Civil Right to a Healthy Environment

With the ongoing climate crisis, there is much talk about formalizing environmental rights for citizens. About 110 countries have legal documentation to guarantee the right to a healthy environment for its citizens. Canada, however, has not yet done such an action.  Hence, the question is asked: should Canada guarantee environmental rights to Canadians? If so, why? In this short blog post, I will support the right of living in a healthy and stable environment which should be protected by civil law.

Firstly, studies have shown that countries that guarantee their citizens a right to a healthy environment are quick to reduce their greenhouse gases and air pollution. Moreover, they provide better and quicker access to safe drinking water and sanitation.  As a country that is increasing its greenhouse gas emissions and has Indigenous communities that still don’t have access to clean drinking water, we need a swifter response on tackling these issues. The climate crisis is real, and its effects are no longer just seen in developing nations. Additionally, protecting the environment by setting higher industry standards is ultimately protecting not only human health but also the economy. Robust environmental protection inspires innovation and reduces health care costs for citizens and governments. Hence, there are multiple benefits in establishing environmental legislation.

Second, failing to establish the right to a healthy environment is a major injustice against Indigenous populations. This is not just because their communities have limited to no access to clean drinking water. Rather, it is mainly because many Indigenous communities have a religious connection to the land and water. Hence, deteriorated environments affect the mental and physical health of Indigenous peoples, but it also infringes upon their religious right to uphold their religious duties. Additionally, in order to proceed with reconciliation, this religious right should be protected by consulting Indigenous populations to incorporate Indigenous law into the legal system. One of my professors was from New Zealand and he states that the Māori people of New Zealand played a vital role in academic, political, and social systems. This is a sign of respect and humanity. Canada has continued to ignore Indigenous issues but does have aims to advance reconciliation. Protecting the right to a healthy environment will surely achieve this advancement.

An argument one can bring forward against the right to a healthy environment is that Canadian provinces such as the Yukon or Ontario already have environmental legislations present. Do we still need to have this right embedded in our constitution? The answer is still affirmative. The laws established by the provinces are weak politically and symbolically. Hence, we need to have a stronger legislative force to establish this right such as the federal government. We can see this example when the United Conservative Party came into power in Alberta and removed the New Democratic Party’s carbon tax. However, the Trudeau government slapped it back on to Alberta when issuing the federal carbon tax. Additionally, besides the strength behind constitutional power,  the constitution of a country reflects its citizens cherished ideals and morals. Hence, it is not only politically important but also symbolically. Having this right in our constitution gives Canadians the full power to hold governments and industries responsible if they ever infringe upon our right to a healthy and clean environment.

print

One thought on “Civil Right to a Healthy Environment

  1. I think your post makes a lot of good points that are very specific to Canada’s role in protecting the environment, namely your comments regarding Indigenous rights. I fully agree, there can be no truth and reconciliation without respect for traditional Indigenous political and spiritual institutions which are greatly embedded with the natural world. You may have seen that this week the Liberal government announced that they would not be meeting their goal to end all water advisories by March 2021; I think that having a Charter right to a healthy environment might be enough pressure to actually hold them to this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *