Search

In La Oroya v. Peru, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights declared Peru responsible for violating several rights, including the right to a healthy environment, due to the environmental degradation and health crises in La Oroya—one of the world’s most polluted cities. Regarding the right to a healthy environment, the Court addresses for the first time pollution in air, water, and soil—marking a departure from previous cases that primarily focused on communal property rights and deforestation—and even goes as far as to refer to the right to a healthy environment as jus cogens. Such innovations would have not been possible without the ever-expanding horizon of Inter-American case law and approaches.

Belgium's new ecocide provision has been hailed as a resounding victory for environmental activists, particularly so for the burgeoning Stop Ecocide campaign. But is the widespread excitement justified? Can the new law deliver on the lofty expectations? And how does it fit within the soon-to-be adopted revision of the Environmental Crime Directive at the EU level? Despite constituting a highly symbolic step, I argue that the Belgian law’s constrained scope makes it a toothless tool to punish environmental outlaws in practice.

Copyright of GAIA: Ecological Perspectives for Science & Society is the property of Oekom Verlag GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)