Access to the courts - the UK photo: gailf548 In 2005, the UK ratified the Aarhus Convention. This international agreement is designed to foster improved protection of the environment. Among other things, the convention explicitly states that citizens should be provided access to environmental justice. The UK is a signatory to the convention but it has so far failed to meet its obligations by providing those living within its shores the access to justice that Aarhus requires. Specifically, in the UK there are a series of barriers preventing people from accessing the courts, which would provide the crucial means of arguing against bad environmental decisions. Bringing environmental cases: What's stopping us? The Aarhus Convention stipulates that bringing environmental cases should not be "prohibitively expensive", but under current rules in the UK those making legal challenges must initiate the process with no idea of what they might have to pay should they lose. In most cases costs are unlimited, are decided at the discretion of the court and are calculated only once a case has been heard. What this means is that claimants must face unreasonable financial risk - a court hearing could mean costs of may £100,000s and very few people are able to take on such a potential burden. This is the simplest of a series of barriers to justice in the UK that make it near impossible for individuals and environmental groups to represent the environment in court: others include unfair time limits for bringing cases and the fact that in most cases, the actual environmental harm resulting from a bad decision is not admissible as evidence. ClientEarth is fighting for your right to environmental justice In September 2009, we took a case to the UN in Geneva, to be heard by the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee. The compliance committee assesses countries’ compliance with the Aarhus Convention, and makes recommendations on what needs to be changed if a country’s rules are found wanting. In August 2010 the committee released its draft recommendations - and ClientEarth's evaluation of the shortcomings of the UK court system were vindicated. The panel of international legal experts agreed with ClientEarth’s assessment, that the enormous financial risks required in bring an environmental case, and the unreasonable time limits applied, mean the UK does not comply with the international law on environmental justice. |
