The Rise of Environmental Courts and Tribunals: Ethiopia’s move for Environmental Justice and Sustainability

Introduction

Environmental challenges are intensifying on a global scale, with issues such as climate change, deforestation, pollution, and biodiversity loss becoming increasingly severe. Climate change, driven by greenhouse gas emissions, is causing rising global temperatures, extreme weather events, and sea-level rise, threatening ecosystems and human livelihoods (IPCC, 2021). Deforestation, particularly in tropical regions, exacerbates climate change by reducing carbon sinks and displacing wildlife, leading to habitat destruction and biodiversity loss (WWF, 2020). Pollution, including air, water, and soil contamination, further degrades ecosystems and poses significant health risks to populations worldwide (UNEP, 2019). These interconnected challenges highlight the urgent need for comprehensive and coordinated global action to mitigate their impacts.

Biodiversity loss, driven by habitat destruction, overexploitation, and climate change, is occurring at an unprecedented rate, with scientists warning of a sixth mass extinction (Ceballos et al., 2020). This loss not only threatens the stability of ecosystems but also undermines essential services such as pollination, water purification, and climate regulation (Díaz et al., 2019). Addressing these environmental challenges requires a multi-faceted approach, including policy interventions, sustainable practices, and public awareness campaigns. International agreements like the Paris Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity provide frameworks for action, but their success depends on robust implementation and cooperation among nations, industries, and individuals (UNFCCC, 2015; CBD, 2022). Without immediate and sustained efforts, the consequences of these environmental crises will continue to escalate, jeopardizing the planet's health and future generations' well-being.

Since the 1960s, the concept of environmental rule of law has evolved globally, with varying degrees of progress across different countries and continents. While some regions have made significant strides in establishing legal frameworks to address environmental issues, no nation—whether in Africa, Asia, Europe, or elsewhere—has fully developed a comprehensive set of rules capable of addressing the dynamic and complex nature of contemporary environmental challenges (UNEP, 2019). These challenges, which include climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution, require adaptable and robust legal systems that can effectively regulate human activities and enforce accountability. Despite widespread recognition of the importance of environmental rule of law, implementation gaps and enforcement weaknesses remain persistent obstacles worldwide.

Ethiopia serves as a notable example of this disparity between legal frameworks and practical implementation. The country has enshrined environmental rights in its constitution and enacted numerous laws and policies aimed at environmental protection. However, significant gaps in implementation, compliance, enforcement, resource allocation, and institutional capacity hinder the effective realization of these legal provisions (Abebe, 2020). Challenges such as limited public awareness, weak monitoring systems, and competing development priorities further exacerbate the situation. Ethiopia's experience underscores the broader global need to not only develop environmental laws but also strengthen their implementation and enforcement to achieve meaningful environmental governance.

In response to the growing complexity of environmental challenges, the global community has increasingly turned to specialized legal mechanisms to address these pressing issues. Environmental Courts and Tribunals (ECTs) have emerged as a critical tool for advancing environmental justice, ensuring accountability, and promoting sustainable development. These specialized judicial bodies are designed to handle the unique and often technical nature of environmental disputes, providing a dedicated forum for resolving conflicts related to environmental protection and resource management (Pring & Pring, 2021). Their rise reflects a broader recognition of the need for targeted legal frameworks to address the multifaceted dimensions of environmental degradation.

The adoption of ECTs has seen significant growth in recent years, underscoring their importance in global environmental governance. Between 2016 and 2021, the number of ECTs worldwide increased from over 1,500 to 2,115, spanning 67 countries (UNEP, 2021). This expansion highlights the growing acknowledgment of ECTs as essential institutions for enforcing environmental laws and ensuring compliance with international environmental commitments. By offering expertise in environmental matters and streamlining legal processes, ECTs play a vital role in bridging the gap between legal frameworks and their practical implementation. Their proliferation signals a global shift toward strengthening legal systems to better address the urgent and interconnected challenges of environmental sustainability.

A Global Overview

Environmental Courts and Tribunals (ECTs) are specialized judicial bodies designed to address environmental disputes with expertise, flexibility, and efficiency. Unlike ordinary courts, which often struggle with backlogs and lack the technical knowledge to handle complex environmental issues, ECTs integrate legal and scientific expertise. This interdisciplinary approach ensures that environmental cases are adjudicated fairly and effectively, leading to higher conviction rates and stronger enforcement of environmental laws (Pring & Pring, 2021). By focusing exclusively on environmental matters, ECTs provide a dedicated forum for resolving disputes related to pollution, resource management, and biodiversity conservation, thereby enhancing the overall effectiveness of environmental governance.

The growing importance of ECTs has been widely recognized, as highlighted in the 2016 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Guide, which reported over 1,500 such bodies worldwide. By 2021, this number had increased to 2,115 across 67 countries, reflecting a global commitment to strengthening environmental rule of law (UNEP, 2021). Countries like China have made significant strides, establishing more than 1,353 ECTs since 2016, which have played a crucial role in addressing the country’s environmental challenges (Zhang, 2020). Other nations, such as India and Pakistan, have maintained and expanded their existing systems, while countries like Indonesia and Thailand have opted for green benches within their judicial systems to handle environmental cases (Kotzé & Chin, 2019). These developments underscore the adaptability of ECTs to different legal and cultural contexts, making them a vital tool for promoting environmental justice and sustainable development globally.

Challenges to Establishing ECTs

?Despite their demonstrated benefits in advancing environmental justice and governance, Environmental Courts and Tribunals (ECTs) are not been well developed. Several challenges hinder their establishment and effectiveness, limiting their potential to address pressing environmental issues. These barriers vary across social, economic, political, and jurisdictional dimensions, often preventing countries from prioritizing environmental justice and leaving critical environmental problems unresolved.

Social challenges, such as a lack of public awareness and support for environmental justice, are significant obstacles. In many regions, communities may not fully understand the importance of environmental protection or the role of ECTs in safeguarding their rights and resources (UNEP, 2019). Economic challenges also play a critical role, as financial constraints and competing resource allocation priorities often divert attention and funding away from establishing and maintaining ECTs (Pring & Pring, 2021). Political challenges, including insufficient political will and instability, further complicate efforts to create and sustain these specialized judicial bodies. Without strong political commitment, the necessary legal and institutional reforms to support ECTs are often delayed or neglected (Kotzé & Chin, 2019). Additionally, jurisdictional challenges, such as complex legal frameworks and overlapping jurisdictions, can create confusion and inefficiencies, undermining the effectiveness of ECTs even where they exist (Zhang, 2020).

These multifaceted barriers highlight the need for a coordinated approach to overcome the challenges hindering the adoption and effectiveness of ECTs. Addressing these issues requires raising public awareness, securing adequate funding, fostering political commitment, and streamlining legal frameworks. Without such efforts, the potential of ECTs to deliver environmental justice and promote sustainable development will remain unrealized in many parts of the world.

Driving Factors for ECTs

The global growth of Environmental Courts and Tribunals (ECTs) has been driven by a combination of factors, reflecting the increasing recognition of the need for specialized legal mechanisms to address environmental challenges. One key driver has been the advocacy efforts of civil society, including environmental groups and local communities, who have pushed for stronger legal frameworks to protect natural resources and ensure environmental justice (UNEP, 2019). These groups have played a crucial role in raising awareness about environmental issues and demanding accountability from governments and corporations.

Another significant factor is the rise in climate change litigation, as individuals, organizations, and governments increasingly turn to the courts to hold polluters accountable and enforce climate action (Pring & Pring, 2021). This trend has underscored the importance of having specialized judicial bodies capable of handling the technical and scientific complexities of environmental cases. Additionally, the growing recognition of the link between environmental degradation and human rights violations has further fueled the establishment of ECTs. Courts are increasingly being called upon to address cases where environmental harm impacts fundamental rights, such as access to clean water, air, and a healthy environment (Kotzé & Chin, 2019).

The adoption of international environmental law principles and standards has also played a pivotal role in promoting the growth of ECTs. Global agreements, such as the Paris Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity, have encouraged countries to align their legal systems with international environmental commitments (UNEP, 2021). Furthermore, the leadership of organizations like the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has provided essential guidance and support for the development of ECTs worldwide. Finally, international financial institutions have contributed to this growth by offering funding and technical assistance, enabling countries to establish and strengthen these specialized judicial bodies (Zhang, 2020). Together, these factors have created a conducive environment for the expansion of ECTs, highlighting their critical role in advancing environmental justice and sustainability.

?Good Practices and Innovations

Environmental Courts and Tribunals (ECTs) worldwide have embraced innovative practices to enhance their effectiveness in addressing complex environmental disputes. One key innovation is the flexibility of procedures, allowing ECTs to tailor their processes to the unique nature of environmental cases, which often involve scientific, technical, and social dimensions (Pring & Pring, 2021). This adaptability ensures that cases are handled efficiently and fairly, accommodating the specific needs of each dispute. Additionally, many ECTs have incorporated Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms, such as mediation and negotiation, to resolve conflicts amicably and reduce the burden on the judicial system. ADR not only fosters collaborative solutions but also helps preserve relationships between stakeholders (UNEP, 2019).

Another critical practice is ensuring the independence and impartiality of ECTs, which is essential for maintaining public trust and delivering fair judgments. By operating autonomously from political and economic pressures, ECTs can make decisions based solely on legal and scientific evidence (Kotzé & Chin, 2019). Furthermore, many ECTs have adopted broad standing rules, allowing individuals and groups to file cases in the public interest, even without a direct personal stake in the matter. This approach, pioneered by countries like India, empowers communities and environmental advocates to seek justice on behalf of affected populations (Zhang, 2020). Comprehensive jurisdiction is another hallmark of ECTs, enabling them to address civil, criminal, and administrative aspects of environmental disputes, thereby providing a holistic approach to environmental governance.

Innovative examples from around the world highlight the adaptability of ECTs. India’s broad standing rules have set a precedent for public interest litigation, while Australia and the Philippines have introduced mobile courthouses to bring justice to remote and underserved areas (UNEP, 2021). These practices demonstrate the potential of ECTs to overcome geographical and institutional barriers, ensuring that environmental justice is accessible to all. By adopting such innovative approaches, ECTs play a vital role in strengthening environmental rule of law and promoting sustainable development globally.

African Countries

Some Africa countries have made notable progress in establishing Environmental Courts and Tribunals (ECTs), demonstrating the continent’s commitment to addressing environmental and land-related disputes through specialized legal mechanisms. Kenya stands out as a regional leader with its Environment and Land Courts (ELCs), which operate across 26 counties and are staffed by 51 judges. These courts have been instrumental in resolving conflicts related to land use, natural resource management, and environmental protection, providing a model for other African nations. By integrating legal and technical expertise, Kenya’s ELCs have enhanced the efficiency and fairness of environmental adjudication, setting a benchmark for the region.

?Other African countries have also made significant strides in developing specialized judicial bodies to address environmental and land disputes. Ghana, Lesotho, and South Africa have established courts and tribunals that focus on these issues, reflecting a growing recognition of the need for targeted legal frameworks to manage environmental challenges (Pring & Pring, 2021). Madagascar, for instance, has introduced special courts to combat the illegal trafficking of rosewood and ebony, highlighting the adaptability of ECTs to address specific local environmental issues, such as wildlife crime and deforestation (Kotzé & Chin, 2019). These initiatives underscore the potential of ECTs to provide tailored solutions to the unique environmental challenges faced by African nations.

?Despite these advancements, the full potential of ECTs in Africa remains untapped. Challenges such as limited resources, insufficient public awareness, and weak enforcement mechanisms continue to hinder their effectiveness (Zhang, 2020). However, the progress made so far demonstrates the transformative role ECTs can play in promoting environmental justice and sustainable development across the continent. With increased support and investment, Africa’s ECTs could become a cornerstone of environmental governance, ensuring that environmental laws are effectively implemented and enforced.

Europe ?

In Europe, Environmental Courts and Tribunals (ECTs) are frequently structured as specialized chambers within general or administrative courts, reflecting the region’s diverse legal traditions and systems. For example, Sweden has integrated environmental and land courts into its general court system, allowing for a seamless adjudication process that combines environmental expertise with broader judicial oversight (Pring & Pring, 2021). This approach ensures that environmental disputes are handled efficiently while maintaining consistency with the country’s overall legal framework. Similarly, Finland and Denmark have established specialized administrative courts to address environmental and food-related disputes, highlighting the adaptability of ECTs to specific national priorities and legal structures (UNEP, 2021).

These European models demonstrate the flexibility of ECTs in accommodating different legal systems and addressing unique environmental challenges. By embedding environmental expertise within existing judicial frameworks, countries like Sweden, Finland, and Denmark have been able to streamline the resolution of environmental disputes while ensuring that decisions are informed by both legal and scientific knowledge (Kotzé & Chin, 2019). This integration also enhances the legitimacy and enforceability of environmental rulings, as they are issued within the context of well-established judicial institutions.

The success of these models underscores the importance of tailoring ECTs to fit the specific legal and cultural contexts of individual countries. While some nations may opt for fully independent environmental courts, others may find it more effective to integrate specialized chambers into their existing court systems (Zhang, 2020). This adaptability is a key strength of ECTs, enabling them to address a wide range of environmental issues, from land use conflicts to pollution and resource management.

?Why we need the establishment of an Environmental Tribunal in Ethiopia?

Under Ethiopian policy, Environmental sustainability concern is a new phenomenon. When Ethiopia started modern government system in 1908, the country adopted rules to control sanitation related challenges, which was major concern at the time. Ethiopia, despite recognizing environmental rights in its supreme law and enacting dozens of laws and policies to protect the environment, still faces significant gaps in implementation and enforcement. The current legal framework in Ethiopia, while comprehensive on paper, lacks the “power and teeth” to effectively address environmental issues. This is primarily due to the absence of well-developed regulatory, law enforcement, and judiciary mechanisms tailored to environmental matters. Ordinary courts, which are already overwhelmed with backlogs and cases, are ill-equipped to handle the unique and scientific nature of environmental disputes. Their rigid procedures and lack of flexibility make them unsuitable for delivering “environmental justice”. In response, Ethiopia is turning to specialized legal mechanisms to address these complex issues.

Since 2018, Ethiopia has taken significant steps toward establishing environmental tribunals, supported by technical expertise from prominent international organizations specializing in environmental rule of law. Institutions such as the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), Advocates for International Development (A4ID), and International Legal Response have contributed to the development of draft legislation aimed at creating specialized judicial bodies to address environmental disputes. However, despite these efforts, the legislation has not yet been enacted, delaying the formal establishment of environmental tribunals in the country.

In 2024, a notable milestone was achieved with the adoption of Regulation No. 545/2024 by the Council of Ministers, which outlines the powers, duties, and organizational structure of the Ethiopian Environmental Protection Authority (EPA). Article 5 of this regulation mandates the EPA, in consultation with relevant institutions, to work toward establishing environmental tribunals and courts capable of adjudicating civil and criminal cases related to environmental issues (FDRE EPA Regulation, 2024). This legal provision marks a significant step forward in Ethiopia’s commitment to strengthening environmental governance. Currently, the draft legislation for establishing these tribunals is under review by eminent experts in the field, reflecting a careful and consultative approach to ensuring the framework’s effectiveness and alignment with international best practices.

While progress has been made, the delay in finalizing and implementing the legislation highlights the challenges of translating policy into practice. Once operational, environmental tribunals in Ethiopia could play a transformative role in addressing environmental degradation, promoting accountability, and advancing sustainable development. As Ethiopia adopting the ETCs establishing legislation, it joins a growing global movement dedicated to environmental justice. This is not just a legal milestone but a testament to the power of specialized institutions in safeguarding our planet for future generations. The time to act is now—for the environment, for justice, and for humanity.

An Environmental Tribunal would address these gaps by providing a specialized forum for resolving environmental disputes. Unlike ordinary courts, such a tribunal would integrate “scientific expertise” alongside legal knowledge, ensuring that environmental cases are handled by professionals with the necessary interdisciplinary skills. This is crucial because many environmental issues are rooted in scientific foundations rather than purely legal frameworks. A mix of lawyers and scientists working together would ensure that environmental matters are adjudicated fairly, efficiently, and effectively.

Moreover, the tribunal would enhance “access to environmental justice” a critical area where Ethiopia, like many other countries, needs transformation. By offering a dedicated platform for environmental disputes, the tribunal would reduce the burden on ordinary courts and provide a more flexible and context-sensitive approach to resolving environmental issues. This would ultimately lead to better enforcement of environmental laws, greater accountability, and a tangible impact on environmental protection and sustainability. In conclusion, the establishment of an Environmental Tribunal in Ethiopia is not just a legal necessity but a practical solution to address the growing environmental challenges facing the country. It would strengthen institutions, ensure justice is served, and contribute to the broader goals of environmental sustainability and socio-economic development. Without such specialized mechanisms, the existing laws and policies risk remaining ineffective, leaving the environment and future generations vulnerable to irreversible harm.

?

?