Search Climate Insights Directory

The document details how Sime Darby's palm oil operations in Liberia violate national laws and international human rights, specifically regarding land grabs and the lack of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC). It highlights environmental risks to the Upper Guinean Forest Ecosystem and lists European banks and pension funds providing financial support to the company.

The report examines the draft CETA Investment Chapter, highlighting concerns over the broad definition of 'investment' and 'investor', the inclusion of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), and the potential for 'treaty shopping'. It critiques the shift toward a negative listing approach for market access and the lack of clear, closed-list definitions for 'fair and equitable treatment'. The author argues that the proposed frameworks for indirect expropriation and general exceptions provide insufficient protection for legitimate public welfare objectives, such as health and environmental regulations, potentially exposing Canada and EU member states to excessive legal risks.

The document identifies three recognized felling permits in Ghana: Timber Utilisation Contracts (TUCs), Salvage Permits (SPs), and Timber Utilisation Permits (TUPs), while distinguishing the Certificate of Purchase (CoP) as a proof of ownership rather than a felling permit. It emphasizes that TUCs, as grants of natural resource rights, require parliamentary ratification under the 1992 Constitution. The briefing warns that a provision in the Timber Resources Management Act (Amendment) Act 2002 may be unconstitutional if used to grant timber rights without such ratification. Finally, it notes that only TUCs, SPs, and CoPs are recognized as legal sources of timber under the Voluntary Partnership Agreement (VPA) for export to the European Union.

The document provides a detailed critique and set of recommendations for the World Bank's Environmental and Social Safeguard Policies. It argues that the Bank has failed to incorporate current international standards and suffers from inadequate monitoring, noting that between 1999 and 2008, more than one-third of projects were inadequately monitored. The authors advocate for the adoption of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) as a cross-cutting requirement for all safeguards, the recognition of Indigenous Peoples’ and Community Conserved Territories and Areas (ICCAs) as legitimate conservation measures, and the integration of human rights due diligence into the Bank's operational framework.

The document examines Brazil's shift in foreign policy from traditional non-intervention toward a more active role in UN peacekeeping and the development of the 'Responsibility while Protecting' (RwP) concept. It argues that these diplomatic shifts are driven by Brazil's ambition to secure a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. The author analyzes the practical application of 'non-indifference' in Haiti and the theoretical framework of RwP, which emerged as a response to perceived excesses in the 2011 military intervention in Libya. The paper concludes that RwP is a refinement of the existing 'Responsibility to Protect' (RtoP) framework, focusing on the accountability and monitoring of those authorized to use force.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) submitted comments on 27 March 2013 regarding the draft Infrastructure Development Bill, 2013. The CER argues that the Bill is vulnerable to Constitutional challenge because it disregards national environmental policies, undermines the functions of provincial and local governments, and conflicts with the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000 (PAJA). While supporting the goal of streamlined approvals, the CER asserts that the Bill's proposed fast-tracking of infrastructure projects risks bypassing essential environmental impact assessments (EIAs) and public participation processes.

The document examines the international legal obligations of host States to compensate foreign investors for expropriated investments, noting a historical divergence in views between capital-exporting and newly independent or communist countries. It argues that current investment protection treaties and customary international law now mandate that expropriation follow specific rules. The author recommends that States signing Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) provide clearer definitions of indirect expropriation—especially regarding legitimate laws and regulations—and draft more precise compensation clauses to better guide arbitral tribunals in complex evaluations.

Over 440 labour and social lawyers from Europe have issued a manifesto calling on the European Union to protect fundamental social rights against the pressures of the economic and financial crisis. The signatories argue that austerity measures and labour market deregulaton—often forced by the 'troika' (IMF, European Commission, and ECB)—are undermining collective bargaining, increasing poverty, and threatening the viability of the European project. They urge the EU to adhere to the Lisbon Treaty and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, asserting that high labour and social standards are essential pre-conditions for sustainable economic development.

The report examines the divergence between lawful and wrongful expropriation compensation, the challenges of indirect expropriation, and the various valuation methods used by arbitral tribunals, such as market value and discounted cash flow.

The document examines the complexities of expropriation compensation, contrasting customary international law—which distinguishes between licit and illicit acts—with BITs, which often apply a uniform standard. It highlights the risks associated with indirect expropriation, where general public interest regulations may trigger high compensation costs. The guide evaluates three primary valuation methods: market value, net book value, and discounted cash flow, noting that the latter is often speculative. It concludes by recommending that states explicitly define indirect expropriation and specify interest rates and payment flexibility in their treaties, citing the SADC model BIT as a reference.

The document analyzes the Unique Identification Number (UID) project in India, the world's largest biometric ID programme, focusing on its goals of improving service delivery to the poor and reducing welfare fraud. It identifies critical challenges including jurisdictional conflicts between the UIDAI and the Home Ministry, the lack of independent grievance mechanisms, and significant risks to privacy and data protection. The authors warn that the convergence of data across agencies could enable profiling and surveillance, and they recommend establishing stronger legal safeguards and an independent review body.

The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) argues that the Basel Convention's Secretariat has created legal loopholes by concluding that the Convention's transboundary movement (TBM) and environmentally sound management (ESM) obligations do not apply to wastes generated on board ships. CIEL proposes that 'marine area' and 'area under national jurisdiction' should be interpreted to include a coastal State's internal waters, territorial sea, and exclusive economic zone (EEZ), as well as the ships themselves under flag-State jurisdiction. While CIEL agrees that wastes from 'normal operations of a ship' covered by Marpol are excluded under Article 1(4), it asserts that industrial wastes generated on board vessels fall within Basel's scope. The document emphasizes the principles of 'systemic integration' and 'effet utile' to ensure the Convention effectively protects human health and the environment from illegal waste movements, citing the 2006 Probo Koala incident as a primary example of the risks posed by such loopholes.

The report examines how States use registration and approval requirements in investment treaties to control which investments are eligible for protection and international arbitration. It analyzes treaty practices in Southeast Asia and Africa, reviews key arbitral awards, and provides drafting recommendations to ensure these requirements are legally effective and not dismissed as mere formalities.

The guide examines how states use 'registration' or 'approval' requirements in investment treaties to restrict which investments are eligible for protection and arbitration. It analyzes treaty examples from ASEAN and COMESA, as well as arbitral awards (Yaung Chi Oo, Gruslin, and Desert Line), to demonstrate that while these criteria are legitimate strategic tools for quality control, their effectiveness depends on precise drafting and clear procedural frameworks. The document recommends that states explicitly state these requirements as indispensable conditions and provide transparent, detailed procedures for compliance.

The document examines the conflict between Uganda's constitutional property rights and the practical application of land acquisition laws in the oil sector. It highlights systemic failures in compensation processes, the inadequacy of current legislation, and the vulnerability of grassroots landowners facing displacement for oil-related infrastructure.

The CER evaluates the draft NWRS2 against its previous 'Stop Treading Water' report, supporting goals to improve Department of Water Affairs (DWA) stability and the establishment of Catchment Management Agencies (CMAs). However, it criticizes the draft for lacking specific timeframes and financial details, failing to afford legal status to Catchment Management Forums (CMFs), and omitting necessary reforms for the Water Tribunal. The CER specifically warns that proposed revisions to the 'Reserve' for economic development may complicate its implementation and threaten ecosystems.

The document addresses the tension between the pursuit of a green economy and the existing international trade system. It argues that while Rio+20 provided general guidance, it failed to establish what constitutes 'appropriate state behaviour' regarding green industrial policies, such as subsidies and local content requirements. The author highlights a rise in trade frictions—including disputes between the U.S., China, and the EU over solar and wind technology—and asserts that the WTO's Dispute Settlement Mechanism is ill-suited to resolve these issues because they stem from a lack of international consensus on policy propriety rather than simple rule breaches. The text advocates for the creation of an institutional space, such as through UNCTAD, to evaluate the effectiveness of green tools and their impacts on trading partners, particularly developing nations, to ensure a just transition.

The report analyzes the lack of formal legal recognition for TICCAs in Panama, highlighting conflicts between the National Environment Authority (ANAM) and indigenous peoples. It examines national environmental laws, the Constitution, and comarca-specific laws, noting that while state laws often ignore traditional conservation, indigenous customary laws—such as the Guna's Anmar Igar—effectively protect biodiversity. The document proposes strategies to integrate traditional governance into the National System of Protected Areas (SINAP) and protect indigenous collective rights over natural resources.

The report examines the status of ICCAs in Taiwan, highlighting a systemic lack of formal legal recognition for indigenous customary land and resource rights. While the Basic Act of Indigenous Peoples (2005) provides some theoretical recognition, state agencies—particularly the Forestry Bureau—remain reluctant to share decision-making power. The document details several community-led conservation successes, such as the Danayiku Nature Park and the Smangus village's collective management, and notes a positive shift in judicial trends where courts have begun to recognize traditional territories.

The document examines the status of Indigenous Territories and Community Conserved Areas (TICCAs) in Bolivia, highlighting the gap between the country's advanced constitutional protections for indigenous peoples and the actual implementation of state policies. It details the legal evolution from the 1953 Agrarian Reform to the 2009 Constitution, which recognizes Bolivia as a Plurinational State. The report identifies significant threats to biodiversity and indigenous governance, including the expansion of the agricultural frontier, large-scale extractivist projects (mining and hydrocarbons), and the government's failure to conduct prior informed consultation. Through case studies of the TIPNIS and Kaa-Iya, it illustrates conflicts over infrastructure projects and the erosion of co-management agreements between the state and indigenous organizations.