Environmental Courts & Tribunals (ECTs)
As the amount of environment-related litigation has increased, so has the number of ECTs dedicated to hearing these types of disputes.
I recently prepared a detailed report about Chilean law and the country’s legal and judicial systems. While researching for the report, I noted that Chile has three environmental courts that are designated to hear only environment-related litigation. Given Chile’s beautiful and varied geography, this didn’t surprise me, but it did leave me wondering if other nations (including the US) have similar ECTs.
To answer my question, I found the following helpful source: United Nations Environment Programme, Environmental Courts and Tribunals – 2021: A Guide for Policy Makers (2022), https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/40309. This publication confirms that, as the amount of environment-related litigation has increased, so has the number of ECTs dedicated to hearing these types of disputes. Some nations have created special environmental courts that operate as part of the national judiciary, while others have created environmental tribunals that operate under the executive or administrative branch of government.
In the US, at the national level, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for enforcing environment-related laws and can take action against violators of these laws. The EPA’s administrative judges render opinions on disputes between the EPA and citizens, businesses, and organizations regulated under US environmental laws.[1] Federal and state courts also serve as venues for environmental litigation. For more on environmental litigation in the US, see C.M. Rea, N.E. Merten, and C.J. Rife, “Outcomes and policy focus of environmental litigation in the United States,” NATURE SUSTAINABILITY 7 (2024): 1469–480, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-024-01456-x. At the US state level, I wasn’t surprised to learn that there is a separate Environmental Division of the Vermont Superior Court. See https://www.vermontjudiciary.org/environmental.
Below are some of the jurisdictions outside of the US that have ECTs, bearing in mind that each has unique jurisdictional and topical coverage. I gleaned most of this information from the aforementioned UN publication. I admit to being surprised that there are so many, although my next line of research will involve determining (if possible) the efficacy of these ECTs.
Australia: In Australia, there is one environmental court in New South Wales, three environmental courts in Queensland, three environmental courts in South Australia, two environmental tribunals in Tasmania, one environmental tribunal in Victoria, and two environmental tribunals in West Australia.[2] See, e.g., Land and Environment Court of New South Wales: https://lec.nsw.gov.au/.
Brazil: Brazil has 73 environmental courts and 27 environmental tribunals.[3] According to the aforementioned UN publication, “Brazil has exemplary environmental prosecutors to investigate and prosecute criminal and civil complaints on behalf of the people and the environment.”[4]
Chile: Chile’s environmental courts were created by Law no. 20,600 (2012), which called for three courts with jurisdiction over the northern, central, and southern regions of the country, respectively. See https://tribunalambiental.cl/.
India: The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, was enacted by the Indian Parliament, which led to the establishment of the NGT on October 18, 2010. See https://www.greentribunal.gov.in/.
Kenya: Kenya’s Environment and Land Court was established by Article 162(2) of the Constitution, and the Environment and Land Court Act no.19 of 2011, gave effect to the constitutional provision to establish the court. See https://judiciary.go.ke/environment-and-land-court/.
New Zealand: The Environment Court of New Zealand is one of the oldest free-standing environmental courts in the world.[5] The Environment Court has three registries in different parts of the country. See https://www.environmentcourt.govt.nz/.
Sweden: Sweden has six environmental courts per the Swedish Environmental Code (2000). [6] Their jurisdiction covers decisions made pursuant to the Environmental Code and acts and ordinances relating to the Code, including European Union environmental law.[7] See https://www.domstol.se/hitta-domstol/mark--och-miljodomstolar/.
[1] US EPA, “About the Office of Administrative Law Judges (OALJ)” (last updated May, 2, 2024), https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/about-office-administrative-law-judges-oalj.
[2] United Nations Environment Programme, Environmental Courts and Tribunals – 2021: A Guide for Policy Makers (2022), at 14, https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/40309.
[3] Id. at 13.
[4] Id. at 59.
[5] Id. at 44.
[6] Id. at 45.
[7] Id. at 46.