It seems self-evident that states seek to solve problems primarily through legal
means, within the increasingly widely-recognized framework of the rule of law.
However, the emergence of crises in the first quarter of the 21st century raises the
question: why have the international community and international law failed to
effectively address and prevent global environmental problems in recent decades?
If one looks back at the history of ‘modern’ institutional environmental protection,
one will find that the spectacular increase in the number of international treaties
and other documents and of scientific and educational books and programmes
has led to hardly any positive changes in the state of the environment.
Some regions have seen improvements, but overall there have been no spectacular
successes or real solutions. Despite our scientific knowledge, technical skills and
sophistication, the only environmental challenge in recent decades to which
countries around the world have been able to respond relatively quickly and
effectively, albeit with a delay, has been the reduction of the use of ozone-depleting
substances (Shaw 2017: 740). Indeed, it has now become clear that the two most
serious environmental challenges facing humanity as a whole are the acceleration
of climate change and the loss of biodiversity. These are also closely interlinked,
mutually reinforcing processes that have an increasingly direct effect on the future
of individuals, societies and the global economy.
Despite the fact that economic interests and considerations continue to enjoy
clear priority over environmental requirements in decision-making, we are no
longer only concerned about pollution caused by the economy, but increasingly
about environmental degradation as well, and more specifically its economic and
social consequences, which increasingly threaten the UN’s main objective: the
maintenance of international peace and security.
By definition, law is a set of rules of conduct created by the state (their creation
is linked to state bodies), are generally binding in a given society and are ultimately
enforced by state bodies. The public power of the state is manifested through
various institutions (e.g., public authorities, courts), thus ensuring the enforcement
of legal norms at the state level. The legal norm is thus normative’, i.e., it determines
the direction of future behavior. Under the rule of law, therefore, it is in principle
possible to do everything that is not explicitly prohibited by law (by means of
precise legal provisions or so-called general clauses).