Marc Levesque: Beaver Lake Cree vs Tar Sands – Let’s take it international

Paper proposal:

Research Question

Do we now (or, if not, should we henceforth) have access to a clean environment as a human right?

Overview

    The Beaver Lake vs Tar Sands case is interesting window onto the greater contemporary problem of how climate change and large industrial projects effect the environment, and subsequently the way of life of local populations. In this case, the legal argument is being made on the basis of the 1876 Treaty Six agreements between the First Nations of Alberta and the Government of Canada promising the plaintiffs the right to hunt, fish, and trap on their former lands in perpetuity. The Beaver Lake Cree, with the aid of native rights superstar lawyer Jack Woodward, are citing “17,000 infringements by oil companies of [their] constitutionally protected treaty rights and seek[ing] injunctions against new developments.” Their legal challenge has since received international support and is seen as being “the last and best” legal hope to stop the proposed expansion of tar sands operations, including the controversial Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline.

    Though the chief legal weapon brought to bear in this case is the Treaty 6 right to the use of land, and accordingly the context of the case is that of Native Rights, interesting questions are raised about what is to be done, and what rights may be threatened, in similar situations involving peoples who do not have recourse to specific Native rights claims. The question is, then, can a case be made in terms of general human rights in other (international) instances of large-scale environmental destruction? I intend to investigate this in the context of international law and international human rights.

Comments

[Michael Byers]

I like the question, i.e. what happens if you remove the indigenous dimension? Essentially, that was the situation of the Lubicon, who the Canadian government insisted had no treaty rights. In a different context, you might want to examine the massive damage awards handed out for environmental harm by the UN Compensation Commission after the First Gulf War. There will be a literature on the general question, of course, though it's been more than a decade since I read any of it. Try Boyle and Birnie, International Environmental Law, for a start. And look into the 1503 procedure for gross human rights violations within the context of the UN Human Rights Council. I wonder whether the situation of indigenous peoples in Northern Alberta, Saskatchewan and the NWT as a result of the tar sands might perhaps fit in there?

Keep up the good work!