In response to an investigation by the Aarhus Convention’s Compliance Committee, Belgian government officials, parliamentarians, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and members of the judiciary have come together to explore ways in which to strengthen the right of the public to have access to justice in Belgium. The investigation was initiated when a Belgian NGO, Bond Beter Leefmilieu, wrote to the Compliance Committee claiming that the failure of some Belgian courts to grant standing to environmental NGOs in certain cases concerning the issuing of construction permits and planning decisions was in violation of the Convention.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
In a letter to UNECE, Belgium’s Federal Environment Minister Bruno Tobback set out a number of measures being taken to address the matter. A multistakeholder roundtable had been held in the federal parliament in mid-May and plans were under way for further training for the judiciary, consultations between the relevant Ministers at federal and regional level and the establishment of a national team of officers to follow up on the matter. Improvements in the law were also under consideration.
The Compliance Committee, in its findings which were adopted on 14 June 2006, did not in fact conclude that Belgium had failed to comply with the Convention. However, it noted that certain court decisions arising from proceedings initiated before the entry into force of the Convention would have been in conflict with the Convention’s provisions had the proceedings been initiated after the entry into force. In other words, if those practices were to continue, Belgium would be in non-compliance. This finding was sufficient to prompt Belgium to initiate the above steps.
The Committee’s Chairperson, Mr. Veit Koester of Denmark, commented that the case showed the compliance mechanism working at its best: “Even without the unpleasant business of having to find a Party in non-compliance, the consideration of the case has led to positive steps being taken – largely thanks to the willingness of Belgium to cooperate with and listen to the Committee and to take the initiative. It also illustrates the value of having a mechanism which responds to input from the public, without which the issue might not have come to the attention of the Committee.”
Several multilateral environmental agreements have developed mechanisms to strengthen and support compliance. However, the Aarhus Convention’s compliance mechanism is unusual in that it allows for any member of the public to trigger a review of a Party’s compliance by simply writing to the Compliance Committee.
For more information, contact Jeremy Wates ([email protected]).
[Source: UNECE Weekly]
