|
| |
| 1. März 2014 |
Gerichtsurteil: Umweltministerin und Fischereiministerin
verstoßen gegen kanadisches Artenschutzgesetz, weil
sie Schutzpläne für bedrohte Tierarten nicht vorlegen |
| |
| Die kanadische Umweltministerin Leona Aglukkaq (Minister of the Environment) und die kanadische Fischereiministerin Gail Shea (Minister on Fisheries and Oceans) verstoßen gegen Gesetze! Sie handelten ungesetzlich, weil sie die Vorlage von Schutzplänen für vier bedrohte Tierarten jahrelang hinausgezögert haben. Hierdurch verstießen sie gegen das kanadische Artenschutzgesetz (Species at Risk Act, SARA). Dies urteilte das Kanadische Bundesgericht (Federal Court) mit Richterin Anne L. Mactavish am 14. Februar 2014. Die Klage von Ecojustice im Namen der fünf Umweltschutzgruppen David Suzuki Foundation, Greenpeace Canada, Sierra Club BC, Wilderness Committee und Wildsight vom September 2012 hatte Erfolg. Zwischen drei und 6 ½ Jahren waren die gesetzlich vorgeschriebenen Schutzpläne für die nordpazifische Population der Buckelwale, für die Nechako-Störe (Nechako White Sturgeon), die Marmelalke und die Population der Südlichen Berg-Karibus bereits überfällig, als die Klage eingereicht wurde (vgl. Meldung vom 8. Oktober 2012 auf dieser Website). |
| In der Presseerklärung von Ecojustice vom 15. Februar 2014 (Environmental groups declare victory in endangered species protection case) heißt es: „The Federal Court has declared that the Minister of Environment and Minister of Fisheries and Oceans acted unlawfully in delaying for several years the production of recovery strategies for four at-risk species threatened by industrial development, including the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline and tanker route. ‚We’re pleased that the Court has agreed that it’s unacceptable for the federal government to continue to miss the mandatory deadlines set out in the Species at Risk Act‘, said Sean Nixon, Ecojustice staff lawyer. ‚That said, it is disappointing that we had to resort to litigation yet again to force the government to follow its own law.‘ … ‚This is a clear decision, not just for the four species at issue in this lawsuit, but for the more than 160 at-risk species in Canada that still await the release of their recovery strategies‘, said Scott Wallace, senior research scientist at the David Suzuki Foundation. The lawsuit challenged the federal government’s multi-year delays in producing recovery strategies for four species – the Pacific Humpback Whale, Nechako White Sturgeon, Marbled Murrelet and Southern Mountain Caribou. Ecojustice lawyers argued that the federal government’s chronic delays have forced species already struggling to survive to wait even longer for the protection they desperately need. |
| Justice Anne L. Mactavish wrote in her judgment: It is, moreover, apparent that the delay encountered in these four cases are just the tip of the iceberg. There is clearly an enormous systemic problem within the relevant Ministries, given the respondents’ acknowledgement that there remain some 167 species at risk for which recovery strategies have not yet been developed. She later wrote: To state the obvious, the Species at Risk Act was enacted because some wildlife species in Canada are at risk. As the applicants note, many are in a race against the clock as increased pressure is put on their critical habitat, and their ultimate survival may be at stake … The timelines contained in the Act reflect the clearly articulated will of Parliament that recovery strategies be developed for species at risk in a timely fashion, recognizing that there is indeed urgency in these matters. |
| The final recovery strategies for the four species at issue in this case were at least three years overdue when the lawsuit was filed in September 2012. While the final recovery strategy for the humpback whale has since been posted, it was not taken into account by the Northern Gateway Joint Review Panel – even though it contains relevant information the panel should have considered in its final report. In response to the lawsuit, the federal government has issued proposed recovery strategies for the white sturgeon, murrelet and caribou in recent months. The Court will oversee that process to ensure the final recovery strategies are produced in a timely fashion. ‚This is a good day for Canada’s species at risk‘, said Gwen Barlee, policy director with the Wilderness Committee. ‚Not only did Justice Mactavish find that the federal government acted unlawfully, but she found these delays were part of a larger systemic problem. The Canadian government now needs to ramp up its efforts to finalize recovery strategies for the more than 160 other species at risk that need protection.‘“ |
| In dem Gerichtsurteil heißt es: „Public officials are not above the law. If an official acts contrary to a statute, the courts are entitled to so declare … It is simply not acceptable for the responsible ministers to continue to miss the mandatory deadlines that have been established by Parliament.“ Leider sind für diese Gesetzesverstöße der Ministerien, d. h. für die Fristüberschreitungen für die Vorlage von Schutzmaßnahmen nach dem Species at Risk Act, keine Strafen vorgesehen. Allerdings muss die kanadische Regierung den klagenden Umweltschutzgruppen die Gerichtskosten von 22.500 CAD erstatten. Die kanadische Umweltministerin musste eingestehen, dass gegenwärtig für 192 bedrohte Tierarten Schutzpläne ausgearbeitet werden müssten, für 163 sind Fristen zur Vorlage dieser Schutzpläne längst abgelaufen. |
| „This is a big win for species at risk“, sagte Caitlyn Vernon vom Sierra Club BC. „The court has agreed that the government has been acting unlawfully. We are very pleased with this ruling, while disappointed that we need to take the government to court to follow their own laws.“ |
| |
 zurück |
|
|
