THE AARHUS CONVENTION – THE LEGAL CULTURAL PICTURE

Autori

  • Giulia Parola

Abstract

The Aarhus Convention was ratified in France on the 8th July 2002 and came into force on the 6th October 2002 by the Law n° 2002-285 of 28 February 2002.The Convention was then applied by the Decree of 12 September 2002. Generally speaking, the Convention did not bring about many legislative changes. Even before the Convention was adopted France had some provisions on what are known as the three pillars. This notwithstanding, the rights provided in the Convention are still not fully enforceable in France and the report will outline some of the reasons for this.

One peculiarity of the French situation is that the courts had an important role to play. Indeed, citizens and NGOs have seen the Convention as an opportunity to improve their rights and since the ratification they started to invoke it before the French courts.

The Conseil d’Etat (State Council, the highest administrative court) plays an important role in terms of integration of both EU and international law into the domestic law. The administrative courts have laid down the conditions under which an international provision is to be given direct effect, with a mechanism that resembles to the “direct effect” principle in EU. Since the 1989 Nicolo case, the Conseil d’Etat changed its position and ruled that it was allowed to check the compliance of a measure with an international treaty, even if this measure was posterior to the treaty. This offered the courts the occasion to interpret the Aarhus Convention and to define its legal impact on domestic law. The Convention is a mixed agreement because it is an international law instrument but it is also – to some extent – part of EU law. Without going into details, this basically means that many among its provisions are to be applied by the French courts, whether or not the legislation has been transposed and implemented. As a consequence, according to the Conseil d'Etat, the provisions in the first and second pillars, which have been implemented by the EU Directive, can be invoked by individuals. On the contrary, individuals cannot avail themselves of the rights bestowed in the third pillar as long as the Directive on access to justice proposed by the European Commission is not enacted. Moreover, the Conseil d'Etat has recognised direct effects to a few provisions of the Aarhus Convention only, having chosen “a soft interpretation of this treaty’s requirements”. More specifically, the Conseil d’Etat recognises direct effect on the basis of the analysis of each individual paragraph in any of the Convention articles rather than taking any article as a whole. So far, the Conseil d'Etat has held that the provisions of Article 6, paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 7, of the Convention are directly applicable in the domestic legal order. The provisions of Article 6, paragraphs 4, 6, 8, and 9, and of Articles 7, 8, and 9, paragraphs 3 and 5, instead were held to merely establish obligations between the Member States. In other words, the provisions last listed have no direct effect in the domestic legal order and they can thus be invoked only by the claimant or by the defender.

Finally, it has to be noted that French environmental policy has been strengthened thanks to a political process called the “Grenelle de l’Environnement” (Environment Roundtable). Among the outcomes from these environment roundtables are that the Grenelle I and GrenelleII statutes, each containing provisions collecting, modifying and, to some extent, strengthening the French Environment Code and addressing compliance with the Aarhus Convention.

 

Downloads

I dati di download non sono ancora disponibili.

Riferimenti bibliografici

AGOSTINI, F. Article 9.1 of the Aarhus Convention, Some current issues under French law. In Access to justice Regional Workshop for High-Level Judiciary, Tirana, 17-18 november 2008, p. 1.

AGUILA, Y. Conclusions sur CE, 6 June 2007, Commune de Groslay, n° 292942, AJDA, 2007, p. 1533.

BANISAR, D. Freedom of Information Around the World 2006. In A Global Survey of Access to Government Information Laws, Privacy International. 2006.

BÉTAILLE, J. The direct effect of the Aarhus Convention as seen by the French Conseil d'Etat. In Environmental Law Network International, 2009, p. 64.

BLATRIX, C.; MERMET L.; RAOUL-DUVAL, J. Research on Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making: Approaches, Contexts, Stakes and Perspectives Across Borders, In International seminar - 12 and 13 April 2011 Wadham College, Oxford, 2011.

BLATRIX, C. La loi Barnier et le débat public: quelle place pour les associations ?, In Ecologie et Politique, n°21, automne-hiver 1997, p. 7792.

BRASIL. Vers une ‘démocratie participative’ ? Le cas de l’enquête publique. In CURAPP, La gouvernabilité, Paris, PUF, 1996, p. 299313.

BOURG, D.; BOY, D. Conférences de citoyens, mode d’emploi, Paris, Charles Léopold Mayer, 2005.

CAILLOSSE, J. Même réformée, l’enquête publique n’offre toujours pas les garanties d’une procédure démocratique, In Revue Juridique de l’Environnement, 1986, p. 166, quoted by ROMI, R. Droit et administration de l’environnement, Paris, Montchrestien, 6ème édition, 2007, p. 106.

CHAPUS, R. Droit Administratif Général, Tome I, Paris, Dalloz, 2001 p. 749.

CHEVALIER, J. Le débat public en question. In Pour un droit commun de l’environnement, Mélanges en l’honneur de Michel Prieur, Paris, Dalloz, 2007, p. 505.

DUBOUIS, L. Bref retour sur la longue marche du ‘Conseil d’Etat’ en terres internationales et européennes. In Mélanges en l’honneur de Bruno Genevois : Le dialogue des juges, 2009, p. 391.

HALLO, R.E. How far has the EU applied the Aarhus Convention?, Brussels 2007.

LE BOURHIS, J.-P. De la délibération à la décision: l’expérience des commissions locales de l’eau, In BILLE, R.;MERMET, L. (eds), Concertation, décision, environnement. Regards croisés, Vol. 1. Paris. In La Documentation Française, 2003, pp. 147-159.

LAERNOES, P. E. The Aarhus Convention: a partial solution for the Environmental and Democratic Crises? In Sustainable Development Master Thesis, Utrecht., 2011, p. 47.

LEFLOCH, G. La Convention d'Aarhus devant le juge administratif. Les petites affiches, 4 – 9, 2008, p. 4.

MERMET, L. Between international standards and specific national contexts, initiatives and perspectives: teachings from a French research program on public participation and environmental governance. In Conference on Environmental Governance and Democracy Institutions, public participation and environmental sustainability: Bridging research and capacity development, May 10-11, 2008, Yale University, New Haven, 2008.

MULLER, P. Le Technocrate et le paysan. Essai sur la politique française demodernisation de l’agriculture de 1945 à nos jours. Paris, Editions ouvrières, 1984.

PAOLETTI , M. La démocratie locale et le référendum. Paris, L'Harmattan, 1997, p. 235.

PRIEUR, M. Droit de l’environnement. 5th ed. 2004, Paris, Précis Dalloz.

____. La Convention d'Aarhus, instrument universel de la démocratie environnementale. In special RJE 9 – 29, 1999, p. 22.

PRIEUR, M.; GUIGNIER, A. État de l’art des questions soulevées par la participation du public aux travaux des instances internationales. In Rapport pour le Ministère de l’Écologie et du Développement Durable, Centre International de Droit Comparé de l’Environnement, 2006.

JACQUOT, H.; PRIET, F. Droit de l’urbanisme, 6ème édition, Paris, Précis, Dalloz, 2008, p. 107.

JECOUZO,Y. L’enquête publique en débat. In Etudes offertes au professeur René Hostiou, 2008, p. 280.

JOLY_SIBUET, E.; LASCOUMES, P.; GUCHAN, A.; LEOST, R. “Conflits d’environnement et intérêts protégés par les associations de défense” Aquitaine, Alsace, Bretagne, Rhône-Alpes, Ministère de l’environnement, Mai 1988, p. 148.

JORF, 1 March 2002, p. 3904 - Loi n° 2002 285, 28 February 2002.

JORF, 21 September 2002, p. 15563 - Décret n° 2002-1187, 12 September 2002.

WIKLUND M. Access to justice in French Environmental Law. In Juridiska institutionen, Vårterminen Thesis, 2011, p. 22.

Downloads

Come citare

Parola, G. THE AARHUS CONVENTION – THE LEGAL CULTURAL PICTURE. REVISTA DIREITO DAS POLÍTICAS PÚBLICAS, 1(1), 107–138. Recuperato da https://seer.unirio.br/rdpp/article/view/9396

Fascicolo

Sezione

Dossiê