Search Climate Insights Directory

ClientEarth identifies systemic failures in the implementation of the IED's 'Aarhus rights' across the EU. It argues that the IED's wording is too narrow to comply with the Aarhus Convention, particularly regarding public participation during permit updates. National implementation is further hindered by limited online information, high litigation costs in the UK, and a tendency for judges in Bulgaria and the UK to defer to regulators due to the technical complexity of the IED. Case studies from Bulgaria, Spain, and the UK illustrate these deficits, including the withholding of baseline reports in Spain and the lack of electronic access to permit applications in Bulgaria.

The document outlines the legal mechanisms available to the public and environmental NGOs in Estonia to challenge environmental decisions, access information, and participate in decision-making. It details the 'three pillars' of the Aarhus Convention—access to information, public participation, and access to justice—and explains how these are implemented through EU directives and Estonian laws. The guide describes specific court procedures in Estonia, the role of the European Court of Justice, the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee, and the European Court of Human Rights, while highlighting challenges such as court costs and the strict 'personal interest' requirements for standing.

The document is a guide for creating enabling legal frameworks for community forestry, emphasizing iterative and participatory reform processes. It provides a comprehensive set of questionnaires across ten thematic areas—including land tenure, allocation, governance, and market access—to ensure that laws protect the rights of local communities and indigenous peoples while promoting sustainable forest management.

The briefing analyzes the impacts of PLV 22/2019 on the Brazilian Forest Code and the Environmental Regularization Program (PRA). It warns that a proposed three-day deadline for state agencies to call landowners to sign commitment terms is practically impossible due to the complex validation process of the Rural Environmental Registry (CAR). If passed without changes, the bill could lead to the automatic environmental regularization of thousands of properties and the amnesty of fines, bypassing the required recovery of degraded areas.

The document analyzes the implementation of the Aarhus Convention in Austria, detailing the legal paths for accessing environmental information, public participation in decision-making, and the right to challenge environmental violations. It highlights significant deficits in the Austrian system, particularly regarding the third pillar of the Aarhus Convention (access to justice for general environmental violations), and examines the role of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee (ACCC) in shaping these rights.

The Centre for Environmental Rights (CER) asserts that South Africa's Minimum Emission Standards (MES) for sulphur dioxide (SO2) are already weak compared to other developing nations and should be strictly enforced. The CER disputes claims by Eskom and Sasol that compliance is too expensive, citing expert analysis that suggests Eskom's capital cost estimates for flue gas desulphurisation (FGD) and low NOx burners are significantly inflated. The document highlights that failure to comply with the MES could lead to approximately 16,000 avoidable premature deaths, while doubling the SO2 limit to 1000mg/Nm3 would cause an additional 3,300 premature deaths. It recommends the use of FGD as the best available technology for long-term operation and dry sorbent injection (DSI) only for plants nearing decommissioning.

Friends of the Earth and Friends of the Earth Action have passed a resolution calling for an impeachment inquiry into Donald Trump. The organization argues that Trump poses a fundamental threat to environmental protection by allowing self-dealing within his administration and obstructing the enforcement of environmental laws. Specifically, they cite the conduct of former officials Scott Pruitt and Ryan Zinke, as well as a dramatic decline in EPA inspections and prosecutions, as evidence of a systemic failure to uphold the rule of law in favor of fossil fuel interests.

The General Court's decision in Case T-108/17 ClientEarth v Commission reinforces restrictive barriers for NGOs seeking to challenge EU environmental decisions. The court ruled that the internal review procedure under Article 12 of the Aarhus Regulation cannot result in the annulment of the underlying administrative act, only the decision on the review request itself. Furthermore, the court limited the admissibility of arguments to those explicitly raised in the initial request, preventing NGOs from adapting their claims based on the Commission's response. ClientEarth argues these restrictions violate the Aarhus Convention by denying an effective remedy for illegal EU acts.

Lawyers for Human Rights requested consent for UN Special Rapporteur David Richard Boyd to act as amicus curiae in a South African court case (NGHC case no 39724/19). Boyd intended to provide international and comparative legal perspectives on State obligations regarding air pollution and the right to a healthy environment to assist the court in interpreting the NEM: Air Quality Act and the South African Constitution.

The document serves as a guide for citizens, NGOs, and legal professionals to navigate the complex system of environmental litigation in Germany. It details the three pillars of the Aarhus Convention—access to information, public participation, and access to justice—and explains how these are implemented through EU directives and German national law. The toolkit outlines specific procedures for challenging government inaction or illegal acts, the standing of recognized environmental associations, and the roles of international bodies like the European Court of Justice (ECJ), the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee (ACCC), and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

The document outlines the legal framework for accessing environmental information in the EU, including the Aarhus Convention and specific EU regulations. It details the process for submitting requests, the grounds upon which authorities may legally withhold information, and the various avenues for challenging refusals, such as confirmatory applications, complaints to the EU Ombudsman, and judicial appeals to the EU General Court. Additionally, it provides guidance on filing formal complaints with the European Commission regarding Member State failures to implement EU environmental law and discusses the limitations of direct access to EU courts for NGOs.

This document is a Rule 16A notice filed in the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria, in June 2019. It outlines the constitutional issues raised by applicants—including GroundWork and the Vukani Environmental Justice Alliance—regarding air pollution in the Highveld Priority Area and the failure of the Minister of Environmental Affairs to establish regulations to implement the Highveld Priority Area Air Quality Management Plan.

ClientEarth calls for the abolition of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) and investment court system (ICS) mechanisms, arguing that these asymmetric systems prioritize corporate interests over the public good. The organization asserts that such mechanisms create a 'regulatory chill' that prevents governments from implementing climate and environmental laws, citing examples in Germany and Romania. It advocates for the use of domestic legal systems as the primary route for resolving investment disputes to ensure the protection of the environment and the sovereignty of states.

Natural Justice submitted a set of recommendations to the County Government of Kilifi to improve the 2018 draft Air Quality Regulations. The organization argues for the inclusion of more stringent penalties, the removal of exemptions for contaminant discharge, and the requirement that the County Director of Environment (representing NEMA) be involved in notifications and monitoring to ensure transparency and compliance with national laws and the Constitution of Kenya.

The document examines how Kazakhstan can vertically integrate climate action by linking national strategic documents and subnational development programs. It highlights the role of the Ministry of Energy and the Ministry of National Economy in coordinating these efforts, while emphasizing the need for improved climate information, systematic risk and vulnerability assessments (RVA), and capacity building for local authorities. The report proposes specific mechanisms to embed climate risks into regional development planning and suggests a 'training of trainers' model to sustain methodological expertise.

The document evaluates the EU's proposed Multilateral Investment Court (MIC) as a replacement for ad hoc investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms. ClientEarth argues that the MIC provides only cosmetic procedural improvements and fails to address systemic imbalances, such as the lack of investor obligations and the marginalization of domestic courts. The briefing provides six key recommendations for reform, including the requirement to exhaust local remedies, the inclusion of 'clean hands' and 'supremacy' clauses to protect public interest legislation, and the limitation of compensation to proven economic damages. Alternatively, the document suggests that states should withdraw consent from ISDS and terminate international investment agreements (IIAs) in favor of domestic judiciaries, political risk insurance, and state-to-state dispute settlement.

The Centre for Environmental Rights, representing several environmental groups, is demanding the withdrawal of an amendment to the List of Activities that weakened sulphur dioxide minimum emission standards for existing plants. The groups argue the amendment was made without following legally-prescribed public participation procedures and threaten High Court litigation if the provision is not withdrawn by 12 March 2019.

The document outlines the legal obligations of 38 local authorities in England and Wales to address illegal nitrogen dioxide levels. It details a three-part legal test from High Court judgments requiring plans to achieve compliance as soon as possible, reduce human exposure quickly, and ensure compliance is likely rather than just possible. It emphasizes that cost and political difficulties, including election Purdah, are not lawful reasons for delay, and that these duties persist despite Brexit.

The document warns that 35 amendments to MPV 867/2018, which was intended only to extend the deadline for joining the Environmental Regularization Program (PRA), seek to drastically alter the Forest Code. The authors argue these changes are unconstitutional, lack thematic relevance, and risk creating legal insecurity, potentially undoing the consensus reached during the law's creation and subsequent STF rulings.

The document serves as a reference list of legal precedents and compliance findings related to access to justice. It categorises these by the issuing body: the Court of Justice of the EU, the General Court, and the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee (ACCC). The listed cases cover a wide range of legal issues, including the definition of "individual concern," standing for NGOs, the standard of review under the EIA and Habitats Directives, and the compliance of the Aarhus Regulation with the Aarhus Convention.