Requests for internal review and the revised Aarhus Regulation

Attila Pánovics
{"title":"Requests for internal review and the revised Aarhus Regulation","authors":"Attila Pánovics","doi":"10.15170/studia.2023.01.08","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the development of EU law in the context of access to justice guaranteed under the Aarhus Convention. It considers how the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Compliance Committee of the Convention (ACCC) interpret obligations arising under Article 9(3) of the Convention. When the EU ratified the Convention in 2005 it committed to guaranteeing broad access to justice in environmental matters at both national and Union levels. Until now, the 2006 Aarhus Regulation is the sole piece of EU legislation outside the provisions of the Treaties that was adopted for the purpose of providing the basis for access to justice in environmental matters at Union level. Unfortunately, the internal review procedure set out by the 2006 Aarhus Regulation has been interpreted so restrictively by the Court of Justice of the EU that its added value in striving for better access to courts remained ephemeral. The article discusses the findings of the ACCC on the EU’s non-compliance with Article 9(3) of the Convention, and highlights the recent legislative activities at EU level relating to access to justice in environmental matters. The application of the revised Aarhus Regulation will demonstrate whether the European Union has duly implemented its international obligations regarding access to justice in environmental matters.","PeriodicalId":231331,"journal":{"name":"Essays of Faculty of Law University of Pécs, Yearbook of [year]","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Essays of Faculty of Law University of Pécs, Yearbook of [year]","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15170/studia.2023.01.08","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines the development of EU law in the context of access to justice guaranteed under the Aarhus Convention. It considers how the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Compliance Committee of the Convention (ACCC) interpret obligations arising under Article 9(3) of the Convention. When the EU ratified the Convention in 2005 it committed to guaranteeing broad access to justice in environmental matters at both national and Union levels. Until now, the 2006 Aarhus Regulation is the sole piece of EU legislation outside the provisions of the Treaties that was adopted for the purpose of providing the basis for access to justice in environmental matters at Union level. Unfortunately, the internal review procedure set out by the 2006 Aarhus Regulation has been interpreted so restrictively by the Court of Justice of the EU that its added value in striving for better access to courts remained ephemeral. The article discusses the findings of the ACCC on the EU’s non-compliance with Article 9(3) of the Convention, and highlights the recent legislative activities at EU level relating to access to justice in environmental matters. The application of the revised Aarhus Regulation will demonstrate whether the European Union has duly implemented its international obligations regarding access to justice in environmental matters.
要求内部审查和修订的《奥胡斯条例》
本文考察了欧盟法律在《奥胡斯公约》保障的诉诸司法方面的发展。它考虑了欧盟法院和《公约》合规委员会(ACCC)如何解释根据《公约》第9(3)条产生的义务。当欧盟在2005年批准该公约时,它承诺保证在国家和欧盟层面的环境问题上广泛诉诸司法。到目前为止,2006年《奥胡斯条例》是欧盟在《条约》条款之外的唯一一部欧盟立法,其目的是在欧盟层面上为环境问题诉诸司法提供基础。不幸的是,2006年《奥胡斯条例》(Aarhus Regulation)规定的内部审查程序被欧盟法院(Court of Justice)如此严格地解释,以至于它在争取更好地诉诸法院方面的附加价值仍然是短暂的。本文讨论了ACCC关于欧盟未遵守《公约》第9(3)条的调查结果,并强调了欧盟最近在环境问题上诉诸司法的立法活动。经修订的《奥胡斯条例》的适用将表明欧洲联盟是否适当地履行了其在环境问题上诉诸司法的国际义务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信