Health Impact Assessment as an Essential Element of Environmental Law in the National Legal Order. Considerations on the Basis of International Law

• Autorzy: Pakowski Maciej , Garus-Pakowska Anna

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.35784/pe.2021.2.21

Warianty tytułu

PL

Ocena Odziaływania na Zdrowie jako niezbędny element prawa ochrony środowiska w krajowym porządku prawnym. Rozważania na gruncie prawa międzynarodowego

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The purpose of this paper was to prove that the standards for environmental friendliness set out by international law require the states to carry out Health Impact Assessment (HIA) before implementation of public or private investments having a potential human health impact even if national legal systems do not require it. The analysis of both soft international law and treaty law, as well as the case-law of international courts and tribunals show that Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is the international law ius cogens. At the same time the human right to information and protection of life and health are regarded as fundamental human rights. According to the authors it means that carrying out proper Environmental Impact Assessment without Health Impact Assessment is not possible. It would be contrary to the human right to information and the obligation of the authorities to provide citizens with active transparency mentioned by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and with the principle of fair balance developed in the case-law of the similar European Court together with the objective on sustainable development adopted in Agenda 2030. According to the authors Health Impact Assessment is an immanent and integral part of environmental impact and the possible absence of provisions in the national law requiring investors to carry out HIA where EIA is necessary, does not justify the failure to assess.

PL

Celem niniejszej publikacji było wykazanie, że wyznaczone przez prawo międzynarodowe standardy ochrony środowiska wymagają od państw przeprowadzania oceny oddziaływania na zdrowie przed realizacją inwestycji publicznej lub prywatnej, która mogłaby potencjalnie oddziaływać na zdrowie nawet wówczas gdy nie wymagają tego krajowe porządki prawne. Analiza zarówno miękkiego prawa międzynarodowego, jaki i prawa traktatowego oraz orzecznictwa międzynarodowych sądów i trybunałów wskazuje, że ocena oddziaływania na środowisko jest międzynarodowym prawem ius cogens. Równocześnie prawo człowieka do informacji oraz ochrony życia i zdrowia uznawane są za fundamentalne prawa człowieka. Oznacza to w ocenie autorów, że przeprowadzenie prawidłowej oceny oddziaływania na środowisko z pominięciem kwestii odziaływania na zdrowie człowieka nie jest możliwe. Byłoby sprzeczne z prawem człowieka do informacji, oraz z obowiązkiem rządów zapewnienia obywatelom aktywnej przejrzystości, o której wspomina Międzyamerykański Trybunał Praw Człowieka, czy z zasadą fair balance wypracowaną w orzecznictwie adekwatnego Trybunału w Europie oraz z celami zrównoważonego rozwoju przyjętymi w Agendzie 2030. Zdaniem autorów ocena oddziaływania na zdrowie jest immanentną i integralną częścią oceny oddziaływania na środowisko, zaś ewentualny brak w prawie krajowym przepisów nakładających na inwestora obowiązku przeprowadzenie oceny oddziaływania na zdrowie, tam gdzie istnieje konieczność przeprowadzenia oceny oddziaływania na środowisko nie uzasadnia zaniechania przeprowadzenia tej oceny.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

public health; health security; environmental security; human environment; human rights; health impact assessment; law

PL

zdrowie publiczne; bezpieczeństwo zdrowotne; bezpieczeństwo środowiskowe; środowisko człowieka; prawa człowieka; ocena wpływu na zdrowie; prawo

• Wydawca: Lublin University of Technology
• Czasopismo: Problemy Ekorozwoju
• Rocznik: 2021
• Tom: Vol. 16, nr 2
• Strony: 199--208
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 48 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Pakowski Maciej

• Kancelaria adwokacka, ul. Piotrkowska 287/2, 90-003 Łódź, Poland

autor

Garus-Pakowska Anna

• Uniwersytet Medyczny w Łodzi, Zakład Żywienia i Epidemiologii, ul. Żeligowskiego 7/9, Łódź, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1677-8146

Bibliografia

• 1. AARHUS, 1998, Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus Convention), Official Journal, L 124: 0004-0020.
• 2. ACHR SAN JOSE, 1969, American Convention on Human Rights, San Jose, Costarica.
• 3. ADELAIDE, 1988, Second International Conference on Health Promotion, Adelaide, South Australia, 5-9 April, https://www.who.int/healthpromotion/confer- ences/previous/adelaide/en/ (20.06.2020).
• 4. ADVISORY OPINION, 2017, OC 23/17 of November 15, on the application from Colombia regarding state obligations with regard to the environment in the context of protection and guarantee of the right to personal life and integrity: interpretation and scope of Art. 4.1 and art. 5.1 in relation to Art. 1 (1-2) of the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights, http:// hrlibrary.umn.edu/iachr/iachr.html (17.07.2020).
• 5. ALMA-ATA, 1978, Declaration of Alma-Ata International Conference on Primary Health Care, AlmaAta, USSR, 6-12 September, https://www.who.int
• /publications/almaata_declaration_en.pdf (20.06.2020).
• 6. BANGKOK, 2005, The 6th Global Conference on Health Promotion, Thailand, August, https://www. who.int/healthpromotion/conferences/6gchp/hpr_05 0829 _%20BCHP.pdf (20.06.2020).
• 7. BANJUL CHARTER, 1981, The African (Banjul) Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, Nairobi, https://www.achpr.org/legalinstruments/detail?id=49 (20.06.2020).
• 8. BOISSON DE CHAZOURNES L, 2020, Opening of the Judicial Year of European Court of Human Rights Environment Human rights and the environment: an evolving relationship Seminar 31.01, Strasbourg, https://echr.coe.int/Documents/Speech_20200131_ Boisson_de_Chazournes_JY_ENG.pdf (17.07.2020).
• 9. BOYLE A., 2012, Developments in International Law of EIA and their Relation to the Espoo Convention, https://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/eia/documents/mop5/Seminar_Boyle.pdf (18.07.2020).
• 10. CAVTAT, 2004, Meeting of parts of Espoo Convention in Cavtat, Guidance on Public Participation The third meeting of the Parties of Espoo Convention Desision III/8, https://www.unece.org/env/eia/pubs/ publicpart_guidance.html (18.07.2020).
• 11. CURIA, 2013, Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber), 14 March 2013 Jutta Leth v Republik Österreich, Land Niederösterreich C‑420/11, http://cu- ria.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?num=C-420/11&languag e=EN (18.07.2020).
• 12. CURIA, 2014, Advocate General’s opinion C570/13, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/GA/ TXT/?uri=CELEX:62013CC0570 (24.01.2021).
• 13. ECHR, 2003, Decisions of European Court of Human Rights, Jul 8, Hatton and Others v. the United Kingdom § 128 Reference number 36022/97, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-611 88%22]} (20.06.2020).
• 14. ECHR, 2004, Decisions of European Court of Human Rights, Nov 10, Tasking and Others v. Turkey Reference number 46117/99, §118, http://world- lii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2004/621.html (20.06.2020).
• 15. ECHR, 2007, Decisions of European Court of Human Rights, March 26, Giacomelli v. Italy. §83; Reference number 59909/00, http://www.ecolex.org/8984/ server2neu.php/libcat/docs/COU/Full/En/COU157044.pdf (20.06.2020).
• 16. ECHR, 2009, Decisions of European Court of Human Rights, January 27, Affaire Tătar v. Roumanie, §101 Reference number 67021/01, https://hudoc.echr.coe. int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-90909%22]} (20.06.2020).
• 17. EIA DIRECTIVE, 2011, Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, EUR-Lex-32011L0092-EN-EUR-Lex.
• 18. ESCAZÚ CONVENTION, 2018, Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean Escazú, 4 March, https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/2018/03/20180312%2003-0 4%20PM/CTC-XXVII-18.pdf (18.07.2020).
• 19. ESPOO, 1991, Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, done at Espoo on February 25, (Espoo Convention), Journal of Laws 1999, No 96 item 1110.
• 20. GOETHEBORG, 1999, WHO European Centre for Health Policy, Health Impact Assessment: main concepts and suggested approach – Gothenburg consensus paper, WHO European Centre for Health Policy, Brussels, http://rbus-eis.org/pdf/Consensus_de_Got- borg.pdf (20.06.2020).
• 21. HELSINKI, 2013, The 8th Global Conference on Health Promotion, Finland, 10-14 June, https:// www.who.int/healthpromotion/conferences/8gchp/ 8gchp_helsinki_statement.pdf (20.06.2020).
• 22. ICCPR, 1966, UN Resolution 2200A (XXI) December 16, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, UN.
• 23. ICJ ADVISORY OPINION, 1996, Legality of the Threut or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports: 241-242, § 29, https://www.icjcij.org/public/files/case-related/95/7497.pdf (18.07.2020).
• 24. ICJ JUDGMENT, 2010, International Court of Justice, Judgment of 20 April, Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), https://www.icjcij.org/en/case/135/judgments (18.07.2020).
• 25. ICJ STATUTE, 1945, Statute of the International Court of Justice, http://www.icj-cij.org/en/statute, (3.01.2021).
• 26. IPESCR, 1966, UN Resolution 2200A (XXI) December 16, International Pact on Economic, Social and Cultural rights, UN.
• 27. JAKARTA, 1997, The Fourth International Conference on Health Promotion: New Players for a New Era – Leading Health Promotion into the 21st Century, meeting in Jakarta from 21 to 25 July, https:// www.who.int/healthpromotion/conferences/previous/jakarta/declaration/en/ (20.06.2020).
• 28. JENSEN G.K., STAUFLER A., ZANDER E., MICHALAK W., PULJIC V.M., 2020, Lignite – health effects and recommendations for the healthcare sector, HEAL :7-9.
• 29. KIESSLING K.L., 1998, Conference on the Aral Sea: Women, Children, Health and Environment, Ambio, 27(7): 562.
• 30. KIEV, 2003, Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, drawn up in Kiev on May 21, Kiev.
• 31. MALL I., VAN DER MEER J., UPSHUR R.E.G., 2001, Acting on an Environmental Health Disaster: The Case of the Aral Sea, Environmental Health Perspectives, 109(6): 547-548.
• 32. MEXICO, 2000, Fifth Global Conference on Health Promotion, Health Promotion: Bridging the Equity Gap, Mexico City, June 5th, https://www.who. int/healthpromotion/conferences/previous/mexico/ statement/en/ (20.06.2020).
• 33. MOWBRAY A., 2010, A Study of the Principle of Fair Balance in the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights Law Review, 10(2): 289-317. DOI: 10.1093/hrlr/ngq006.
• 34. NEW YORK, 1946, Constitution of the World Health Organization, https://www.who.int/governance/eb/ who_constitution_en.pdf (17.07.2020).
• 35. OTTAWA, 1986, The 1st International Conference on Health Promotion, Ottawa charter for health promotion, https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/ot- tawa-charter-for-health-promotion (20.06.2020).
• 36. PRZYBYTEK J., 2015, In Szopienice, children ate lead. The doctor waged war on the system, https://dziennikzachodni.pl/w-szopienicach-dzieci-jadly-olowlekarka-wydala-wojne-systemowi-historia-dz/ar/377 6395 (20.06.2020).
• 37. REGULATION (EC), 2006, Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters to Community institutions and bodies, https://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CEL EX:32006R1367&from=EN(24.01.2021).
• 38. RIO, 2011, Rio Political Declaration on Social Determinants of Health, https://www.who.int/sdhconference/declaration/en/ (20.06.2020).
• 39. ROME, 1950, Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Rome.
• 40. SEA DIRECTIVE, 2001, Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment, EC.
• 41. STEC S., 1998, Of Solemn Oaths and Obligations: TheEnvironmental Impact of the ICJ’s Decision in the Case of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project, https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/06de/60cfaedd66c7 429ce8f0aefa0b325d184f07.pdf (18.07.2020).
• 42. SUNDSVALL, 1991, Third International Conference on Health Promotion, Sundsvall, Sweden, 9-15 June, https://www.who.int/healthpromotion/confer- ences/previous/sundsvall/en (20.06.2020).
• 43. STOCKHOLM, 1972, Raport of United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, https://www.un. org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/CONF.48/1 4/REV.1 (20.06.2020).
• 44. UDHR, 1948, Universal Declaration of Human Rights Paris, UN.
• 45. UNECE, 2020, Guidelines on the Shared Environmental Information System reporting mechanism, United Nations, Geneva, https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2020-12/2014795E_WEB.pdf (3.01.2021).
• 46. UN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL GENEVA, 2000, Commitee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 14, The right to the highest attainable standard of health (article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights), http://docstore.ohchr.org/Self- Services/FilesHandler.ashx?enc=4slQ6QSmlBEDzF EovLCuW1AVC1NkPsgUedPlF1vfPMJ2c7ey6Paz2 q aojTzDJmC0y%2B9t%2BsAtGDNzdEqA6SuP2r0 w%2F6sVBGTpvTSCbiOr4XVFTqhQY65auTFbQ RPWNDxL (17.07.2020).
• 47. UN RESOLUTION, 2015, Resolution No. A/RES/70/1.
• 48. WHO EUROPE, 1989, European Charter on Environment and Health, https://www.euro.who.int/ en/publications/policy-documents/european-charteron-environment-and-health,-1989 (18.07.2020).

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2021).