Search results

AbstrakTulisan ini bertujuan menguji pengaturan hukum lingkungan internasional mengenai kebijakan pengurangan pengasaman (acidification) dan menganalisis peran rejim internasional dalam pengurangan pengasaman di Eropa. Hukum Lingkungan Internasional telah menetapkan Konvensi Internasional tentang Polusi Udara Jarak Jauh Lintas Batas Negara beserta beberapa Protokol. Protokol yang paling baru adalah protokol untuk mengurangi pengasaman eutrofikasi, dan ozone level dasar. Protokol ini menetapkan batasan emisi tahun 2010 bagi empat polutan, yaitu: belerang (sulphur), Nitrogen Oksida (NOx), Senyawa Organik Volatil (VOCs), dan Ammonia. Selain itu, protokol ini juga menetapkan nilai batasan yang ketat untuk sumber emisi yang khusus serta mensyaratkan penggunaan teknologi terbaik yang tersedia. Pada level regional Eropa, Uni Eropa telah mengadopsi directives kebijakan-kebijakan udara dan secara terus menerus menginisiasi pengembangan strategi acidification untuk memberantas acidifikasi dan eutrofikasi. Kedua rejim, CLRTAP dan kebijakan udara Uni Eropa dapat digunakan untuk mengurangi proses acidifikasi di Eropa. Kedua rejim berfungsi secara timbal balik dan saling melengkapi dan terimplementasi dengan baik di Eropa. Hal ini terbukti bahwa proses acidifikasi dapat dikurangi. Konsekwensinya meningkatkan kualitas udara di wilayah Eropa. Jelas bahwa hukum lingkungan internasional dapat saling melengkapi hukum regional dan berperan dalam pengurangan acidifikasi di Eropa.Kata Kunci: Hukum Lingkungan Internasional, acidifikasi, Uni EropaAbstractThis article examines the international environmental governance regarding abating acidification policy and analyses the role of the international regime in abating the acidification in Europe. International environ- mental law has been established the Convention of Long Range Trans boundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP) as well as its protocols. The recent protocol is Protocol to Abate Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground- level Ozone which sets emission ceilings for 2010 for four pollutants; sulfur, NOx, volatile organic com- pounds (VOCs) and ammonia. In addition, it sets tight limit values for specific emission sources and requires best available technologies to be used. The European Union adopted Air policies Directives and simultaneously initiated the development of an Acidification Strategy for combating acidification and eutrophi- cation. Both of these regimes; CLRTAP and its protocols and the EU Air policy, might be used to abate the acidification in Europe. These regimes serve a reciprocal function and are well implemented in Europe. There is a proof that the acidification in lakes and streams is decreased. The consequence is the improve- ment of the air quality. It is clearly shown that the regimes play the major role in abating the acidification process in Europe.KEY WORDS: International Environmental Law, Acidification, European Union

Abstract
This article explores the potential contribution of international human rights law – specifically, the oft-neglected 'right to science' – to the interpretation, operation and progressive development of international environmental law. Science and its applications play a critical role in environmental protection. At the same time, society faces persistent controversies at this interface. Environmental regimes may lack sufficient norms and tools for regulating upstream science and innovation processes because they tend to focus narrowly on physical harms to the environment and may not address the wider ethical, legal, social and political concerns. The human right to science, which is codified in various international and regional human rights instruments, may serve to augment international environmental law and contribute to more effective, equitable and democratically legitimate and accountable processes and outcomes in relation to the application of science and technology in environmental regimes. The article begins by outlining the scope and contents of, as well as the limitations on, the right to science, focusing on Article 15(1)(b) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and its overlaps with the norms of international environmental law.1 It then analyses the ways in which the right to science may influence the development of international environmental law by elucidating mechanisms for the integration of a human rights perspective in science and technology and by outlining its potential substantive contributions to the development of international environmental law.

AbstractThe relationship between international environmental law and international humanitarian law, like relationships between many other subsystems of contemporary international law, has not yet been articulated. The problem of environmental damage in international armed conflict lies at the intersection of these two branches and thus provides an ideal opportunity to investigate this relationship. Rather than simply evaluating the applicable international law rules in their context, we break them into elements that we separately assess from both (international) environmental law and international humanitarian/international criminal law perspectives. By doing so, we identify how international law rules for cross-sectoral problems may appropriately combine the existing expertise and institutional strengths of simultaneously applicable branches of international law, and also discover how an evaluation of the ultimate appropriateness of the cross-sectoral rules adopted may be substantially affected by the different frames of reference that are used by those working within the different fields.

Cover -- Contents -- Foreword -- Acknowledgments -- Abbreviations -- Executive Summary -- HIGHLIGHTS: Day 1: 16 November 2013 -- Opening Ceremony -- Opening Remarks -- Welcome Remarks -- Keynote Address -- Overview: Asian Judges Network on Environment -- Introduction of Participants -- Session 1 ASEAN Environmental Challenge: Climate Change-Science, Economics, and Law -- The State of Climate Change in Thailand and an Update on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Report, and Its Impacts -- International Litigation and Legal Developments

Intro -- National Courts and EU Environmental Law. Edited by Jan H. Jans, Richard Macrory and Angel-Manuel Moreno Molina.The Avosetta Series (10)Proceedings of the Avosetta Group of European Environmental Lawyers -- Foreword by Lord Carnwath JSC -- Contents -- Abbreviations -- Contributors -- chapter 1. Introduction by Jan H. Jans, Richard Macrory & Angel-Manuel Moreno Molina -- chapter 2. National Administrative Procedural Law under EU Requirements -- With a Focus on Public Participation by Gerd Winter -- chapter 3. Consistent Interpretation of EU Environmental Law by Richard Macrory, Verena Madner & Stefan Mayr -- chapter 4. Direct Effect and Consistent Interpretation: Strengths andWeaknesses of the Concepts by Ludwig Krämer -- chapter 5. Direct Effect and State Liability by Angel-Manuel Moreno Molina -- chapter 6 Constitutional Review of European Environmental Law by Luc Lavrysen -- chapter 7. Judicial Dialogue, Judicial Competition and Global Environmental Law. A Case Study on The UNECE Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters by Jan H. Jans -- chapter 8. Effective Justice? Synthesis Report of the Study on the Implementation of Articles 9(3) and 9(4) of the Aarhus Convention in Seventeen of the Member States of the European Union by Jan Darpö -- chapter 9. Austria by Verena Madner -- chapter 10. Belgium by Luc Lavrysen -- chapter 11. Croatia by Lana Ofak -- chapter 12. Czech Republic by Vojtech Vomacka & Ilona Jancarova -- chapter 13. Denmark by Peter Pagh -- chapter 14. Germany by Bernhard Wegener & Gerd Winter -- chapter 15. Hungary by Gyula Bándi -- chapter 16. Italy by Massimiliano Montini -- chapter 17. The Netherlands by Jan H. Jans -- chapter 18. Portugal by Alexandra Aragão -- chapter 19. Slovenia by Rajko Knez & Verena Rošic Feguš.