|
Minister for the Environment, Heritage
and Local Government (Mr. Roche):
The recent European Court of Justice decision is about where the dispute
between Ireland and the United Kingdom concerning Sellafield should be
litigated. It does not deal with the merits of the dispute itself. In
2001, the Government instituted legal proceedings against the United
Kingdom before the tribunal provided for under the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea. The advice available to the Government
at that time indicated that the dispute resolution procedures provided
under the convention were an appropriate avenue for the litigation of
the issues raised for Ireland by the continued operation of Sellafield.
This advice was based on the best analysis as to the state of Community
and international law at the time. The action in going to UNCLOS was
widely welcomed politically in this House.
The European Commission contested Ireland’s right to take proceedings
under UNCLOS procedures. Ireland considered that national competence
operated in this area and that, consequently, the duty to co-operate
with and consult the Commission on the dispute proceedings with the UK
did not arise. It is interesting to note that in discussions between
Ireland’s legal team and the legal service of the Commission, it was
recognised that these issues were not the subject of settled law at the
time.
The court judgment on 30 May, inter alia, declared that Ireland, by
instituting proceedings against the UK under UNCLOS, failed to fulfil
its obligations under Community law. The judgment also established that
certain provisions of UNCLOS form part of the Community legal order and
that the European Court of Justice has jurisdiction to determine
disputes on their interpretation and application. Therefore, the
judgment represents a significant development and clarification of
Community law. It means that the resolution of disputes between member
states on a wide range of international agreements, especially in the
environmental field, comes within the jurisdiction of the ECJ.
The judgment presents member states, such as Ireland, with new
mechanisms for holding other member states to account on their
transboundary environmental obligations. These and other issues
consequent on the judgment are being examined in detail by Ireland’s
international legal team, led by the Attorney General. Ireland’s
strategy in pursuit of the objectives of this case will be considered
and determined by Government based on this examination and analysis. |
CiaranCuffe.com