Damian Carrington, Environment Editor, explored the role of courts as “a new front line of climate action” and covered the Climate Principles for Enterprises in March 2018 for The Guardian.
“an international panel of senior judges concluded in January that many companies around the world may well already be in breach of existing laws in relation to their impact on climate change. “Very, very few enterprises currently meet their obligations – if they did [climate change] would mostly be solved,” said Jaap Spier, who was advocate general in the Dutch supreme court until 2016 and part of the panel that published the assessment.
Spier says judges are influenced by growing concerns in society, such as worries over climate change, and are increasingly likely to look favourably on climate litigation in coming years. “If you assume companies don’t [change] at some stage, I have not the slightest doubt that courts will understand that they must step in.”
“The Climate Principles for Enterprises are a valuable initiative which can help in achieving the Paris Agreement’s objectives and ultimately tackling climate change. I sincerely hope that this project will enjoy broad support.” Laurent Fabius, President of the Constitutional Council of France, Former Prime-Minister of France, Former Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Development of France during COP-21
“Climate change may be the greatest challenge that currently faces mankind. If it is to be solved it requires collective action. That creates a problem, because if collective action is to be successful, each individual needs to understand what his or her contribution is to be. And if that contribution is to be made, it needs to be, and to be seen to be fair amongst all participants. Scientists agree that we need to keep the temperature rise to two degrees. But what does that mean for way we run those enterprises that are the engine of the global economy? If we leave it for every company to invent their own rules, it will take enormous effort, and it is unlikely that all will agree that each has contributed their fair share. That is why this document is of such importance. Here in less than 3,000 words, some of the world’s most eminent lawyers have laid out a simple set of rules.” David Pitt-Watson, Former Chair UN Environment Program Finance Initiative
“The Climate Principles for Enterprises provide a very explicit and easy to follow mandate for corporates to incorporate the imperatives of reducing carbon emissions into their planning, management and reporting. The simplicity of the document serves only to highlight the sophistication of its drafting and the power of its message.” Ashok Khosla, Chairman, Development Alternatives; Past Chairman, UN’s International Resource Panel; Past President, IUCN and the Club of Rome
The Climate Principles for Enterprises “provide a solid framework for identifying the obligations of all businesses to reduce their greenhouse emissions in line with national targets that are sufficient to meet the two degree goal. Businesses that reduce their total emissions in line with these principles are likely to avoid the risk of future litigation and liability for contributing to the loss and damage from climate change.” James Thornton, CEO of Client Earth
“The Principles on Climate Obligations of Enterprises are impressive, well-conceived, and well-constructed. I am glad to endorse them.” Parvez Hassan, Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan; President of the Pakistan Environmental Law Association; former Chairman, IUCN World Commission on Environmental Law
“Finally, the Oslo Principles, although not endorsed by the UN or binding on any states, contain a useful framework for conceptualizing state obligations in this context [domestic mitigation obligations]. The principles explicitly reference the need to protect human rights and clarify the obligations that states have to reduce GHG emissions, taking into account cost and other factors” “[I]t is worth noting that non-state obligations with respect to human rights are also outlined in the Oslo Principles (which deal specifically with climate change)” UN Environment in cooperation with the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, Climate Change and Human Rights, 2015, p.24-29
by Ganesh Sahathevan John McKechnie The issues raised on my related RealpoltikAsia blog in the posting: ALP's Anne Aly's Phoenix Consulting of Dubai provides covert intel training-Who does she report to in Dubai, and then there is the matter of Malaysia....... were brought to the attention of The Hon John McKechnie QC,the current Commissioner, WA Corruption and Crime ,given the security implications that arise from the connections between PAVE and one David (Dave) Allen, currently Assistant Director Intelligence,WA CCC. McKechnie's response is as follows: Thank you for the email. I am the Corruption and Crime Commissioner. I will decide if and when Mr Allens security clearance should be reconsidered but nothing in this email is either new or worthy of consideration. The Hon John McKechnie QC Readers have now confirmation from no less a personage than the WA CCC Commissioner himself, a former judge and QC,of the fact of Aly's Dubai connection, and her referring
by Ganesh Sahathevan Tough talking Damien Tudehope may not have the power to impose th. bulk of his quarantine fee, if any Readers will recall that former NSW Police Commissioner Mick Fuller (now a PwC partner) said in his notice that Revenue NSW " will be charging a mandatory quarantine fee". Readers will also recall that the rormer NSW Minister For Financial Services, Damien Tudehope insisted that the quarantine fees charged by Sydney Local Health District, pursuant to the NSW Health Services Act include charges for police security. However, there is nothing in the SLHD's financial statements for the relevant periods (see links below) to reflect any payment from the COVID quarantine fee revenue being made over to NSW Police. SLHD's revenue must then have been overstated, by the CEO concerned Teresa Anderson. SLHD Financial Statements https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/annualreport/Publications/2020/slhd.pdf https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/annualr
by Ganesh Sahathevan Advice for living in, or buying into, a strata community Strata managers are employed to manage strata schemes which are often home to renters as well as owners. However, in evasion of that which they are paid to do there are instances where strata managers have attempted to evade their duties by refusing to deal with tenants. Even this writer can recall an instance where the strata manager warned that it was against the law for tenants to contact him directly. The instances where strata managers have refused to deal with tenants occur when the issues raised concern fairly pedestrian maintenance issues, for example blocked plumbing and the like. Having said that, tenants do actually have a legal right to a great many things, including being informed (and presumably make representations) when strata schemes consider re-development. Strata managers who seek to stand in place of strata committees are even more exposed to liability for the loss and and dam
Comments
Post a Comment