Volume 19: Issue | Numéro 1 (2022)
Valérie Dupont and Marc-Antoine Racicot
In 2017, the Government of Quebec adopted the Act respecting the conservation of wetlands and bodies of water, setting a goal of no net loss for wetlands and relying on the mitigation hierarchy (avoid, mitigate, compensate) to regulate human activities that may affect their integrity. To implement this last step in the hierarchy, the Government of Quebec opted for a public compensation fund in which permittees must pay a financial contribution (“in-lieu fee”) instead of relying on permittee-responsible measures or wetland mitigation banks. These contributions must be used by the fund manager to finance wetland restoration and creation projects. Although appealing, this approach is not without its pitfalls. Whereas such a public fund can be invested more strategically by aggregating measures and by locating them in priority areas, the ex post implementation raises interim losses. In addition, the equivalency between losses and gains is more difficult to ensure. In practice, many funds have failed to provide equivalent offsets in many jurisdictions for a variety of reasons, including the fees being insufficient, the funds not being spent in a timely manner, a lack of enforcement, a lack of adequate structure, or a lack of additionality. In light of these issues, this article critically reviews the legal safeguards that have been established in Quebec to ensure the effective implementation of compensatory measures.
Federico Díaz Chacón
Countless historically contaminated territories currently exist in the world. This problem is even more complex when contaminated territories are located near populated areas, affecting the right to life, health, physical and psychological integrity, and a healthy environment for inhabitants. In this context, litigation has become an important instrument for advancing human rights. Nonetheless, many of these human rights cases do not produce the positive results that are expected, both in the short term and long term. As such, this article examines how the legal system could effectively address historical environmental problems that affect human rights. This article develops a comparative analysis of two well-known cases of historical environmental contamination in Chile that occurred in 2018 and 2019: the Quintero Puchuncaví case and the Copiapó Tierra Amarilla case. Both cases involved a violation of human rights, individual and collective; addressed vulnerable populations and distributive justice; and denounced state omissions. Regardless of these similarities, the processes were carried out differently, with disparate results. This article analyzes the strategies and judicial processes of these cases—and their results to date—and seeks to better understand strategic human rights litigation around historical environmental contamination. Hopefully, this greater comprehension will increase the likelihood of their success and advance the respect and protection of human rights.
Stéphanie Roy
Durant l’hiver 2021, la Municipalité régionale du comté de Minganie et le Conseil des Innu d’Ekuanitshit ont adopté des résolutions pour octroyer des droits ainsi que la personnalité juridique à la rivière Magpie au Québec. Cet événement s’inscrit dans un mouvement qui se développe à travers le monde, soit celui d’octroyer des droits aux rivières, aux fleuves et autres entités naturelles pour en assurer une meilleure protection. L’octroi de droits—voire de la personnalité juridique—à la nature est envisagé comme une solution pour rétablir une relation humain-nature qui reflète leur interconnexion et ainsi dépasser l’éthique anthropocentrique à la base du système juridique actuel. La véritable efficacité de tels droits repose toutefois sur les mécanismes permettant de les mettre en œuvre. Le guardianship encadrant la protection de la rivière Whanganui en Aotearoa Nouvelle-Zélande apparaît prometteur parce qu’il impose des responsabilités à des gardiens chargés de protéger les entités naturelles, ce qui en fait un modèle écocentrique. L’octroi de droits à la nature, qui à lui seul ne saurait remettre en cause les fondements libéraux du système juridique dans lequel ils opèrent, est-il alors la véritable voie à suivre pour mieux la protéger? Cet article fournira des pistes de réflexion à ce sujet, après avoir exposé les enjeux juridiques entourant l’octroi de la personnalité juridique à la rivière Magpie au Québec et les caractéristiques du régime néozélandais mettant en œuvre les droits de la rivière Whanganui.
