International Environmental Law Protection & Human Right Issues I

1. Introduction

1. What is International Environmental Law and Human Right?

Figure 1 Short recap for the whole topic.

Figure 2 Introduction of Environmental Law Protection & Human Rights

The existence of environmental law is due to the awareness that increased over the years. It can be defined as a set of rules and regulations, policies, and principles that enforced by a country also international entities that concerned with the maintenance and protection of the environment. Besides that, the modern international environmental law can be referred directly to international legal developments that took place in the 19th century (Sands, 2003). It is reflecting the massive developments of scientific knowledge such as an application of new technologies and understanding about their impacts toward human life and toward all living things. In addition, it also concerns about the flora and fauna that coincided with industrialization and the use of mineral resources. Due to this awareness, the early environmental laws start developed at national level.

Besides that, the formation and adoption of environmental laws has raised up the importance of human rights in the context of environmental impacts toward life, health, and property of the people (Boyle, 2012). According to Brundland Commission Report on a set of General Principles Rights and Responsibilities, the fundamental of human rights is all the human beings own the fundamental right to have a safe environment for their health and well-being. However, everyone entitled to respect the human rights that stated in Article 3(1) United Nations system and the modern human rights regime (1945),

“Promotion and encouragement of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion” (Rehman, 2003).

If there are a people that violate the human rights that own by a person, she or he entitled to be punished by the law. The existence of the Human Rights Committee also helpful in term of providing the general comments that relate to various rights. In this globalization era, the participation from state and non-state actors is vital in order to ensure the environmental law being successfully implemented. It has stated on the Stockholm Declaration on Principle 21, which the state has the right to exploit their own resources, and at the same time they need to ensure that the activities within their jurisdiction and do not cause harm and damage to the environment of others state that beyond their limits of national jurisdiction. The non-state actors like oil rigs also need to follow the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea which they are bound to the obligations to protect the marine environment by not simply spread pollution into the sea. This both actors play an important role in order to protect the human right related to do environmental protection.

1.0.1 How does Environmental Law affect Human Right?

Stockholm Declaration proclaims that this globalization era, a human has the capability to transform his surroundings in term of rapid development, in order to enhance their own benefit and the economic development of the country. Every action that taken by a human in term of massive development such factory will shape the environment into what it will be in the future (Burhenne & Jahnke, 1993). Due to the massive development in this 4th industrial revolution, there are many contaminations occur in different types and situation. In order to achieve the environmental goal, it demands the responsibility of the citizens, communities, and institution at every level. Due to the environmental problem that commonly occurs today, the needs of law that subjected to the environmental protection is compulsory to protect the human right which is the right to have a safe environment. For instance, New York has implemented the Convention on the Rights of the Child that subjected to environmental protection in respect toward the Child’s right to health. This kind of rules and regulations help a lot in term of protecting the right of the children from being violated by the irresponsible party. Moreover, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and UN Special Rapporteur on human rights cooperate together to promote and exchange opinion toward good practices on the use of human rights obligations to support the environmental policymaking. However, the exploitation of the natural environment or resources is essential for every human being.

Human has manipulating the natural resources in order to produce food and materials for the purpose of growing human populations. Due to the struggle for survival and to develop the country, the people itself indirectly has creates a lot of negative impacts toward the environment. Thus, the impacts such as over-exploitation resources that lead to the destruction of the ecosystem have raised up the environmental problem. According to Principle 2 of Stockholm Declaration, the natural resources of the earth such as air, water, land and so on must be safeguarded for the benefit in present and especially for future generations through planning or appropriate management. Every activity that conducted against this principle will direct violating the Article 1 of the Rio Declaration, which is the human beings “entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature” (LawTeacher, 2018).

It is undeniable that international environmental law exists for the sake to protect the human rights that subjected to environmental protection. People have the rights to breathe fresh air without pollution, and they also have the right to live in a better place and safe environment without any disease that exists from the environmental problem. The existence of international law also helps the states to deal with others country that try to spread the pollution either indirect or directly into their territory. For instance, the case of air pollution which is the haze that been spread away by Indonesia to Malaysian territory due to the open burning. This issue has violated the human rights of Malaysian people because many schools need to be closed due to the disease that causes from the haze. By the international environmental law, it will guide both countries to settle down the problem in a peaceful manner.

1.0.3 Environmental Human Right Protection in General

International arena concern with the human rights protection not only in regional aspects but also in international level. It also included a specific human right to environment at universal level which included the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) which both of this adopted in 1966. Besides that, the international community has also created the international legal instruments, specialized organs and agencies that not only focusing in international but also in regional levels in order to respond and to identify any problems that occur in the particular area. In fact, the human right had a strong relationship with the health and environmental. Somehow, the health has seemed to be subject that bridges the human rights and environmental protection. In addition, the international conference on the human environment that held in Stockholm in 1972 declaring that,

“Man is both creature and moulder of his environment, which gives him physical sustenance and affords him the opportunity for intellectual, moral, social and spiritual growth…. Both aspects of man’s environment, the natural and the man-made, are essential to his well-being and to the enjoyment of basic human rights even the right to life itself” (International Conference in Stockholm 1972).

Furthermore, the Principle 1 of the Stockholm Declaration has also created the foundation for linking the human rights, health and environment protection. This principle declaring that the man has its own rights of freedom and equality in a safe environment that guarantee a life of dignity and well-being. However, there are some non-binding which is a soft law that widely accepted and adopted the declarations that supporting the individual’s right to clean environment. For instance, World Charter 1982 for nature was the first instruments that recognise the right of the individuals to participate in decision-making to redress the environmental problem. Moreover, most of the human rights treaties are drafted and adopted before the environment protection being implemented and become a matter for the international concerns. For instance, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966 has stated in Article 7 b that the person entitles to have the right to safe and healthy working condition while in Article 10-3 stated the right of the children and young persons to be free from work.

In fact, the world starts to care about the right of the child to free from work harmful their health due the first industrial revolution that taken place in Britain and United States. During this time, there is a high demand for labour. The children employ as a “Pauper apprentices” and “Scavengers”, they work under hazardous condition which unhealthy and dangerous to their physical and directly affect their mental. Thus, the need of law that subjected to protect their right is a must and to support their rights to safe and health the implementation of environmental law is compulsory. Somehow, there are several committees that has been form in order to ensure the environmental human rights protection well-implement. Firstly, the committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDEW). This committee linked environment to the right to health that focus on woman protection. CEDEW concerns about the environment situation such as industrial accidents and the impacts to the woman’s health. Next, the United Nation Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. This committee work through Periodic Reporting. This procedure the states need to report on their environmental issues that affect to their citizen rights to safe environment. For instance, in 1995 Ukraine reported their environmental situation due to the explosion at Chernobyl and the committee will work together to find out the solution to redress the problem (Joint UNEP-OHCHR Expert Seminar on Human Rights and the Environment , 2002).

Additionally, human rights and environmental protection are really interdependent. A safe, clean and healthy environment is importance for the enjoyment of human rights such as freedom of education, expression and participation in term of protection of the environment. The regional levels also play its role in order to implement the environmental human right protection. For instance, Article 42 of the constitution Kenya 2010 provides the right to clean and healthy environment. This article includes the right of the people to lives in a condition in which the environment is protected for the benefit in present and future generations through various measures and obligations relating the environment (Wasonga, 2018). Besides, the Rio Declaration on Principle 13 also stresses the role of national law to protect the environment and human rights.

“All States and all people shall co-operate in the essential task of eradicating poverty as an indispensable requirement for sustainable development, in order to decrease the disparities in standards of living and better meet the needs of the majority of the people of the world” (The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development 1992).

2. Practices of Environmental Protection and Human Rights

2.0.1 Practices in United Nations

Under United Nations, there are two main covenants that focus on the human right matter which known as International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) (Press, 1967). Where both of these covenants were adopted in 1966 and had been bind by the countries that ratify them (Code, 2005). However, through these years, both of these agreements had been oblivious on the environmental right (Beyerlin & Marauhn, 2011). Beyerlin and Marauhn further discuss in the International Environmental Law book, at global stage the right to water issue had been debating from many years back and finally in 2010, the UN General Assembly declared that “the right to safe and clean drinking water and sanitation as a human right that is essential for the full enjoyment of life and all human right’. According to a news article by Clark, 2010, the discussion on the issue had been started since early 2002 which strengthen throughout the years until 2010.

Despite the notable effort from the UN Convenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (UNCESCR) not all countries votes in favour to the issue whereby 122 countries votes in favour, zero votes agaisnt and 41 countries abstained from voting (UN News, 2010). Some of the countries, namely Australia absatining themselves to ratify the covenant based on the rationale that the composition and implications of the right to water and sanitation have not yet been meticulously studied (Clark, 2010). There are also other ecological human right related cases that been put under ICCPR which mostly about the right to lands of the indigenous peoples and some other cases (Beyerlin & Marauhn, 2011). One of the cases that reviewed on the right to lands of the indigenous people is the Poma Poma v Peru (2009), whereby it dealt with a conflict over the exploitation of water (Göcke, 2010). According to a journal article by Katja Göcke, The Case of Angela Poma Poma v Peru before the Human Rights Committee, the case was brought by Ms Poma Poma, one of the Aymara people that was affected by the building of wells by the Peru government. Göcke further reported in the paper that conclusively the Human Rights Committee decision was not only praised as it was relevance to the claimant but also the government of Peru. The decision was that the Aymara people regain their right over the water which aligned with the Article 2(3)(a) ICCPR (Each State Party … (a) To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognized are violated shall have an effective remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity…) (Beyerlin & Marauhn, 2011).

Figure 3 More explanation on how Environment is related to Human Rights by United Nation

2.0.2 Practices in Africa

Figure 4 ACHPR Logo

As for 47 African countries, they owned The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights or known as African Commission as the body that secure and advocate the human right in the region (Beyerlin & Marauhn, 2011). Beyerlin and Marauhn further explain in the book that the African Commission had documented Banjul Charter or also known as the 1981 African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights which had foreseen the founding of the African Court of Human and People’s Right. However, until today the Court has yet performed any act even though 15 of the African countries has ratify the protocol on early 2004 (Beyerlin & Marauhn, 2011). This means that the only body that uphold the Banjul Charter is the African Commission.

Prior to present time, the one and only case that the African Commission had handled was the Ogoni Land case (Beyerlin & Marauhn, 2011). Ogoni Land case was a dispute between the Ogoni people and the joint company of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC) with the Shell Petroleum Development Corporation (SPDC) (Coomans, 2003). Coomans discussed in his paper “The Ogoni Case before the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights”, both of the company had violated Articles 2 (non-discriminatory enjoyment of rights), 4 (right to life), 14 (right to property), 16 (right to health), 18 (family right), 21 (right of peoples to freely dispose of their wealth and natural resources) and 24 (right of peoples to a satisfactory environment) to the Ogoni people under the Banjul Charter. Moreover, the complainants, the Social and Economic Rights Action Centre (SERAC) and the Centre for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) claimed that the Nigerian government had never supervised the procedure of the oil companies or enforced safety criterion to the companies. The outcome of the case is noteworthy where the act of both, the companies that involved and the Nigerian government were condemned, in addition to the Commission adopt plainly the complainant’s statement which fully satisfy the complainant side (Coomans, 2003). Coomans further argued in his paper that the effort and attempt by the Commission was remarkable however in the future there are a lot of improvement that could be made. Nonetheless, we must be noted that all of the Commission’s resolution and judgment are not legally binding (Beyerlin & Marauhn, 2011). This Ogoni Land case proved that there are practices in environmental protection and human right in the African region.

Figure 5 Africa Map

2.0.3 Practices in Americas

Figure 6 IACHR Logo

On the contrary, in Americas, there are both the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights which their cases mainly focus on the indigenous people rights.

One of the cases that handled by the Inter-American Commission is the Mary and Carrie Dann v United States (2002) which it was a case that involves two sisters, Mary Dann and Carrie Dann or their company known as Western Shoshones as the claimants against the Bureau of Land Management of the United States (Beyerlin & Marauhn, 2011). Beyerlin and Marauhn wrote that the Inter-American Commission later surmise that the Bureau of Land Management of the United States had neglected the Western Shoshones right to property which lies under the American Declaration. The article that supported the claimant statement are Article II (Right to equality before law), Article XVIII (Right to a fair trial) and Article XXIII (Right to property) which embedded in the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties and Man (American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, 1948). Based on article by Mark D. Preston, (1998, p13), in Febuary 1998, United States Bureau of Land Management had filed a noticed of illegitimate grazing use against the Western Shoshones with addition of a total $852,000 fee. The Danns and the Western Shoshone then counter the act by filing for a decree to stop the fine (D.Preston, 1948). This case proves that the Commission do have their attention to the indigenous in Americas region.

Figure 7 Mary & Carrie Dann

Meanwhile, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights also had handled several cases which include the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tigni Community v Nicaragua (2001), the Claude Reyes and Others v Chile (2006) and the Samaraka People v Suriname (2007). The Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tigni Community v Nicaragua (2001) case was about the logging of timber activity in Awas Tigni land (Beyerlin & Marauhn, 2011). The activity was sponsored by the government of Nicaragua and resulted to the declaration by the Court that the state had defied the Article 21 (right to property) and Article 25 (right to judicial protection). Therefore, both of these cases showed the practices of environmental protection and human right in Americas.

Figure 8 America Map

2.0.4 Practices in Asia

Figure 9 ASEAN Logo

As for in Asia, the charter of ASEAN which is Association of Southeast Asian Nations, adopted on 20th November 2007, commits itself in Article 2(i) inter alia, to the promotion and protection of human rights, and requires ASEAN in Article 14(1) to establish an ‘ASEAN human rights body’. The Article 2(i) of United Nation of Human Right is the main idea and references that lead to the formation of the ASEAN Human Rights. However, until this moment, there is still no regional human rights mechanism for ASEAN due to the ASEAN policy in non-interference. (Secretariat, 2008)

Figure 10 ASEAN Human Right

2.0.5 Practises in Europe

Figure 11 ECHR

Compared to others country that we have mentioned before, Europe holds a very advanced system in the ecological human rights protection. They have European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) that contains lots of ‘classic’ civil and political rights to the exclusion of economic and social rights. ECHR is a judicial organ established in 1959 that is charged with supervising the enforcement of the Convention for the protection of Human Rights and fundamental freedoms. Nevertheless, the ECHR still lacks in any specific guarantee for the environment but, as one of the great instruments, ECHR is flexible enough to say that it can guarantee accommodating the environmental protection. Over the years, they have been an ecological jurisprudence unsurpassed in another regional human rights system. Besides, with the European Court of Human Right, they also have been developing a ‘green’ case law based on the right to private life as guaranteed in Article 8(1) ECHR, which everyone entitle to ‘the rights to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence’.

As a result, there have been a few green case laws on greening the human rights such as the Powell and Rayner v. United Kingdom (1990) and Budayeva case (2000). For the first case, Powell and Rayner v. United Kingdom, Powell and Rayner assumed that the United Kingdom had been violating the 1950 ECHR under Article 8 which is ‘everyone has the right to respect for his private life and his family and there shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of the economic well-being of the country’, by letting Heathrow Airport to operate and caused an excessive levels of aircraft noise. However, this case was justified as a necessary in democratic society for the economic wellbeing of the United Kingdom. Meaning that, the court justified this as a condition whereby the airport operation is more important than the sensitivity of the noise it produces. It is claimed that it is reasonable justification. This shows that there are cases where the law cannot be used to help us to claim our rights. It is also has been recognised as ‘undeniable link between the protection of the environment and the enjoyment of other human rights’.

However, it is not the same case for the Budayeva case, where the law finally helps the people (individual) to gain their lawfully right. In Budayeva case, there had been a mudslide that swept through a town in the central of Caucasus that killed few people and destroy almost all the buildings in the town. It is claimed that Russia had violated Article 2 in ECHR, ‘safeguards the right to life and sets out the circumstances when deprivation of life may be justified, ranks as one of the most fundamental provisions in the Convention, from which no derogation is permitted’. This is because, the authorities of Russia have been neglecting their duty in taking preventive measure when a natural hazard were identified and there are no effective measures to mitigate the risk were available to them. The state was found guilty as the environmental accident was happened because of the industrial activities. (Beyerlin & Marauhn, 2011)

Figure 12 Brief Explanation about ECHR

Figure 13 Europe map

2.0.6 Environmental Rights of Indigenous People

Figure 14 For better understanding on Indigenous people human rights, please watch this video.

Indigenous people are no exception in environmental rights, they are sharing the same right of ‘all people’ under the Article 1(2): ‘All people may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudiced to nay obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence’. There are also instrument that can protect indigenous people which is the first one is, ILO Convention Concerning the Protection and Integration of Indigenous Populations and the second one is, Integration of Indigenous Populations and Other Tribal and Semi Populations in the Independent Countries (Convention No 107) of 2nd June 1959. To illustrate the use of environmental law for indigenous people, there is one case that catches our interest which is the Saramaka People v. Suriname case.

In this case, Suriname has been violating the people’s right by adopting new constitution specifying that all non-titled lands and natural resources belong to the State. In the 1990's, Suriname granted logging and mining concessions to private companies within the traditional Saramaka people’s territory without consultation or their consent, however, Saramaka people has been living in the territory since the early 1700s. This action is violating the Saramakan people right because they had the right to use and possess the territory because of their cultural, religious and economic activities that was carried out years before the Constitution were established. The case become intense when the petitioners complained and said that Saramakan is not an indigenous people, so they do not have the right to claim the land. However, the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights decided that, even though the Saramakan were not an indigenous community, they had certain resemblances with traditional indigenous communities and therefore enjoyed the same rights (ESCR,2014). As result, they do not need any title in order to own the lands in their territory and for the petitioner, the court found out that they have violated three rights such as articles 3 (Judicial Personality), 21 (Right to Property) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention of Human Rights in relation with articles 1.1 and 2 (obligations to respect, ensure and to give domestic legal effect of those rights). It asked Suriname to “delimit, demarcate and grant a collective title over the territory of the members of the Saramaka people, in accordance with their customary laws, and through previous, effective and fully informed consultations” (ESCR,2014). Besides that, Suriname are obliged to pay compensation to the Saramaka people as they have interrupted their daily routine.

3. Environmental Protection in Bhutan

3.0.1 Bhutan

Figure 15 Bhutan

Quoting from United Nation Environmental Program website, there are three main idea of the inter-relationship between environmental and human rights. Firstly, “the environment is a pre-requisite for the enjoyment of human rights (human rights obligations of States include the duty to ensure the level of environmental protection necessary to allow the full exercise of protected rights) (UNEP,2013)”. Which mean that in order to enjoy all the privileges in human rights, the State must ensure that the environmental condition is up to standard where the people will have clean air to breathe, clean water to drink and etc. Secondly, “certain human rights, especially access to information, participation in decision-making, and access to justice in environmental matters, as essential to good environmental decision-making (human rights must be implemented in order to ensure environmental protection) (UNEP,2013)”. This statement shows that the people in a state have the right to know about their environmental status, they also have the right to participate in any decision making when it comes to environment. Lastly, the right to a safe, healthy and ecologically-balanced environment is a human right in itself (Programme, 2013). This is the reason why there is a strong relationship between environmental law and human rights.

Environmental protection is not a new thing in Bhutan. It is always has been the centre of their national development thinking and policy making for decades. Despite their small population in the world, they also faced the same problem as other country that are threatening their beautiful and pristine environment. However, they have taken serious action so that they can continue to preserve their country environment and indirectly protecting the citizen human rights. There are a few policy and action that they have taken such as, banning certain agriculture practises, banning plastics bags and the “five-year plan”. First, the banning on certain agriculture practises. In Bhutan, there is a practise whereby the land is cleared and farmed intensively until it becomes unproductive and it is left afterwards by the Sharchops and Lhotshampas. It is called as “shifting cultivation”. This practise can be considered as a poor system of land utilization, and worse, it can cause permanent deforestation, which is contradicting with Bhutan policy in keeping its forest up to 60%. Since this practice is environmentally harmful, the practice has been banned by the government since 1969 until today. Taking from Bhutan Forest Act (1969), section 8(b) “Nothing shall be deemed to prohibit the practice of shifting cultivation in the areas where it was practiced prior to issue of this Act. His Majesty's Government reserves the right to withdraw this concession if such land endangers the safety of the highways and public property. Fresh clearance for shifting cultivation is strictly prohibited and the offender shall be punished” (Bhutan Forest Act,1969).

Secondly, one of the most challenging policy they need to implemented is banning the plastic bags. It is indeed a very daunting challenging for the government because it is practicality of lightweight storage and there is no other feasible alternative that can replace the plastic bags. They banned plastics in 1999 and reinforced the ban in 2005 and 2009 with an aim to reduce the plastic waste in the country. To replace the plastic bags, they have initiate to use cotton bags and cloth bag instead and those who disobey the law will be charge fine. The third initiative is, ‘the five-year plan’ (Ahsan, 2014). The dependency on firewood as a fuel source is high. This is because, before hydroelectric power and other modern energy sources became available in the country, the source of fuel for heating, cooking, and lighting is only using firewood. This firewood harvesting, and management remains one of challenges that they need to overcome. To make Bhutan a self-sustaining country and to improve its current ability to feed itself, the ‘five-year plan’ are established. Besides that, the government also have been implementing green tax where it encourages people to buy environment friendly vehicles. This mean the people who buy this kind of car will be not charge for tax since they do not produce any pollution in Bhutan. The people of Bhutan get to enjoy their human rights well since the government has been doing a great job in protecting the environment.

4. Importance of the environment for the realization of human rights.

Environment is important because how can we live without a clean environment. It is part of our life, so we must protect it at all cost. However, human sometimes tends to be irrational and make decision that will impact our environment either directly or indirectly. Not only that, it will also impact all classes of human rights. It is a given that, environmental quality will impact on our ability to secure our rights. For an example in direct impact is, the decision made by the Nigeria government by allowing the Shell company doing some crude oil exploration that has resulted a serious damaged to the environment in Niger Delta in 2014. It is directly impact to the people who live nearby Niger Delta as the gas flaring produces so much CO2 and it also caused noise pollution, itching, rashes, black dust and soot that settle in the people house. This can decrease the quality of human life and directly violating the right of the people to live in healthy environment. While for indirect impact is, we can take Syria as example. Syria has a combination of extreme drought and natural resources mismanagement. Negligence of the government are leaving impact to its people and their future generation. The government overlooked about this matter due to the conflict that happen in Syria. Hence, it has indirectly affected the environment in the country and contribute in the climate change. Climate change are expected to last until 2050 in Syria.

5.Conclusion

In conclusion, the environmental law and human rights are interdependent in order to provide a safe environment for all living things. Besides, in this 4th industrial revolution we are not able to develop our country and at the same time protecting the environment. Every development that been made by the human does not only harm the people but also the flora and fauna. As we know, every law especially environmental law will not be enforced unless there is a Plaintiff. This situation show that the existence of environmental law is very significant to protect those in need. All the cases that had been mention before show how the human manipulated the resources without thinking about the environment. Every actor also plays it significant role to protect the human and environment from the irresponsible party that violate their rights which is the rights to have a safe environment. Environmental law become a guideline that remind all the countries to fully protect their environment for the benefit in present and for the future generations. Every environmental law that had been implemented also need to be rationale. As we know, every country has a different environment and the law also must be suitable with the environment. For instance, the country that become the major producer in oil sector like Nigeria need to focus and strictly implement a law that related to the oil waste. Somehow, in this 21st century every country in this world compete to develop their country. People that living in developed country are more exposed to environmental problem due to the rapid development.

Link to our Prezi : https://prezi.com/view/c8Kt316W6zG64kJyS5w2

 

References

Article

Boyle, A. (2012, October 11). Human Rights and the Environment: Where Next?

Act, B. F. (1969). InforMEA. Retrieved from https://www.informea.org/en/legislation/bhutan-forest-act-1969

Conference Proceedings

Joint UNEP-OHCHR Expert Seminar on Human Rights and the Environment . (2002)., (p. 5). Geneva.

Book

Jahnke, W. B. (1993). INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONEMNTAL SOFT LAW (Collection of Relevant Instruments). Netherlands : Kluwer Academic .

Rehman, J. (2003). International Human Rights Law ( A Practical Approach ). Great Britain: Longman.

Sands, P. (2003). Principles of International Environment Law ( Second Edition ). United Kingdom: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.

Beyerlin, U., & Marauhn, T. (2011). International Environmental Law. In U. Beyerlin, & T. Marauhn, Environmental Protection and Human Rights (pp. 391-405). Oxford: Hart publishing Ltd.

Code, W. M. (2005). Sovereignty Relinquished? Explaining Commitment to the International Human Rights. American Sociological Review, Vol. 70, No. 3, 472-495.

Coomans, F. (2003). The Ogoni Case before the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights. The International and Comparativve Law Quarterly, Vol. 52, No. 3 , 749-760.

D.Preston, M. (1948). Sister fight for treaty rights. Progressive. Nov98, Vol. 62 Issue 11, p13. 3/4p. 1 Black and White Photograph. , 13.

Göcke, K. (2010). The Case of Àngela Poma Poma v Peru before the Human Rights Committee. Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law, Volume 14, 337-370.

Press, C. U. (1967). United Nations: Human Rights Covenants. The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 61, No. 3, 861-890.

Beyerlin, U., & Marauhn, T. (2011). International Environmental Law. In Environmental Protection and Human RIght (pp. 398-404). Oxford: Hart Publishing Ltd.

Website

McDivitt, J. F. (2018, October 3). ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA . Retrieved from Indonesia : https://www.britannica.com/place/Indonesia

LawTeacher. (2018). Right to environment of human right. Retrieved from https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/human-rights/right-to-environment-of-human-right.php

Wasonga, B. (2018, September 14). Environmental, human rights protection should be safeguarded. Retrieved from StandardDigital : https://www.standardmedia.co.ke/article/2001295540/environmental-human-rights-protection-should-be-safeguarded

American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man. (1948).

Clark, C. (2010, September 29). Why didn't Australia support the human right to water? Retrieved from ABC News: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-08-02/35644

General Assembly declares access to clean water and sanitation is a human right. (2010, July 28). Retrieved from UN News: https://news.un.org/en/story/2010/07/346122-general-assembly-declares-access-clean-water-and-sanitation-human-right

Bhutan, L. (2018). Retrieved from Bhutan : https://www.littlebhutan.com/bhutan

Programme, U. N. (2013). UN Environment. Retrieved from http://web.unep.org/divisions/delc/human-rights-and-environment