The Aarhus Convention at Ten

Contributors

Michel Delnoy, partner at Bours & Associés law firm, has a degree in law from
the University of Liège (1991 – magna cum laude) and a doctorate in law from the
same university (2006). Specialising in administrative law and spatial planning
and environmental law, he is a leading corporate legal adviser for companies
operating in Belgium. As a Professor at the Faculty of Law of the University of
Liège, he teaches courses in environmental law and advanced administrative law.
He is also a member of the editorial board of the legal journal Aménagement-
Environnement and a founder member of the French-speaking Belgian Town and
Country Planning Association (ABeFDATU). Dr Delnoy has published several
books and articles and lectured widely in the areas of his specialisation. He has
participated, as an expert for the Belgian presidency, in the drafting of Directive
2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003. His
major book deals with public participation in environmental matters (see the
bibliography at the end of this volume).

Jonas Ebbesson is Professor of Environmental Law at Stockholm University,
Director of the Stockholm Environmental Law and Policy Centre, and Researcher
at Stockholm Resilience Centre. He serves on the Aarhus Convention
Compliance Committee since 2005. His research and writings cover various
international, EU and transnational dimensions of environmental law, including
legal aspects on public interests, public participation and access to justice in
environmental law; transnational corporate responsibility; justice in environmental
law; and the impact of law for social-ecological resilience. Among his
books are (as editor) Access to Justice in Environmental Matters in the EU – Accès à
la Justice en Matière d’Environnement dans l’UE (Kluwer, 2002), and (as co-editor)
Environmental Law and Justice in Context (CUP, 2009). Professor Ebbesson has
acted as a consultant for various governmental, non-governmental and intergovernmental bodies, including UNEP and UNECE, OSCE and the Nordic Council, and he has been an advisor to various environmental law journals.

Ralph Hallo is an environmental lawyer and Director of Brussels Strategics,
a European public affairs consultancy based in the Netherlands. Previously,
he was European Public Affairs Manager at Econcern, a sustainable energy
company. Prior to joining Econcern, he was Senior Advisor for European Affairs
for Stichting Natuur en Milieu (Netherlands Society for Nature and Environment).
He served as President of the European Environmental Bureau (EEB),
Europe’s largest federation of environmental organisations, from 2000 to 2005.
He has also been a member of the boards of Climate Network Europe (Brussels)
and Milieukontakt Oost-Europa (Amsterdam). Mr Hallo participated in the
negotiation of the Aarhus Convention as an independent expert advisor to the
delegation of the Netherlands and is the author of numerous publications on
environmental rights, instruments and processes, including access to information.
He holds a law degree from New York University and is a graduate of Harvard College.

Veerle Heyvaert is a Senior Lecturer in Law at the London School of Economics
and Political Science. She teaches environmental law and European law. She has
an LL.M. from Harvard Law School, and a Ph.D. from the European University
Institute in Florence. In 1998-1999, she was the inaugural Sir Peter North
Fellow at the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies and Keble College, Oxford. She has
published on issues of health and environmental law, European law and decision-
making in areas of scientific uncertainty in English, Dutch and Italian.

Jerzy Jendro?ka holds the Chair of European and Public International Law
at Opole University, Poland. He is also the Managing Partner at Jendro?ka
Jerzma?ski Bar & Partners, Environmental Lawyers, and the Director of the
Environmental Law Center in Wroc?aw, Poland. Professor Jendro?ka’s involvement
in developing and implementing environmental law includes many activities
at both national and international level. He has been involved, often with
a leading role, in drafting most environmental legislation in Poland since 1990.
Besides, he has held a number of official positions, including as a member of
the National EIA Commission (since 1994) and a permanent legal expert of
the Parliamentary Environment Commission (since 1996). At the international
level, he served inter alia as Secretary to the Aarhus Convention (1998-1999),
and subsequently as a member (2000-2006) and Chair (2002-2003) of the
Bureau of the Meeting of the Parties to the Convention and is currently serving
as a member of its Compliance Committee (since 2006) and of the Implementation
Committee of the Espoo Convention (since 2004). Serving as a legal expert
to UNEP,UNECE and OSCE, he has provided advice to a number of governments
of Central Asia and South-East Europe on environmental law reforms.
Professor Jendro?ka is the author and/or editor of 28 books and about 200
articles (in Polish, English, Russian and German) dealing with environmental
law in international, domestic and comparative perspectives.

Mihail Kritikos is a Research Programme Manager for the Research Directorate
General of the European Commission and is responsible for ethical, legal and
governance issues arising in the frame of the Commission’s FP7 Ethics Review
procedure and Responsible Research and Innovation Strategy. Dr Kritikos is
a qualified practicing lawyer, member of the Athens Bar Association and of
the International Law Association. He holds a PhD in EU Biotechnology and
Environmental Law from the London School of Economics and Political Science
(LSE-Department of Law) and Masters Degrees on EU and International Institutional
Law and Environmental Law and Management. He is the holder of the
2008 UACES Prize for the Best PhD Thesis in European Studies in Europe and
of the 2004-2008 EPEES Prize for the Best Thesis written by a Greek Researcher.
He has published extensively on issues related to new forms of governance,
EU institutional, environmental, biotechnology and food law, EU external
relations law and international environmental and trade law. Before joining the
European Commission, Dr Kritikos had been a Lecturer at the University of
Exeter (Department of Law) and taught European Union Law and Institutions
for several years in the LSE. He is a visiting Lecturer in the Academy of European
Law.

Francesco La Camera has been working in the field of environmental and sustainability related matters in different positions for more than 25 years. As a public
official and manager, he served as head of unit and Deputy Director General in
the EIA Directorate of the Italian Ministry of Environment (1992-2000), and as
Director General of the Sustainable Development Directorate of the same Ministry
(2000-2002). Since the beginning of 2009, following a judicial decision,
he is back in the Ministry. As an expert, he has been a member of technical
bodies in charge of cost-benefit analysis and environmental assessment in Italy,
and has also cooperated with the European Commission, UNDP and UNEP on
environment assessment and sustainability related activities. As an academic,
Dr La Camera has been teaching environmental economics at the faculty of
engineering of Roma3 University (from 2003) and sustainable development at
the faculty of economics of Cosenza University. He has been scientific director
of ORSA, the Regional Sicilian Observatory for the Environment (2003-2008).
As a negotiator, he has been involved in the drafting of the major UNECE environmental conventions, of the EU Directives on environmental assessment and,
as chairman, in the consultative group in the preparation of the 2002 Johannesburg
World Summit on Sustainable Development. He has served as Chairman
of the Meeting of the Signatories to the Aarhus Convention prior to its entry
into force. He has published several books on environmental assessment and
sustainable development.

Richard Macrory is a barrister and professor at the Faculty of Laws, University
College London, where he is director of the Centre for Law and the Environment.
He has been a board member of the Environment Agency, and was a long
standing member of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution. Professor
Macrory is a Patron of the UK Environmental Law Association, and in 2008
was appointed an Honorary Queen’s Counsel for his work on the development of
environmental law.

Daniela Obradovic is a senior researcher at the Faculty of Law, University of
Amsterdam. She has acted as project leader (coordinator) of the European
Commission Sixth Framework Project ‘Accountability of Civil Society Groups
Participating in New Modes of EU Social and Economic Governance’ conducted
within the ‘New Modes of Governance’ (NEWGOV) Project. She also takes part
in ‘Project IG3T 2010: Internet Governance: Truth, Trust and Tools’ under the
leadership of Professor Philippe Goujon of the Computer Science Department
of the Facultés Universitaires Notre-Dame de la Paix in Namur, Belgium. Dr
Obradovic has published extensively on the participation of civil society groups
in EU decision-making.

Marc Pallemaerts is Professor of European environmental law at the University
of Amsterdam. He also teaches European and international environmental law
at the Université Libre de Bruxelles. He studied law and political science at the
Vrije Universiteit Brussel and Harvard University and completed his doctorate
in international environmental law at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel in 1999.
Apart from his academic work, Professor Pallemaerts also serves as Senior
Fellow and Head of the Environmental Governance Research Programme at the
Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP), an independent, non-profit
research institute with offices in London and Brussels. From 1992 to 2003, he
served as legal and political advisor to successive ministers of environment,
energy and sustainable development at regional and federal government level in
Belgium. He has also served as Chairman of the Meeting of the Parties to the
Aarhus Convention (2003-2005).

Cesare Pitea is Researcher in International Law in the Department of Law at the
Faculty of Law of the University of Parma. He holds an LL.M. in Public International
Law from the University of London, School of Oriental and African
Studies, and a Ph.D. in International Law from the University of Milan. His
academic activity focuses mainly on international human rights and environmental
law, as well as on international dispute settlement, especially judicial.
From 2009 to 2011, Dr Pitea worked as a lawyer at the Registry of the European
Court of Human Rights. From 2004 to 2009, he acted as advisor to the Italian
Ministry of the Environment in relation to various UNECE processes, especially
under the Aarhus and Helsinki Conventions. He has been a member of the Ad
Hoc Expert Group on Public Participation in International Forums under the
Aarhus Convention.

Gerhard Roller is Professor of Environmental Law at the University of Applied
Sciences in Bingen (Germany) and Director of the Institute of Environmental
Studies and Applied Research (IESAR) of Bingen University. He is also an Associate
Researcher at the Facultés universitaires St. Louis (FUSL) in Brussels, and
Lecturer at the Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Ingénieurs de Bourges (France).
Frankie Schram is an official of the Belgian Federal Public Service for Home
Affairs, where he serves as Member and Secretary of both the Commission
on Access to and Reuse of Administrative Documents and the Federal Appeal
Commission on Access to Environmental Information. He is also a Visiting
Professor at the Public Management Institute of the Katholieke Universiteit
Leuven and at the Faculty of Political and Social Science of the University of
Antwerp. He holds a doctorate in law from the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven.

Stephen Stec is adjunct professor at Central European University (CEU) and
head of program at CEU’s Center for Environment and Security (CENSE). He
is also a fellow of the Institute for East European Law and Russian Studies at
Leiden University (Netherlands). From 1998 to 2008 he worked at the Regional
Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe (REC), where he established
its Environmental Law Programme. From 1996 to 1998 he served as Legal
Advisor to the NGO Coalition Delegation during the negotiation of the Aarhus
Convention. Among his numerous publications, he is co-author of The Aarhus
Convention: An Implementation Guide (UN, 2000). In 2007 he received the Rule
of Law Award. Mr Stec worked on his contribution to this book while a visiting
scholar at Middlebury College and the Monterey Institute of International
Studies in 2009.

Attila Tanzi is Professor of International Law at the University of Bologna. He
has been an external consultant to the Ministry of the Environment of Italy
since 1999, as well as, from 1987 to 2007, to the Legal Service of the Italian
Ministry for Foreign Affairs. He also advises international organisations on
aspects of international law. He has been a member of the Italian delegation
to the General Assembly of the United Nations on several occasions. Professor
Tanzi has acted as counsel or arbitrator in several interstate arbitrations;
in 2002 he was appointed to serve in the panel of arbitrators under the PCA
Optional Rules for Arbitration of Disputes Relating to Natural Resources and/or
the Environment. He has chaired the Ad Hoc Expert Group on Public Participation
in International Forums under the Aarhus Convention. Since 2004 he is
Chairman of the Legal Board of the UNECE 1992 Helsinki Convention. In the
past, he has also been Chairman of the Compliance Committee of the London
Protocol on Water and Health (2007-2010). He has held numerous academic
positions and has published extensively on environmental law, State responsibility,
international organisations and jurisdictional immunities.

Jeremy Wates served with the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
(UNECE) from 1999 to 2010 as Secretary to the Aarhus Convention. Prior to
taking up his post with UNECE, he led the campaign by the European ECO
Forum, an NGO coalition, to persuade governments to start work on a treaty
on environmental democracy and then coordinated the input from civil society
organizations into the official negotiations over the Aarhus Convention text. In
this capacity, he was able to draw upon his grassroots campaigning experience
as Coordinator of the Irish environmental organization Earthwatch (Friends of
the Earth Ireland), which he founded in the early 1980s and led for more than a
decade. In May 2011, he took up the post of Secretary-General of the European
Environmental Bureau (EEB), the largest federation of environmental organizations
in Europe. Mr. Wates holds an MA Honours Degree in Philosophy and
Social and Political Science from Cambridge University, UK.

Ned Westaway is a barrister of Lincoln’s Inn practising in a wide range of
environmental law areas including nuisance, statutory nuisance, water law,
waste law and contaminated land. He has been instructed for both environmental
prosecution and defence work. He is an honorary research assistant at the
Centre for Law and the Environment of University College London, where he
completed an LL.M in environmental laws in 2007. He was a founder of Public
Interest Environmental Law UK.

Abbreviations
Contributors
Introduction
Marc Pallemaerts

Chapter 1 Economy, Ecology and Environmental Democracy
Francesco La Camera

Chapter 2 EU Enlargement, Neighbourhood Policy and Environmental Democracy
Stephen Stec
1 Introduction
2 EU enlargement
3 EU Neighbourhood Policy
4 The Russian Federation and Central Asia
5 Environmental democracy
6 The EU’s role as an Aarhus environmental norm diffuser
7 Analysis of norm dynamics in the EU enlargement area
8 The uptake of ‘Aarhus’ norms
9 Cycles of ecological urgency
10 Aarhus norm relevance to environmental justice and security
11 The future of environmental democracy

Chapter 3 Access to Environmental Information. The Reciprocal Influences of EU Law and the Aarhus Convention
Ralph Hallo
1 Introduction
2 EU law on access to environmental information: Directive 90/313
3 Aarhus negotiations launched (1996)
4 Impact on the Aarhus negotiations
5 Impact of Aarhus on EU access to environmental information law
6 Impact of Aarhus on EU general access to documents law
7 Aarhus in practice
8 Aarhus at ten

Chapter 4 From a General Right of Access to Environmental Information in the Aarhus Convention to a General Right of Access to All Information in Official Documents. The Council of Europe’s Tromsø Convention
Frankie Schram
1 Introduction
2 Background and development of the Tromsø Convention
2.1 Situation in 2002
2.2 The elaboration of the legally binding instrument by the Group of Specialists
2.2.1 The first mandate of the Group of Specialists
2.2.2 The second mandate of the Group of Specialists
2.2.2.1 The interim report
2.2.2.2 The elaboration of the ideas in the interim report
2.3 The adoption of the proposal by the CDDH
2.4 The comments of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
2.5 The adoption of the proposal by the Committee of Ministers
3 The content of the Tromsø Convention
4 The Aarhus Convention and the Tromsø Convention
4.1 Introduction
4.2 The right of access in the Aarhus Convention and the Tromsø Convention compared
4.2.1 The objective
4.2.2 The scope
4.2.3 The expression of the right of access
4.2.4 Relation with a broader right of access
4.2.5 Non-discrimination principle
4.2.6 Possible limitations of the right of access
4.2.7 Procedural aspects of the right of access
4.2.8 Appeal procedures
4.2.9 Implementation of the conventions
5 Conclusion

Chapter 5 Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making. Interactions Between the Convention and EU Law and Other Key Legal Issues in its Implementation in the Light of the Opinions of the Aarhus Convention Compliance
Committee

Jerzy Jendro?ka
1 Introduction
2 Nature and scope of legal obligations under the second pillar
2.1 Public participation and the structure of decision-making
2.2 Overview of the legal regimes for public participation under the Convention
2.3 The Convention and the ‘ladder of public participation’
2.4 Public participation under the Aarhus Convention and EIA/SEA
3 Approach to implementation in the EU
4 Legal status of the Convention and of the implementing directives in EU Member States
4.1 The Aarhus Convention as a ‘mixed agreement’
4.2 Direct effect of the Aarhus Convention
4.3 Direct application of directives
4.4 Obligations stemming from the Aarhus Convention in relation to secondary Community law
5 Clarity and coherence of legal framework
6 Article 6 versus Article 7 decisions
6.1 Significance of the issue
6.2 Contextual basis
6.3 Criteria
6.4 Practical solution
7 Subject of the obligations
7.1 Unclear who is obliged
7.2 Developer’s responsibility for carrying out public participation procedure
7.3 Obligation to provide for public participation under Article 7
8 Subject of rights
8.1 Different approaches
8.2 Concept of ‘the public’ and its derivatives
8.3 Foreign public
8.4 Subject of rights under the Public Participation Directive
9 ‘Early public participation, when all options are open’
9.1 Scope of obligation
9.2 Legal meaning and impact on decision-making
9.3 ‘Early public participation’ in EU law
10 Reasonable time-frames
10.1 Scope of obligation
10.2 Legal meaning and impact on decision-making
10.3 Time-frames for public participation in EU law
11 Due account taken of the outcome of public participation
11.1 Scope of obligation
11.2 Legal meaning and impact on decision-making
11.3 Substantive obligation and procedural tool to reflect it
11.4 Failure to take due account
12 Conclusions

Chapter 6 EU Rules on Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making Operating at the European and National Levels
Daniela Obradovic
1 Introduction
2 Disparities between EU rules governing national and European level consultations with interest groups on environmental matters prior to the conclusion of the
Aarhus Convention by the EU
3 Disparities between EU rules governing national and European level consultations with interest groups in the area of environmental decision-making subsequently to the EU approval of the Aarhus Convention
3.1 Transposition of the Aarhus requirements in EU law
3.2 Consultation standards
3.3 The enforcement of participation rights
3.3.1 The internal review
3.3.2 Judicial review at EU level
3.3.3 The distinction between the criteria for commencing administrative and judicial review by NGOs for the purpose of protecting their Aarhus participation rights at the
EU level
3.3.4 The justiciability of the Commission’s minimum standards for consulting interested parties
3.3.5 The distinction between national and EU level conditions to be met by NGOs wishing to protect their Aarhus participation rights in courts
4 Recommendations for the elimination of the discrepancies between the EU and national level eligibility criteria for the use and enforcement of Aarhus Convention
participation rights by interest groups

Chapter 7 Aarhus to Helsinki: Participation in Environmental Decision-Making on Chemicals
Veerle Heyvaert
1 Introduction
2 REACH
2.1 Registration
2.2 Evaluation
2.3 Authorisation
2.4 Manufacture, marketing and use restrictions
2.5 Institutional design
2.6 Enforcement
3 Public participation in REACH
3.1 Input
3.2 Throughput
3.2.1 First stage: application
3.2.2 Second stage: review
3.2.3 Third stage: decision
3.3 Output
4 A contextual appraisal of inclusiveness
4.1 The terms of Article 64(2) REACH
4.2 Structuring access to decision-making
4.3 The scope of the REACH Regulation
4.4 Inclusiveness through integration
4.5 The organisation of interest representation
5 Conclusion

Chapter 8 Shaping Transnational Public Participation Norms in the Field of Modern Biotechnology. Time for a Global Good Governance Approach?
Mihail Kritikos
1 Introduction
2 Good governance and public participation in decision-making structures
3 Open-field biotechnology as a distinct object of regulatory attention on public participation issues
4 Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and public participation: negotiation and further elaboration
4.1 Negotiation of the Protocol’s public participation clauses
4.2 The adopted provisions
5 Further elaboration of the Cartagena Protocol
6 The Aarhus Convention, agricultural biotechnology and public participation
6.1 The general provisions of the Convention on public participation
6.2 The adoption of the GMO amendment
7 Aarhus and Cartagena: uneasy coexistence or harmonious co-development?
8 Public participation in a biosafety context: servant of two masters or much ado about nothing?
9 Conclusions

Chapter 9 Access to Justice at the National Level. Impact of the Aarhus Convention and European Union Law
Jonas Ebbesson
1 Direct and indirect impact of the Aarhus Convention
2 Institutions: compliance review by the ACCC and the ECJ
3 Norms: access to justice in the Aarhus Convention and EU law
3.1 Minimum standards for three categories of decisions, acts and omissions
3.2 Access to justice concerning requests for environmental information
3.2.1 Forum and review procedure
3.2.2 Access
3.2.3 Scope of review
3.2.4 Remedies
3.2.5 Costs
3.2.6 Preliminary conclusion
3.3 Access to justice concerning permits and decision-making for specific activities
3.3.1 Forum and review procedure
3.3.2 Access
3.3.3 Scope of review
3.3.4 Remedies
3.3.5 Costs
3.3.6 Preliminary conclusion
3.4 Access to justice concerning other acts and omissions
3.4.1 A broad spectrum of challengeable acts and omissions
3.4.2 Forum and review procedure
3.4.3 Access
3.4.4 Scope of review
3.4.5 Remedies
3.4.6 Costs
3.4.7 Preliminary conclusion
4 Conclusions

Chapter 10 Access to Environmental Justice at EU Level. Has the ‘Aarhus Regulation’ Improved the Situation?
Marc Pallemaerts
1 Introduction
2 Entitlement to apply for internal review
3 Acts subject to internal review
4 Procedure for consideration of requests for internal review
5 Drafting history of the provisions on judicial review
6 Judicial review following internal review
7 Case-law on access to justice for members of the public
8 No evolution in the case-law since the approval of the Aarhus Convention by the EU
9 Aarhus before the Court of First Instance
10 Conclusions

Chapter 11 Access to Environmental Justice. A United Kingdom Perspective
Richard Macrory & Ned Westaway
1 Introduction
2 Signature, ratification and implementation
3 Access to environmental justice
4 Expense of access to justice
5 Calls for a specialist environmental court or tribunal
6 Governmental inaction
7 Concerns from the courts
8 Concerns from NGOs
9 Government interpretation of Article 9(4)
10 Background to the Sullivan Report
11 Main conclusions of the Sullivan Report
11.1 UK courts prohibitively expensive under Aarhus
11.2 Greater use of protective costs orders
11.3 Interim injunctions
11.4 Improved court administration and use of specialist environmental judges
11.5 Number of environmental cases involved
12 Response to Sullivan in the courts
13 Government response to Sullivan and European Commission action
14 Conclusions

Chapter 12 Implementation of the Aarhus Convention in Belgium: Some Elements
Michel Delnoy
1 Introduction
2 General obligations
2.1 Clear, transparent and consistent legal framework
2.2 Environmental education and awareness
2.3 Support for non-governmental organizations
3 Access to information
4 Public participation
5 Access to justice
5.1 Standing for environmental NGOs in review procedures
5.2 Connection between standing in review procedures and participation
5.3 Availability of a review procedure to challenge any decision, act or omission
5.4 Availability of a review procedure for the re-examination of requests for information
6 Cost of review procedures
7 Conclusion

Chapter 13 Locus Standi for Environmental NGOs in Germany: The (Non-)implementation of the Aarhus Convention by the Umweltrechtsbehelfsgesetz. Some Critical Remarks
Gerhard Roller
1 Introduction
2 The traditional concept of standing to sue under German administrative law
3 Some empirical findings concerning NGO lawsuits
4 The obligations concerning locus standi which derive from the Convention and from EU law
4.1 Access to the courts if information is denied
4.2 Access to the courts where participation rights exist (Article 9(2) of the Convention)
5 The German implementing act
6 The German implementation of the associations’ rights under the Environmental Liability Directive
7 Conclusion

Chapter 14 The Interplay between EU Law and International Law Procedures in Controlling Compliance with the Aarhus Convention by EU Member States
Attila Tanzi & Cesare Pitea
1 Introductory remarks
2 On the direct effect of the provisions of the Convention for EU Member States
2.1 The Aarhus Convention and rights for individuals and groups
2.2 The obligation to adopt national implementing legislation is not an obstacle to direct effect
2.3 The flexible language of the Convention is not necessarily an impediment to direct effect
3 The interplay between the compliance mechanism and EU law procedures
3.1 Non-compliance by EU Member States, its impact on the responsibility of the Community and the competence of the Compliance Committee
3.2 The exhaustion of local remedies by the communicant and the identification of the party or parties concerned
3.3 Should the Committee entertain a party-to-party submission when both parties are EU Member States?
3.4 May the case-law of the Compliance Committee have an impact on the ECJ?

Chapter 15 The Future of the Aarhus Convention. Perspectives Arising from the Third Session of the Meeting of the Parties
Jeremy Wates
1 Introduction
2 Achievements of the first decade
3 Strategic Plan for 2009-2014
4 Improving implementation
4.1 Monitoring implementation
4.2 Addressing non-compliance
4.3 Awareness-raising and education
4.4 Capacity building
4.5 Role of civil society
4.6 Legal challenges leading to jurisprudence
4.7 Subsidiary bodies
5 Geographical expansion
6 Thematic development
6.1 Information
6.2 Public participation
6.3 Access to justice
7 Sustainable development and participatory democracy
7 Conclusions

Bibliography