The Responsibility of States to

Protect Environment
Organization of Lecture
1. Concept of State Responsibility
2. Importance of the concept
3. recognition of the principle by
International instruments
4. Acknowledgement of State
Responsibility through case laws
5. Mechanism to ensure the responsibility
of states
shamsuddin masum

1. Concept of State
Responsibility
The liability of international persons under
the operation of rules of international law.
In general sense, State Responsibility is a
principle of international law imposing
liability on actors for their illegal acts, or for
the adverse consequences of their lawful
activities.
Emerges from the concept of state
sovereignty. How? limitations upon state
soveriegnty.
shamsuddin masum

2. Importance of State
Responsibility
The concept of state responsibility makes an
obligation for states to act in conformity with
the international agreements or customary law.
Since the concept of state responsibility is
applicable to the field of environment, the
breaches of treaty or customary international
law allow the injured state to lodge claim
against injuring (violating) state whether by way
of diplomatic action or by way of recourse to
international mechanism where such are in
place with regard to the subject matter at issue.
shamsuddin masum

2. Recognition of the principle by International instruments

Stockholm declaration, 1972

Principle 21: States have sovereign rights to
exploit natural resources and have responsibility
to ensure that activities so that it does not cause
damage to the environment.
Principle 22: called on states to cooperate to
develop further the international law regarding
liability and compensation for victims of pollution
and other environmental damage caused by
activities within the jurisdiction or control of such
states to areas beyond their jurisdiction.
shamsuddin masum

2. Recognition of the principle by

International instruments (Contd.)
Rio declaration (Declaration on
Environment
and
Development,
1992): Principle 2:
reflects the limited progress which has
occurred since 1972 .it emphasises the
development of national rules addition
to
the
further
development
of
international rules for all adverse effects
of environmental damage including,
implicitly, liability for damage to the
environment itself.
shamsuddin masum

2. Recognition of the principle by

International instruments (Contd.)
Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), 1982:
Article 194 (2): States shall take all measures necessary
to ensure that activities under their jurisdiction do not cause
damage by pollution to other States and their environment.
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), 1982:
Article 3: States have, in accordance with the Charter of
the United Nations and the principles of international law,
the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant
to their own environmental policies, and the responsibility
to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do
not cause damage to the environment of other States or of
areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.

shamsuddin masum

3. State Responsibility under Case

Laws
1. Trail Smelter Case (US Vs Canada), 1931
Fact: The dispute was between United States and Canada
because of the air pollution coming from the Canadian
factory and causing the damage to crops in the United
States.
Decision of Tribunal: Under the principles of international
law, as well as the law of the United States, no state has
the right to use or permit the use of its territory in such
manner as to cause injury by fumes in or to the territory
of another or the properties of person therein, when the
case is of serious consequence and the injury is
established by clear and convincing evidence.
shamsuddin masum

3. State Responsibility under Case

Laws (Contd.)
2.

Corfu Channel Case (UK Vs Albania),

1949
Fact: United Kingdom suffered loss of human lives
and damage to their vessels because the
explosions of mines in Albanias territorial sea.
Decision of ICJ: Stressed that it was Albanias
obligation to notify and warn about those mines.
Court
held
Albania
responsible,
set
the
compensation and declared that obligation of each
state is not to allow knowingly its territory to be
used for acts contrary to the rights of other states.

shamsuddin masum

3. State Responsibility under Case

Laws (Contd.)
3. Lac Lanoux Case (Spain Vs France), 1957
Fact:
the dispute was between Spain and
France about using the lake by France for
generating electricity. It was needed to
redirect part of the water to another river.
Spain claimed that it would affect the interest
of Spanish users of river.
Decision: there was a principle which prohibits
the upstream state from alerting the waters of
a river in such a fashion as seriously to
prejudice downstream state.
shamsuddin masum