The Exploration of Some Challenges and Limitations of the Application of International Law on State Responsibility in the Context of Transboundary Pollution
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The international legal principles governing State responsibility can be applied to the issues of environmental damage, including transboundary pollution. Due to the fact that the number of cases which have been brought to international courts and tribunals relating to State responsibility is sparse, this could create uncertainties regarding the application of such principles. When applying these rules to environmental matters some theoretical problems remains unresolved, since problems of pollution and transboundary environmental damage have distinctive characteristics which can be distinguished from other general issues in international law. This article attempts to provide explanations of some difficulties and challenges in the application of international rules on state responsibility in an environmental context. Such challenges include, for example, the issue of actions or omissions that are attributable to the State, the issue of the constitution of a breach of an international obligation, the issue of the definition of the term “damage”, the issue of causation and the issue of bringing a case before international courts and tribunals for a breach of erga omes obligations.
Article Details
-
Any opinions expressed in the CMU Journal of Law and Social Sciences are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial board.
-
The editorial board of the CMU Journal of Law and Social Sciences does not claim copyright. However, proper citation of the source is required.
References
Boyle, A. (1990). State Responsibility and Liability for Injurious Consequences of Acts not Prohibited by International Law: A Necessary Distinction. International Comparative Law Quarterly, 33, 1.
Boyle, A. and Harrison J. (2013). Judicial Settlement of International Environmental Disputes: Current Problems. Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 4 245.
Burkett, M. (2014). Loss and Damage. Climate Law, 4, 119.
Crawford, J. (2002). The International Law Commissions Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text and Commentaries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
____¬¬¬¬____. (2013). State Responsibility: The General Part. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fitzmaurice, M. (2010). Necessity in International Environmental Law. Netherlands Yearbook of International Law, 41, 159.
Gray, C. (2015). Current Development: The 2014 Judicial Activity of the ICJ. American Journal of International Law, 109, 583.
Harimoto, Y. (2014). The ICJ Judgment on the Whaling Case: Some Reflections. AALCO Journal of International Law, 3, 31.
Linderfalk, U. (2009). State Responsibility and the Primary-Secondary Rules Terminology – The Role of Language for an Understanding of the International Legal System. Nordic Journal of International Law, 78, 53.
Okowa, P. (1998). Environmental Dispute Settlement: Some Reflections on Recent Developments. In Malcolm, D. Evans. (Ed.), Remedies in International Law: The Institutional Dilemma. Oxford: Oxford Hart.
Peel, J. (2017). Climate Change. In Nollkaemper, André., & Plakokefalos, Ilias. & Schechinger, Jessica. (Eds.), The Practice of Shared Responsibility in International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Peel, J. (2015). Unpacking the Elements of State Responsibility Claim for Transboundary Pollution. In Jayakumar, S. et al. (Eds.), Transboundary Pollution: Evolving Issues of International Law and Policy. Glos: Edward Elgar.
Redgwell, C. (2013). The Wrong Trousers: State Responsibility and International Environmental Law. In Koutrakos, P. & Evans, M. (Eds.), The International Responsibility of the European Union – European and International Perspectives. UK: Hart Publishing.
Sand, P. (1992). Transnational Environmental Disputes. In Bardonnet, Daniel. (Ed.), Le Règlement Pacifique des Différends Internationaux en Europe: Perspectives D'avenir (127). Natherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
________ . (2005). Compensation for Environmental Damage from the 1991 Gulf War. Environmenal Law and Policy, 35, 244.
Simma, B. (1994). From Bilateralism to Community Interest in International Law. Recueil des Cours, 250, 217.
Stephens, T. (2004). The Limits of International Adjudication in International Environmental Law: Another Perspective on the Southern Bluefin Tuna Case. International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 19, 177.
Tol, R. and Verheyen, R. (2004). State Responsibility and Compensation for Climate
Change Damage- A Legal and Economic Assessment. Energy Policy, 32, 1109.
Tomuschat, C. (1999). International Law: Ensuring the Survival of Mankind on the Eve of a New Century. Recueil de Cours, 281, 1.
Voigt, C. (2008). State Responsibility for Climate Change Damages. Nordic Journal of International Law, 77, 1.
Vicuña, F. (2002). Current Trends in Responsibility and Liability for Environmental Harm under International Law. In Koufa, Kalliopi. (Ed.), Protection of the Environment for the New Millennium: Thesaurus Acroasium Vol XXXI. Sakkoulas Publications.
Zimmermann, A. (2014). Between the Quest for Universality and its Limited Jurisdiction: The Role of the International Court of Justice in Enhancing the International Rule of Law In Giorgio, Gaja & Jenny Grote Stoutenburg (Eds.), Enhancing the Rule of Law Through the International Court of Law. Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Cases Law
Advisory Opinion on Responsibilities and Obligations of States Sponsoring Persons and Entities with Respect to Activities in the Area (2011) ITLOS, Seabed Disputes Chamber, (2011) 50 ILM 458.
Case Concerning Factory at Chorzów (Germany v Poland) (Claim for Indemnity; Merits) (1927) 9 PCIJ (Ser A) No 12.
Case Concerning Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay) (Judgment) [2010] ICJ Rep 14.
Case Concerning the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia) (Judgment) [1997] ICJ Rep 7.
Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Advisory Opinion) [1996] ICJ Rep 226.
MOX Plant Case (No.10) (Ireland v. United Kingdom) (Provisional Measures, Order of 3 December 2001) ITLOS Reports 2001, (2003) 126 ILR 310.
Question relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal) (Merits) [2012] ICJ Rep 422.
Responsibilities and Obligations of States Sponsoring Persons and Entities with respect to Activities in the Area (1 February 2011).
Trail Smelter (USA v Canada), Award RIAA 1911.
Trail Smelter Arbitration (US v. Canada) (1941) 3 RIAA 1907.
