致命的空气和对第 24 条环境权的曲解:基础工作信托案

Q3 Social Sciences
Michael Kidd
{"title":"致命的空气和对第 24 条环境权的曲解:基础工作信托案","authors":"Michael Kidd","doi":"10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a15833","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The judgment in Trustees for the Time Being of the Groundwork Trust v Minister of Environmental Affairs rests on a finding that the right in section 24 of the Constitution consists of two separate rights in subsections (a) and (b), and that the right in section 24(a) is immediately realisable. I argue in this article that this approach is incorrect and that a logical and contextual interpretation of section 24 cannot justify the conclusion that the court reached. I argue that section 24(b) is a qualifying \"internal modifier\" to section 24(a), and that, in practical terms and due to the modifier in section 24(b), in many situations section 24 would have to be regarded as implementable over time, and not immediately. Such implementation would have to be reasonable. The article also considers the use of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act to address the unacceptable level of air pollution in the area known as the Highveld Priority Area.","PeriodicalId":55857,"journal":{"name":"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal","volume":"87 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deadly Air and the Misinterpretation of the Section 24 Environmental Right: The Groundwork Trust Case\",\"authors\":\"Michael Kidd\",\"doi\":\"10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a15833\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The judgment in Trustees for the Time Being of the Groundwork Trust v Minister of Environmental Affairs rests on a finding that the right in section 24 of the Constitution consists of two separate rights in subsections (a) and (b), and that the right in section 24(a) is immediately realisable. I argue in this article that this approach is incorrect and that a logical and contextual interpretation of section 24 cannot justify the conclusion that the court reached. I argue that section 24(b) is a qualifying \\\"internal modifier\\\" to section 24(a), and that, in practical terms and due to the modifier in section 24(b), in many situations section 24 would have to be regarded as implementable over time, and not immediately. Such implementation would have to be reasonable. The article also considers the use of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act to address the unacceptable level of air pollution in the area known as the Highveld Priority Area.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55857,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"87 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a15833\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2023/v26i0a15833","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Groundwork Trust 暂时受托人诉环境事务部长一案的判决基于这样一个结论,即《宪法》第 24 条中的权利由(a)和(b)两款中的两项独立权利组成,且第 24(a)条中的权利可立即实现。我在本文中指出,这种做法是不正确的,对第 24 条的逻辑和上下文解释不能证明法院得出的结论是正确的。我认为第 24(b)条是第 24(a)条的一个限定性的 "内部修饰词",从实际情况来看,由于第 24(b)条中的修饰词,在许多情况下,第 24 条必须被视为可在一段时间内实施,而不是立即实施。这种实施必须是合理的。文章还考虑了使用《国家环境管理:空气质量法》来解决被称为 Highveld 优先区的地区令人无法接受的空气污染问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Deadly Air and the Misinterpretation of the Section 24 Environmental Right: The Groundwork Trust Case
The judgment in Trustees for the Time Being of the Groundwork Trust v Minister of Environmental Affairs rests on a finding that the right in section 24 of the Constitution consists of two separate rights in subsections (a) and (b), and that the right in section 24(a) is immediately realisable. I argue in this article that this approach is incorrect and that a logical and contextual interpretation of section 24 cannot justify the conclusion that the court reached. I argue that section 24(b) is a qualifying "internal modifier" to section 24(a), and that, in practical terms and due to the modifier in section 24(b), in many situations section 24 would have to be regarded as implementable over time, and not immediately. Such implementation would have to be reasonable. The article also considers the use of the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Act to address the unacceptable level of air pollution in the area known as the Highveld Priority Area.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
67
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: PELJ/PER publishes contributions relevant to development in the South African constitutional state. This means that most contributions will concern some aspect of constitutionalism or legal development. The fact that the South African constitutional state is the focus, does not limit the content of PELJ/PER to the South African legal system, since development law and constitutionalism are excellent themes for comparative work. Contributions on any aspect or discipline of the law from any part of the world are thus welcomed.
×
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