Elizabeth Haub Prize 1979

The Elizabeth Haub Prize was pre- sented in Brussels on 8 June 1979 to Guillermo J. Cano o f Argentina and Eckhard Rehbinder o f the Federal Republic o f Germany.

The Laudatio was read by Rector Foriers, o f the Universitd Libre de Bruxelles who also presented the Prizes. W. E. Burhenne, Executive-Governor o f the International Council o f Environ- mental Law, congratulated the Prize- winners.

Professors Cano and Rehbinder since both have had many successes over the years in bringing about new concepts in legislation. I won't dwell on successes in the past, but would only like to let you know of hoped for future successes by these two: Professor Cano has re- cently been active assisting in an attempt to better the water legislation in Senegal and Professor Rehbinder is involved in

To these people, I would point to the positive results accomplished by Profes- sor Cano and Professor Rehbinder as examples of how a realistic approach can lead to tangible and long lasting environmental improvements.

Extraits des discours prononc6s par Maitre Guillermo J. Cano

J'ai appris avec une profonde 6motion que le Jury pr6sid~ par vous, Monsieur le Recteur, allait m'honorer du Prix Elizabeth Haub, ex aequo avec le distingu6 Professeur Eckhard Rehbinder de l'Universit6 de Francfort, m'inscrivant ainsi dans une liste d'6minentes person-

Extracts from the Speech of W. E. Burhenne

Today before congratulating the Prize winners I feel that 1 must present my compliments to the Prize Jury for their further success in promoting the Prize as a truly international award. Last year we had for the first time a winner from the new world: this year we have a lawyer from Latin America and a German lawyer who is strongly internationally oriented, and 1 find this trend to be most appropriate. Both Professor Cano and Professor Rehbinder have renown far beyond the borders of their own countries, and indeed beyond their respective con- tinents. Their experiences in the inter- national sphere and in various national endeavors throughout the world are well known.

1 also have personal reasons for being very pleased with the selections of the Jury: both recipients are not only friends, but they are both indivi- duals with whom I have had the pleasure to do "combat" in the international legal field. Both have shown what good combatants they can be. In view of my experiences with the two winners, two points become evident: the first is that I am glad that the ICEL Exec- utive Governors are not placed in the position of serving on the Prize Jury since we could be all too easily criticized for selecting those known to us even though they happen to be most worthy recipients, and secondly knowing these two as I do, I don't feel that I am the right person to speak at length about their qualifications. So I will try to be brief.

Speaking as someone who works with the legislature, I can express special pleasure that the Haub Prize is given to

Environmental Policy and Law, 5 (1979)

Courtesy: ULB

Elizabeth Haub Prize. From left to right: Rector Foriers, Gui l lermo Cane and Eckhard Rehbinder.

assisting the Government of Malawi in the drafting of legislation for the con- servation of multi-purpose areas.

Another compliment that I must pay to our winners is the fact that they are both realists. By this I mean that they both have the ability to work for achievable goals rather than to press for perhaps desirable, but unreachable ends. This leads me to my final thought. The environmental movement, if it is to be successful, must always take into account the overall and fluctuating political, economic and social climate. By "keeping an ear to the ground", and this does not mean being overwhelmed by existing situations, it is possible to consider problems in their totality which is the only way to achieve meaningful results. Unfortunatly, we all too often are seeing advances jeapardized by well- meaning, but overly emotional people.

nalit6s en compagnie de qui je suis tr6s tier de prendre place.

Je me permets de vous dire que ce ne sont pas mes modestes m6rites qui me valent de recevoir ces lauriers. Je les accepte en t6moignage de la reconnais- sance que les institutions qui me les d6cernent ont pour la r~gion du Monde

laquelle j'appartiens - l'Am~rique latine. N o u s y sommes nombreux /t travailler avec ferveur pour veiller ce que le Droit de l'Environnement devienne un instrument efficace, pour aider les 6tres humains g vivre dans un environnement, et fi jouir d'une qualit6 de vie, qui soient en harmonic avec leur condition d'~tres cr66s fi l'image et g la ressemblance de Dieu.

Vous m'avez choisi peut-6tre parce que je prdside la Commission Inter- amdricaine du Droit et de l'Administra- tion de l'Environnement, 6tablie

141

Bogot~i au cours du mois d'avril dernier, ou parce que, il y a deux ans, rues coll~gues de la Soci6t6 Argentine pour le Droit et l 'Administration de l'Environ- nement et des Ressources Naturelles m'ont choisi pour pr6sident. Je p~cherais toutefois par fatuit6 si je ne signalais pas que, par exemple, Rafael Valenzuela du Chili, Nelson Geigel Lope-Bello du V6n~zuela, Mateo Magarifios de Mello de l'Uruguay, ou Antonio Barrera Carbonell de Colombie, ont des m6rites suffisants pour que, lors de ses futures d61iMrations, le Jury du Prix Elizabeth Haub les consid~re en mesure d'aspirer

la distinction. Ce faisant, je reste conscient du fait qu'en les nommant, je suis injuste d'omettre d'autres noms qui, ~ l'int6rieur ou ~ l'ext~rieur de mon pays, ont autant de m6rite.

Puisque suivant la suggestion que Son Excellence le Juge Taslim Elias de la Cour de La Haye fit ici il y a deux ans, le Jury a sans doute retenu le fait que je suis latino-am6ricain, je vous invite regarder tout particuli~rement mon pays, l'Argentine, l'une des Nations remar- quables dans ce sous-continent. Son histoire nous apprend qu'elle obtint son lnd6pendance il y a presque 170 ans. Depuis, elle a d6velopp6 au cours de ce si6cle et demi, des lois et des institutions civiles et politiques d'inspiration indubi- tablement europ6enne, mais qui furent d61ib6r6ment transform6es - suivant les circonstances g6ographiques et humaines du pays - et qui ont, par cons6quent, une physionomie propre. Elle est parfois jug6e dans une optique purement europ6enne, et cela conduit quelques fois

des critiques injustes. Sa plus ancienne Universit6, celle de C6rdoba, fut fond6e en 1613, il y a trois si6cles et demi. Voil~ l'~ge qu'a dans mon pays, l 'action en faveur du progr~s du Droit. Le fait que, dans le domaine scientifique trois distingu6s argentins aient m6rit6 le Prix Nobel, n'est pas 6tranger/~ cette m6me anciennet6. Mon pays - ainsi que d'autres parmi les plus avanc6s de l'Am6rique Latine - n'appartient cul- turellement ni au Premier ni au Deux- i~me Monde et pas non plus au Trois- i~me. I1 est simpliste de penser que le compartimentage du Monde s'arr6te au chiffre trois. Ainsi tant dans le domaine juridique que dans celui des autres sciences, mon pays est en mesure - et il le fait - d'apporter, par l'interm6diaire des hommes de science, sa coop6ration technique ~ d'autres nations du m~me niveau. Les courants de diffusion de la culture juridique n 'ont d6jg plus pour seule origine l 'Europe ou les Etats-Unis.

142

Tout ce que je viens d'affirmer est particulibrement vrai dans le domaine du Droit de l 'Environnement car, fi partir du Code colombien de 1974 et de la Loi v6n6zuelienne de 1976, certains principes de ce nouveau Droit ont 6t6 d6finis en Am~rique Latine et de lg, expos6s au Monde. L'un d'eux est l ' incorporation aux lois humaines des lois de la Nature, entre autres, celle de l'interd6pendance entre les diff6rentes ressources naturelles et d'autres ~l~ments de l 'environnement loi physique celle-lg que Gifford Pinchot avait 6nonc6e au d6but du si61e aux Etats-Unis. Un autre principe est celui de retenir les avantages qui r6sultent d'une 16gislation visant simultan6ment et int6gralement l'en- semble des ressources naturelles et des divers autres 616ments de l'environ- nement, m6me immat6riels. Un trois- i6me principe soutient que tout dom- mage ~ l 'environnement porte pr6judice au patrimoine commun du peuple d 'un pays, et permet une action (judiciaire ou administrative) sans qu'il soit besoin de prouver un dommage personnel.

Extracts from the Speech of Eckhard Rehbinder

Major changes in the existing legisla- tion controlling industrial pollution were made in the FRG between 1957-1965. It was not until the early seventies that politicians and the general public have become aware that the problems which hitherto had been tackled by these laws were not isolated ones but part of one and the same fundamental problem of highly developed industrial societies: namely consumption of nature. This was the date o f birth of envionmental policy as a separate subject of internal politics. In 1971, the Federal Government deter- mined a comprehensive Environmental Program. Pursuant to this program, several new environmental statutes were enacted and existing ones amended which reflect this new concern for the environ- ment as a whole.

The integrated policy approach to environmental protection has also had some impact on legal science. In the early seventies, one began to speak of environmental law as a separate body of law. Of course, lawyers are always reluctant to recognise that social changes could affect the classification of law. And the concept of environmental law no doubt runs counter to the tradi- tional criteria of classification: environ- mental law is not oriented at the addres- see of legal norms or a group of activi- ties; it is oriented at a problem, com-

prising a variety of legal rules which are already covered by the traditional classi- fication. In spite o f this, the concept of environmental law is now well established in the juridical landscape o f the Federal Republic of Germany.

What distinguishes a legal scholar who is engaged in environmental law from other legal scholars? ! would say his way of thinking is different. The traditional emphasis of private law is on delimiting the spheres of interest of individuals. The private lawyer attempts to achieve justice among private parties. In administrative law, the primary con- cern is with the protection of individual freedom and property from encroach- ment by the state. The traditional administrative lawyer sees his primary task in the defense o f the rule of law - what we in Germany call the "Rechts- staat" - he is concerned with legal forms and procedure, not so much with the social results. The environmental lawyer, although - I would like to stress this point - not ignoring the importance of traditional legal values, is more interested in goal-setting and in the function of legal norms in relation to given political goals. His questions are: Is a particular environmental policy goal reasonable? Which interests would suf- fer if the goal were attained? What does a particular body of legal norms con- tribute to the attainment of a particular environmental protection goal and how, seen against the background of the existing socio-economic structural con- ditions, must it be altered in order to achieve attainment?

This leads to the second characteristic of an environmental lawyer. The tradi- tional legal scholar is concerned with the existing legal system, i.e. the sys- tematisation and interpretation of exist- ing law, as expressed by statutory texts and courts of justice. The environmental lawyer looks much more, although not exclusively, towards the law-making process. He has a keen interest in the making of new laws with a view to achieve a higher level of environmental protection, and he may even undertake a considerable amount of lobbying for that purpose. With the advent of a whole series of new or amended environmental laws, this concern may well become less important in the future. But then, the environmental lawyer would still feel obliged to have a careful look at the implementation and enforcement of these laws - a concern which is rather unfamiliar to the traditional lawyer. (See also page 147)

Environmental Policy and Law, 5 (1979)