 |
|
TEXT 10. ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS: RIGHT TO INFORMATION
Human rights texts generally contain a right to freedom of information or a corresponding state duty to inform. The right to information is included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Art. 19), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Art. 19(2)), the Inter-American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man (Art. 10), the American Convention on Human Rights (Art. 13), and the African Charter on the Rights and Duties of Peoples (Art. 9).
In applying article 10 of the European Convention, the European Court of Human Rights has held that a state may not extend defamation laws to restrict dissemination of environmental information of public interest. The examples are: Bladet Tromsó and Stensaas v. Norway (ECHR, May 20, 1999); Thoma v. Luxembourg (ECHR, March 29, 2001). In the first case, the editor and publisher of a newspaper were sued and found to have committed defamation by publishing a series of articles that accused seal hunters of illegal and cruel hunting methods. The European Court said that most careful scrutiny is called for when the measures taken or sanctions imposed on journalists by the national authority are capable of discouraging the participation of the press in debates over matters of legitimate public concern. It found that the crew members' undoubted interest in protecting their reputation was insufficient to outweigh the vital public interest in ensuring an informed public debate over a matter of local and national as well as international interest. Thus, the reasons for imposing liability relied on by Norway, although relevant, were not sufficient to show that the interference with freedom of speech was "necessary in a democratic society." Accordingly, the Court held that there had been a violation of Article 10 of the Convention. The Thoma case involved a journalist's accusations of self-dealing by officials engaged in reforestation projects in Luxembourg. Numerous forest wardens and engineers sued for defamation and the journalist was fined a nominal amount. The European Court again found the action incompatible with the requirements of freedom of expression, in part because the subject was one of public concern, but also because the Court noted that public officials must accept a greater amount of scrutiny and criticism than private persons.
Informational rights are widely found in environmental treaties. Broad guarantees of public information are found in regional agreements, including the 1992 Helsinki Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (Art. 16), the 1992 Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Art. 3[8]), and the 1992 Paris Convention on the North-East Atlantic (Art. 9). The last mentioned requires the contracting parties to ensure that their competent authorities are required to make available relevant information to any natural or legal person, in response to any reasonable request, without the person having to prove an interest, without unreasonable charges and within two months of the request.
Other treaties require states parties to inform the public of specific environmental hazards. The states participating in the OSCE have confirmed the right of individuals, groups, and organizations to obtain, publish and distribute information on environmental issues.