Después de la ratificación de México, el Acuerdo de Escazú, que promete más participación y acceso a la justicia en temas ambientales, entra en vigor. . . . El Acuerdo de Escazú es el primero tratado ambiental de América Latina y el Cariba. Se abrió para firmas el 27 de septiembre de 2018 en las Naciones Unidas. Promete una participación más amplia en decisiones ambientales y el acceso a la justicia para víctimas de daños ambientales. También incluye protecciones importantes para personas defensoras de los derechos ambientales. El Acuerdo de Escazú entrará en vigor 90 días después de la 11ª ratificación. Los expertos elogiaron a los 11 países que ratificaron el acuerdo: Antigua y Barbuda, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, Guyana, Nicaragua, México, Panamá, San Vicente y las Granadinas, San Cristóbal y Nieves y Uruguay.
After Mexico's ratification, the Escazú Agreement, which promises more participation and access to justice in environmental matters, enters into force. . . . The Escazú Agreement is the first environmental treaty in Latin America and the Caribbean. It was opened for signature on September 27, 2018 at the United Nations. It promises broader participation in environmental decisions and access to justice for victims of environmental damage. It also includes important protections for environmental rights defenders. The Escazú Agreement will enter into force 90 days after the 11th ratification. The experts praised the 11 countries that ratified the agreement: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, Guyana, Nicaragua, Mexico, Panama, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saint Kitts and Nevis and Uruguay. (Business and Human Rights.org HERE)
This Regional Treaty is particularly interesting for its alignment with the UN's Sustainability Development Goals, as well as the efforts to align environmental objectives with the sensibilities of human rights discourse and objectives. There is a nod, as well, to issues of development, and to multilateralism post Globalization. Also, as is customary within Latin-American legal-political cultures, the focus and emphasis of duty (and here responsibility as well) rests with the state. It is a pity that the great institutions of civil organizations--nongovernmental and business remain supplementary figures in this scheme. A useful provision, Article 23, waives rights to reservations, which provides a n important contribution to transnational coherence. And the provisions on human rights defenders in environmental matters is significant. Lastly, the access to justice provisions provide a clear and principled baseline against which the non-regression principle and principle of progressive realization (Article 3( c)) may be applied.
Most innovative, for me, is the character of Acuerdo de Escazú as a political document--that is as an agreement about the baseline principles for collaborative democracy within a Western liberal democratic tradition. Public participation has not been a strong element of Western democratic and constitutional theory, which centers the issue of voting in representative democracies at the core of its political structures and legitimacy. Participation was understood as a structural but consequential element--those who vote participate, but more granular participation was viewed either with suspicion (corruption, cronyism, privilege, class, etc.) or as inherent in civil and association rights that would itself serve as the basis for access driven by markets for votes. The result was that participation was devolved onto the electorate (and institutions) who were understood as the active elements of this aspect of democratic operation. State state had no positive obligation (just a negative obligation to avoid constraining the exercise of the right except under law and in a neutral way). The Acuerdo de Escazú appears to try to center the focus of the operation of democratic states not in the act of voting but in the right of participation. More specifically, it appears to create positive (constitutional level) obligations of the state--at least with respect to human-rights-environment (though there is no reason its principles cannot be general expanded)--to facilitate, to ensure the exercise of participation rights. Those rights can be exercised at every stage of decision making. Taken to its limit, this has the potential of substantially re-creating the performance of democratic governance in the West. Effectively it might push western liberal democracy from a primary reliance on attributes of exogenous democratic practice (voting) to endogenous democracy (deep participation in the decision making by state organs) (Cf. Here for Marxist Leninist notions of endogenous democracy; Backer, Larry Catá and Dai, Miaoqiang, Socialist Constitutional Democracy in the Age of Accountability (问责时代的社会主义宪制民主) (October 23, 2018). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3271731 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3271731).
Este Tratado Regional es particularmente interesante por su alineación con los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible de la ONU, así como por los esfuerzos para alinear los objetivos ambientales con la sensibilidad del discurso y los objetivos de derechos humanos. También se hace un guiño a las cuestiones de desarrollo y al multilateralismo posterior a la globalización. Además, como es habitual en las culturas jurídico-políticas latinoamericanas, el enfoque y énfasis del deber (y aquí también la responsabilidad) recae en el Estado. Es una lástima que las grandes instituciones de las organizaciones civiles, no gubernamentales y empresariales, sigan siendo figuras complementarias en este esquema. Una disposición útil, el artículo 23, renuncia al derecho a las reservas, lo que proporciona una importante contribución a la coherencia transnacional. Y las disposiciones sobre defensores de derechos humanos en materia ambiental es significativa. Por último, las disposiciones sobre acceso a la justicia proporcionan una línea de base clara y basada en principios contra la cual se puede aplicar el principio de no regresión y el principio de realización progresiva (artículo 3 (c)).
De mi parte, lo más innovador es el carácter del Acuerdo de Escazú como documento político, es decir, como un acuerdo sobre los principios básicos para la democracia colaborativa dentro de una tradición democrática liberal occidental. La participación pública no ha sido un elemento fuerte de la teoría democrática y constitucional occidental, que centra el tema del voto en las democracias representativas en el centro de sus estructuras políticas y su legitimidad. La participación se entendía como un elemento estructural pero consecuente: quienes votan participan, pero la participación más granular se veía con sospecha (corrupción, amiguismo, privilegio, clase, etc.) o como inherente a los derechos civiles y de asociación que en sí mismos servirían como la base para el acceso impulsado por los mercados de votos. El resultado fue que la participación pasó al electorado (y las instituciones), entendidos como elementos activos de este aspecto del funcionamiento democrático. Estado Estado no tenía ninguna obligación positiva (solo una obligación negativa de evitar restringir el ejercicio del derecho excepto bajo la ley y de manera neutral). El Acuerdo de Escazú parece intentar centrar el enfoque del funcionamiento de los estados democráticos no en el acto de votar sino en el derecho de participación. Más específicamente, parece crear obligaciones positivas (a nivel constitucional) del Estado, al menos con respecto a los derechos humanos y el medio ambiente (aunque no hay razón para que sus principios no puedan ampliarse en general), para facilitar, garantizar el ejercicio de los derechos de participación. Estos derechos pueden ejercerse en todas las etapas de la toma de decisiones. Llevado al límite, esto tiene el potencial de recrear sustancialmente el desempeño de la gobernabilidad democrática en Occidente. Efectivamente, podría empujar a la democracia liberal occidental de una dependencia primaria en los atributos de la práctica democrática exógena (votación) a la democracia endógena (participación profunda en la toma de decisiones de los órganos estatales) (Cf. aquí para las nociones marxistas leninistas de democracia endógena Backer, Larry Catá and Dai, Miaoqiang, Socialist Constitutional Democracy in the Age of Accountability (问责时代的社会主义宪制民主) (October 23, 2018). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3271731 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3271731). ).
The Preface to the Acuerdo, written by Alicia Bárcena, Executive Secretary Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) follows. ECLAC will play an important role in the elaboration and implementation of the Acuerdo going forward. The Acuerdo Text may be accessed HERE:
- English
- languageSpanish
- languagePortuguese
- languageFrench
- languageQuechua
On 4 March 2018, the Latin American and Caribbean region made history when it adopted the Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean, at Escazú, Costa Rica.
Initiated at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) and rooted in the tenets of Principle 10 of the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the Regional Agreement is the fruit of a two-year preparatory phase and nine intense meetings of its negotiating committee. Led by Chile and Costa Rica, as co-chairs, and five other Presiding Officers (Argentina, Mexico, Peru, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago), the negotiations brought together government delegates, representatives of the public, experts, academics and other interested stakeholders who participated actively on a collaborative basis and an equal footing.
The result of such an innovative process could not be more inspiring. At a time of increasing uncertainty and profound economic, social and environmental imbalances, and when multilateralism is under intense scrutiny, Latin American and Caribbean countries demonstrated the value of regional action. To advance towards greater environmental rights and protection at the local level, our countries decided to act in a regionally coordinated manner, putting capacity-building and cooperation at the service of greater collective goods and interests.
The Regional Agreement is a ground-breaking legal instrument for environmental protection, but it is also a human rights treaty. Its main beneficiaries are the people of our region, particularly the most vulnerable groups and communities. It aims to ensure the right of all persons to have access to information in a timely and appropriate manner, to participate significantly in making the decisions that affect their lives and their environment, and to access justice when those rights have been infringed. The treaty recognizes the rights of all individuals, provides measures to facilitate their exercise and, most importantly, establishes mechanisms to render them effective.
Visionary and unprecedented, it is an agreement reached by and for Latin America and the Caribbean, reflecting the ambition, priorities and particularities of our region. It addresses key aspects of environmental management and protection from a regional perspective, regulating access rights to information, public participation and justice in matters as important as the sustainable use of natural resources, biodiversity conservation, the fight against land degradation and climate change, and building resilience to disasters. It also includes the world’s first binding provision on human rights defenders in environmental matters in a region where sadly they are all too often subject to attacks and intimidation.
From a rights-based approach, the Agreement recognizes core democratic principles and seeks to address the region’s most important challenges, namely the scourge of inequality and a deep-rooted culture of privilege. Through transparency, openness and participation, the Regional Agreement contributes to the shift towards a new development model and tackles the region’s inefficient and unsustainable culture of narrow, fragmented interests. In that vein, the Agreement vows to include those that have traditionally been underrepresented, excluded or marginalized and give a voice to the voiceless, leaving no one behind.
With this Agreement, our region is also setting a shining example of how to balance the three dimensions of sustainable development. By engaging the public in all decisions that affect them and establishing a new relationship between the State, the market and society, our countries are refuting the false dichotomy between environmental protection and economic development. Growth cannot take place at the expense of the environment and the environment cannot be managed if our economies and peoples are ignored. Legal certainty and trust in public institutions are also crucial to sustainable development. Such interlinkage and interdependence, recognized in the Regional Agreement, makes the first regional treaty of ECLAC an invaluable tool for achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
The strong regional commitment to environmental protection and human rights is expected to lead to the Regional Agreement’s prompt entry into force. By joining this landmark treaty, the 33 countries of Latin America and the Caribbean will not only continue to strengthen environmental democracy, but will also move a step closer towards making equality, sound economic growth and sustainable development for all a reality.
Alicia Bárcena
Executive Secretary Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
No comments:
Post a Comment