The windbags are opened by the decision of the European Court against Switzerland that links environmental issues with public health – Cypriot citizens and organizations can now seek justice at the European level – The specific case is also being studied by the Legal Service, explains the Ministry. Georgia
Well-known cases like the “Astrasol” factory are coming back to the fore, as well as other bad ones – environmental – having the Cypriot reality, after the decision – station of the European Court of Human Rights against Switzerland. Specifically, the European Court of Justice condemned Switzerland a few days ago for its failure to implement effective measures to combat climate change, ruling that it constitutes a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights.
This is the first such decision against a state, which sets an important judicial precedent and is expected to create domino developments in various European countries, among them Cyprus. The lawyer Achilleas Dimitriadis and the Professor of Environmental Health at the Cyprus International Institute of TEPAK, Konstantinos Makris, were yesterday at SIGMA and the show Mesimeri and Kati, where, analyzing the impact of the case in question, they spoke of an unprecedented decision that now opens the way for Cypriot citizens and organizations to seek justice at the European level for environmental issues affecting public health.
The decision, as explained by Mr. Dimitriadis, affects Cyprus since it is a member of the Council of Europe and therefore, the decisions of the European Court are guiding for the countries – members who are not part of the decision, while they are binding, for those directly involved. He also expressed the certainty that in any case a new environment is being created.
Citizens vs Switzerland you scored 1
Describing, initially, the history of the decision, Achilleas Dimitriadis characterized the case as “very interesting”, explaining that four women, over 60 years old, and a Non-Governmental Organization took Switzerland before the European Court, with the accusation that it did not has done enough to prevent climate change with all that it entails for their health.
The issue, as he said, was examined at two levels: At the procedural level and at the substance level. After focusing on the importance of these two strands, Mr. Dimitriadis focused on how the Court, with its decision, essentially expanded the concept of residence, as defined in Article 8 of the Convention (Right to respect for private and family life).
“The concept of residence, Article 8 is broader than the narrow meaning of the words that the Convention had when it was made in 1950,” he noted, adding that the Court interpreted the Convention in a more expansive way, so that the quality of life, the non-protection from climate change, environmental issues and so on to be included in article 8. He expressed the opinion that this decision now opens the way for states to be controlled by organizations that represent these rights. The main issue, as he pointed out, was for the Court to establish, firstly, whether procedurally the complainants could be heard, and secondly, that in essence the right to residence was “broader” than what we knew until now.
< strong>Now human right and personal interest
Commenting on the fact that the concept of environmental pollution is now leaving the purely activist agenda and moving to human rights and self-interest, Mr. Dimitriadis agreed, adding that self-interest is an expanded concept of residence, which residence also includes the environment and within it is life, health, well-being and a good quality of life, which states have a positive obligation to maintain for the benefit of their citizens who will be able to live well. “To live well in a country is a right that the country has an obligation to ensure,” he added.
Cyprus also in the dance
When asked whether he believes that such cases will start to be launched in Cyprus as well, Mr. Dimitriadis replied that the concept of legal activism is very important because with this way “the ladies from Switzerland have paved the way for issues of environmental protection”, something that has been done at the level of the Council of Europe.
As he pointed out, in Cyprus we do not have a constitutional right for the environment, however, based on international treaties, such as for example the European Convention on Human Rights, it has increased power over domestic law, as it prevails over domestic legislation. He also warned that these initiatives need time and procedures, while referring to cases such as the Astrasol factory, Vassilikos and the asphalt plants, he said that they constitute examples “that at the end of the day if the citizens are not vindicated in the internal courts of Cyprus, they will end up to the European Court of Justice”. “I see it being done”, he emphasized, underlining that “they will have one more weapon, that of protecting the home in the broad sense that includes the environment”.
Case study the pollutants of the EAC<< /strong>
Mr. Dimitriadis focused on the issue of the pollution of the Cyprus Electricity Authority, characterizing it as a problem, which is there. As he characteristically stated “we overcome it or better we wash it away with about 1 million euros a day, as a fee for this pollution”. He added that this is one side of the coin, explaining that even though we pay 1 million per day, we breathe their pollutants. “So this influx of pollutants is definitely not helping our health,” implying that this is a clear case of an environmental issue with public health implications.
Good timing for Astrasol >
Commenting on the development with the European Court, Professor Constantinos Makris said that this is an “unprecedented court decision”, since for the first time, as he said, the climate crisis is “interpreted” as a crisis for human health issues, the protection of public health and, more generally, of well-being and quality of life.
As he mentioned, we had a vulnerable sub-population group (the ladies over 60), who managed to raise the issue before the highest judicial body of the EU, something that Cyprus also recently did with the issue of Astrasol and the effect that its function may have had on human health.
It is recalled that in 2017 the District Court of Nicosia vindicated the 22 families who appealed to it and who had lost loved ones due to cancer or had fallen ill. At the time the court had awarded €50,000 in compensation to each family of a deceased or cancer patient, which was not paid pending an appeal by the Supreme Court. Five years later, in 2022, the Supreme Court ruled, following an appeal filed by the factory owner's defense lawyers, that there was not the required testimony that residents had contracted cancer as a result of the factory's operation, with the complainants appealing to the European Court of Human Rights.
“It's a new beginning”, Mr. Makris pointed out, adding that “since there is a legal framework, it will better help the competent states and authorities to update any programs and legislations related to the climate crisis, health issues and environmental issues”. Emphasizing this point, Mr. Makris emphasized that we should not disconnect environmental issues from health issues, because they are interrelated and only if we look at them holistically will we be able to better convince the citizens, and also for the implementation to be more effective of any proposed control measures.
Min. of Agriculture: The case is being studied by the Legal Service
In her intervention, the Minister of Agriculture, Maria Panagiotou, stated that in addition to judicial precedent, there is pan-European interest in the decision of the European Court of Justice. He also revealed that the specific case is also being studied by the Legal Service.
“In general, however, the whole effort to live in a healthy environment starts first of all from the fact that this is now an inalienable right of every citizen”, he noted, assuring that all these problems, outstanding issues and the efforts that must be made for to live in a healthy environment have already been identified and recorded in the governance program.
Our health the biggest motivation
“The reason I say this is because we need to emphasize the political will that exists and to change and improve our infrastructure, to the extent that this can be done in an island state with its particularities and to naturally change habits and way of thinking about how we deal with our daily lives,” he pointed out, noting that there is a lot of work that needs to be done top-down and top-down. “It's not a job that concerns one person or political will,” he added, emphasizing that “there is no greater motivation than our health” and that we don't always have to wait for someone to give us a strong financial incentive.
< p>“Climate change and its consequences are a daily phenomenon,” he said, citing examples such as limited rainfall, fires and extreme weather events, while declaring that no one needs to convince us. “What is important is to give the tools, to make these changes and the infrastructure needed to be more ready and more adapted to these changes,” he concluded.
See it video here:
source: Economy Today
