6

INTRODUCTIONThe conservation of our natural resources is a subject which has had little attention in the past. Every State developed their continent, wealthier than any other, they have vast possession of natural resources and used it without thinking much how they used it. Nearly much of the natural resources have been used without reasonable care, and as each becomes exhausted, a heavier burden of hardship is laid upon every state.Inthelate1960sconcern with the state of the worlds environment emerged as an international issue. This is in response to several environmental like high pollution levels and the threats they pose to human health and biological diversity. Environmental degradation is pervasive, accelerating and unabated. Global warming, climate change, pollution and other environmental damages are but some of the problems faced by every nation. Because of these circumstances, the strong environmental sentiments led to several legislations and to the emergence of international environmental law.International Environmental Law is a term pertaining to some aspect of the natural or human environment and regulates uses of the environment. In its modern conception, environment is treated as including the physical surroundings that is common to all, including air, space, water, land, plants and life. Environmental laws are the standards that governments establish to manage natural resources and environmental quality. (http://www.ciel.org/) In general, the standards set forth in environmental laws can apply to either private parties or the government. International environmental law focuses on the relations and agreements among nations and it is part of public international law. International Environmental law is ultimately the product of environmentalism which can be considered as a system that seeks to redefine humans relationship to nature. Specifically it seeks to induce humans to act as stewards of nature, rather than his exploiters, and therefore to respect the functioning of natural systems by limiting activities which disturbs these systems. Environmental law is a new concept with more discontinuity rather than continuity with past legal and intellectual traditions. Like all emerging areas of law, environmental law is therefore a mix of rules from other areas and new but contested normative principle. It deals with the control of pollution, the protection of the environment, and the depletion of natural resources within a framework of sustainable development. Development and growth are predicated on the protection of the environment to safeguard the health and economic needs of future generations.Environmental Laws are now critical factors in defining of the right to life, such inherent right as the right to breathe and eat healthy food. On the national level, laws had been enacted enhancing and safeguarding the integrity of our environment. The 1987 Philippine Constitution expressly provides: The State shall protect and advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology and accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature. This shows that the Philippines is one of the unflinching supporters of this emerging globalization of international law. International environmental law has been integrated into international law as such. On the international level, through United Nations, hundreds of laws and treatise had been concluded by countries all over the world. In 1972 a convention was conducted, the United Nations Conference on the human environment in Stockholm, Sweden. The Declaration contains several legal principles that have become the foundation for a vast network of international agreements. The most important principle in this treaty directs that each state has the sovereign right to use its natural resources and has the corresponding duty to ensure that its activities do not cause harm outside its boundaries such mutual cooperation in the environmental protection field, as provided, served as a model for further environmental treaties, supplementing the Stockholm resolutions. Since the Stockholm Conference a large body of international environmental law has developed. Documents which have become important to this area of law include: international Declarations, agreements, and treatise; UN General Assembly and Resolutions; EU directives, regulations, and legislations; Judicial decisions of International Courts of Justice of UN and European Court of justice; and other International Conference.The gains in the first United Nations Conference were consolidated in the second United Nations conference on environmental development which was held in Rio de Janiero in Brazil in 1992 known as the Earth Summit. In this conference, a more improved action to protect the environment was created. Thereafter, several domestic and international laws were laid down to protect the environment. During the 1992 United Nations Conference of the Environment and Development (UNCED), in Rio de Janiero a declaration to abide by the principle of sustainable development based on the recognition that the current generation should meet their needs without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their needs. (http://www.unep.org)In the struggle to save the world from environmental ruin, every nation must work together as purveyors of hope in an increasingly deteriorating situation. The problems in our environment today can be addressed by applying the full force of law both in domestic and international levels. By providing ample laws and rules and regulations defining offenses under international environmental laws and providing for penalties for their violations can be the basis to obtain redress in environmental degradation.This research gives emphasis on the scope and importance of international environmental law in the field of Public International Law. The various treatise and agreements between states which are critical to ensuring the ongoing legitimacy of the development of international environmental law are herein discussed, including laws that seek to implement efficient and effective responses to the ever increasing urgent nature of our global environmental challenges.

DISCUSSIONInternational Environmental Law HistoryA. Traditional EraNatural resource management has been a subject of international law-making for over two hundred years- starting with bilateral and regional regulatory agreements, and dispute settlement arrangements over the shared utilization of water, wildlife, and fisheries in transboundary areas and over the allocation and exploitation of marine resources outside national jurisdiction. What emerged during the early period-especially under the label of 'vicinage' or 'good neighbourship law' were typically territorial regimes of reciprocity, either between contiguous states or for the users of geographical areas customarily designated as 'global commons'. Green policies began to make their appearance in treaty regimes from the middle of the nineteenth century onward, echoing a transition in national laws from single-use-oriented regimes to multiple use and resource-oriented regulations. And, even though the legal history of economic development is often associated with the unbridled over-exploitation of resources such as of the forests in Europe and North America, the history of conservation can also be traced back to enlightened legislative models of Jean-Batiste Colbert, which is seen as preliminary precursors of contemporary environmental law. (Peter H. Sand, 1994)The initial policy motives for much of this law-making were utilitarian and self-serving-the avowed reason for Colbert's forest legislation was to secure long term timber supplies for French naval construction. Anthropocentric lines of reasoning were prominent in early multilateral environmental treatise, such as the 1900 London Convention Designed to ensure the Conservation of Various Species of Wild Animals in Africa that is Useful to Man or Inoffensive and the Paris Convention to Protect Birds Useful to Agriculture. Yet the twentieth century also marks the entry of genuine conservation ethics on the treaty agenda, reflecting new concerns of the international community for common natural heritage and the prevention of global risks. From President Roosevelt's abortive attempt at convening an International Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the western Hemisphere; from the colonial powers' 1933 London Convention Relative to the Preservation of Fauna and Flora in their Natural State, to The post-colonial 1968 Algiers African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources; to 1963 Nuclear ban Test. (Ibid.)Although the pre-war efforts to translate these concerns into new intergovernmental institutions failed at the time, the 'para-govenmental' International Union for the Protection of nature, which was established in 1948 (renamed in 1956 the International union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) and later the World Conservation Union), became an influential source of subsequent treaty initiatives for environment. In 1959, the International Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO or IMO) was designated to deal with global marine pollution risks under 1954 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the sea by Oil. Together with several other UN specialized agencies and bodies which during the post war period assumed new environment-related functions (Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), International Labor Organization (ILO), World Health Organization (WHO), UN Economic Commission of Europe (ECE)), further contributed to the growing stock of international law and governance practice now available.B. Modern EraThe beginning of 'modern' international environmental law is usually dated to June 5, 1972, the opening day of the first UN Conference on the Human Environmental in Stockholm, which is now annually celebrated as World Environment Day. However, it really was the culmination of an intense preparatory process going back to Resolution 1346 of the UN Economic and Social Council on July 30, 1968, endorsed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2398 (XXIII) on December 1968. The Stockholm 'watershed' or 'paradigm shift' so initiated must be seen in the context of several concurrent discourses: a global rise in environmental risks, highlighted by a series of eco-disasters starting with the 1967 Torrey Canyon case (Oil pollution in the North Sea) and the 1971 Minamata Case (river pollution by organo-mercury in Japan). a growing public awareness of the 'world-eco crisis', alerted by media attention, and by seminal publications such as Rachel Carson's 1962 Silent Spring, Max Nicolon's 1969 Environmental Revolution; which readily espoused by the civic protest movements of the late 1960s and early 1970s; and innovative examples of national legislations enacted in response to the environmental challenge, including Japans 1967 Kogai Act, Swedens 1969 Miljoskyddslag, and the 1970 US National Environmental Policy Act. (Robison N.A.,2002)In terms of International Environmental Law, the Stockholm process produced a new type of global institution, with a de-centralized action plan assigning environmental responsibilities to a wide spectrum of existing institutions, and a excess of new legal instruments (hard and soft) within the network of functional risk oriented international regimes.The new generations of international legal instruments that were emerging no longer fitted the territoriality defined 'procrustean bed' into which environmental issues had been forced before. international environmental law expanded well beyond the stereotype of 'transboundary matters' on the one hand and 'governance of the commons' on the other, to match not only the growing catalogue of environmental problems that had once seemed local, yet had turned out to be globally shared. Accordingly, the scope and focus of international law-making shifted towards 'functional' regulation, depending on the ecosystems affected or the specific environmental risks addresses, and largely irrespective of traditional territorial limitations. (Das Rechtder Gesellschaft N. Luhman, 1993)C. Post-Modern EraInevitably perhaps, the proliferation of new multilateral environmental instruments and norms also raised new questions, as critical observers expressed alarm over 'treaty congestion' and a lack of synergy in international law-making and institution building. With the state of the world's environment continuing to deteriorate, and new mega-risks arising at the same time (for example the ozone layer and global climate), international environmental law as grand narrative or 'mobilizing myth' suffered a severe loss of credibility- a symptom of post modernity. Hence, the focus of attention shifted to the effectiveness of the existing international legal structure, its empirical verification and procedural or institutional anchorage.(Ibid.)

Scope of International LawWhen attempting to determine the boundaries of international environmental law, no clear definition can be applied. Like many other branches of international law, international environmental law is interdisciplinary, intersecting and overlapping with numerous other areas of research, including economics, political science, ecology, human rights and navigation or admiralty. It was only until the late 1960s, most international agreements aimed at protecting the environment served narrowly defined utilitarian purposes. (Alexandre C. Kiss and Dinah Shelton, 2007)

Sources of International LawIn general, the sources international environmental law is the soft and hard law. We have distinction between soft law and hard law. One of the differences between international law and domestic law is that international law is not as clearly enforceable as domestic law. Therefore, the distinction soft law refers to those instruments that do not have concrete obligations. In other words they are instruments that act more to predict the future of what hard law will be. They carry more of a moral force rather than a legal force. Now, hard law- this refers to what we commonly known as the treatise protocols and conventions- the international instruments that actually have binding obligations. (Nancy P. Rodrigo, 2001)As to soft law, part of it is the Constitution or the framework of international environmental legislation. One of the most famous is the Rio de Janiero or Earth Summit where they came up with principles that summarized the state of International Environmental Law at that time. They point to principles that had been well-known for a long time, but had gained global acceptance only about that time as well as principles which parties knew would emerge as priority principles in the coming years.( Ibid.)In international negotiations and the international arena, it is still the State government representatives- who have the foremost responsibility to negotiate and to enter into obligations for the State, but International Environmental Law brings to for the increasing importance of non-State actors such as NGOs and the private sector.(Ibid.)As to the hard law some of the multilateral environmental agreements entered into by the Philippines. This treatise creates binding obligations including the enactment of legislation and the implementation of legislation that deal with these particular areas.

Emerging PrinciplesVarious principles of environmental protection are gradually being developed and are coming out from various conferences. These conferences call upon the Governments and peoples to exert common efforts for the preservation and improvement of the human environment, for the benefit of all the people and for their posterity. (Joaquin Bernas, SJ, 2002)

A. The Stockholm Conference on the Human EnvironmentThe first major international conference on environmental issues was held in Stockholm, Sweden, in 1972 and was sponsored by the United Nations. This meeting, at which the United States took a leading role, was controversial because many developing countries were fearful that a focus on environmental protection was a means for the developed world to keep the undeveloped world in an economically subservient position. The most important outcome of the conference was the creation of the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP).Phenomenon such as acid rain and the poisoning of fishermen in Japans Minimata Bay raised concerns about the state of the world environment led the United Nations to convene the Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment in 1972. Until this time, environmental problems were dealt with sporadically, resulting in few significant treaties. The Stockholm Conference resulted in the creation of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the first international organization devoted to the environment, and produced the Stockholm Declaration, 26 principles setting forth the rights and obligations of citizens and governments to preserve and improve the environment. (http://www.unep.org/documents/default.asp?documentid=78)The Stockholm conference was attended by some 1,200 representatives from 114 nations. The most conspicuous absentee was the Soviet Union, which objected to the exclusion of East Germany from full participation. However, this circumstance was to some extent offset by a little-heralded treaty of potential significance signed by presidents Richard M. Nixon and Nikolai V. Podgorny in Moscow during their meetings in May. This treaty, which provides for mutual cooperation in the environmental protection field, could serve as a model for further bilateral treaties, supplementing the Stockholm resolutions. Although the ultimate significance of the collective environmental agreements approved in the plenary sessions of the Stockholm conference remains to be seen, the resolutions surely may be considered 'the first steps on a new journey for the future of mankind,' one speech declared. (Ibid.)At many of the meetings there was obvious disagreement, some of which centered on the insistence of underdeveloped nations that they have a legitimate right to embark upon a path of industrialization unhampered by restrictive antipollution legislation formulated by developed nations. Also, the well-represented Third World countries felt that the developed nations should cease neocolonial resource exploitation and proceed as rapidly as possible to dismantle their war-based technocracies. (Ibid.)The three positive recommendations of the conference were a declaration of broad environmental principles, a plan for environmental management, and a proposal for a global environmental agency. The first, the declaration of general environmental principles, is intended 'to inspire and guide the peoples of the world in the preservation and enhancement of the human environment.' This statement, which lists in general terms a set of human rights and collective responsibilities for the environment, is essentially the same as the draft prepared some two years ago by an intergovernmental working group. However, some additions to the draft were made at the conference when China and several other nations objected that they had no representatives on the original working committee. In its final adopted version, this document contained four new principles: the conservation of wildlife; the prevention of pollution of the oceans; the stabilization of prices in developing countries; and the right to national self-determination on internal environmental standards. The last of this document's 26 principles, which called for worldwide efforts to attain an early consensus on the abolition of nuclear weapons and other methods of mass destruction, provoked much discussion. (Ibid.)The second proposal, the environmental management project, is an action plan incorporating specific recommendations to deal with pollution and conservation on an international basis. The action plan includes 106 recommendations approved by the conference; these fall into three general areas. The first group is intended to provide a global environment monitoring service called Earthwatch, which is to 'identify and measure environmental problems of international importance and to warn against impending crises.' The establishment of a worldwide network of at least 110 atmospheric monitoring stations was suggested. The second group, which deals specifically with environmental management, proposes to 'work what is known or learned about the environment, so as to preserve what is desired and to prevent what is feared.' The last category of recommendations is aimed at supporting such various ancillary activities as the dissemination of information, environmental education, and the organization and funding of environmental activities. (Ibid.)The third major proposal recommends establishing an environmental coordinating agency, known as the Governing Council for Environmental Programs, to be developed as an agency within the United Nations. As initially constituted, GCEP includes 54 nations. This recommendation was at first opposed from within the UN organization because of possible overlap between this new agency and existing UN agencies, from which the GCEP is to be independent. An environmental fund of some $100 million over a five-year period will be required to support the new agency; contributions totaling nearly two-thirds of this amount have already been promised. (Ibid.)The conference recommended that in 1976 the UN General Assembly review all the organizational machinery set up by the conference. In any case, the General Assembly at its fall meeting must ratify all these recommendations before they can be implemented. No major alterations are expected. There will subsequently, no doubt, be some disappointments. For example, the ten-year moratorium on all whale fishing recommended without dissent by the conference was not upheld by the International Whaling Commission, which met in London shortly afterward. At the insistence of the Soviet Union and Japan, whaling is still to continue but with reduced catch quotas. (Ibid.)

B. Rio Declaration on Environment and DevelopmentIn 1992, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development sponsored another conference in Brazil. It was attended by 170 states. The Conference came out with the Rio Declaration. (Joaquin Bernas, SJ, 2002)Leaders of over 170 countries, representatives of regional agencies, and delegates from numerous nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) gathered in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in June for the UN Conference on Environment and Development (Unced). This Earth Summit, including a parallel but unofficial Global Forum of some 15,000 NGOs, met to devise strategies to halt environmental deterioration and promote sustainable development. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change was modified at the insistence of the United States to include only recommended rather than legally binding emission ceilings for carbon dioxide and other gases associated with global warming. Also, the United States, alone among the major powers, did not sign a treaty on biodiversity, requiring that wealthier countries finance protection of species and that companies developing biotechnology products from plants, animals, or microbes share profits and technology with the countries of origin of the species used. (Microsoft Encarta, 2008)Known as the Rio Declaration after it was approved at the Earth Summit, the agreement also spoke of a 'global partnership' to protect and restore the earth's environment. Industrialized nations, the declaration stated, bore extra responsibility in this partnership because of 'the pressures their societies place on the global environment.' Thus the principle was established that developed countries would provide aid to developing countries to help them pay for various environmental measures. (Ibid.)Other documents approved included the Rio Declaration, which set out 27 principles to govern actions relating to the environment and development; Agenda 21, a 40-chapter compilation of goals, programs, projects, and the estimated finances needed for sustainable development globally; and a statement of principles to govern forestry. A UN Commission on Sustainable Development to review progress was created by the General Assembly in December. (Ibid.)

TreatiesThe Stockholm and Rio de Janiero Declarations are just declarations; they do not have the force of law. There exist, however, some conventions which are legally binding on the parties. International agreements came to reflect a desire to limit damages to the environment. These international agreements paralleled national legislation which increasingly sought to preserve the environment.A. United Nations Convention on Law of The Sea (UNCLOS)The UNCLOS or also known as Law of the Sea Convention or the Law of the sea Treaty, is the international agreement that resulted from the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea which took place between 1973 and 1982. UNCLOS defined the rights and responsibilities of nations with respect to their use of the worlds ocean, establishing guidelines for businesses, the environment and the management of marine natural resources. (http://www.ciel.org/)The fourth session of the Third Conference on the Law of the Sea met in New York, amid widespread concern that time was fast running out on the prospects for peaceful cooperation in the management of the earth's oceans. Already, a number of countries (including the United States) have unilaterally declared 200-mile offshore fishing or resource zones, and a shooting conflict between Iceland and Britain erupted over the right of British trawlers to fish off the Icelandic coast. The matter was taken to the Security Council in December 1975, but a British-Icelandic compromise agreement was not reached until six months later. In addition, if the sea law conference fails to produce a treaty soon, the U.S. Congress is expected to proceed with legislation permitting the mining by American firms of minerals on the ocean floor. (Microsoft Encarta, 2008)Although agreement has been reached on nearly 80 percent of the prospective treaty's 400-odd provisions, the two issues of a 200-mile economic zone and of access to minerals on the ocean floor are considered vital. The establishment of a 200-mile economic zone would give coastal nations control over one-third of the total ocean areaand thus access to fish supplies amounting to four-fifths of the world's total, to almost all the oil and natural gas offshore, and to minerals that lie off the coasts. (The traditional rights of freedom of the high seas and of innocent passage beyond a 12-mile territorial limit would be preserved.) A 'blocking third' of 52 landlocked and 'geographically disadvantaged' states is protesting the withdrawal of such a large percentage of economic resources from the oceans that the same treaty declares to be the 'common heritage of mankind. (Ibid.)The seabed area that lies beyond the coastal resource zones contains valuable deposits of manganese and other minerals. U.S. technology is in the lead in being able to recover these minerals. The current stalemate arises from disagreement over whether the proposed International Seabed Authority should share mining activities with private companies or whether it should have exclusive authority. The United States has offered to help the seabed authority develop a mining facility in return for guaranteed access to mining sites for private concerns. It is considered unlikely that the United States will settle for lessand doubtful that a UN majority will concur when the sixth session opens in May 1977. (Ibid.)

B. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED)This treaty is formally known as the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED, the Brundtland Commissions mission is to unite countries to pursue sustainable development together. The Chairman of the Commission, Gro Harlem Brundtland, was appointed by Javier Perez de Cuellar, former Secretary General of United Nations, in December 1983. At that time, the UN General Assembly realized that there was heavy deterioration on human environment and natural resources. To rally countries to work and pursue sustainable development together, the UN decided to establish the Brundtland Commission. (http://en.wikipedia.org)The organization aimed to create a united international community with shared sustainability goals by identifying sustainability problems worldwide, raising awareness about them, and suggesting the implementation of solutions. In 1987,the Brundtland Commission published Our Common Future which strongly influenced the Earth Summit in Rio de Janiero, Brazil in 1992. (Ibid.)In an attempt to resolve conflicts between environmental protection and economic development, the General Assembly of the United Nations created WCED in 1983 and charged it with proposing strategies for sustainable development. The WCED called for an international conference to act as a successor to the Stockholm Conference and carry out its legacy.

C. The Kyoto ProtocolThe Kyoto Protocol is an International treaty, which extends the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)that commits State Parties to reduce greenhouse gases emissions based on the premise that (a) global warming exists and (b) man-made CO2 emissions have caused it. This treaty was adopted in Kyoto, Japan, on December 11, 1997 and entered into force on February 16, 2005. There are currently 192 parties to the protocol. This was implemented to fight global warming by reducing greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere to a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system as provided in Article 2 thereof. The protocol is based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities; it puts the obligation to reduce current emissions on developed countries on the basis that they are responsible for the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. (http://en.wikipedia.com)The Kyto Protocol is a flexible treaty, allowing individual governments to decide what specific policies and reforms to implement to meet their commitments. It also allows countries to offset some of their emissions by increasing the carbon dioxide absorbed, or sequestered, by trees and other vegetation. However, eligible sequestration activities, and the amount of offsetting allowed, are tightly controlled. (Microsoft Encarta, 2008)The protocols major feature is that it has mandatory targets on greenhouse-gas emissions, which aimed at the issue on global warming, for the worlds leading economies which have accepted it and a treaty. Kyoto Protocol sets binding target for 37 industrialized countries and the European community for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. These amount to an average of five percent reduction against 1990 levels of five-year period 2008-2012. It is however a complicated agreement that has been slow in coming. The protocol not only has to be as effective against a complicated worldwide problem it has also be politically acceptable.(http://www.eoearth.org) D. Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone LayerVienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer is a multilateral environment agreement. It was agreed upon at the Vienna Conference of 1985 and entered into force in 1988. In terms of university, it is one of the most successful treaties of all time, having been ratified by 196 states (all United Nations members as well as Holy Sea, Niue and the Cook Islands) as well as European Union. (http://en.wikipedia.com)It acts as framework for the international efforts to protect the ozone layer. However, it does not include legally binding reduction goals for the use of CFCs, the main chemical agents causing ozone layer depletion. These are laid out in the accompanying Montreal protocol. (Ibid.)This convention is also known as the Framework convention, because it served as a framework for efforts to protect the globes ozone layer. In 2009, the Vienna Convention became the first Convention of any kind to achieve universal ratification. The objectives of the Convention were for parties to promote cooperation by means of systematic observations, research and information exchange on the effects of human activities on the ozone layer and to adopt legislative or administrative measures against activities likely to have adverse effects on the ozone layer. (http://ozone.unep.org)The Vienna Convention did not require countries to take concrete actions to control ozone depleting substances. Instead, in accordance with the provisions of the convention, the countries of the world agreed the Montreal Protocol on Substance that Depletes the Ozone Layer under the Convention to advance that goal. (Ibid.)The parties to this convention meet once every three years, back to back with the parties to Montreal Protocol, in order to take decisions designed to administer the convention. (Ibid.)E. The Convention on Biological DiversityThe Convention on Biological Diversity, an international treaty developed in 1992 at the United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development, obligates more than 160 countries to take action to protect plant and animal species. (http://www.biodiv.org) The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), known informally as the Biodiversity Convention, is a multilateral treaty. The Convention has three main goals: conservation of biological diversity (or biodiversity); sustainable use of its components; and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from genetic resources. (http://en.m.wikipedia.org)In other words, its objective is to develop national strategies for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. It is often seen as the key document regarding sustainable development. The Convention was opened for signature at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro on 5 June 1992 and entered into force on 29 December 1993. (Ibid)The convention recognized for the first time in international law that the conservation of biological diversity is "a common concern of humankind" and is an integral part of the development process. The agreement covers all ecosystems, species, and genetic resources. It links traditional conservation efforts to the economic goal of using biological resources sustainably. It sets principles for the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources, notably those destined for commercial use. It also covers the rapidly expanding field of biotechnology through its Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, addressing technology development and transfer, benefit-sharing and biosafety issues. Importantly, the Convention is legally binding; countries that join it ('Parties') are obliged to implement its provisions. (Ibid)The convention reminds decision-makers that natural resources are not infinite and sets out a philosophy of sustainable use. While past conservation efforts were aimed at protecting particular species and habitats, the Convention recognizes that ecosystems, species and genes must be used for the benefit of humans. However, this should be done in a way and at a rate that does not lead to the long-term decline of biological diversity. (Ibid)The convention also offers decision-makers guidance based on the precautionary principle that where there is a threat of significant reduction or loss of biological diversity, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to avoid or minimize such a threat. The Convention acknowledges that substantial investments are required to conserve biological diversity. It argues, however, that conservation will bring us significant environmental, economic and social benefits in return. (Ibid)This convention rivals the Climate Change convention in the breadth of its coverage, speaks of the intrinsic value of biological diversity, and of the primary responsibility of States in conserving biological diversity. It recognizes the close and traditional dependence of indigenous peoples on these resources as well as the rights of others to partake of the benefits especially now that we have a lot of pharmaceutical companies looking at the benefits of biodiversity and plants in the Philippines. It also recognizes its importance for meeting the food, health, and other needs of persons and of people. (Nancy P. Rodrigo, 2001)

F. Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species CITES is the worldwide law that protects endangered species and limits the illicit trade in wildlife among nations. Drawn up by the United Nations (UN) in 1973, this treaty came into force in 1975 when the United States and 17 other nations became parties to it. As of January 1, 1998, 143 of the world's nations had become parties to the treaty.CITES lists endangered plant and animal species in three Appendices. Appendix I includes those species threatened with extinction that may be affected by illicit trade. Appendix II includes species that are not necessarily yet in danger of extinction, but could easily become so unless trade is strictly regulated. Appendix III lists any species that individual nations want to have protected. Species similar to endangered plants or animals are also included in these appendices to help distinguish them from their troubled relatives and to protect them from exploitation. About 2500 animal species and 30,000 plant species are currently listed in the three appendices.( http://www.cites.org)In 1976 the World Conservation Union (IUCN), an international conservation group comprised of government and nongovernment organizations, established Trade Records Analysis of Flora and Fauna in Commerce (TRAFFIC) to monitor and report on worldwide trade in wild animals and plants. Although CITES provides the framework for international cooperation to stem illegal trade in endangered species, TRAFFIC monitors both legal and illegal trade. TRAFFIC is intended to provide an early warning system for excessive trade. Its data can be used to bring sanctions against nations that fail to comply with CITES. (Ibid.)Many innovations in technology have made monitoring and management of endangered species populations easier. For example, in South Africa several stolen endangered cycads, primitive plants favored for landscaping, were recently recovered and reestablished at their original sites because local conservation authorities had tagged each with a tiny microchip indicating their exact place of origin. (Ibid.)Implanted microchips are also increasingly being used by veterinarians for identification of individual endangered animals. Thus far, this technology has primarily been used to help manage captive breeding programs. But many experts believe microchips offer the potential to permanently and inconspicuously mark wild animals as well, allowing authorities to detect wild animals and return them to their native habitats. (Ibid.)CITES has no enforcement authority, but rather depends on the voluntary development of laws and enforcement procedures within each nation. As a result, technology and sound biology are not always employed in enforcement efforts. For example, confiscated endangered species in some countries have been released into nature preserves without adequate consideration of potential ecological impacts. Animals released may be from elsewhere, carrying diseases or parasites that are introduced into the native population. For example, orangutans seized from people who kept them as pets in Indonesia have been rehabilitated and released on the Indonesian island of Sumatra, despite the danger that they could introduce human diseases into the wild population. (Microsoft Encarta, 2008)National efforts to comply with CITES have also resulted in the release of species into areas outside of their normal range. For example, Malayan pangolins, a species of anteater that does not naturally occur in China, have been released into Chinese pangolin populations where they can compete with native animals. (Ibid.)

G. Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, usually known as the Basel Convention, designed to reduce the movements of hazardous waste between nations, and specifically to prevent transfer of hazardous waste from developed to less developed countries (LDCs). It does not, however, address the movement of radioactive waste. The Convention is also intended to minimize the amount and toxicity of wastes generated, to ensure their environmentally sound management as closely as possible to the source of generation, and to assist LDCs in environmentally sound management of the hazardous and other wastes they generate.The Convention was opened for signature on 22 March 1989, and entered into force on 5 May 1992. As of January 2015, 182 states and the European Union are parties to the Convention. Haiti and the United States have signed the Convention but not ratified it. (http://en.wiki.org)With the tightening of environmental laws (for example, RCRA) in developed nations in the 1970s, disposal costs for hazardous waste rose dramatically. At the same time, globalization of shipping made transboundary movement of waste more accessible, and many LDCs were desperate for foreign currency. Consequently, the trade in hazardous waste, particularly to LDCs, grew rapidly. (Ibid.)One of the incidents which led to the creation of the Basel Convention was the Khian Sea waste disposal incident, in which a ship carrying incinerator ash from the city of Philadelphia in the United States dumped half of its load on a beach in Haiti before being forced away. It sailed for many months, changing its name several times. Unable to unload the cargo in any port, the crew was believed to have dumped much of it at sea. (Ibid.)Another is the 1988 Koko case in which 5 ships transported 8,000 barrels of hazardous waste from Italy to the small town of Koko in Nigeria in exchange for $100 monthly rent which was paid to a Nigerian for the use of his farmland. These practices have been deemed "Toxic Colonialism" by many developing countries. (Ibid.)At its most recent meeting, 27 November 1 December 2006, the Conference of the parties of the Basel Agreement focused on issues of electronic waste and the dismantling of ships. (Ibid.)According to Maureen Walsh, only around 4% of hazardous wastes that come from OECD countries are actually shipped across international borders. These wastes include, among others, chemical waste, radioactive waste, municipal solid waste, asbestos, incinerator ash, and old tires. Of internationally shipped waste that comes from developed countries, more than half is shipped for recovery and the remainder for final disposal. (http://www.basel.int)Increased trade in recyclable materials has led to an increase in a market for used products such as computers. This market is valued in billions of dollars. At issue is the distinction when used computers stop being a "commodity" and become a "waste". (Ibid.)As of January 2015, there are 183 parties to the treaty, which includes 180 UN member states plus the Cook Islands, the European Union, and the State of Palestine. The 13 UN member states that are not party to the treaty are Angola, East Timor, Fiji, Grenada, Haiti, San Marino, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Tuvalu, United States, and Vanuatu. (Ibid.)The Basel Convention as discusses in the conference proceeding of the Philippine Judiciarys The Environment on Scale: Ipagtanggol and Kalikasan II, the Basel Convention also speaks of the polluter pays principle saying in sum that it is the generator of the waste who must take care of its disposal, whether at source on wherever it is more feasible to dispose and treat waste. This speaks of transboundary movement of hazardous wastes.H. Convention on Long-Range Transboundary PollutionConvention on Long-Range Transboundary Pollution often abbreviated as Air Pollution or CLRTAP, is intended to protect the human environment against air pollution and to gradually reduce and prevent air pollution, including long-range transboundary air pollution. It is implemented by the European Monitoring evaluation Programme (EMEP) directed by the nations Economic Commissions for Europe (UNUCE). (http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/)The convention which has 51 Parties, identifies the executive Secretary of UNECE as secretariat. Since 1979 it has addressed some of the major environmental problems of the UNECE region through scientific collaboration and policy negotiation. The convention has been extended by eight protocols that identify specific measure to be taken by Parties to cut their emissions of air pollution.(http://en.wiki.org)The aim of the Convention is that parties shall endeavor to limit and, as far as possible, gradually reduce and prevent air pollution including long-range transboundary air pollution. Parties develop policies and strategies to combat the discharge of air pollutants through exchanges of information, consultation, research and monitoring.The parties meet annually at sessions of the Executive Body to review ongoing work and plan future activities including workplan. The three main subsidiary bodies the Working Group on Effects, the Steering Body to EMEP and the working Group on Strategies and Review- as well as the Conventions Implementation Committee, report to executive body each year. (http://en.wiki.org)Currently, the Conventions priority activities include review and possible revision of the most recent protocols, implementation of the convention and its protocols across the entire UNECE region (with special focus on Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia and South-East Europe) and sharing its knowledge and information with other regions of the world. (ibid.)

I. Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter This Inter-Governmental Conference on the Convention on the Dumping of waste at Sea which met in London in November 1972 at the invitation of the United Kingdom adopted the instrument generally known as the London Convention. The London Convention, one of the first international conventions for the protection of marine environment from human activities, came into force on August 30, 1977. Since 1977, it has been administered by International Maritime Organization (IMO. (http://www.imo.org)The London Convention contributes to the international control prevention of marine pollution by prohibiting the dumping of certain hazardous materials. In addition, a special permit is required prior to the dumping of a number of other identified materials and a general permit for other waste matter. (Ibid.)Dumping has been defined as the deliberate disposal at sea of wastes or other matter from vessels, aircrafts, platforms or other man-made structures, as well as the deliberate disposal of these vessels or platforms themselves. Amendments adopted in 1993 (which entered into force in 1994) banned the dumping into sea of low-level radioactive wastes. In addition, the amendments phased out the dumping of industrial wastes by December 31, 1995 and banned the incineration at sea of industrial wastes. (Ibid.)In 1996, Parties adopted a Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of wastes and Other Matter, 1972 (known as London Protocol) which enetered into force in 2006. (Ibid.)The London Protocol stresses the precautionary approach, which requires that appropriate preventive measures are taken when there is reason to believe that wastes or other matter introduced into the marine environment are likely to cause harm even when there is no conclusive evidence to prove a causal relation between inputs and their effects. It also states that the polluter should, in principle, bear the cost of pollution and emphasizes that Contracting Parties should ensure that the Protocol should not simply result in pollution being transferred one part of the environment to another.

J. Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural & Natural HeritageThe idea of creating an international movement for protecting heritage emerged after World War I. The 1972 Convention concerning the Protection World Cultural & Natural Heritage developed from the merging of two separate movements: the first focusing on the preservation of cultural sites, and the other dealing with the conservation of nature.( http://whc.unesco.org) The most significant feature of the 1972 World Heritage Convention is that it links together in a single document the concepts of nature conservation and the preservation of cultural properties. The Convention recognizes the way in which people interact with nature and the fundamental need to preserve the balance between the two. (Ibid.)The Convention sets out the duties of state Parties in identifying potential sites and their role in protecting and preserving them. Article 4 of the Convention provides that: Each State Party to this Convention recognizes that the duty of ensuring the identification, protection, conservation, presentation and transmission to future generations of the cultural and natural heritage referred to in Articles 1 and 2 and situated on its territory, belongs primarily to that State. It will do all it can to this end, to the utmost of its own resources and, where appropriate, with any international assistance and co-operation, in particular, financial, artistic, scientific and technical, which it may be able to obtain.By signing the Convention, each country pledges to conserve not only the World Heritage sites situated on its territory, but also to protect its national heritage. K. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification Desertification, along with climate change and the loss of biodiversity were identified as the greatest challenges to sustainable development during the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. Established in 1994, United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification UNCCD is the sole legally bonding international agreement linking environment and development to sustainable land management. The Convention addresses specifically the arid, semi-arid and dry-sub-humid areas, known as the drylands, where some of the most vulnerable ecosystems and peoples can be found. In the 10-Year Strategy of the UNCCD (2008-2018) that was adopted in 2007, Parties to the Convention further specified their goals: to forge global partnership to reverse and prevent desertification/land degradation and to mitigate the effects of drought in affected areas in order to support poverty reduction and environmental sustainability. http://www.unccd.int/) The Conventions 195 parties work together to improve the living conditions for people in drylands, to maintain and restore land and soil productivity, and to mitigate the effects of drought. The UNCCD is particularly committed to a bottom-up approach, encouraging the participation of local people in combating desertification and land degradation. The UNCCD secretariat facilities cooperation between developed and developing countries, particularly around knowledge and technology transfer for sustainable land management. (Ibid.)As the dynamics of land, climate and biodiversity are intimately connected, the UNCCD collaborates closely with the other two Rio Conventions; the Convention on Biological Diversity and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), to meet these complex challenges with an integrated approach and the best possible use of natural resources.

L. The Treaty of RomeThe Treaty of Rome, officially the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (TEEC), is an international agreement that led to the founding of the European Economic Community (EEC) on January 1, 1958. It was signed on March 25, 1957 by Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and West Germany. The word Economic was deleted from the treatys name by the Maastricht Treaty in 1933, and the treaty was repackaged as the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union on the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon in 2009. (http://en.m.wiki.org)The TEEC proposed the progressive reduction of customs duties and the establishment of a customs union. It proposed to create a common market of goods, workers, services and capital within EECs member states. It also proposed the creation of common transport and agriculture policies and a European social fund. (Ibid.)The terms of the economic treaty, provided for economic cooperation, and reduction and eventual removal of customs barriers. The terms also provided for the free movement of capital, goods, and labor between the member countries, together with common agricultural and trading policies. Subsequent new members of the EU have been obliged to accept these terms. (http://www.un.org/)

M. North American Agreement on Environmental CooperationThis environmental agreement between United States of America, Canada and Mexico as a side-treaty of the North American Free Trade Agreement. The agreement came into effect January 1, 1994.The agreement consists of a declaration of principles and objectives concerning conservation and the protection of the environment as well as concrete measures to further cooperation and protection of the environment as well as concrete measures to further cooperation on these matters between the three countries. (http://en.m.wiki.org)

N. Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic TreatyThe Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty, also known as the Antarctic-Environmental Protocol, or the Madrid Protocol, is part of the Antarctic Treaty System. It provides for comprehensive protection of the Antarctic environment and dependent and associated ecosystems. It was concluded in Madrid and opened for signature on October 4, 1991 and entered into force on January 14, 1998. The treaty will be opened for review in 2048. (http://en.m.wiki.org)Some of the key articles of the treaty are:- Article 3 of the treaty states that protection of the Antarctic environment as a wilderness with aesthetic and scientific value shall be a fundamental consideration of activities in the area; -Article 7 states that Any activity relating to mineral resources, other that scientific research, shall be prohibited. This provision contrasts with the rejected Convention on the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource activities, which would have allowed mining under the control and taxation of an international managing body similar to International seabed Authority;-Article 8 requires environmental assessment for all activities, including tourism;-Article 11 creates a Committee for the Environmental Protection for the continent;-Article 15 calls for member states to be prepared for emergency response actions in the area;-Article 18-20 arrange for arbitration of international disputes regarding Antarctica; and-Article 25(5) states that the Article 7 ban on mining may not be repealed unless a future treaty establishes a binding regulatory framework for such activity. (Ibid.)The Antarctic Treaty aims to protect the Antarctic environment and dependent and associated ecosystems, and preserve the intrinsic value of Antarctica - its aesthetic values as well as its status as a place of research.

Means of Implementing and Enforcing International Environmental LawThere are forums where international environmental disputes can be adjudicated, such as national courts, the International Court of Justice, and international arbitration panels. These forums, however, generally require that the disputing parties voluntarily submit to the jurisdiction of the court or panel. Additionally, even when these forums obtain jurisdiction over an international environmental dispute, they must rely on the cooperation of national governments to enforce rulings. For economic and political reasons, this cooperation is often withheld.As provided by the Global Change Instruction program, there are small numbers of environmental agreements which have established international institutions that can directly impose trade sanctions, such as the Montreal Protocol, or have authorized member states to impose trade sanctions against violating parties such as the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. For instance, in response to Japans violation of the International Whaling Commissions whaling moratorium, the United States threatened to restrict Japanese fishing vessel activity in U.S. territorial waters. Japan elected to accede to the whaling moratorium rather than suffer any such restrictions. (http://wiki.org.)The type of sanctions envisioned under the Montreal Protocol and International Whaling Commission are procedurally very difficult to impose. In general, there is no international body authorized to directly enforce international environmental law. The task of direct enforcement is left to the member nations, whose governments propose and adopt implementing policies. Sometimes the implementing national legislation is identical to the international agreement. For example, Canada implemented the Migratory Birds Treaty (with the United States) by adopting the Migratory Birds Treaty Act. Because the languageof this act is identical to language in the treaty, the law is basically a legislative codification of the international agreement.(Ibid.)Other times, however, the international environmental agreement is of a general nature and national governments must draft and implement more specific laws. For instance, in 1989 the International Convention on Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Waste was signed in Basel, Switzerland. This convention forbids the export of hazardous wastes to countries that lack adequate means to dispose of them. Under the terms of the convention, signatory nations are called upon to draft their own more specific national laws to implement this pledge. (http://ucar.edu.)Although international institutions are generally not responsible for directly implementing and enforcing international environmental law, they often play important monitoring, informational, and diplomatic roles. For example, agendas adopted at the 1992 Convention on Environment and Development at Rio de Janeiro created a new international body, the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD). The CSD meets yearly at the United Nations in New York to review and advance the implementation of Agenda 21an enormous and complex mandate. Most global agreements, such as the Biodiversity Convention and the Framework Convention on Climate Change, are implemented by an annual or biennial Conference of Parties (COP). These COPs lack the power to bring enforcement actions against either governments or private parties. They help monitor national compliance by requiring member nations to submit annual reports. Through meetings and publications, COPs also provide a forum to discuss and debate issues associated with the implementation of the agreement. (Ibid.)There are other institutions similar in function to the CSDs and the COPs. The North American Commission on Environmental Cooperation (NACEC), based in Montreal, Canada, monitors compliance with the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation, one of the side agreements under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The European Environmental Agency, based in Copenhagen, Denmark, monitors the compliance of individual European countries with environmental directives adopted by the European Union. (Ibid.)Although the CSD, COPs, NACEC, and the European Environmental Agency indicate that the international community is trying to improve compliance with environmental agreements, there is still a lack of effective implementation and enforcement. A 1992 study by the U. S. General Accounting Office concluded that international environmental agreements lack adequate procedures to monitor and ensure compliance. Countries have become skilled in negotiating international environmental agreements, but they are much less skilled at making the agreement operate effectively. (Ibid.)In the past two decades, states have also used economic incentives and trade bans to encourage compliance with international environmental agreements. For example, the Montreal Protocol, the Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the Biodiversity Convention provide economic incentives in the form of technical assistance, technology transfers, and money to build the administrative capacity of national environmental agencies. These incentives have been of particular value in promoting the involvement and compliance of developing countriespart of the Rio bargain between northern (developed) and southern (developing) countries. The Global Environmental Facility (GEF), a new international funding institution, also provides money for training, equipment, and enforcement related to environmental protection measures. Some recent international environmental agreements, such as the Biodiversity Convention, have designated the GEF as their exclusive funding mechanism. (Ibid.)

Jurisdiction for Disputes: Courts, Parties, and EnforcementRoughly speaking, jurisdiction may be defined as a courts legal ability to hear a complaint. If the subject matter of the case is not within the scope of a courts jurisdiction, or if one of the parties, either the one bringing the case (plaintiff) or the one against whom it is brought (defendant) is not within a courts jurisdiction, the court will not hear the dispute. This is particularly relevant to international environmental law for a number of reasons. First and foremost, if a treaty or convention does not specify an international forum that has subject-matter jurisdiction, often the only place to bring a suit with respect to that treaty is in the member states domestic court system. This then presents at least two additional hurdles. If the member state being sued does not have domestic implementing legislation in place to hear the dispute, there will be no forum available. Even in the event that the domestic legislation provides for suits of this nature, the judges who decide the case are residents of the country against which it is brought, and the resulting potential conflicts of interest are apparent. (http://ucar.edu.)With respect to parties, only nations are bound by treaties and conventions. In international forums, such as the International Court of Justice, countries must consent to being sued in order to preserve their sovereignty. Thus, it is often impossible to sue a country. In any case, it is often a transnational corporation (TNC), not a country that has violated an international agreement. It is nearly impossible to sue a country for not enforcing its laws against a TNC or for not enacting sufficient implementing legislation.(Ibid.)The final difficulty in the jurisdictional arena is the question of who may bring a suit. Often, only countries may sue countries, not individual citizens and not nongovernmental organizations. This has huge repercussions in that the environmental harm must be large and notorious for a country to even notice it. Second, for a country to have a stake in the outcome of the subject matter, some harm may have to cross the borders of the violating country into the country that is suing.Finally, even if transboundary harm does exist, the issue of causation, especially in the environmental field, is often impossible to demonstrate with any certainty. In addition, in all fields of international law no country is ever in perfect compliance with every international obligation. Moreover, some countries are substantially more powerful than others. This may seem self-evident and unimportant, until one considers that suing another country may expose the plaintiff country to retaliatory actions. In spite of this political reality, however, Mexico successfully challenged the United States in the World Trade Organization in the Tuna- Dolphin Case, and several Asian countries successfully challenged the United States over U.S. efforts to compel shrimp-exporting countries to harvest shrimp without harming turtles. The enforcement issue is one where advocates for a safer environment often find themselves stymied. The entirety of international law, beyond the environmental field, remains largely unenforceable, even if a treaty or convention provides for specific substantive measures to be taken by a country (which is not always the case, since many treaties merely provide frameworks), and even if a forum for litigation or dispute resolution is specified or sanctions by member states for noncompliance are authorized. A country cannot be forced to do what it is not willing to do. One can sanction the country, order damages, restrict trade, or, most frequently, declare noncompliance, but beyond that, if a country will not comply, there is very little to be done.(Ibid.)Countries usually accept or avoid international environmental obligations because it is in their economic self-interest to do so. Nations rarely take actions that may harm their domestic economy or their international trade for altruistic reasons. They take these actions expecting some economic or political benefit sooner or later. (Ibid.)International Environmental Law Interest GroupA. Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL)CIEL is a public interest, not-for-profit law firm focusing on strengthening and developing international and comparative environmental law, policy and management. (http://www.ciel.org)B. Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (E-LAW) E-LAW is a world-wide network of public interest attorneys, scientists and other advocates interested in international and domestic environmental law. The advocates exchange information concerning international environmental issues, with the aim of building local environmental law expertise. Most of these exchanges occur through e-mail and electronic conferencing. The site features environmental law cases from around the world, mostly in English. (http://www.elaw.org)C. Environmental Law Institute (ELI) The ELI is an independent, non-partisan, not-for-profit organization working to activate a broad constituency of nearly 4,000 environmental professionals in government, industry, the private bar, public interest groups, the media, and academia. They provide training programs, law and policy reform programs, and produce numerous publications, which can be ordered via the Web site. One of ELI's major program areas focuses on international environmental law issues. (http://www.eli.org)D. International Environmental Law Research Centre (IELRC) The IELCR, located in Geneva and New Delhi, serves as a forum for the development of legal and institutional frameworks that foster equitable and sustainable environmental management at the local, national and international level. The site provides access to articles, working papers, briefing papers and more on a variety of environmental topics, including biosafety, biodiversity, climate change, intellectual property, justice and human rights, and water. (http://www.ielrc.org/)E. International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) IISD works to promote sustainable development in decision-making internationally and within Canada. IISD publishes the Internet periodical Earth Negotiations Bulletin and hosts the Linkages site, which is a multimedia resource providing timely coverage of conferences and updates re ongoing negotiations. (http://www.iisd.org/)F. Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development (OECD) The OECD is a Paris-based intergovernmental organization enabling its Member Countries to consult and cooperate with each other in matters concerning sustainable economic growth, OECDs site contains the text of recent annual reports, policy briefs, statistics, background papers and numerous other documents. OECD's Environment page addresses related topics, including biodiversity, sustainable development, environment and trade. (http:www.oecd.org)

CONCLUSIONThis paper has discussed the environmental law, policy, institutions and its implementation. From this discussion, it can be seen that the environmental issues are often complex and less addressed. The concept International Environmental Law is new, as far as the legal part of it is concerned. This being the case, the environmental issues are not adequately addressed by the laws. Environmental laws are important to provide the framework for the administration of environment. On the whole, international law for the environment has coped rather well with the challenges of global change. The complexity of environmental laws should be raised to reality, that damages should be allocated. Without doubt, International Environmental Law concerns merit more than just a passing attention and have become the major concern in all countries today. It must be understood that many environmental challenges are global in nature. As stated in the Principle 25 of Rio Declaration: peace, development and environmental protection are interdependent and indivisible. International law is a very dynamic field and sometimes there is a tendency to think of environmental protection and environmental law as a universe in itself and in fact it is, but we must not forget that development, peace and environmental protection go together. Damage to environment always constitutes general damage to all. Whatever harm is done to a particular environment, the harm is not only on that particular environment but it also has an effect elsewhere.

REFERENCESBooksBernas, Joaquin G. Introduction to Public International Law. Manila, Philippines, 2009Kiss, Alexandre C. and Shelton, Dinah Guide to International Environmental Law. Leiden; Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, c2007.N.A., Robison, ed. Comparative International Law and the Environment. 22nd edition, Oxford University Press, 2002.Nelson, Brian R. Western Political Thought: From Socrates to the Age of Ideology. 2nd ed., New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Rodrigo, Nancy P. The Environment on the Scale: Ipagtanggol ang kalikasan II. Puerto Princesa, Palawan.Sand, Peter H. Evolution of International Environmental. Law p. 31 1994.

JournalsThe George Washington University Law School, Introduction to International Environmental Law

Internethttp://en.wikipedia.com/kyotoptotocol.092383/as45http://unfccc.int/essential_background/convention/items/2627.phphttp://www.basel.int/text/documents.htmlhttp://www.biodiv.org/convention/articles.asphttp://www.ciel.org/http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/text.phphttp://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/SpecialProgrammesAndInitatives/Pages/London-Convention-and-Protocol.aspx http://www.unep.org/documents/default.asp?documentid=78), http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/SpecialProgrammesAndInitiatives/Pages/London-Convention-and-Protocol.aspxhttp://www.ll.georgetown.edu/guides/InternationalEnvironmentalLaw.cfmhttp://www.unep.org/documents/default.asp?documentid=78