Aarhus Convention: the public loves it, States not so much

The Aarhus Convention is an international agreement that gives people three core rights: the right to access information about the environment, the right to take part in decision-making and the preparation of environment-related policies, and access to justice on environmental matters, whether as individuals or NGOs. It also established a mechanism to protect environmental defenders who face t hreats, harassment or prosecution for their public service.

But these rights are only as strong as the system that upholds them, and that system is under strain. Across the UN, international cooperationis going through one of its more difficult moments, and international law is increasingly undermined by the very States that signed up to it but would rather not follow the rules.

The most immediate problem is money. A shortfall in the voluntary financial contributions the Parties (The EU and Member States included) are meant to provide is forcing the Convention to slow down. The consequences are concrete:

• The Special Rapporteur on environmental defenders has little support to visit countries and hear from defenders on the ground, and few resources to process their complaints under the Rapid Response Mechanism (RRM) – a tool meant to address urgent threats that cannot wait to be resolved

• The Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee (ACCC) – a free mechanism that members of the public and environmental NGOs can turn to when their right to information or participation is ignored, or when access to justice is blocked in practice – now has more cases than it can handle, so complaints can take years to resolve.

Despite the strain, the rights themselves still stand. NGO and members of the public retain their right of access to justice on environmental matters. You can learn more about your rights and how you can use them on our My Environmental Rights page.

None of this is accidental. The Parties unhappy with the ACCC’s findings of non-compliance, or with the spotlight the Special Rapporteur shines on their treatment of environmental defenders, have spent years looking for ways to weaken the Convention that grants the public these rights. The irony is that the Committee’s growing workload is itself a symptom of their failure. Cases pile up precisely because Parties are not complying with the Convention and not giving the public the rights they are owed.

These rights are essential for public scrutiny and accountability, one of the few ways any of us has to protect our common home and our future, and, above all, democratic. Democracy is not a performance but is constant practice – and many of our representatives would rather not do that work.

So, 28 years after the Convention was adopted and still falling short of its promises, a number of Parties have settled on a quieter tactic by not paying their voluntary contributions. That way, they can claim to champion democratic rights while letting the Convention wither for want of resources it needs to function. Cunning, isn’t it?

And it comes at a telling moment. Many of these same Parties – the EU and its Member States included – are sharply increasing their military spending, an industry with an enormous and long-listing environmental impact, from soil and water contamination to pollution from chemicals and lead. The same is true of the data-center boom, with its massive energy and water use and the pollution already affecting communities in many places. Yet when the public and environmental NGOs ask for information about exactly these impacts, they are routinely refused, usually in the name of “security” or “competition” – as if knowing whether you can safely drink your tap water or eat local crops were not itself a matter of security. If only there was a Convention you could turn to in order to demand these rights.

Last week, when States were finally pushed to discuss money, most Parties still did not step up to pay what they owe, let alone increase it. Many preferred to talk about cost cutting instead.

There is, despite all of this, a reason for hope. The Convention is still standing, and the compliance mechanisms that so many environmental defenders and civil society groups rely on are still going strong despite the financial squeeze. The dedication of the people keeping this work alive is genuinely inspiring; they are not turning their back on the public.

The ACCC, a team of volunteer legal experts, h as spent years working to protect the environment and the rights of the public and is now handling a record number of cases.

The latest Working Group of the Parties was also a stark reminder of the threats environmental defenders face around the world. In his update, Special Rapporteur Michel Forst reported that he is dealing with more than 100 complaints of harassment, threats and intimidation against defenders. You may consult the published complaints and outcomes and other reports online.

For now, then, we are at an impasse – the Convention (including the Special Rapporteur and the ACCC) is still operating, but the funds are still not forthcoming. Civil society and environmentalists, for their part, will keep advocating for environmental rights on every front, and keep speaking truth to power by calling out the hypocrisy and bad faith of governments that say they are committed to democracy, human rights and environmental protection, but then undermine these principles in every sneaky way they can.