THE AARHUS CONVENTION IN RUSSIAN AND FOREIGN INTERNATIONAL LEGAL DOCTRINES

INTRODUCTION. The article provides a doctrinal legal description of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus, 25 June 1998) (hereinafter referred as the Aarhus Convention). According to the common position of the Russian and Anglo-American legal scholars, the Aarhus Convention was a new and crucial step in linking environmental protection measures with human rights, including through improved international legal mechanisms for environmental impact assessment. The few assessments of this convention in the Russian science of international law are restrained. In the Anglo-American scientific literature the scholars see legal value of this convention as a source of international law in the context of the Convention setting very specific legal standards for public participation in environmental protection measures. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The material for the study was the Aarhus Convention itself, the previous international legal instruments on environmental protection, as well as the European Union Directives defining the basis of the environmental impact assessment procedure, primarily against the background of the interpretation of these legal instruments in the Russian and Anglo-American international legal doctrine. The methodological basis of the study was general scientific and private scientific methods of cognition (dialectical method, methods of analysis and synthesis, deduction and induction), as well as special methods used in legal science, such as historical and legal, formal legal and comparative legal methods. RESEARCH RESULTS. In the article, the author critically analyzed how the Russian and AngloAmerican scientific publications on international law assesses the impact of the Aarhus Convention on the development of international environmental law. What is especially important, the conventional mechanisms are analyzed in the context of the applicable court practice to the Arctic regions. The article deals with the doctrinal interpretation of the Convention mechanisms of harmonization of socio-environmental (including environmental) and economic interests of States and their individuals, physical and legal, especially against the background of environmental law of the European Union. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. In the article the author draws the reader’s attention to the fact that the Aarhus Convention is little studied even in foreign courses of international law, especially in the Russian international legal doctrine. Having been adopted through the UN Economic Commission for Europe platform, the Aarhus Convention entered into force in 2001, the Anglo-American legal literature is considered as closely interrelated with the development of environmental regulation in the States of the European Union taking into consideration that in the Aarhus Convention that many procedural and legal elements related to public participation in decision-making on specific activities, including in the field of energy, as well as the receipt of significant environmental information by the population, have been developed. The Aarhus Convention, having had a significant impact on the development of the legal mechanisms at the intersection of the human rights and environmental sectors, is aimed at the effective harmonization of social, environmental and economic interests what is especially important for the verification of the regime of environmental protection in the Arctic.

1. Alge T. Selected Problems of the Aarhus Convention Application in Austria. – Selected Problems of the Aarhus Convention Application based on Experience and Court Practice of NGOs in 7 EU Countries. 2009. P. 11–18. URL: http://www.justiceandenvironment.org/_files/file/2009/09/access_to_justice_collection.pdf (accessed date: 18.09.2018).

2. Berkman P.A. [et al.]. The Arctic Science Agreement Propels Science Diplomacy. – Science. 2017. Vol. 358. Issue 636. P. 596–598. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaq0890

3. Berkman P.A., Vylegzhanin A.N., Young O.R. Governing the Bering Strait Region: Current Status, Emerging Issues and Future Option. – Ocean Development and International Law. 2016. Vol. 47. Issue 2. P. 186–217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00 908320.2016.1159091

4. Block N. Sustainable Development Considerations in the Arctic. – Environmental Security in the Arctic Ocean. Ed. by P. Berkman and A. Vylegzhanin. Dordrecht: Springer. 2013. P. 37–58.

5. Černý P. Selected Problems of the Aarhus Convention Application in the Czech Republic. – Selected Problems of the Aarhus Convention Application based on Experience and Court Practice of NGOs in 7 EU Countries. 2009. P. 19–24. URL: http://www.justiceandenvironment.org/_files/file/2009/09/access_to_justice_collection.pdf (accessed date: 18.09.2018).

6. Chesterman S., Johnstone I., Malone D. Law and Practice of the United Nations: Documents and Commentary. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press. 2016. 741 p.

7. Corell R.W. Consequences of the Changes across the Arctic on World Order, the North Pacific Nations, and Regional and Global Governance. – The Arctic in Word Affairs: A North Pacific Dialogue on Arctic Transformation (2011 North Pacific Arctic Conference Proceedings). Ed. by R.W. Corell, J.S.-C. Kang, Y.H. Kim. Honolulu, USA: East-West Center. 2013. P. 17–57.

8. Csaba K. Selected Problems of the Implementation of the Aarhus Convention in Hungary. 2009. P. 31–38. URL: http://www.justiceandenvironment.org/_files/file/2009/09/access_to_justice_collection.pdf (accessed date: 18.09.2018).

9. Loucaides L. Environmental Protection through the Jurisprudence of the European Convention on Human Rights. – British Yearbook of International Law. 2005. Vol. 75. Issue 1. P. 249–267. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1093/bybil/75.1.249

10. Olsvig S. Greenland perspective. Building Resilient Communities in the Arctic. – The Arctic in World Affairs: A North Pacific Dialogue on the Future of the Arctic (2013 North Pacific Arctic Conference Proceedings). Ed. by O.R. Young, J.D. Kim, Y.H. Kim. Busan, Republic of Korea: Korea Maritime Institute; Honolulu, USA: East-West Center. 2013. P. 252–264.

11. Richardson B.J., Razzque J. Public Participation in Environment Decision-making. – Environmental Law for Sustainability. Ed. by B.J. Richardson and S. Wood. Oxford: Hart Publishing. 2006. P. 165–194.

12. Selected Problems of the Aarhus Convention Application based on Experience and Court Practice of NGOs in 7 EU Countries. 2009. 54 p. URL: http://www. justiceandenvironment.org/_files/file/2009/09/ access_to_justice_collection.pdf (accessed date: 18.09.2018).

13. Shaw M. International Law. 8th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2017. 1033 p.

14. Vaarmari K. Selected Issues of Application of the Aarhus Convention in Estonia. 2009. P. 25–30. URL: http://www.justiceandenvironment.org/_files/file/2009/09/access_to_justice_collection.pdf (accessed date: 18.09.2018).

15. Vylegzhanin A.N. Pravovoye polojeniye Arkticheskogo regiona v dokumentah [Legal Status of the Arctic Region in Documents]. – Arkticheskiy region. Problemy mezhdunarodnogo sotrudnichestva: Chrestomatia v 3 tomah. Tom 3: Primenimye pravoviye istochniki [The Arctic Region. Problems of International Cooperation. In 3 volumes. Vol. 3. Applicable Legal Sources. Ed.-in-Chief I.S. Ivanov]. Moscow: Aspect-Press Publ. 2013. P. 11–44. (In Russ.)

16. Vylegzhanin A.N., Shapovalov B.P. Pravovye osnovy arkticheskoi politiki Evropeiskogo soyuza [Legal Basis for the EU Arctic Policy]. – Moscow Journal of International Law. 2013. No. 1 (89). P. 191–202. (In Russ.)

17. Vylegzhanin A.N., Young O.R., Berkman P.A. Governing the Barents Sea Region: Current Status, Emerging Issues and Future Option. – Ocean Development and International Law. 2017. Vol. 49. Issue 1. P. 52–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0090 8320.2017.1365545