Governance Structures that Respect the Rights of Future Generations

Governance Structures that Respect the Rights of Future Generations

Catherine PearceProgramme ManagerFuture Justice

2

“We act as we do because we can get away with it: future generations do not vote, they have no political

or financial power; they cannot challenge our decisions. But the

results of the present profligacy are rapidly closing the options for

future generations.” (Brundtland, 1987)

3

Ombudspersons for Future Generations as Implementation Units

4

Ombudspersons for Future Generations as Implementation Units

5

6

7

8

At the formal level, our proposal is not new

• In a four-page document (A/CONF.151/PC/WG./L.8/Rev.1/Add.2), dated February 21, 1992, Malta submitted a proposal to the working group of the preparatory committee of the UN Rio conference, which met in New York in early March 1992.

“We declare that each generation has, in particular, the responsibility to ensure that in any national or international forum where it is likely that a decision is taken affecting the interests of future generations access be given to an authorised person appointed as ‘Guardian’ of future generations to appear and make submissions on their behalf, so that account be taken of the responsibilities stated in this declaration and the obligations created thereby.”

9

Constitutions

Andorra, Armenia, Argentina, Belgium, Bhutan, Bolivia, Burundi, Cuba,

Czech Republic, Ecuador, Estonia, France, Germany, Kenya, Poland,

South Africa, Switzerland, Ukraine

Institutions

Brazil, Canada, Chile, Finland, Germany, Hong Kong, Hungary,

the Philippines, Wales, New Zealand

Without the Hungarian Commissioner

• A military radar would have been constructed next to the residential area of the city of Pécs

• The gene-bank of Érd would have disappeared

• The Hungarian public water utilities would have been privatised

• A huge straw-fired power plant would have been established in the World Heritage Tokaj region

• A shopping mall and parking lot would have replaced the protected peat-bog of Dunakeszi

• A golf-course and housing estate would have been built on high quality cropland near Páty

• The right of public participation in decision-making would have been violated several times

• The waste utilisation factory of the Borsod metal factory would still be polluting

11

Thank you for your attention

www.futurejustice.org

[email protected]