This paper raises questions about the accessibility of the Articles 14 & 15 submissions mechanism, a public complaint process that attempts to use the eyes of ordinary persons in Canada, Mexico and the US to monitor an important environmental treaty obligation: NAFTA signatories' commitment to effectively enforce their environmental laws. In order to consider whether the Articles 14 & 15 review tool is accessible, we assemble a set of indicators that nourish four hypotheses, which may reveal if the review tool is sufficiently well installed to attain its long term objectives in a significant measure. The hypotheses are: 1) that the CEC receives an insufficient amount of submissions; 2) that it takes considerable or random times to process them; 3) that it consistently takes longer, or has more troubles, to process Mexican and disadvantaged-group cases; 4) that few complainants harvest any benefits from complaining, being more likely that they do if they are rich environmental NGOs than if they are ordinary individuals. The information we present is based on primary research and statistical information on the processing of NAAEC Articles 14 and 15 submissions. Our chief objective is not to conclusively prove or disprove these hypotheses, but to provide a framework to respond these questions. By consistently focusing their efforts on evaluating the attainment of the ultimate objectives of this review tool, all authors who have critiqued the Articles 14 & 15 submissions process have failed to consider whether the complaint mechanism is effectively positioned to capture environmental law enforcement information from all of its target population. Instead, this paper explores the implementation of Articles 14 & 15 by generating information on the attainment of its midcourse objectives. This paper may be of interest to persons working on issues concerning the implementation and further elaboration of NAAEC Articles 14 and 15 and to those pondering whether and how the proposed FTAA and the Canada-Chile Free Trade Accord should be structured to deal with the environmental consequences of further economic integration.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:LACETR/oai:collectionscanada.gc.ca:QMM.19769 |
| Date | January 2003 |
| Creators | Hernandez, Roberto |
| Publisher | McGill University |
| Source Sets | Library and Archives Canada ETDs Repository / Centre d'archives des thèses électroniques de Bibliothèque et Archives Canada |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Coverage | Master of Laws (Institute of Comparative Law) |
| Rights | All items in eScholarship@McGill are protected by copyright with all rights reserved unless otherwise indicated. |
| Relation | alephsysno: 002024570, Theses scanned by McGill Library. |
Page generated in 0.0127 seconds