United Nations Environment Programme

environment for development

 
Division of Environmental Law and Conventions
Manual on Compliance with and Enforcement of Multilateral Environmental Agreements
Alert someone to this resource Leave Feedback Home > Enforcement > Institutional Frameworks > Establish Effective Courts
Establishing Effective Courts

Guideline

41(o)
Provision of courts which can impose appropriate penalties for violations of environmental laws and regulations, as well as other consequences.

see full text

Courts are the most prevalent formal institutional setting for sanctioning the violation of environmental laws and regulations and ensuring compliance with environmental laws and standards. They exist in virtually all States in the world, although there are variations in the court systems from one country to another. Given the importance of their role in adjudicating violations of law and imposing penalties, courts must be imbued with sufficient authority to sentence violators to effective penalties and other consequences.

In some parts of the world, specialised courts are created expressly to address environmental cases. The establishment of environmental courts is not strictly necessary for ensuring that environmental cases are handled appropriately, but States with a judicial structure that lends itself to such specialisation may want to consider it.

Specialised administrative bodies serving in a quasi-judicial capacity can supplement environmental courts and/or standard courts. Such environmental commissions often are the first avenue for appealing actions by an environmental agency or ministry. Trinidad & Tobago’s Environmental Commission, discussed below, is one such example.

Thus, States have opted to use different mechanisms to impose penalties for violations of environmental laws and regulations. These range from generic formal legal mechanisms (such as courts of general jurisdication) to specific formal legal mechanisms (such as environmental courts) to less formal quasi-judicial bodies (such as environmental tribunals, environmental appeals boards, and other administrative bodies). The less formal arrangements tend to reach decisions more quickly, with less cost (a lawyer is not necessarily required), and there usually is the option of appealing to formal courts if one of the parties to the case disputes the outcome. As such, less formal arrangements can improve public access to justice. In contrast, the more formal mechanisms have the advantage that they protect the various parties’ rights through their procedural rules (albeit at the expense of longer and potentially more costly proceedings). For example, see the discussion of “Specialised Environmental Administrative Tribunals and Prosecutors in the United States” following Guideline 41(a)(v).

A A Print this page
Search the Manual
Guidelines Search
Case Studies Search
» More Search Tools
Resources for
Guideline 41(o)
Case Studies
Australia’s Specialised Environmental Court
The Environmental Commission of Trinidad & Tobago
Guyana’s Environmental Appeals Tribunal
Environmental Courts in Sudan
Additional Resources
Additional Resources on Environmental Courts and Tribunals
© UNEP | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Site Map