Access to justice on EU level: The long road to implement the Aarhus Convention

Sebastian D. BECHTEL

doi:10.25167/osap.4266

Published: 2021-09-02

Vol. 19 No. 2 (2021)

Access to justice on EU level: The long road to implement the Aarhus Convention

Sebastian D. BECHTEL

The Opole Studies in Administration and Law

Section: Articles

https://doi.org/10.25167/osap.4266

Abstract

More than 15 years after the EU’s accession to the Aarhus Convention, EU legislation does not yet ensure that members of the public have access to justice as envisaged by the Convention. Specifically, the possibilities to judicially challenge contraventions of EU environmental law by EU institutions and bodies remain very limited. The result is a lack of accountability to EU law, which undermines the rule of law and the protection of the environment and human health. This article describes the EU’s long road to implement the Convention. It analyses the EU’s current legislative proposal to amend the Aarhus Regulation and explains why it would not, in this form, suffice to ensure compliance with the Convention, leaving the Council and European Parliament to ensure that international law is respected. More broadly, the lengthy process reflects wider issues of the EU legal framework, related to the institutional balance and the overconstitutionalisation of the EU’s standing regime.

Keywords:

access to justice, Aarhus Convention, rule of law, environment, EU Aarhus Regulation

Download files

PDF

Citation rules

BECHTEL, S. D. (2021). Access to justice on EU level: The long road to implement the Aarhus Convention. The Opole Studies in Administration and Law, 19(2), 19–42. https://doi.org/10.25167/osap.4266

Cited by / Share

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

References

Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies, 2006 OJ L 264/13. See COM(2020) 642 final for the proposal to amend this Regulation.
Google Scholar

Council Decision (EU) 2018/881 of 18 June 2018 requesting the Commission to submit a study on the Union’s options for addressing the findings of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee in case ACCC/C/2008/32 and, if appropriate in view of the outcomes of the study, a proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006, 2018 OJ L 155/6.
Google Scholar

Study on EU implementation of the Aarhus Convention in the area of access to justice in environmental matters, September 2019, 07.0203/2018/786407/SER/ENV.E.4, available at: <https://ec.europa.eu/environment/aarhus/pdf/Final_study_EU_implemention_environmental_matters_2019.pdf>.
Google Scholar

Commission Staff Working Document, Report on European Union implementation of the Aarhus Convention in the area of access to justice in environmental matters, SWD(2019) 378 final.
Google Scholar

Communication from the Commission on Improving access to justice in environmental matters in the EU and its Member States, COM(2020) 643 final.
Google Scholar

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on amending Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies, COM(2020) 642 final.
Google Scholar

Amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 (European Climate Law), COM/2020/563 final.
Google Scholar

ClientEarth Legal Guide on Access to Justice in European Union Law: A Legal Guide on Access to Justice in environmental matters, 2021 edition, available at: <https://www.clientearth.org/latest/documents/access-to-justice-in-european-union-law-a-legal-guideon-access-to-justice-in-environmental-matters-edition-2021/>.
Google Scholar

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 June 2012 in case T-338/08 Stichting Natuur en Milieu and Pesticide Action Network Europe v European Commission, ECLI:EU:T:2012:300.
Google Scholar

Order of the General Court (First Chamber) of 28 September 2016 in case T-600/15, PAN Europe and Others v Commission, ECLI:EU:T:2016:601.
Google Scholar

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 14 March 2018 in case T-33/16 TestBioTech eV v European Commission, ECLI:EU:T:2018:135.
Google Scholar

Judgement of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 27 September 2018 in case T-12/17, Mellifera v Commission, ECLI:EU:T:2018:616.
Google Scholar

Judgement of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 November 2018 in case T-545/11 RENV Stichting Greenpeace Nederland and PAN Europe v Commission, ECLI:EU:T:2018:817.
Google Scholar

Order of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 26 March 2021 in case T-31/18 DEP, Izuzquiza and Semsrott v Frontex, ECLI:EU:T:2021:173.
Google Scholar

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 27 January 2021 in case T-9/19, ClientEarth v EIB, ECLI:EU:T:2021:42.
Google Scholar

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 13 January 2015 in joined cases C-404/12 P and C-405/12 P Council and Commission v Stichting Natuur en Milieu and Pesticide Action Network Europe, ECLI:EU:C:2015:5.
Google Scholar

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 28 March 2017 in case C-72/15, Rosneft, EU:C:2017:236.
Google Scholar

Judgement of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 September 2017 in joined cases C-643/15 and C-647/15, Slovakia v Council, ECLI:EU:C:2017:631.
Google Scholar

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 13 March 2018 in case C-384/16, European Union Copper Task Force v Commission, EU:C:2018:176.
Google Scholar

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 November 2018 in case C-622/16 P, Scuola Elementare Maria Montessori v Commission, ECLI:EU:C:2018:873.
Google Scholar

Opinion of Advocate General Szupnar of 17 October 2018 in Case C-82/17 P, TestBioTech v Commission, EU:C:2018:837.
Google Scholar

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 12 September 2019 in case C-82/17 P, TestBioTech eV v Commission, ECLI:EU:C:2019:719.
Google Scholar

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 3 September 2020 in case C-784/18 P, Mellifera v Commission, ECLI:EU:C:2020:630.
Google Scholar

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 September 2020 in case C-594/18 P, Austria v Commission, ECLI:EU:C:2020:742.
Google Scholar

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 14 January 2021 in case C-297/20 Sabo and Others v Parliament and Council, ECLI:EU:C:2021:24.
Google Scholar

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 25 March 2021 in case C-565/19 P, Carvalho and Others v Parliament and Council, ECLI:EU:C:2021:252.
Google Scholar

Findings and recommendations of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee with regard to communication ACCC/C/2008/32, part I, concerning compliance by the European Union, ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2011/4/Add.1.
Google Scholar

Findings and recommendations of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee with regard to communication ACCC/C/2008/32, part II, ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2017/7.
Google Scholar

Findings and recommendations of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee with regard to communication ACCC/C/2015/128, adopted on 17 March 2021, advance unedited version, available at: <https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-03/C128_EU_findings_advance%20unedited.pdf>.
Google Scholar

Advice by the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee to the European Union concerning the implementation of request ACCC/M/2017/3, available at: <https://unece.org/ sites/default/files/2021-02/M3_EU_advice_12.02.2021.pdf>.
Google Scholar

Academic sources Fasoli, Elena and Alistair McGlone. 2018. The Non-Compliance Mechanism Under the Aarhus Convention as ‘Soft’ Enforcement of International Environmental Law: Not So Soft After All! Netherlands International Law Review 65 (1): 27–53.
Google Scholar

Grimm, Dieter. 2015. The Democratic Costs of Constitutionalisation: The European Case, European Law Journal 21 (4), July: 460–473.
Google Scholar

Koester, Veit. 2005. Review of Compliance under the Aarhus Convention: a rather unique compliance mechanism. Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law 2 (1): 31-44.
Google Scholar

Kravchenko, Svitlana. 2007. The Aarhus Convention and Innovations in Compliance with Multilateral Environmental Agreements Compliance Mechanisms. Yearbook of European Environmental Law 7.
Google Scholar

Jendrośka, Jerzy. 2011(1). Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee: Origins, Status and Activities. Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law 8 (4): 301-314.
Google Scholar

Jendrośka, Jerzy. 2011(2). Recent Case-Law of he Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee. Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law 8 (4): 375-449.
Google Scholar

Jendrośka, Jerzy. 2012. Citizen’s Rights in European Environmental Law: Stock-Taking of Key Challenges and Current Developments in Relation to Public Access to Information, Participation and Access to Justice. Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law 9 (1): 71-90.
Google Scholar

Jendrośka, Jerzy. 2020. Access to Justice in the Aarhus Convention – Genesis, Legislative History and Overview of the Main Interpretation Dilemmas. Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law: 1-37
Google Scholar