Britta Sjöstedt

The role of multilateral environmental agreements in armed conflict: ‘Green-keeping’ in Virunga Park. Applying the UNESCO World Heritage Convention in the armed conflict of the Democratic Republic of the Congo

This article analyses the application of the 1972 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Convention (the WHC) in the context of the armed conflicts that have taken place in the Virunga National Park (the Park), a natural world heritage site in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (the DRC). Instead of addressing wartime environmental damage under the law of armed conflict, this article seeks to establish how such damage can be addressed using multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs). MEAs often consist of general principles and vague obligations and their relevance or applicability during situations of armed conflict may be questioned. However, a number of MEAs, including the WHC, authorise their convention bodies to develop detailed and substantive obligations applicable to their parties. Thus, the decisions and recommendations adopted by the World Heritage Committee, a body established under the WHC, provide substantive content to the provisions of the WHC. These decisions and recommendations may, however, run counter to the requirements of military necessity thereby affecting the application of the law of armed conflict. While the position adopted by the World Heritage Committee does not inevitably imply a clash between the obligations in the WHC and the law of armed conflict, it does raise the question of whether the outstanding values of world heritage should trump the rules of military necessity and other pressing concerns during armed conflict. On an informal basis, the World Heritage Committee and the UN peacekeeping forces deployed in the DRC have agreed to perform operations that jointly address the interconnected concerns of security and conservation of natural resources in the region of the Park. This cooperative ‘green-keeping’ operation represents a useful approach to regime interaction and the harmonisation of obligations set out in different legal regimes that are applicable to the same subject matter.

Costa Rica and Nicaragua before the International Court of Justice – Trying to work out the complicated relationship between law and the environment

Nicaragua and Costa Rica have twice turned to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to resolve disputes related to environmental damage occurring in a transboundary context. In these two cases the Court has to consider at least two issues. The first issue concerns the territorial status of a disputed border area. The disagreement is triggered by natural variations of the San Juan River at the border between the two countries, which causes confusion as to where the State line lies. The second issue concerns environmental damage; more specifically, it involves adversely affected wetlands protected under the Ramsar Convention. The obligations stemming from the Ramsar Convention are of an open-ended character, rendering them difficult to apply. Both issues are connected with the fact that law and the environment have a complicated relationship – that is, legal obligations may be difficult to reconcile with a constantly changing environment. Here, the ICJ has the opportunity to clarify this uneasy relationship. (Less)