plenary session, two panel discussions provided introductory perspectives of academic scholars and government officials, respectively. Conference discussion mainly took place in working groups, which considered papers on two topics: i) public participation at different levels of the governance hierarchy, including: international, national, regional, local and corporate environmental governance, as well as interdependencies across levels of governance;6 and ii) the democracy-environment interface, including democratization of knowledge generation, democratising institutions (i.e., regularising participatory procedures), access to justice, and public interest mobilisation and capacity.7 Papers, presentations and working group outcomes can be accessed through the UNITAR/Yale Conference website.8   Notes The event was organised through the UNITAR/Yale Environment and Democracy Initiative, launched in March 2007 by UNITAR and the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. The initiative is executed jointly through the UNITAR Environmental Governance Programme and the Yale Center for Environment Law and Policy, a collaboration of the Yale School of Forestry and Environment Studies and Yale Law School. Partners of UNITAR and Yale University in the Conference included the UN Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), the University of Cape Town, the French Institute of Forestry, Agricultural and Environmental Engineering (ENGREF-AgroParisTech), the World Resources Institute (WRI), and the Stakeholder Forum for a Sustainable Future. Financial support for the Conference was provided by the Edward J. and Dorothy Clarke Kempf Fund of the MacMillan Center at Yale, the Oscar M. Ruebhausen Fund of Yale Law School and UNITAR.  See, for example, Fiorino, D. 2006. The new environmental regulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; or Beierle, T.C. 1999. “Using social goals to evaluate public participation in environmental decisions”. Policy Studies Review 16(3&4): 75–103. 3) Examples of multi-stakeholder processes catalysed through these international processes include, for example, the development of National Strategies for Sustainable Development, National Capacity Self-Assessments (NCSAs) for implementation of the three Rio Conventions, Global Environment Facility (GEF) Country Dialogues, and Local Agenda 21 processes. 4) For a contribution from the perspective of the UNECE Aarhus Convention Secretariat, see conference paper of Jeremy Wates. For a case study on the implementation of the Aarhus Convention see conference paper of Amy Forster Rothbart. 5) The UN Global Compact promotes, for example, new forms of good governance by corporations, which include multi-stakeholder dialogue and collaboration. 6) Conference papers on international environmental governance were presented by Eric Dannenmeier, Osvaldo Álvarez Pérez, Tatjana Rosen and Donald K. Anton; on national environmental governance by Georg Winkel and Metodi Sotirov, Guy Salmon et al., Amando Tolentino and Amy Forster; on sub-national environmental governance by Debra Emmelman et al., Sigrid Vascónez, Alfred Marcus and Adam Fremeth, and Noela Eddington and Ian Eddington; on local environmental governance by Wilson Akpan, Hua Wang, Daniel Sherman and Marc Hufty et al.; on corporate environmental governanceby Frank de Hond, Robert Repetto, Carmit Lubanov and Harris Gleckman; and on interdependencies across levels of governance by Sonja Walti, James Kho, Patricia Cavanaugh, and Alessandro Bonifazi and Carmelo M. Torre. 7)  Conference papers on democratising institutions were presented by Stuart White, Ralph Hallo, Suparek Janprasat and Vanessa Schweizer; on democratising knowledge generation by Douglas Kysar, Sofia de Abreu, Remi Chandran et al. and Edwin Camp; on public interest mobilisation and capacity by Olya Melen, Araya Asfaw and Kenneth Kakaru; and on access to justice by Louis Kotzé, Juan Martin Carballo, Vasiliki Karageorgou and Meredith Wright. 8)  http://www.unitar.org/eg/UNITAR_Yale/index.html or http://www.yale.edu/envirocenter/envdem. Please find the link for the full article at Environmental 324 Policy and Law, 38/6 (2008)   

In May 2008 a unique conference on Environmental Governance and Democracy was held at Yale University with UNITAR aimed to discuss globally “Institutions, public participation and environmentally sustainability: Bridging research and capacity development”. The conference was the first stage to host discussions with participation of different stakeholders form dozens of countries, to defining the linkages between democracy and environment. During the conference 2 days diverse themes of participatory governance on environmental fields were raised and relevant other topics. Among the participants were Ms Carmit Lubanov, and the Yale-Unitar conference was among the motivation that led to establish few months later (2009) the Association of Environmental Justice in Israel (AEJI) as independent research and resources center on environmental justice and assisted with framing our focuses on access to justice, linking research and capacity development. Please find the review of the conference by Achim Halpaap at the time of the conference Associate Director and Head, Environment Unit, United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR)  

The Regulation on the sustainable management of external fishing fleets will set up an EU-managed public register of authorisations for vessels fishing outside EU waters, and has already been approved by the Parliament’s Fishing (PECH) and Development (DEVE) committees. A key feature of this future register is that it will include details on the “beneficial” – the ultimate or real – owners of fishing vessels, making it easier for both law enforcement, watchdog civil society organisations, and journalists to track who is really behind illegal fishing. The forty plus civil society groups, including leading global organisations working on transparency and accountability, note in the letter to MEPs that transparency is essential: fishing by EU-flagged vessels in the waters of developing coastal States in the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans and off the coast of West and Central Africa, aided by EU funds of EUR 145 million annually, has a significant impact on the conservation and management of global fish stocks. “The need for beneficial ownership information about all types of commercial activity became patently clear after the Panama Papers scandal last year,” stated Helen Darbishire, Executive Director of Access Info Europe. “This regulation is part of a global trend to increase transparency about the owners of companies operating in an increasingly complex globally economy so that we can combat tax crime and corruption.” added Darbishire. The letter to MEPs notes that the Regulation on sustainable fishing is in line with the current position of the European Parliament on fighting money laundering, as well as with recommendations from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. Countries such as the UK, Slovenia, Denmark, France, Bulgaria and the Netherlands have set up or are currently setting up public databases. Other countries have recently made pledges to do so in fora including the G8 (2013), the G20 (2014) and the Open Government Partnership Summit (2016). AEJI is among the dozens of organisations signing up to the letter to MEPs are those specialised in environmental protection (Oceana, Greenpeace, Bloom, Environmental Justice Foundation, Good Fish Foundation, Marine Conservation Society) as well as leading transparency and accountability groups (Access Info Europe, The Engine Room, Global Financial Integrity, Global Witness, Open Corporates, the Sunlight Foundation, the Open State Foundation, the UNCAC Coalition and the World Resources Institute).

AEJI has signed with 22 organizations around the world on call to Government of Kenya to provide security and justice for environmental defenders  Dear Ambassador (Dr.) Amina Mohamed, Prof Githu Muigai, and Prof. Judi Wakhungu, We, the undersigned organizations and members of the Access Initiative, are writing to urge the Government of Kenya to investigate and prosecute those responsible for threatening the safety and security of members of the Center for Justice Governance and Environmental Action (CJGEA), including plaintiffs Phyllis Omido, (Goldman Prize Winner), Wilfred Kamencu, Anastacia Nambo, and Alfred Ogola, as well as their families. In doing so, we join a growing chorus of international friends and allies who are outraged and alarmed, including UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights and the Environment, John Knox (read statement here). These threats, and the kidnapping of a child of one of the members, have occurred after CJGEA initiated a lawsuit to address alleged damages caused by lead smelter Metal Refineries EPZ Ltd to the local community and surrounding soil. We call for the Government of Kenya to issue a response on the steps they are taking to apprehend the culprits and protect the plaintiffs and their families. In addressing these specific threats, the Government of Kenya has an opportunity to extend protections to other environmental defenders. These should include measures for the prevention of actions that affect the life, integrity and security of these environmental defenders. We call on the Government to consult with these defenders to deal with this emergency situation and provide where appropriate legal support, emergency funds or help in safety prevention measures from the relevant police and other judicial authorities based on the high level of risk in this case. The Access Initiative, a global network that works on transparency, public participation and access to justice believes this case illustrative of the growing risks of ordinary citizens standing up and seeking justice for harm that is happening in their community. The Kenyan Government has been a champion of issues around the environment, including housing the United Nations Environment Programme and being an active member of the Open Government Partnership.  We urge the Government of Kenya to continue to show leadership and act in accordance with its principles and values by taking immediate steps to urgently address the threat faced by its citizens. We stand united to lend our aid and support for such efforts.   Respectfully,   Associacion Ambiente y Sociedad (Colombia)  Association of Environmental Justice in Israel Benin Environment and Education Society Bioresources Development and Conservation Programme Cameroon Community Legal Education Center (Cambodia) Corporación Fiscalía del Medio Ambiente--FIMA (Chile) Cultura Ecologica (Mexico) The Environmental Pillar (Ireland) Denge Ecology Organization (Turkey) FIAN Nepal Friends of the Irish Environment (Ireland) Friends of Kota Damansara (Malaysia) Green Alternative (Georgia) Greenwatch (Uganda) Indian Environment Lawyers Association Instituto de Derecho y Economia Ambiental (Paraguay) Justice Institute Guyana Persona Natural (Chile) Public Interest Law Foundation (Sri Lanka) Saint Lucia National Trust Samata (India) Thailand Environment Institute Zimbabwe Environmental Law Association