scholarly journals Equitable and Reasonable Utilization and the Obligation Against Causing Significant Harm – Are they Reconcilable?

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 115 ◽  
pp. 183-188
Author(s):  
Salman M.A. Salman
Keyword(s):  
Water Law ◽  
Challenging Issue ◽  
Significant Harm ◽  
History Of ◽  
International Water Law ◽  
International Water ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Relationship

The relationship between the principle of equitable and reasonable utilization and the obligation against causing significant harm has been the most challenging issue in the long history of the evolution of international water law. The purpose of this essay is to discuss the genesis of the debate on the relationship between the two concepts, present the opposing positions of the different riparians thereon, and clarify how the UN Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses has resolved this matter and rendered the two concepts reconcilable.

scholarly journals Water Security and International Law

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tuomas Kuokkanen
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Water Security ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Water Law ◽  
Rules And Principles ◽  
International Water Law ◽  
International Water ◽  
The Relationship

The article explores water security from an international law point of view. The article argues that in order to better understand water security it is important to focus on the function of international water law. Even though water security is a relatively recent concept it was latent in the process of the evolution of international water law.  In addition, the article examines the relationship between man and water from the point of view of water security. The article seeks to answer the question: how does international water law deal with that relationship? Is water only an object to be utilized and protected or has the relationship become more complex and ambivalent through the occurrence of various extreme events. Furthermore, the article places the concept of water security into a historiographical and substantive context. It explores three broad approaches by international law to water issues: general international law, the regulatory approach and the management approach. The article argues that they are all relevant to water security. Finally, the article seeks to demonstrate that even though water security has emerged as a new notion, this does not mean that international law does not include rules and principles relevant for water security. Indeed, many general principles of international law are applicable in the context of water security. In addition, specific regulations dealing with water quantity and quality issues have been developed in international environmental law, although they are not necessarily labelled as water security rules. Moreover, various risk management methods have been elaborated to deal with water-related disasters and crises. Reciprocally, water security arguments are not necessarily new notions but rather reflect already existing concepts and principles. 

Transboundary watercourses, dams and human migration: an international water law perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 154-175
Author(s):  
Tamar Meshel
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Human Migration ◽  
Water Law ◽  
Potential Contribution ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Significant Harm ◽  
International Water Law ◽  
International Water ◽  
Transboundary Watercourses

This article examines the potential contribution of international water law (IWL) to alleviating the negative cross-border impacts of ‘dam-induced migration’, the displacement of individuals or communities resulting from dam construction. While much has been written on efforts to deal with this global problem in other areas of international law, the application of IWL in this context has yet to be meaningfully explored. But since dams are frequently constructed on transboundary watercourses, the principles of IWL (no significant harm, equitable and reasonable utilisation, and the duty to cooperate) may prove relevant and useful to mitigating the harmful cross-border impacts of dam-induced migration. The no significant harm principle requires States to comply with a due diligence standard of conduct designed to avoid, minimise, or compensate for significant harm that might result from the use of shared watercourses, including harm to human life or health. The equitable and reasonable utilisation principle obligates each basin State to use an international watercourse in a manner that is equitable and reasonable vis-à-vis the other States sharing it. The duty to cooperate requires States to collaborate in the management and use of shared watercourses and sets out concrete measures to enable collaboration, such as information exchange, consultations, and the establishment of joint institutions. Taken together, these IWL principles can effectively guide the planning, construction, and operation of dams on shared watercourses. Applying them to the specific issue of dam-induced migration, moreover, could promote inter-State cooperation and accountability, facilitate the resolution of disputes, and alleviate negative cross-border impacts. In this way, IWL can supplement other areas of international law in providing a comprehensive solution to the growing problem of dam-induced migration.

The Primacy of the Principle of Equitable Utilization in the 1997 Watercourses Convention

1998 ◽  
Vol 35 ◽  
pp. 215-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles B. Bourne
Keyword(s):  
General Assembly ◽  
Water Law ◽  
Final Report ◽  
International Court ◽  
International Water Law ◽  
International Water ◽  
No Harm Principle ◽  
Equitable Utilization ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
The Relationship

SummaryThe International Law Commission wrestled for over a decade with the relationship between the principle of equitable utilization and the no harm principle in its work on the law of the non-navigational uses of international watercourses. In its final Report to the UN General Assembly on this topic in 1994, the Commission presented a set of Draft Articles couched in obscure language that reflected the sharp differences of opinion on the matter and the compromises that had been made. This division of opinion about the relationship between these two principles persisted in the Working Group of the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly to which the Draft Articles were referred. Again, compromises were reached and the language of the substantive articles (in particular Articles 5, 7, 20, and 21) of the Watercourses Convention, adopted by the General Assembly on May 21, 1997, continues to be obscure and its meaning debatable.It is argued here that in this Convention the principle of equitable utilization, which prescribes the reasonable and equitable sharing of the beneficial uses of the waters of an international watercourse, is made the primary substantive rule of international water law; harm caused by a utilization of these waters is, of course, an important factor to be taken into account in determining whether, in a particular case, the utilization is reasonable and equitable and, therefore, lawful. This interpretation of the Watercourses Convention brings it into harmony with customary international water law. It is an interpretation that finds support in the recent decision of the International Court of fustice in the Gabákovo case.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document