Water Quality from the Perspective of International Conventions

1. Water Quality from the Perspective of International Conventions By Ziad Awar

2. Water Quality from the Perspective of International Conventions • What make transboundary water quality different from domestic water quality?? Should a country have different standards for its shared water than for its domestic water??

3. Water Quality from the Perspective of International Conventions • How can water quality and water quantity interact?? Can a country compensate its neighbor country for the bad quality of water by providing a larger volume of water?? • What is a better approach for transboundary water management: No-harm or equitable use?? • Under which conditions compensation (financial or political, etc.) can be an acceptable solution?? Should the polluting state be always obliged to eliminate damages??

4. International Conventions • 1992 UNECE Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (Helsinki convention): ecosystemic approach • 1997 UN Convention on the Law of the Non Navigational uses of  International Watercourses: ecosystem or watercourse??

5. Objectives of the Conventions: To Prevent: • Harm to the water of a watercourse even due to activities taking place outside the actual watercourse if a linkage of interdependence can be established between the ecosystem of the water and the ecosystem of the environment which is primarily affected, or on which the activity has been carried out. • Harm caused by uses of the watercourse to elements of the environment different from the water of the watercourse: Quantity!!!!

6. Helsinki: Problems? • The Helsinki convention define a “Transboundary impact” by an impact which has "effects on human health and safety, flora, fauna, soil, air, water, climate, landscape and historical monuments or other physical structures or the interaction among these factors; they also include effects on the cultural heritage or socio-economic conditions

7. Helsinki:Solutions?? Helsinki convention: Best available economically feasible technology: how to determine what is feasible from a socio-economical perspective??? How pollution remediation or prevention should fit in the overall development priorities of a nation?

8. Ways to Prevention • UN: not well defined • Helsinki: • Set joint water quality objectives and criteria; • Establish techniques and practices to address pollution from point and non-point sources; • Establish lists of substances the introduction of which into the waters of an international watercourse is to be prohibited, limited, investigated or monitored

9. Correction Approaches • Helsinki: Bilateral institutions • UN: • Eliminate harm • Compensate for the harm: • Equitable apportionment of benefits • By private sector to individuals: “polluter-pay” principle: Germany-Switzerland example (Sandoz)

10. ? • How to implement the “Polluter pay” principle?? How domestic and international laws can interact to provide a better protection for environment?? • Should polluter pay directly to the harmed population in the other state or should the governments work together to solve the problems?? How the sovereignty of the states can be affected, if affected, by that?? Can a court have juridical power over citizen of another country living in their own country?? • Should there be an international court for “environmental crimes” as there is a court for “war crimes”?? And if yes, should it deal just with transboundary environmental crimes or should it also deal with domestic environmental crimes?

11. Exchange of Data • UN: no details: notification, communication, consultations and negotiations. • Helsinki: very detailed description

12. Exchange of Data • The two conventions allow States to make the submission of not readily available requested information contingent upon the payment of the costs of collection and, "where necessary". • Both conventions provide a limitation to the obligation to exchange data and information when these are "vital to the national defense or security" of a watercourse State. • While the Helsinki convention provide the right to withhold commercial or industrial information that is deemed confidential, usually pertaining to intellectual property rights, the UN convention deny this “right”.

13. ? • Exchange of data versus security: How to prioritize??? • Exchange of data versus commercial or intellectual rights: how to balance between individual rights and the community right to clean and safe environment??

14. Dispute Resolution: • The Helsinki convention approach to settle dispute is specified by: • Submission of the dispute to the International Court of Justice; • Arbitration in accordance with the procedure set out in annex IV of the convention. • The UN convention offer much more detailed description of the way to settle the disputes. • Helsinki convention requires its members to establish joint institute to manage the water quality issues and problems.

15. ? • How can the international community play a better role in settling disputes regarding transbounday water quality issues??