The role of international case law in implementing the obligation not to cause significant harm

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 20 Số 4 - Trang 631-648 - 2020
Mara Tignino1, Christian Bréthaut2
1Faculty of Law and Institute for Environmental Sciences, Platform for International Water Law, Geneva Water Hub, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
2UNESCO Chair on hydropolitics, Institute for Environmental Sciences, Geneva Water Hub, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

Tóm tắt

AbstractThe no-harm principle is at the heart of the several international conventions focusing on the uses, allocation, management and protection of transboundary water resources. However, in the framework of these agreements, the meaning of “no-harm” remains rather vague. Through an analysis of six emblematic cases brought before the International Court of Justice and arbitration tribunals, we elucidate the various facets of this principle. In doing so, the paper identifies four facets. The first is characterized by concerns related to the protection of territorial integrity rather than those related to the protection of the environment. The second facet focuses on the principle of equitable and reasonable use of water, which testifies to the willingness to anticipate possible harms and to define conditions for cooperation between neighbouring countries. The third facet explores the use of three instruments and emphasizes their importance to clarify the very nature of harm: the conduct of environmental impact assessment, the consultation of local populations and the insurance of minimum environmental flows. The fourth facet develops a preventive perspective on harm by unravelling the duty to take appropriate measures to prevent and mitigate risks deriving from the obligations of notification and consultation.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Application of the Republic of Hungary v. Czech and Slovak Republic on the Danube River. (1994). In P. Sands, R. Tarasofsky, M. Weiss (Eds). Principles of International Environmental Law (pp. 693–698). Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Award in the Arbitration regarding the Indus Waters Kishenganga between Pakistan and India (2013). Reports of International Arbitration Awards XXXI, 1–358.

Boisson de Chazournes, L. (2015). Water: Challenges for international law and policy. The notion of environmental flows and the law applicable to international watercourses. In Proceedings of the 108th annual meeting—The effectiveness of international law. American Society of International Law (pp. 293–297).

Caflisch, L. (2018). Settlement of disputes concerning international watercourses. In M. Tignino & C. Bréthaut (Eds.), Research handbook on freshwater law and international relations (pp. 234–258). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Eek, H. (1965). International law: The first encounter. Nordic Journal of International Law, 35(1–2), 81–102.

International Court of Justice, Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua) and Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica). (2015). Judgment, I.C.J. Reports, 665.

International Court of Justice, Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua) and Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica). (2018). Judgment, I.C.J. Reports.

International Court of Justice, Gabcíkovo–Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia). (1997). Judgment, I. C. J. Reports, 7.

International Court of Justice, Legality of the Threat or the Use of Nuclear Weapons. (1996). Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports, 226.

International Court of Justice, Pulp Mills on the Uruguay River (Argentina v. Uruguay). (2010). Judgement, I. C. J. Reports, 14.

Kliot, N., Shmueli, D., & Shamir, U. (2001). Institutions for management of transboundary water resources: Their nature, characteristics and shortcomings. Water Policy, 3(3), 229–255.

Lake Lanoux (Spain/France). (1957). Reports of International Arbitration Awards, XII, 281–317.

McCaffrey, S. (1998). The UN convention on the law of the non-navigational uses of international watercourses: Prospects and Pitfalls. In S. M. A. Salman & L. B. de Chazournes (Eds.), International watercourses: Enhancing cooperation and managing conflict: Proceedings of a World Bank Seminar (pp. 17–28). Washington: World Bank.

McCaffrey, S. (2019). The law of international watercourses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

McIntyre, O. (2008). Environmental protection of international watercourses under international law. London: Routledge.

McIntyre, O. (2011). The World Court’s ongoing contribution to international water law: The pulp mills case between Argentina and Uruguay. Water Alternatives, 4(2), 124–144.

Murphy, S. (2013). What a difference a year makes: The international court of justice’s 2012 jurisprudence. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 4(3), 539–552.

Nanda, Ved P., & Pring, G. (2013). International environmental law and policy for the 21st century. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

Okowa, P. (2000). State responsibility for transboundary air pollution in international law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Permanent Court of International Justice, Case concerning the Factory at Chorzów (Germany v. Poland). (1927). Claim for Indemnity. Jurisdiction. Series A No. 9, 21.

Salman, M. A. Salman. (2009). The World Bank Policy for projects on international waterways: An historical and legal analysis. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.

Salman, M. A. Salman. (2018). The obligation not to cause significant harm. In L. Boisson de Chazournes, M. M. Mbengue, M. Tignino, & K. Sangbana (Eds.), The UN convention on the law of the non-navigational uses of international watercourses. A commentary (pp. 95–122). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sands, P. (1998). Treaty, custom and the cross fertilization of international law. Yale Human Rights and Development Journal, 1(4), 85–105.

Spijkers, O. (2016). The cross-fertilization between the sustainable development goals and international water law. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 25(1), 39–49.

Tomka, J. P. (2013). President of the International Court of Justice, Inaugural Hilding Eek Memorial Lecture (2 December 2013). Stockholm Center for International Law and Justice, The Rule of Law and the Role of the International Court of Justice in World Affairs. Retrieved from https://www.icj-cij.org/files/press-releases/8/17848.pdf

Trail Smelter case (United States, Canada). (1938 and 1941). Reports of International Arbitration Awards, III, 1905–1982.

Viñuales, J. (2008). The contribution of the International Court of Justice to the development of international environmental law. Fordham International Environmental Law Journal, 32(1), 232–258.

Wegerich, K., & Olsson, O. (2010). Late developers and the inequity of “equitable utilization” and the harm of “do no harm”. Water International, 35(6), 707–717.

Whiteman, M. M. (1965). Digest of international law (Vol. 5). Washington DC: US Government Printing Office.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Tập 20 Số 4

631-648

Thông tin tác giả