"Strengthening the Right to a Healthy Environment: Constitutional and European Perspectives"
Download
Read an extract
Themes
Right to healthy environment, environmental protection, climate change, Charter of Environment 2004, European Court of Human Rights ECHR, Article 8 Convention, climate litigation, air quality standards, Council of State, Commune de Grande-Synthe, environmental jurisprudence, fundamental rights, legislative decisions, administrative decisions, public policies, environmental obligations, greenhouse gas emissions, climate commitments, European law, French law, constitutional block, opposability, future generations, pollution, natural resources degradation, legal uncertainty, jurisdictional bodies, environmental associations, State responsibility, Affair of the Century, environmental policy, Switzerland ECHR condemnation, right to live in balanced environment, health-respecting environment, constitutional value, European protection, legal scope, private actors obligations
Reader
Abstract
Extract
of 6
Abstract
"Discover the evolving landscape of environmental law as the right to a healthy environment gains constitutional and European recognition. Since 2005, France has enshrined this fundamental right, leveraging constitutional and European protection to hold public authorities and private actors accountable. Explore the challenges and limitations of climate litigation, the role of jurisprudence, and the impact on environmental policies. Learn how this recognition strengthens citizens' and environmental associations' legal levers to demand effective measures against climate change, pollution, and natural resource degradation, shaping a healthier environment for future generations."
Extract
[...] In the same vein, the Administrative Court of Lyon recognized a fault of the State due to the non-respect of European air quality standards, thus illustrating the role of contentious proceedings in the effective implementation of the right to a healthy environment (doc. 19). Despite the legal advances, the effectiveness of the right to a healthy environment remains a challenge due to practical obstacles and institutional resistance. II. A implementation faced with limits The effectiveness of the right to a healthy environment remains limited by the need to reconcile environmental protection and other fundamental interests as well as the difficulties related to remedies and reparations A. [...]
[...] Although the right to a healthy environment has gradually been integrated into legal texts and recognized by jurisprudence, its effectiveness remains subject to discussion (doc and 9). It is therefore essential to understand how this right has been established in norms and justice decisions, while measuring the obstacles that limit its concrete application. I. A growing legal recognition The affirmation of the right to a healthy environment is based on strengthened constitutional and European protection as well as on the recognition of its opposability to public decisions A. [...]
[...] A right opposable to public authorities and private actors The recognition of the right to a healthy environment has been strengthened with the consideration of future generations (doc. 22). The QPC of 27 October 2023 has thus established the principle that measures adopted today must not compromise the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (doc. 6). Thus, public authorities have a duty to act to ensure the protection of the environment (doc. 8). This requirement does not only limit to the prevention of harm, but also imposes a duty to repair in case of environmental damage. [...]
[...] This consecration gives the right to a healthy environment a constitutional value, which means it is opposable to legislative and administrative decisions (doc. 4). On the other hand, the Council of State has strengthened this recognition by requiring the State to take effective measures to ensure this right (doc. 5). In parallel, the Constitutional Council has affirmed that respect for the environment justifies restrictions on certain economic freedoms, such as the ban on exporting harmful pesticides (doc. 8). European case law, particularly that of the ECHR, has expanded this protection. [...]
[...] In addition, even when jurisdictions recognize the state's or companies' responsibility, financial sanctions and injunctions often remain insufficient to induce real changes in practices (doc. 12). Finally, the lack of coordination between the different jurisdictional bodies creates legal uncertainty, making the effective implementation of the right to a healthy environment more complex (doc and 22). These perspectives show that the right to a healthy environment is constantly evolving, calling for a strengthening of its application and a better articulation with other fundamental rights (doc and 16). Resources used*: *The entire document is available upon simple request to the customer service. [...]
