Slepcevic Litigating for the Environment

EU Law, National Courts and Socio-Legal Reality
1. Auflage 2010
ISBN: 978-3-531-91999-7
Verlag: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften
Format: PDF
Kopierschutz: 1 - PDF Watermark

E-Book, Englisch, 244 Seiten, eBook

This book is the result of doctoral studies that I started in October 2004. At the outset, I only knew that I wanted to work on interest groups and litigation in the context of the European Union. At that time, I would not have believed that I would find myself some time later touring half Western Europe to interview environmental organisations, nor that I would read French, German and Dutch court rulings on the protection of endangered species whose names were completely unknown to me. Yet I never regretted my choice of topic, and hopefully the following chapters will convince the reader that it is indeed a topic that merits our attention. I would not have been able to cope with all the pitfalls of a long research project without the strong and enduring support of my friends and colleagues. Both personally and academically, I have profited enormously from my three years as a doctoral student at the department of political science at the Institute for Advanced Studies (Institut für Höhere Studien) in Vienna, Austria. I am very much indebted to Gerda Falkner, Oliver Treib, Sylvia Kritzinger and Irina Michalowitz for organising such a great programme which allowed me and my colleagues to engage in intensive discussions with outstanding academic scholars such as Alec Stone-Sweet, Paul Pierson, James Caporaso, Frank Schimmelfennig, Klaus Goetz, Andrea Lenschow, Katharina Holzinger and Hellen Wallace.

Dr. Reinhard Slepcevic completed his doctoral thesis at the Department of Government at the University of Vienna. He subsequently held a position as a researcher at the Austrian Academy of Sciences. In September 2008, he became a Max Weber Fellow at the Law Department of the European University Institute in Florence, Italy.

Zielgruppe

Professional/practitioner

Autoren/Hrsg.

Slepcevic, Reinhard

Inhaltsverzeichnis

1;Preface;6
2;Contents;7
3;List of Tables;10
4;List of Figures;10
5;Abbreviations;11
6;1 Introduction;13
7;2 The Interest in the Judicial Enforcement of EU Law;18
7.1;2.1 Public Interest Group Litigation as a Decentralised System of European Law Enforcement;18
7.2;2.2 The European Court System, European Integration and Democratic Governance;21
7.3;2.3 Empirical Puzzle;24
7.4;2.4 Research Question(s);25
8;3 Theoretical Approach;28
8.1;3.1 Definitional Issues;28
8.2;3.2 Existing Explanations for the Differing Effects of Public Interest Group Litigation;30
8.3;3.3 The Stage Model;33
8.3.1;3.3.1 Legal Preconditions for Public Interest Group Litigation;34
8.3.2;3.3.2 Stage 1: Litigation by Public Interest Groups;36
8.3.3;3.3.3 Stage 2: Interpretation by the National Courts;39
8.3.4;3.3.4 Stage 3: Reaction of the Competent Authorities;40
8.4;3.4 Other Possible Explanatory Factors;43
9;4 Methodological Approach;45
9.1;4.1 Research Design;45
9.2;4.2 Tools of Inquiry, Data Collection and Data Analysis;47
9.3;4.3 The Policy Area: European Nature Conservation Policy and the Natura 2000 Directives;51
10;5 The Natura 2000 Directives;54
10.1;5.1 The Birds Directive and Hunting Dates;54
10.2;5.2 The Site Protection Regime of the Birds Directive;57
10.2.1;5.2.1 The ECJ’s Case Law on the Birds Directive;57
10.2.2;5.2.2 The Protection Regime of the Habitats Directive;59
10.2.2.1;5.2.2.1 The ECJ’s Case Law on the Habitats Directive;62
11;6 France;66
11.1;6.1 The Setting of Hunting Dates;66
11.1.1;6.1.1 Preliminary Remarks: Scientific Evidence and Hunting Dates;66
11.1.2;6.1.2 The Context for the Implementation of the Birds Directive;67
11.1.3;6.1.3 The Initial Transposition;70
11.1.4;6.1.4 French Environmental Organisations and Litigation;71
11.1.5;6.1.5 The Interpretation of the Birds Directive by French Courts;74
11.1.5.1;6.1.5.1 The Conseil d’État and the Supremacy of European Law;74
11.1.5.2;6.1.5.2 French Courts and the Setting of Hunting Dates;78
11.1.6;6.1.6 Reaction of the Competent Authorities;86
11.1.7;6.1.7 The Late Role of the European Commission;94
11.1.8;6.1.8 Ultimately Achieving Compliance;96
11.1.9;6.1.9 Conclusion;98
11.2;6.2 The Implementation of the Natura 2000 Network;99
11.2.1;6.2.1 The Protracted Process of Designating Natura 2000 Sites;99
11.2.2;6.2.2 The Initial Transposition of the Directives’ Site Protection Regime;104
11.2.3;6.2.3 Reaction of French Environmental Organisations;107
11.2.4;6.2.4 The French Courts and the Natura 2000 Directives;108
11.2.4.1;6.2.4.1 Direct Reference to the Directives’ Site Protection Regime;109
11.2.4.2;6.2.4.2 Indirect Reference to the Directives’ Site Protection Regime;112
11.2.4.3;6.2.4.3 Forcing the Designation of Specific Sites;114
11.2.4.4;6.2.4.4 Effects of the Courts’ Restrictive Interpretation;116
11.2.5;6.2.5 Effects of Litigation;117
11.2.6;6.2.6 The Role of the European Commission for Achieving Compliance;118
11.2.7;6.2.7 Remaining Implementation Problems;123
11.3;6.3 Linking the Empirical Results to the Stage Model;124
12;7 Germany;128
12.1;7.1 The Implementation of the Natura 2000 Directives;128
12.1.1;7.1.1 Designation of Sites;129
12.1.2;7.1.2 Site Protection Measures;132
12.1.2.1;7.1.2.1 Transposition;132
12.1.2.2;7.1.2.2 Application;135
12.2;7.2 Reasons for the Implementation Problems;136
12.3;7.3 The Activities of German Environmental Organisations to Achieve Compliance;138
12.3.1;7.3.1 Environmental Organisations and Their Access to Courts;142
12.4;7.4 The Role of the European Commission;146
12.5;7.5 Interpretation by German Courts;148
12.5.1;7.5.1 Initial Rulings on the Directives’ Site Protection Regime;149
12.5.2;7.5.2 Giving Direct Effect to Article 6;150
12.5.3;7.5.3 Clarifying the Status of Potential Natura 2000 Sites;153
12.5.4;7.5.4 Applying the Site Protection Regime: Significant Negative Effects, Alternatives, and Overriding Reasons of Public Interest;154
12.5.5;7.5.5 Holding the Directives back through Courts;159
12.5.6;7.5.6 Assessing the Court’s Rulings;160
12.6;7.6 Reaction of Environmental Organisations: Restricted Litigation;161
12.7;7.7 Effects of Litigation;164
12.8;7.8 Linking the Empirical Results to the Stage Model;167
13;8 The Netherlands;170
13.1;8.1 The Implementation of the Natura 2000 Directives;170
13.1.1;8.1.1 The Site Protection Regime;170
13.1.2;8.1.2 The Designation of Sites;173
13.1.3;8.1.3 The Species Protection Regime;175
13.2;8.2 Reasons for the Implementation Problems;176
13.3;8.3 The Role of the European Commission for the Implementation;179
13.4;8.4 Initial Actions Taken by Dutch Environmental Organisations: Blocked Access;181
13.5;8.5 The Courts’ Interpretation of the Natura 2000 Directives;185
13.5.1;8.5.1 The Site Protection Regime;185
13.5.1.1;8.5.1.1 The First Phase: Complete Neglect;185
13.5.1.2;8.5.1.2 The Second Phase: Approaching the Directives Ambiguously;185
13.5.1.3;8.5.1.3 The Third Phase: Gradually Giving Direct Effect to Article 6;188
13.5.2;8.5.2 The Issue of Site Designation;196
13.5.3;8.5.3 The Issue of Species Protection;198
13.5.4;8.5.4 The Reasoning of the Raad van State – The Way the Court Tests;201
13.6;8.6 Public Interest Group Litigation to Enforce the Directives;206
13.6.1;8.6.1 The Opportunities to Use Litigation;206
13.6.2;8.6.2 The Reaction of Environmental Organisations to the Created Opportunities;207
13.7;8.7 Effects of Litigation;210
13.8;8.8 Linking the Empirical Results to the Stage Model;214
14;9 Conclusion;216
14.1;9.1 Evaluating the Stage Model on the Basis of the Empirical Results;216
14.1.1;9.1.1 The Explanatory Power of the Stage Model;216
14.1.2;9.1.2 The Explanatory Power of Alternative Explanations;220
14.1.3;9.1.3 Forgotten Explanatory Factors of the Stage Model?;221
14.2;9.2 Litigation as a Decentralised Instrument of European Law Enforcement;223
14.3;9.3 European Integration, Democratic Governance and Litigation;225
15;References;228

The Interest in the Judicial Enforcement of EU Law.- Theoretical Approach.- Methodological Approach.- The Natura 2000 Directives.- France.- Germany.- The Netherlands.- Conclusion.

Über Autor(innen)

Dr. Reinhard Slepcevic completed his doctoral thesis at the Department of Government at the University of Vienna. He subsequently held a position as a researcher at the Austrian Academy of Sciences. In September 2008, he became a Max Weber Fellow at the Law Department of the European University Institute in Florence, Italy.