Clean air as a human right
If you are reading this from a city in a high-income country, you have about a one in two chance of breathing in air that exceeds World Health Organisation guidelines for air pollution. That is worrying enough, but if you live in a city in a low or middle-income country, the chances of breathing in clean air are much slimmer still - 97 per cent of cities in these countries do not meet air quality guidelines.
Most of the global population is exposed without their consent to hazardous substances and wastes that increase their likelihood of developing diseases and disabilities throughout their lives. In some cases, it has the potential to be a human rights violation.
The World Health Organisation estimates that 23 per cent of all deaths worldwide - a total to 12.6 million people in 2012 - are exposed to environmental risks. Low and middle-income countries bear the brunt of pollution-related illnesses, with a disproportionate impact on children, women and the most vulnerable. Air pollution alone kills an estimated seven million people worldwide every year.
In response to this, the United Nations Human Rights Council established a mandate on human rights and the environment in March 2012, to study the human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, healthy and sustainable environment. The UN Environment Programme (UNEP) works closely with the Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment, David R. Boyd.
What would the world look like if the enjoyment of a healthy environment was indeed universally recognised as a fundamental human right?
First and foremost, the sound management of chemicals and waste would have to be prioritised, according to the UNEP. Without the sound management of chemicals and waste across the world, it would be impossible to achieve equality, justice and human dignity for all.
Second, knowledge and information sharing on these topics would have to improve, as well as the engagement of vulnerable people. Environmental issues are best handled with the participation of all concerned citizens.
Third, the right to an effective remedy would have to be emphasised, in the case that the damage has already been done. The right to an effective remedy is well established under international human rights law. For example, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees victims of human rights violations an effective remedy. This has been interpreted to include environmental wrongs that adversely affect human rights. Most national constitutions and domestic legal frameworks also provide for these rights.
Fourth, systems would have to be put in place that support these efforts in all parts of the world and all sectors of the global economy. The UNEP calls for a more comprehensive global framework that protects people from a toxic environment and addresses injustices worldwide resulting in risks to human health. Solutions exist to eliminate and reduce exposure to toxic pollution, but strong international cooperation is required to ensure that these solutions lead to sustainable development and the protection of human rights.
From Law Desk (SOURCE: UN.ORG).
Comments