VERDAD COMO PROBABILIDAD

This dissertation proposes a key method in creating uniformity and an adjudication process that is effective for the international community. An International Environmental Supreme Court (IESC), would be a supreme body that would be a court of last resort. The following diagram charts how a such a court could established within a legal hierarchy:

160 |

.

To implement this system, traditional notions of jurisdiction and sovereignty would have to be addressed. All nations place their own courts of last resort as the supreme body of

jurisprudence that is responsible for dispensing ultimate justice within territorial boundaries. However, these courts are limited in scope and adjudicate matters not based on international interests, but those set out by citizens from their own country. Therefore, single courts charged with dispensing justice on the environment, a category that affects all nations, only issues orders and opinions in line with national interests and doctrine.

This proposal does not call for an ultimate international court that would be a court of last resort for all matters. It only seeks to establish a system of international adjudication in matters involving the environment. Its strict limits of subject matter would allow nations to be friendlier to the idea of a higher bodied court superseding domestic institutions.

The referral system can be based in two proposed ways. First is through a referral from the United Nations Security Council. In this instance, for criminal matters, a prosecutor would be assigned from a neutral nation to bring a complaint against the violators. Through an

international grand jury of sorts, a diverse panel would determine if such a complaint is well founded through the presentation of evidence. If so, an indictment would be issued and either a

International Environmental Supreme

Court

Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

Supreme Court of Cassatian of Italy

United Nations Security Counsel

161 |

summons or a warrant for arrest. The arrest warrant could be executed by signatory states that are willing to participate in the court’s application.

Matters adjudicated within domestic court systems face a different form of referral. Here, the Supreme Court of the United States for example can adjudicate a matter and issue an order granting or denying a petitioner’s application. In instances where the court feels unable to comfortably exercise its jurisdiction, for example when multinational corporations begin putting political pressure on domestic judges, it may formally refer the matter to the IESC. This would have allowed Ecuador to refer the Texaco-Chevron matter to the IESC in light of corporate corruption tactics. Once the IESC has heard the matter, it can issue order upon which domestic states would be bound by international law.

For the IESC to remain effective, it should also have the ability to exercise jurisdiction over matters that are being heard in domestic courts; when those cases are being improperly handled by the courts. At any time during proceedings, a petition can be lodged to the IESC by parties who are engaged in litigation. The grant of certiorari would be determined after a fact finding hearing in which the moving party would have the burden of showing impropriety of the domestic tribunal. Once established, the IESC would exercise jurisdiction and move the case into its court.

Within many nations, lawyers and judges themselves are disciplined and managed by their court of last resort, or another judicial body. The IESC should be granted some form of review for attorney and judge statuses when it is shown that impropriety has been alleged. This would require an additional surrender of sovereignty on the part of the nations as the IESC would govern lawyers in a limited manner. This type of authority could proceed in the form of

sanctions, forbidding travel or seizing assets for those attorneys and judges who are culpable in corruption or environmental destructions schemes.

The IESC would also be armed with special knowledge cultivated through its

specialization. Marshalling international experts in the field of environmental study, the Court can implement studies and rely on crucial findings to assist in its decision making process. It could also provide these experts on request to nations who require scientific or technical

consultation. This will also assist in the competency of the court to hear these matters. Given the delicate nature of sovereignty issues, integrity and competency in a judicial body is paramount for participants to agree and follow court order.

162 |

The ICC serves a solid example for the proposed international structure of the IESC. The IESC should consist of three chambers, pretrial, trial, and appeal. Each division receives eight judges from signatory states. The office of the Prosecutor would also be attached to the institution to bring action against parties who violate international law protecting the

environment. In addition, the common law of both the United States and the European Union serve as sufficient legal back drop to begin issuing opinions. Although the judges themselves will decide the area of law that they find influential, these common law areas are established on fundamental rights such as privacy, liberty, and property. Using the ICC as an example, and the environment as its guiding principle, the IESC can do much to change the way criminals are prosecuted on the international scale.