http://dx.doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v17i37.1591
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW:
PARTICULARITIES
Paulo de Bessa Antunes1
Federal University of the State of Rio de Janeiro (UNIRIO)
ABSTRACT
The article analyzes the legal instruments available under international law
for the protection of the environment, seeking to show that there is an
International Environmental Law in formation, which is beginning to be
affirmed. Throughout the article, we analyze the main characteristics able
to mark the peculiar position of this branch in the construction of the international legal order. The International Environmental Law is a new Law,
which, however, has brought important news to the international legal order. The article highlights some of these modifications, e.g. the change of
concepts of responsibility and sovereignty, the wide use of principles and
the gradual transformation of the subjects of Public International Law. The
article also highlights the political, social and economic difficulties for the
effectiveness and implementation of this new branch of international law.
Keywords: environmentalism; International Environmental Law; globalization; public policy; sustainability.
DIREITO INTERNACIONAL DO MEIO AMBIENTE:
PARTICULARIDADES
RESUMO
O artigo examina os instrumentos jurídicos disponíveis no âmbito do
Direito internacional para a proteção do meio ambiente, buscando
demonstrar que existe, em formação, um Direito Internacional do Meio
Ambiente, o qual começa a ser afirmar. Ao longo do artigo são analisadas
as principais características capazes de marcar a posição peculiar
deste ramo em construção da ordem jurídica internacional. Admite-se
que o Direito Internacional do Meio Ambiente é um Direito jovem, que,
no entanto, vem aportando importantes novidades na ordem jurídica
1 PhD in Law from the State University of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ). Master’s degree in Law from the
Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio). Professor at UNIRIO. Regional Attorney
of the Republic ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0375-0213 / e-mail: paulo.antunes@unirio.br
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
249
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
internacional. O artigo destaca algumas de tais modificações, e.g., a
modificação dos conceitos de responsabilidade e soberania, a ampla
utilização de princípios e a transformação gradativa dos sujeitos de
Direito Internacional Público. O artigo ressalta, também, as dificuldades
políticas, sociais e econômicas para a efetivação e implementação deste
novo ramo do Direito Internacional.
Palavras-chave: ambientalismo; Direito Internacional do Meio Ambiente;
globalização; políticas públicas; sustentabilidade.
250
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
INTRODUCTION
This article aims to analyze some of the peculiarities that allow us to
affirm that the International Environmental Law (IEL) is increasingly recognized as an autonomous branch of the International Public Law (IPL).
The protection of the environment is currently part of the global agenda
and, in such a condition, one of the main themes discussed in the different
international fora, allowed that, within the scope of IPL, a specific sector
began to specialize (REI, 2018). In fact, since 1992, the United Nations
(UN) has held several international conferences whose central theme was
the discussion and deliberation on environmental issues. IEL is one of the
responses given by the international community to the deterioration of environmental resources on a planetary scale. It is a legal response, originated in the common understanding of the subjects of International Law in the
sense that only a uniform and articulated action between the different international actors is capable of solving problems that go beyond the frontier
of a single state. IEL emerged in the 20th century, as did the environmental
issue. It is a fact that, in the past, there have been some international agreements on common problems affecting natural resources. However, it was
only in the last century that the concern became more eloquent and visible
on the international scenario. However, it should be noted that interest in
protecting the environment initially arises within each country and, from
there it spreads to the international arena. An essential condition for IEL to
develop is the existence of stable international institutions that express, at
least, the desire for cooperation between States, since it is not conceivable
to treat multilateral problems, without institutions that articulate them, in a
peaceful and cooperative manner. The theme of environment and the right
that affects it has a universal vocation (MORAND-DEVILLER, 2010) and
as such, it needs to be addressed in a way that involves the international
community and the various mechanisms created by it.
IEL can be defined as the set of rules (consistent or not), international
principles and practices that create obligations and rights related to environment protection, nature and natural resources within the international
community. It includes matters that are simultaneously of interest to multiple states, such as transboundary pollution, sea resources, global climate
change and the protection of biological diversity, as well as matters of regional interest, e.g., protection of a particular international river or forests
that spread over more than one country.
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
251
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
Geraldo Eulálio do NASCIMENTO e Silva (2002) claims that the
United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), when calling the Rio de Janeiro Conference, used the expression “International Environmental Law,”
solving the problem related to the existence of a new branch of the IPL,
regarding the designation, the practice has preferred to use International
Environmental Law, adopted in this article.
IEL is made up of international treaties, conventions and declarations
related to nature protection, making it very difficult to identify coherence
between its different standards. Harmonization between the whole set is a
very difficult, if not impossible, task. Thus, it is better to use the notion of
its own sectors within IEL, that is, to seek harmonization between specific
sets of international treaties and conventions. Likewise, one should not disregard the deep relations between IEL and international human rights law
and, also, with international economic law, given the great interpenetration
between them. Therefore, IEL is comprehensive and cannot be understood
outside economic and social contexts. The Stockholm Declaration, proclaimed in 1972, is an eloquent demonstration of what is being argued. In
the proclamation, the Conference states that the human environment has
two aspects, namely: (1) the natural; and the (2) artificial (ONU, 1972).
Both are essential for the Human Being to enjoy well-being and fundamental human rights and even life itself. Thus, protecting and improving it
is a fundamental issue that affects the economic development of the whole
world, being the desire of the peoples and obligation of governments.
Among the most striking characteristics of IEL are: (1) its novelty
(MALJEAN-DUBOIS, 2008); (2) its sectorization; (3) its prospective
character; (4) the modification of the concept of national sovereignty; and
(5) the transformation of its constituent elements, such as the source system and its subjects. These are the points that the article intends to critically examine.
1 THE NOVELTY OF INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
This topic will examine the novelty of IEL, that is, its novelty in the
legal universe compared to the IPL, which is a law whose origins are lost
in the mists of time. Francisco REZEK (2002) states that the first bilateral
treaty proven to exist was the one signed between Hatusil III, Hittite king,
and Ramses II, Egyptian pharaoh. It is believed that peace between nations
was signed between 1280 and 1272 BC. IEL appeared at the time of global
252
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
pollution, with the concern of young people to break the barriers of a millennial legal model to find its full statement. As it will be seen, such a break
will be made by the adoption of specific mechanisms that will be dealt with
in the subsequent topics.
1.1 Importance of environmentalism for the IEL formation
IEL is the result of environmentalism, which is a social and political
movement, composed of different and even antagonistic thoughts about
nature, its protection and its role in the modern world. According to the
sharp vision of David Pepper (2000), it gives us the feeling that it comes
from all sides, from the left, from the right, from the center, mixing with
concepts from ecology. It contains biocentrism and anthropocentrism, and
it is therefore difficult to concretely define green policy. This “mélange”
(PEPPER, 2000), however, is a fact that has a great impact on the production of IEL. Environmentalism is based on a discourse (HANNIGAN,
2014) that is also a major contributor to the IEL formation. Such discourse
is formed by a set of statements, many of them based on scientific arguments, about how nature should be, if certain practices that put it at risk
were avoided, as a consequence of the accelerated urbanization and industrial growth in the post-war period in Europe and the United States, even
mentioning “environmental revolution” (McCORMICK, 1992). In general, the environmentalist discourse tends to alarmism and the spectacular,
dramatizing real problems.
The modern environmental discourse is based on two seminal works:
Silent Spring, by Rachel Carson (2010) and in the Club of Rome’s report,
The limits to growth (MEADOWS et al., 1977). The opening chapter of
Silent Spring has the symptomatic title of A fable for tomorrow in which,
like children’s tales, it is said that there was a city in the heart of the United
States similar to the Garden of Eden, showing discomfort with the modern
world and its problems. Silent Spring is certainly the most influential work
in ecological thinking to date. It contains concerns about nuclear war and
the pollution of the environment by chemicals, linking them with weapons of war and their use as a poison for suicides, etc. There is no issue on
the current environmental agenda that was not present at Silent Spring.
The manifesto addresses issues ranging from the threat of the atomic holocaust to the contamination of breast milk by chemicals. It talks about small
communities and popular participation and the risks brought by modern
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
253
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
science. Alarmist, at a time when concerns about the cold war and thermonuclear explosions were real; radical in banning organochlorines, we
can say that the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants is
a by-product of Silent Spring. The influence of R. Carson is also present
in the speech of Former UN Secretary-General U Thant in stating that he
did not wish to appear “excessively dramatic,” but that his status as Secretary-General allowed him to conclude that members of the United Nations
had “perhaps ten years” to control the arms race, improve the human environment and control the demographic explosion. In order to face the problems, he proposed the urgent creation of an international body, under the
penalty of humanity losing control of the issue (MEADOWS et al., 1977).
1.2 A Right at the Crossroads
The legal treatment of the environment has generated perplexity in the
legal community, because given its peculiar characteristics, it is not possible to insert it in the usual areas of law. Raphaël Romi (2010) states that
Environmental Law is at the crossroads between Public and Private Law,
between Internal and International Law. This occurs because the environment itself does not respect borders, and nor does the damage it suffers.
Thus, environmental protection is not limited to a single legal path, nor
to a single branch of law. All legal remedies are valid for environmental
protection. Thus, its protection, from a legal point of view, is not made
by the construction of a tower parallel to the various branches of law, but
rather by the transversal perforation of the environment theme in any and
all branches of law, even if it the existence of a specialized legal sector is
recognized and admitted.
In this context, IEL plays a fundamental role, since most of the environmental problems faced by countries are global or regional, which
requires a legal solution that is also global or regional. It is relevant to
emphasize that IEL, in relation to internal rights, plays the role of locomotive (MALJEAN-DUBOIS, 2008), pushing national regulations towards a
higher standard of protection.
The crossroads of Environmental Law are not limited to the internal
aspects of the legal system, whether national or international. It is necessary to consider the external aspects (meta-legal in a positivist view)
as essential in the construction and application of legal protection of the
environment. The formulator of the standard and its applicator cannot fail
254
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
to consider the political, economic, scientific and social aspects involved
in a concrete situation. Therefore, Law acts as a catalyst for diverse types
of knowledge and moments that will materialize in a legal norm that is
thought to regulate a current situation, and mainly to shape the future.
These crossed paths are the basis of concrete difficulties for the implementation of Environmental Law, in whatever scope.
2 SECTORIZATION OF IEL
The environment is understood as a totality that encompasses all the
so-called natural resources of the planet, as well as the works of human
culture. Given the breadth of the concept, it becomes impossible to treat
it in a unique way. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the famous
decision in the case of Project Gabiciknovo-Nagyamaros (Hungary v. Slovakia) established that the environment is not an abstraction, but the space
in which human beings live and on which their qualities of life and health
depend on, including for future generations. However, from practical and
normative points of view, there is a real difficulty in reaching a multilateral agreement that deals with “environment.” In this way, States have, in
their concrete practices, signed international sectoral agreements, and the
main ones concern (1) protection of biological diversity, including protection of flora, fauna and genetic resources; (2) protection of maritime
and river water resources; (3) protection against transboundary pollution,
including toxic products and chemical pollution; and (4) protection of the
atmosphere, including with respect to climate change. As it will be seen in
the next topic, IEL has made extensive use of so-called framework conventions, which are open and general agreements that require the adoption of
subsequent measures for their effective implementation.
2.1 Environmental treaties and conventions
Treaties, as defined in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties,
article 1 (a), are formal and written international agreements, celebrated
between States and subject to the rules of international law, may be concluded in a single document or in several related documents, regardless of
nomem iuris. According to the observation of StéphaneDoumbé-Billé et al.
(2013), the quantitative treaties are the most important norms of IEL. For
the authors, the first environmental treaties date back to the 19th century,
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
255
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
although they were not focused on environmental protection in itself, but
on other legal and economic assets, such as the Paris Convention of 1902
on the protection of birds that were useful for agriculture (VARELLA,
2009). In general, according to the Brazilian Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
the term treaty is used for agreements intended to be attributed political
importance (BRASIL, 2020). IEL makes extensive use of conventions that
are multilateral acts on topics of general interest, the result of conferences,
often used in commercial, industrial, human rights and environmental matters.
In environmental matters, framework conventions, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, e.g., are documents of great relevance,
given their condition of being broad agreements, allowing the accommodation of the different views of the Parties, in order to have a long life
(SANDS; PEEL, 2017). Usually, given the complexity of the topic, States
establish Protocols that are interpretative documents of treaties or conventions. In the case of the United Nations Convention on Climate Change, the
Kyoto Protocol was signed (BRASIL, 2002), which entered into force on
February 16, 2005, but failed due to political difficulties. It was replaced
by the Paris Agreement, made possible by the fact of expressing voluntary commitments made by the Parties for the reduction of greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions. At this point it is relevant to note that the Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, originating from
the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, is largely
successful, being “the only multilateral environmental agreement whose
adoption is universal: 197 states made a commitment to protect the ozone
layer” (BRASIL, 2019).
Lavielle, Delzangles and Le Bris (2018) divide environmental treaties
into two major groups: a (1) combating pollution; and (2) the defense of
natural resources. The first group consists of protective agreements for specific means, e.g., water, air, soil, etc. The second group, on the other hand,
encompasses the so-called protection domains, e.g., biological diversity,
or species of flora and fauna. The division is purely didactic, given the
interdependence of the themes. If an agreement protects a given ecosystem
from chemical pollution, it will certainly protect the biological diversity it
contains.
Treaties and conventions may have a (1) universal vocation, that
is, they seek to bring together all states around a single theme; or (2)
regional vocation, covering only states geographically located in a region.
256
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
However, some regional agreements also accept the accession of States
outside the original region, as in the case of the Aarhus Convention,
Article 19 (3), which admits the accession of States with consultative
status with the Economic Commission for Europe. Regarding the effects
on the environment, Lavielle, Delzangles and Le Bris (2018) identify four
types of conventions: (1) those entirely dedicated to the environment;
(2) those dedicated to a specific region with environmental provisions,
e.g., the Antarctic Treaty; (3) treaties that do not have an environmental
nature, such as disarmament, that indirectly protect the environment; and
(4) commercial treaties that, without proper environmental clauses, can
generate harmful effects on the environment.
The production of environmental treaties and conventions over the
past 40 years is impressive. The Register of International Treaties and other Agreements in the field of the Environment, 2005 edition indicates the
existence of 50 main international treaties on the environment between
the 1920s and 1970s; from 1971 to 2005, the total number of treaties in
the publication reached 272, divided into several subjects (UNITED NATIONS, 2005). The total number of existing agreements at the regional
and sub-regional level is not known exactly, however, it is estimated that
they may exceed 2000 (SANDS; PEEL, 2017). The large number of international agreements, if on the one hand demonstrates a growing global
concern with the subject, on the other hand is a complicating element, as
it makes IEL extremely fragmented and difficult to apply and even merely
symbolic, if there is no concrete implementation.
As a rule, the formation of environmental treaties and conventions is
no different than what occurs in other sectors of the IPL. However, there
are some peculiarities in environmental agreements that deserve to be
highlighted. First, there is a common agenda between two or more States
or, still, an international organization and that such actors are willing to
discuss it, with a view to reaching some level of shared understanding. It
is also necessary that the States have reached some level of internal consensus in relation to the policies to be adopted, because otherwise, it is
practically impossible for coherent action at the international level. Especially due to the fact that currently the negotiation and elaboration of
international treaties and conventions is no longer carried out under the
exclusive sponsorship of the ministries of foreign affairs or foreign affairs,
with the increasing intervention of specific government agencies in environmental matters in the negotiating team. In addition to the state actors
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
257
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
that are undoubtedly the main agents in international negotiations, it is important to note that in the environmental field, the intervention of non-state
agents, such as Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), financial institutions, scientific societies, transnational corporations, indigenous peoples
and traditional populations, and even individuals, although, finally, it is
up to States and International Organizations to sign the agreements. However, from the point of view of concrete reality, it cannot be overlooked
that, not infrequently, international corporations and NGOs have more
real power than so-called less developed countries (UNITED NATIONS,
2019b). Economic disparities between States and different views on the
very concept of the environment and development, including with regard
to the concept of sustainable development, have served as a brake on the
implementation of various agreements, mainly due to the vocalization of
non-state agents, often, due to the lack of equity between the proposed
terms (CORNWALL; EADE, 2010).
Framework conventions demand the creation of new structures for
their implementation and inspection, resulting in costs and international
bureaucracies. Such structures have different forms, which in general are:
(1) secretariats; (2) conferences of the parties as physical structures. In
documentary terms agreed: (1) annexes; and (2) other legal instruments.
The framework agreement defines the instruments that will be constituted when they enter into force. For example, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, in its article 2, establishes that the
Conference of the Parties may adopt legal instruments in order to achieve
the objectives of the Convention. In turn, articles 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 establish a (1) Conference of the Parties; (2) a Secretariat; (3) a Subsidiary Body
for Scientific and Technological Advice; (4) Subsidiary Implementation
Agency; and (5) a financial mechanism linked to the Convention. The Conference of the Parties, created by the Convention [article 7 (2)], is the highest body of the Convention with the task of monitoring its implementation
and that of any other legal instruments adopted by the Conference of the
Parties, as well as making decisions, as its mandate for the effective implementation of the convention. It is true that the framework conventions gave
rise to the creation of complex and expensive structures that have been the
subject of much criticism on the part of NGOs that question the spending
and its little effectiveness, given that the UN admits that global environment quality is deteriorating (UNITED NATIONS, 2019a).
258
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
3 FINALISTIC AND PROSPECTIVE NATURE OF IEL
IEL, as it will be seen in this topic, is finalistic law, aimed at achieving
objectives and shaping a future to be built according to the model of environmental, social and economic sustainability. It does not accommodate
past situations but seeks to organize the future. These two elements, in
conjunction, denote innovative and, at the same time, conservative particularities. Innovative, inasmuch as international agreements aim, as already seen, to improve current environmental conditions and to change
production and consumption patterns; conservative, insofar as they aim
at maintaining the environmental resources now existing for tomorrow’s
generations.
3.1 Finalistic nature
For Alexandre KISS (1989), as well as for Dupuy and Viñales (2015),
the objective of IEL is the protection of the biosphere against major deteriorations and imbalances that disturb its normal functioning, which the
authors recognize to be a complex task. However, when arguing about the
final nature of IEL, Kiss recalls that the UNGA (Resolution 2749 (XXV)
of December 17, 1970), had solemnly declared that the sea and ocean floor,
as well as its subsoils, although beyond the limits of national jurisdiction,
and the resources therein, “common heritage of humanity,” and their exploitation and exploitation should be done for the benefit of humanity, regardless of the geographic situation of the States. The proclamation was
incorporated into the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,
article 137 (2).
It is a fact that, currently, the term environment has become a
commonplace (RÈMOND-GOUILLOUD, 1989) being used in a random
and daily way by the press, politicians, environmentalists and countless
people and entities, often without a clear agreement on its meaning.
Therefore, the definition of the IEL’s object will depend on what is
understood by the environment. In Brazilian domestic law, for example,
there are two definitions of the environment, the (1) constitutional one in
Article 225 of the Constitution of the Republic that defines it as a good for
the common use of the people, essential to a healthy quality of life; and (2)
the legal one that defines it as the set of conditions, laws, influences and
interactions of a physical, chemical and biological order, which allows,
shelters and governs life in all its forms. The constitutional definition has
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
259
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
an anthropocentric character, while the legal one emphasizes ecological
aspects.
At this point, the dichotomy between anthropocentrism and biocentrism cannot be avoided. Anthropocentrism has humanity as the center of
importance over all phenomena, assuming that human beings are separate
and independent from physical nature (EBLEN; EBLEN, 1994); in turn,
biocentrism admits that every form of life is endowed with equal value.
IEL has fluctuated between anthropocentric and biocentric positions, as
evidenced from some of its relevant documents. The United Nations Convention concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage
signed in Paris (November 16, 1972) simultaneously affirms both conceptions, in accordance with the provisions of its article 2, which protects both
works produced by human genius, such as natural and scenic beauties,
physical and biological formations that have exceptional universal value,
whether from the aesthetic, scientific or conservation points of view.
The Stockholm Declaration, in its Principle 2, is anthropocentric and
utilitarian, in saying that natural resources, in particular, representative
samples of natural ecosystems must be preserved for the benefit of present and future generations. The Earth Charter, in its article 1, adheres to
biocentrism in saying that living beings are interconnected, showing value
regardless of their usefulness for Humans.
The World Charter for Nature (UNGA Resolution 37/7 of 28 October
1982) affirmed the importance of protecting ecosystems and nature for the
survival of humanity, proclaiming that: (1) Humanity is part of nature, and
the life is dependent on the uninterrupted functioning of natural systems,
which guarantee the supply of energy and nutrients; (2) civilization needs
nature, from which human culture and all artistic and scientific conquests
were built, therefore, life in harmony with nature offers Humans the opportunities to develop all their creativity, including rest and leisure. Its five
general principles are: (1) nature must be respected and its essential processes must not be harmed; (2) the genetic viability of the Earth must not
be compromised; the population level, various forms of life must be at least
sufficient for their survival and, to this end, the necessary habitats must be
protected; (3) all land areas, terrestrial and maritime, shall be subject to
the conservation principles and that special protection should be given for
unique areas, for representative samples of all different types of ecosystems and for the habitats of rare species or threatened; (4) ecosystems and
organisms, as well as terrestrial, marine and atmospheric resources, used
by humans, must be managed in order to achieve and maintain optimal
260
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
sustainable productivity, but not in a way that threatens the integrity of
other ecosystems or species with which they coexist, and (5) nature must
be protected from degradation caused by wars or other hostile activities.
It is also worth mentioning the Earth Charter, which is the result of
an initiative by the United Nations World Commission on Environment
and Development (Brundtland Commission), which in 1987 launched the
well-known report Our Common Future, which contains the concept of
sustainable development. In 1994, initiatives taken by Maurice Strong and
Mikhail Gorbachev, with the support of the Dutch government, launched
the idea for the development of the Earth Charter. In 1997 the Earth Charter Commission was formed. Only in the year 2000 a consensus on its
wording was reached, within UNESCO. The Earth Charter, although expressing an international view on environmental issues, is an in fiere right,
without any normative force.
3.2 Prospective nature
IEL is a law that is not limited to present situations. It is more than a
merely reactive Law; its claim is broader: it seeks to dispose for the future.
However, this is not an easy task. The link between IEL and the future is
made on an anthropocentric basis, as its discourse is basically aimed at
“future generations,” which has been understood as human generations. In
fact, many authors (DUPUY; VIÑALES, 2015; CALVO, 2005) admit the
existence of the principle of intergenerational equity, which in summary
is the use of environmental resources by present generations, without exhausting them, allowing their future use. The Stockholm Declaration (Principle 1) states that humans have a solemn obligation to protect and improve
the environment for current and future generations. The Rio Declaration
(Principle 3) is clearer when it comes to intergenerational equity, stating
that the right to development must be exercised in a way that equitably
meets the needs of development, of the environment and of present and
future generations. It is important to note that it is not only in Soft Law that
the concern for tomorrow’s generations can be found, e.g., the Convention
on Biological Diversity (CBD) is also focused on the future.
4 NATIONAL STATES AND SOVEREIGNTY
The multilateralism of environmental issues makes it often the
case that several States complain about the loss of their sovereignty
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
261
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
due to environmental agreements, as well as feeling harmed due to the
growing existence of international organizations dedicated to the subject.
This behavior is quite recurrent among emerging and less developed
countries, which subsequently show distrust in relation to a new pattern
of international governance. As expected in this topic, multilateralism
is a characteristic of IEL and certainly cannot be confused with loss of
sovereignty, but it is a new form of expression. It is also worth noting the
fact that the peculiarities of the environmental theme lead to the entry of
new actors on the international stage, such as diverse civil associations,
indigenous and traditional peoples and even individuals.
4.1 Role of national States
National states are endowed with sovereignty, that is, they exercise jurisdiction which implies the exercise of political and legal power over their
territories and permanent dominion over their natural resources (UNITED
NATIONS, 1962). The UNGA Resolution was adopted at the height of the
decolonization process when young African nations especially sought to
ensure that their natural resources remained under their control and, in theory, could revert in favor of their populations, affirming their independence
in the face of ancient colonial powers. This concept has been reaffirmed
in IEL, as demonstrated by Principle 21 of the Stockholm Declaration,
Principle 2 of the Rio Declaration and Article 3 of the CBD, among other
documents. However, in the environmental field, the traditional concept of
sovereignty has undergone mitigations that deserve to be mentioned.
States, regardless of their territorial dimensions, economic capacities
and population, are legally equal before the international community, as
provided for in Article 2 (1) of the United Nations Charter. The peculiarity
of the sovereignty concept in IEL originated in 1935, when a Canadian
smelter located close to the border of the United States (State of Washington) emitted gases (sulfur dioxide), causing damage to plantations and
forests across borders. The United States sued Canada before the Arbitration Court, which upheld the claim, condemning Canada to the payment
of compensation and establishing the principle that no State has the right
to use or allow its territory to be used in a way that causes damage to other
countries or to properties and/or persons from other states. Thus, the concept of international responsibility of States was established.
The imposition of responsibility on States is an arduous issue, given
the lack of a global power capable of executing it, at least in relation to the
262
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
great powers. In addition, there are evident economic, social and political
differences in the international community. This is one of the reasons why
there is enormous pressure and even distrust from Developing States and
Least Developed Countries in relation to environmental responsibilities.
The discussion on global climate change is an excellent example of what is
being said, since the emerging and recently industrialized countries claim
that most of the GHGs currently in the atmosphere have their origin in
developed countries, which in turn maintain that, in the current days, the
largest emitters are the emerging ones. In this regard, the outsourcing of
emissions should not be disregarded, given the massive transfer of emission activities from developed to emerging countries.
This context serves as a basis for the concept of common but differentiated responsibilities that is present, e.g., in Principle 7 of the Rio Declaration, among other international agreements, such as the Paris Agreement
in its article 2 (2).
4.2 Common but differentiated responsibilities
The international community recognizes that all its members have a
duty to protect the environment and work to improve it. There is, therefore, a common responsibility to all. Differences in levels of consumption,
income, use of environmental resources, etc., concretely prevent all States
from being equally responsible for the recovery of damage to the environment, or even for its mitigation. It is indisputable that the largest consumers of environmental resources are developed countries, with the greatest
responsibility for the necessary recovery and prevention and/or mitigation
measures.
The common, however, differentiated responsibilities seek to establish a principle of distributive justice that imposes responsibility on each
State, to the extent of its effective contribution to global problems and that
distributes the burden for its solution in proportion to the contribution of
each State. What is more, the principle recognizes the different capacities
of technical, financial and human resources to face global issues, imposing
on the better-off States the legal and moral obligation of cooperation, with
regard to the transfer of resources in order to achieve the desired solution
to global environmental problems.
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
263
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
5 NEW ACTORS ON THE INTERNATIONAL STAGE
The subjects of IEL are the entities endowed with legal personality of
Interactional Law, which traditionally are the national States that, at least
until the middle of the 20th Century, were basically the European States
and those of the American continent. National states, as we know them
today, are basically constructions of European origin. After the decolonization process, countless African and Asian States joined the international community autonomously, claiming their own space for action. The
environmental issue, which arose in the 1970s at the international level,
certainly generates more conflicts between the former colonial powers and
the United States with the former colonies.
National States, together with International Organizations, even
though they are the main subjects of IEL, have been assisted by numerous
actors, whose roles in the construction and implementation of international
agreements are increasingly relevant. Some questions can explain the phenomenon, among which the following can be highlighted: (1) the national
States, as European construction, corresponded to the colonial powers and,
therefore, were in small numbers and they had to dictate the interactional order; (2) the decolonization process experienced in the 20th century
meant that new national states were added to the international scenario,
most of them without any relevant military, economic or political capacity; (3) the globalization process has meant that, from a concrete point of
view, intermediary groups have emerged in the international arena with
economic, financial, political and technical capacities that are often superior to those of the vast majority of States. The Washington consensus, a
set of economic measures2 to be adopted internationally, inspired by the
International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, contributed strongly to
the reduction of the role and size of States, with repercussions on the international scenario, leading to the strengthening of intermediary institutions.
Thus, there was a relativization of the role played by national states in the
international context, with the reduction of their protagonism.
In the specific field of IEL, the relativization of the role of States presents itself in a dramatic way, since most of the environmental issues are
regional or global, which determines that States must “relinquish” part
2 (1) fiscal discipline; (2) public spending focused primarily on health and education; (3) tax reform;
(4) raising interest rates; (5) currency appreciation; (6) opening up international trade; (7) facilitation
for foreign investments; (8) privatization of public companies; (9) deregulation of economic activity;
and, finally (10) respect for private property rights.
264
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
of their sovereignty so that, in collaboration with the other parties to international agreements, they can tackle cross-border pollution or protect
global biological diversity. This fact leads – as it has been seen in international practice – to the entry of new actors in the international legal scenario, which in a way has generated perplexities and misunderstandings
expressed in ultranationalist reactions against a supposed loss of national
sovereignty.
5.1 Non-governmental organizations
The participation of Non-Governmental Organizations in global society and international agreements is, as noted by Vernon I. TAVA (2015),
part of the globalization process and a consequence of the diminished role
of States, both domestically and internationally. Countless powers have
been “returned” to society, leading to the idea of governance at the expense
of government.
The second half of the twentieth century saw a profound change in international relations and, especially, regarding the environment. The great
international environmental accidents,3 the end of the cold war, the socalled international neoliberalism brought about by globalization, meant
that there was a dramatic increase in the exchange of information between
countries and people and groups, concomitant with an increase in the flow
of capital between the various countries, the accelerated development of
China and other Asian countries, with increasing needs for raw materials,
implied enormous pressure on natural resources, leading to the emergence
of what became known as global civil society that is basically composed
of NGOs, indigenous peoples, grassroots activists, etc. Such circumstances
had a profound impact on the formation of IEL and, notably, the legitimacy to participate in the different international decision-making processes
regarding the preparation of environmental agreements and their accompanying documents.
Global Governance is the sum of the different ways in which individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their common businesses.
3 As examples, it can be cited: (1) pollution and poisoning of fishermen by mercury in the bay of
Minamata, Japan in the 50s and 60s of the 20th century, the (2) large oil spills caused by the tankers
Torey Canyon and Amoco – Cádiz on the European coasts in the 1960s, the (3) release of chemicals
into the environment in Seveso in the 1970s, the (4) release of radiation by the nuclear power plant in
Three Mile Island, United States in the 1970s, the (5) chemical pollution in the Love Canal, United
States, 1980s, (6) release of chemicals into the environment in Bhopal, India with thousands of deaths,
in the 1980s, (6) explosion of the nuclear reactor in Chernobyl, ex -Soviet Union, in the 80s, among
many others.
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
265
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
It is an ongoing process by which diverse or conflicting interests can be
accommodated and cooperative actions taken. It includes formal institutions and strengthened regimes to ensure that commitments are observed,
as well as informal arrangements that people and institutions have agreed
to or perceived as of interest to them, as defined by the Global Governance
Commission in 1995. The Commission also understood that, at a global
level, governance, until then, had been understood as government activity,
however, since then, it has been seen as integrated by non-governmental organizations, citizens, movements, multinational companies and the
capital market, with the interaction of the international media. The main
criticism of global governance is that powers are certainly recognized for
entities that do not have the legitimacy of popular vote. In recent years, the
concept of governance has been challenged by nationalist movements that
question the “loss of sovereignty” and the growing bureaucratization of the
international order, as a result of multilateralism. However, it seems to be
evident that it is in multilateralism that developing countries find the best
way to express their common aspirations to the international community,
as it is the only way to balance power in the face of the superpowers.
5.1.1 Legitimation of NGOs
There is much perplexity when observing the participation of NGOs on
the international stage. However, there is a legal basis for such participation.
The United Nations Charter (article 71) provides that the Economic and
Social Council (ECOSOC) may consult with NGOs dedicated to the matters
within its competence, through agreements with international organizations
and, when applicable, with national organizations, after consulting with UN
member states. Resolution ECOSOC 1996/31 establishes the requirements
for an NGO to obtain consultative status, after certain requirements have
been met, with emphasis on the following: that (1) the NGO has among
its objectives a concern with issues within the competence of ECOSOC or
its subordinate bodies, that (2) the NGO’s objectives and purposes must
conform to the spirit, purposes and principles of the UN Charter, that (3)
the NGO supports UN action and promotes knowledge of its principles
and activities, as its objectives and area of operation. There are currently
more than 5,000 NGOs duly registered with ECOSOC. It should be noted
that NGOs are not exclusively civil associations formed by militants of
a public cause, as they are also admitted business associations formed to
266
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
defend legitimate business interests, as in the case of the World Business
Council for Sustainable Development. It is also important to note that
large international NGOs are global institutions that, to some extent, act in
accordance with their institutional and corporate interests. In any case, the
performance of NGOs is relevant, as they often operate in countries with
low levels of development and, therefore, lacking financial, human and
technological resources, compensating for these deficiencies.
NGOs are certainly controversial, as they are often accused of acting
for the benefit of foreign powers at the expense of the national interests of
the countries in which they operate. Although under the name of NGOs,
there are extremely disparate associations between them, in many sectors
and countries, environmental protection depends entirely on them. Entities
such as WWF, IUCN and so many others have provided invaluable services
to the cause of international protection of the environment, and it is certain
that, in many regions of the globe, their performance is indispensable.
There is, in a large part of the criticism of the NGOs’ actions, a nationalist rancidity and a mistaken view of economic development, unable to
understand the urgency of global protection of the environment.
5.2 Individuals and Civil Society
The so-called global civil society, composed of different actors, increasingly plays an important role in the international context. Civil society is a broad concept that encompasses numerous institutions of a diverse
nature, ranging from NGOs (aimed at protecting the environment and business) to informal associations, indigenous peoples and other minorities, as
well as transnational companies. Individuals have also been recognized for
the possibility of international action. Principle 1 of the Stockholm Declaration expressly recognizes the (fundamental) individual’s right to enjoy
adequate living conditions in an environment of such a quality that allows
this individual to lead a dignified life. The Rio Declaration, in its Principle
10, states that the best way to manage environmental issues is to ensure the
right of participation, in an appropriate manner, to all interested citizens.
At the inter-American level, the Protocol of San Salvador recognizes, in
Article 11 (1), the right of every person to live in a healthy environment,
equipped with basic public services.
For the exercise of participation rights, several international agreements were established. At European level, the matter is dealt with in the
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
267
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (ECE/UN) Convention
on Access to Information, Public Participation in the Decision-Making Process and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention)
that establishes the mechanisms for (1) access to information; (2) public
participation in decision-making processes; and (3) access to justice in environmental matters. In Latin America and the Caribbean, the Regional
Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation, and Access to
Justice in Environmental Affairs of 2018 (Escazú, Costa Rica) was signed.
Transnational private companies also deserve special attention from
IEL, being increasingly important actors. As noted by Doumbé-Billé et
al. (2013) large corporations play a twofold role in environmental terms,
either due to their polluting potential, or because of their technical and
financial capacity to offer solutions to environmental problems. The role
of companies was expressly recognized by the Johannesburg Declaration
(item 29), and the heads of state agreed with the need for private sector
corporations to implement their corporate responsibilities, in a transparent
and stable regulatory context.
5.3 International Organizations
According to the lessons of Dupuy and Viñales (2015), there are
four types of IO, according to the model of their legal creation and
their competences. The first (1) is formed by the entities created by a
constitutive treaty, with mandate and its main management bodies defined,
e.g., (a) International Maritime Organization, (b) World Meteorological
Organization and (c) Organization of United Nations for Food and
Agriculture. There are organizations (2) created by treaties, however, such
treaties do not have the constitution of an IO as primary objective, but the
standardization of a sector of international activity, such as, for example,
biological diversity; in these cases the institution is created to manage the
treaty or convention. Usually conferences of the parties or secretariats are
created. A third (3) model is a “by-product” of the previous two, leading to
the creation of subsidiary bodies to the agreements, as the case of UNGA or
the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). The fourth (4) model
of the International Organization is more informal, since they are not the
products of treaties or conventions, directly or indirectly. G20 can be
mentioned as an example4. International Organizations play an important
4 Informal group made up of the 19 richest countries in the world and the European Union.
268
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
role in articulating the international protection of the environment, since
the formation of consensus in the sense that protecting the environment
globally requires coordination between the different countries and
economic blocs.
6 THE LEGAL-ENVIRONMENTAL PRINCIPLES
The general principles of law are sources of law. Guido Fernandes
da Silva SOARES (2001) identifies five sources of law, namely: (1) Jus
Scriptum divided into (a) multilateral treaties and conventions on the environment and (b) acts of intergovernmental organizations; (2) international
custom; (3) the general principles of law; (4) International Doctrine and
(5) international jurisprudence. For the purposes of this article, only the
general principles of law will be examined, insofar as they contribute to
the study of IEL principles.
The Statute of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), in its article 38
(a) establishes that the ICJ will decide the cases based on international conventions, whether general or special, that stipulate rules that are expressly
recognized by the disputing States. In turn, the letters (b), (c) and (d) of the
same article, authorize ICJ to decide based on (b) international custom, as
proof of a general practice accepted as being right and in (c) general principles of law, recognized by civilized nations and, furthermore, (d) subject
to the provisions of article 59 of the ICJ Statute, judicial decisions and the
doctrine of the most qualified jurists from different nations as an auxiliary
means for determining the rules of law (ICJ, [s.d.]).
All the sources presented above are subject to the influence of factors
outside the law, such as, (1) scientific knowledge; (2) major environmental
accidents; (3) the environmental movement; and (4) the economic context.
Among the different IEL sources, the principles are the most controversial due to their enormous fluidity and tendency to constant expansion. It
aggravates the fact that, in matters of IEL, the word “principles” is used
differently in the various international agreements (DOUMBÉ-BILLÉ et
al., 2013).
6.1 General principles of law
In short, it can be said that the general principles of law aim to fill the
gap between the legal rule and the concrete reality (GARCIA, 2015). They
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
269
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
reflect the consolidation of legal practices and understandings that have
been used by the legal community for a long time, mirror the different
existing systems of law. The ultimate foundations of a given legal order
are called upon to intervene to provide a solution to a specific case if the
positive rule does not offer an evident solution. It should be remembered
that, among the sources of International Law recognized in the Statute, the
general principles of Law are the “most vague” (NASCIMENTO E SILVA,
2002).
However, after the end of the colonial cycle and the recognition of
local rights that were subjugated to the colonial order, the question remains: What Law do we speak of and what principles? The fact is that
the contemporary legal order, international or domestic, is kaleidoscopic
(HESPANHA, 2009).
The conception of law that serves as a basis for discussing general
principles is fundamentally the Western one and, in the IPL, that which resulted from colonial structures and the period immediately after the World
War 2. Such a situation is clearly expressed in Article 38 (1) (c) of the ICJ
Statute when recognizing as general principles of law only those of the
“civilized nations.” The norm, to all evidence, starts from the assumption
that the peoples submitted to the colonial regime did not have structures
of social control and organization of life in society that could be classified
as Law (KELSEN, 1979), let alone as “Civilized Law.” At this point, it is
worth recalling Soares’ (2001) observation that the drafters of the Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ), predecessor of
ICJ, in the inter-war period, “believed themselves to be representatives of
civilization in such a way” that they adjective general principles of law.
Kiss (1989) also adds that the concept of civilized nation is contested and
controversial.
Western law, the “law of civilized nations” is no longer as sovereign as
it was at the time of colonization or intended to be. Nowadays, the indigenous rights have been increasingly recognized, as for example, occurred
in the so-called Mabo cases (1 and 2), judged by the Australian Supreme
Court, involving lands belonging to the Merian people, an aboriginal group
that postulated rights over the Murray Islands, considered nullius land
(HCOURT, 2019). In Mabo (1) the Australian Supreme Court declared that
Australian lands, before the arrival of the English colonists, were not terrae nullius, and the Merian people were their rightful owner. In Mabo (2)
the Court adopted the doctrine of the native title of property, recognizing
270
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
that the aborigines were legitimately expropriated from their traditional
lands, admitting the existence of a plural legal order (HESPANHA, 2013).
At the international level, Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples (ILO Convention) recognizes
peoples “whose social, cultural and economic conditions distinguish them
from other sectors of the national community, and which are governed,
totally or partially, by their own customs or traditions” (article 1 (1) (a).
The exclusive model of Western law is no longer supported, as anthropology shows us that any society, however “barbaric” and “primitive” it
may be, brings with it a sense of order, without which “there is no humanity possible” (ASSIER-ANDRIEU, 2000, p. 98), nor law. The multiplicity
of Rights is now a recognized fact and, therefore, the definition of a set of
general principles valid for each legal system is an increasingly difficult, if
not impossible, task. It follows that the simple recognition of the general
principles of law “of civilized nations” is anachronism incompatible with
modern reality.
6.1.1 Principles in IEL
As Alexandre Kiss warns us with regard to IEL, the legislative texts
“swarm” (1989), and it is necessary for its principles to be identified that
there is a consolidation of such documents, with exhaustive research in
order to identify the ideas underlying them.
The term “principle” has spread widely in international environmental
law, being used interchangeably in documents with varying legal force.
For the purposes of this article, the 1972 Stockholm Declaration, which
contains 26 principles, is considered as the first major international document to deal with IEL principles. In turn, the 1992 Rio Declaration contains 27, as noted by Handl (2012). It seems evident that such a proliferation of principles, even if proclaimed through non-mandatory documents,
indicates that care is taken more about affirming political guidelines than
legal norms. It is noteworthy that the Preamble of the English version of
the Stockholm Declaration speaks of “common principles to inspire and
guide” the peoples, which indicates their inexhaustible guiding nature and
no more than that. The Rio Declaration is ambiguous, because despite proclaiming 27 principles, it establishes that principles 15 (precaution) and 16
(polluter pays) are, according to the English language, “approaches”5 that
5 The Portuguese language versions adopted by Brazil inexplicably translate approach by principle.
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
271
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
should be considered by the national authorities. It seems clear that the
major environmental conferences, aware of their political and legal limitations, did not use the word principle, as equivalent to “general principles
of law” as specified by Article 38, (1) (c) of the ICJ Statute. In fact, such
care is clear in the wording of principles 15 and 16 of the Rio Declaration,
with the inclusion of the word “approach” in the original version, which
also occurs in the French version that uses the term “mesures” (measures)
(ANTUNES, 2016).
Environmental agreements also reflect the ambiguity already mentioned. The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants uses
the word approach (article 1), although it refers to Principle 15 of the Rio
Declaration; the CBD, in turn, using the word principle (article 3), does so
in a traditional way, indicating principles fully established in the IPL, such
as: (1) sovereignty, “ States, in accordance with the United Nations Charter
and with the principles of international law, have the sovereign right to exploit their own resources in accordance with their environmental policies,”
(2) international responsibility, “responsibility to ensure that activities under their jurisdiction or control do not harm the environment of other States
or areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.”
Therefore, principle in IEL, it is a polysemic word whose legal value
corresponds to that of the international document in which it is inserted.
However, it is important to note that there is no consensus in international
legal doctrine on (1) the number of principles of International Environmental Law; and (2) on what are the IEL principles. However, the political difficulties that are usually present in the elaboration of international
agreements recommend the adoption of open formulas. The more difficult
the negotiation, the more open the document that will emerge from it.
It is possible, therefore, to observe that in environmental agreements
with mandatory force (treaties and conventions) the use of the term principle tends to be made in a conservative and traditional way, being limited
to consensual concepts. On the other hand, when it comes to declarations,
political text and no legal force, the expansion of principles seems to be
the rule.
Thus, the cogent agreements recognize principles such as: (1) the principle of sovereignty over natural resources and of not causing damage to
third states, goods or people; (2) principle of cooperation; (3) principle
of common but differentiated responsibility; (4) the principle of sustainable development. Political declarations, in turn, embrace broader and
272
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
more controversial principles such as (1) the precautionary principle; and
(2) polluter pays principle. Ultimately, the existence of a list of principles
within the framework of international agreements, as defined by the Permanent Court of Justice in the famous Lotus Case, depends on the will
freely manifested by the States. At this point, it is convenient to recall
the acid criticism formulated by Martine Rèmond-Gouilloud (1989, p. 37)
when talking about an “inflation of false sources” and of “great formulas”
that, although well-constructed, have no mandatory force. Thus, it is important to avoid a principled metastasis that will be of little use, if any, for
the effective application of International Environmental Law.
CONCLUSIONS
IEL is a new branch of IPL that has established itself in the last decades as one of the most innovative instruments for protecting the environment on a global level. It has been constituted over the past 50 years from
concrete demands that originate in the phenomenon of transboundary pollution, whose first recognition happens before the second half of the 20th
century, resulting from the dispute between two developed countries. The
international responsibility of States for damages caused to third parties,
due to pollution from their territory, is now widely accepted. However,
the disparity between the different members of the international community meant that the concept of international responsibility was mitigated in
order to understand that there is a responsibility of all States for environmental protection, which, however, must be proportional to the pollution
caused by each Individually considered State and, equally, to its different
capacities to face it. Here, one should not forget the question of the sovereignty of States over their natural resources, recognized in mandatory
agreements.
International experience has proven the practical impossibility of
addressing the environmental issue in a unitary manner, generating the
sectorialization of agreements, either by geographic regions or by thematic
area. However, the multiplicity of agreements creates concrete difficulties
for their implementation, given the lack of harmonization between them,
in addition to political, social and economic factors. The construction of
specific bodies for the management and implementation of the agreements is
another important point of IEL. The structural changes in global economies
under the aegis of the Washington consensus, with the weakening of state
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
273
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
entities, brought new actors to the international scene (NGOs, indigenous
peoples, etc.) that, in environmental matters, play a relevant role, as well
as multinational corporations.
IEL is a principled right, that is, it tends to resort to open principles
as a way of accommodating different views on the environment. The principles, however, will be consistent or not, depending on the nature of the
international document in which they are inserted. Therefore, there is no
need to talk about principles with equal legal value.
The diverse particularities of IEL certainly elevate it to the dignity of
an autonomous branch of IPL that gains importance in the modern world.
The new conceptions related to development, the participation of society
and sovereignty are relevant, as they seek accommodation between States
with great differences between them, which, effectively, need to be minimized so that there can be peace between nations and that, through cooperation, serious environmental and social problems can be adequately
managed in multilateral fora.
IEL, however, is still an immature Law, as its structures still lack the
necessary consolidation and stability that allow the Law to offer security
to the parties. Finally, it concerns a Law that is a hope for a peaceful solution to the serious environmental problems that plague the planet, as well
as a hope for an egalitarian understanding between nations, with a view to
solving their common problems.
REFERENCES
AIATSIS – AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER STUDIES. Mabo case. Acton: AIATSIS, 2019.
Available at: https://aiatsis.gov.au/explore/articles/mabo-case. Access on:
Sept. 22, 2019.
ACIDENTE NUCLEAR em Three Mile Island, Estados Unidos. Energia Nuclear, 2 maio 2019. Available at: https://pt.energia-nuclear.net/acidentes-nucleares/three-mile-island.html. Access on: Sept. 23, 2019.
ANTUNES, P. B. Dano ambiental: uma abordagem conceitual. 2. ed. São
Paulo: Atlas, 2015.
ANTUNES, P. B. Precautionary Principle on Brazilian Environmental
Law. Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v. 13, n. 27, p. 63-88, set./dez.
2016. Available at: http://www.domhelder.edu. br/revista/index.php/veredas/article/view/877. Access on: July 7, 2019.
274
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
ASSIER-ANDRIEU, L. O Direito nas Sociedades Humanas. São Paulo:
Martins Fontes. 2000.
BRASIL. Câmara dos Deputados. Decreto Legislativo n. 144, de 2002.
Aprova o texto do Protocolo de Quioto à Convenção-Quadro das Nações
Unidas sobre Mudança do Clima, aberto a assinaturas na cidade de Quioto, Japão, em 14 de dezembro de 1997, por ocasião da Terceira Conferência das Partes da Convenção-Quadro das Nações Unidas sobre Mudança do Clima. Brasília, DF: Câmara dos Deputados, 2002. Available
at:
https://www2.camara.leg.br/legin/fed/decleg/2002/decretolegislativo-144-20-junho-2002-458772-protocolo-1-pl.html. Access on: Mar. 24,
2020.
BRASIL. Ministério do Meio Ambiente. Convenção de Viena e Protocolo de Montreal. Available at: http://www.mma.gov.br/clima/protecao-da-camada-de-ozonio/convencao-de-viena-e-protocolo-de-montreal.
Access on: July 9, 2019.
BRASIL. Ministério das Relações Exteriores. Atos Internacionais. Available at: http://www.itamaraty.gov.br/pt-BR/663-atos-internacionais. Access on: Mar. 26, 2020.
CALVO, T. L. Derecho Internacional del Medio Ambiente. Barcelona:
Atelier, 2005.
CARSON, R. Primavera silenciosa. São Paulo: Gaia, 2010.
CMED – COMISSÃO MUNDIAL SOBRE MEIO AMBIENTE E DESENVOLVIMENTO. Nosso futuro comum. Rio de Janeiro: Fundação Getúlio Vargas, 1988.
CORNWALL, A.; EADE, D. (Eds.). Deconstructing development discourse – buzzwords and fuzzwords. Oxford: Practical Action, 2010.
DOUMBÉ-BILLÉ, S. et al. Droit International de L`Environnement.
Bruxelles: Larcier, 2013.
DUPUY, P.-M.; VIÑALES, J. E. Introduction au Droit International de
L’environnement. Bruxelles: Bruylant. 2015.
EARTH CHARTER INITIATIVE. Available at: http://earthcharter.org/#.
Access on: Sept. 26, 2019.
EBLEN, R. A.; EBLEN, W. R. (Eds.). The Encyclopedia of the Environment
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
275
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
– The René Dubos Center for Human Environment. Boston; New York:
Houghton Mifflin Company, 1994.
ESCALA INES – Escala Internacional de Eventos Nucleares. Energia
Nuclear, 2019. Available at: https://pt.energia-nuclear.net/acidentes-nucleares/escala-ines.html. Access on: Sept. 23, 2019.
FUNDO AMAZÔNIA. Available at: http://www.fundoamazonia.gov.br/
pt/home/. Access on: Sept. 24, 2019.
GARCIA, M. G. O lugar do Direito na proteção do ambiente. Coimbra:
Almedina, 2015.
HANDL, G. Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the HUMAN
ENVIRONMENT (Stockholm Declaration), 1972 and the Rio Declaration
on Environment and Development, 1992, (2012). Available at: http://legal.
un.org/avl/pdf/ha/dunche/dunche_e.pdf. Access on: Sept. 24, 2019.
HANNIGAN, J. Environmental sociology. 3. ed. London; New York:
Routledge, 2014.
HCOURT – HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA. Available at: http://www.
hcourt.gov.au/. Access on: Sept. 6, 2019.
HESPANHA, A. M. O caleidoscópio do Direito: o Direito e a Justiça nos
dias e no mundo de hoje. 2. ed. Coimbra: Almedina, 2009.
HESPANHA, A. M. Pluralismo jurídico e Direito democrático. São Paulo:
Annablume. 2013.
ICJ – INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE. Statute of the International Court of Justice. Available at: https://www.icj-cij.org/en/statute. The
Hague: ICJ, [s.d.]. Access on: Sept. 22, 2019.
ICJ – INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE. Affaire du lotus. Recueil
des Arreêts, Série A, n. 70, 7 Sept. 1927. Available at: https://www.icj-cij.
org/files/permanent-court-of-international-justice/serie_A/A_10/30_Lotus_Arret.pdf. Access on: Sept. 23, 2019.
ICJ – INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE. Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia). Available at: https://www.icj-cij.org/en/
case/92. The Hague: ICJ, 1992. Access on: Sept. 22, 2019.
KELSEN, H. Teoria pura do Direito. 4. ed. Coimbra: Armênio Amado,
1979.
276
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
KISS, A. Droit International de L`Environnement. Paris: Pedone, 1989.
LAVIELLE, J.-M.; DELZANGLES, H.; LE BRIS, C. Droit International
de l’Environnement. 4. ed. Paris: Ellipses, 2018.
MALJEAN-DUBOIS, S. Quel Droit pour L’environnement? Paris:
Hachette, 2008.
McCORMICK, J. Rumo ao paraíso: a história do movimento ambientalista. Rio de Janeiro: Relume Dumará. 1992.
MEADOWS, D. H. M. et al. Limites do crescimento. São Paulo: Perspectiva, 1977.
MORAND-DEVILLER, J. Le Droit de L’Environnement. 10. ed. Paris:
PUF, 2010.
NASCIMENTO E SILVA, G. E. Direito Ambiental Internacional. 2. ed.
Rio de Janeiro: Thex, 2002.
ONU – ORGANIZAÇÃO DAS NAÇÕES UNIDAS. Declaração do Rio
sobre Meio Ambiente e Desenvolvimento. Rio de Janeiro: ONU, 1992.
Available
at:
https://cetesb.sp.gov.br/proclima/wp-content/uploads/
sites/36/2013/12/declaracao_rio_ma.pdf. Access on: Sept. 25, 2019.
ONU – ORGANIZAÇÃO DAS NÇÕES UNIDAS. Declaração de Estocolmo sobre o ambiente humano. Estocolmo: ONU, 1972. Available at: http://
www.direitoshumanos.usp.br/index.php/meio-ambiente/declaracao-de-estocolmo-sobre-o-ambiente-humano.html. Access on: Sept. 25, 2019.
PEPPER, D. Ambientalismo moderno. Lisboa: Instituto Piaget, 2000.
REI, F. C. F. International Environmental Law and global environmental
governance: southern influences. Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.
15, n. 32, p. 143-165, maio/ago. 2018. Available at: http://www.domhelder.edu.br/revista/index.php/veredas/article/view/1257. Access on: June
29, 2019.
RÈMOND-GOUILLOUD, M. Du Droit de Détruire: essai sur le Droit de
L`Environnement. Paris: PUF. 1989
REZEK, F. Direito Internacional Público: curso elementar. 9. ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2002.
ROMI, R. Droit de LÈnvironnement. 7. ed. Paris: Montchrestien, 2010.
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
277
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: PARTICULARITIES
SAKAGUCHI, K. Para resolver o problema do metil-mercúrio na Amazônia. Japan International Cooperation Agency, 12 ago. 2010. Available
at: https://www.jica.go.jp/brazil/portuguese/office/articles/100812.html.
Access on: Sept. 20, 2019.
SANDS, P.; PEEL, J. Principles of International Law. 3. ed. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2017.
SOARES, G. F. S. Direito Internacional do Meio Ambiente: emergência,
obrigações e responsabilidades. São Paulo: Atlas, 2001.
TAVA, V. I. The role of non-governmental organizsations, peoples and
courts in implementing international environmental laws. In: ALAM, S. et
al. (Eds.). Routledge handbook of International Environmental Law. London; New York: Routledge, 2015. P. 123-136.
United Nations. Introduction to ECOSOC Consultative Status. Available
at: http://csonet.org/?menu=30. Access on: Sept. 26, 2019.
UNITED NATIONS. Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources General Assembly Resolution 1803 (XVII). New York, 14 dec. 1962. Available
at: http://legal.un.org/avl/ha/ga_1803/ga_1803.html. Access on: Sept. 26,
2019.
UNITED NATIONS. General Assembly – Quick Links. Available at:
https://research.un.org/en/docs/ga/quick/regular/44. Access on: Sept. 25,
2019.
UNITED NATIONS. United Nations Environment Programme. Global
Environment Outlook 6, 4 Mar. 2019a. Available at: https://www.unenvironment.org/resources/global-environment-outlook-6. Access on: Sept.
24, 2019.
UNITED NATIONS. LDCs at a Glance. Available at: https://www.un.org/
development/desa/dpad/least-developed-country-category/ldcs-at-aglance.html. Access on: Sept. 26, 2019b.
UNITED NATIONS. United Nations Environment Programme. Register of international treaties and other agreements in the field of the environment. Nairobi: UNEP, 2005. Available at: https://www.unenvironment.org/resources/report/register-international-treaties-and-other-agreements-field-environment. Access on: Sept. 25, 2019.
278
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
Paulo de Bessa Antunes
UNITED NATIONS. Trail smelter case (United States, Canada): 16 April
1938 and March 1941. Reports of International Arbitral Awards, v. III, p.
1905-1982, 2006. Available at: https://www.ecolex.org/details/court-decision/trail-smelter-case-united-states-v-canada-b86fd680-d04e-4245-a1c244a1191170c0/. Access on: Sept. 22, 2019.
VARELLA M. D. O surgimento e a evolução do Direito Internacional do
Meio Ambiente: da proteção da natureza ao desenvolvimento sustentável.
In: VARELLA, M. D.; BARROS-PLAUTAU, A. F. (Orgs.). Proteção internacional do meio ambiente. Brasília: Unitar/UniCEUB/ UnB, 2009. p.
6-25.
Article received on: 07/11/2019.
Article accepted on: 02/11/2020.
How to mention this article (ABNT):
ANTUNES, P. B. International Environmental Law: particularities. Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v. 17, n. 37, p. 249-279, Jan.-Apr. 2020.
Available at: http://www.domhelder.edu.br/revista/index.php/veredas/article/view/1494. Access on: Month day, year.
Veredas do Direito, Belo Horizonte, v.17 n.37 p.249-279 Janeiro/Abril de 2020
279