V okviru projekta Discussions and Actions on Climate and Environment (DACE), ki ga financira EU, smo pripravili pravno študijo o sistemih prilagajanja podnebnim spremembam ter pravnih instrumentih, ki vzpostavljajo podnebne pravice. Proučili smo širši relevantni mednarodni in regionalni pravni kontekst ter orisali trenutne razmere v Sloveniji na tem področju.
Kaj smo ugotovili?
Slovenija ni vzpostavila učinkovitega sistema prilagajanja podnebnim spremembam. Glavni strateški dokument, Strateški okvir prilagajanja podnebnim spremembam iz leta 2016, je v večji meri ostal neizpolnjen. Ker v Sloveniji ni splošnega okvira, ki bi bil namenjen prilagajanju na podnebne spremembe, prav tako ostajajo nekoherentne in neusklajene sektorske strategije, prebivalstvo pa izpostavljeno posledicam podnebnih sprememb.
Na področju razvoja podnebnih pravic Slovenija prav tako zaostaja za drugimi evropskimi državami. Vzrok za to je manjkajoča pravna podlaga za upravljanje podnebnih sprememb, ki bi ukrepanje na področju podnebnih sprememb zasidrala v nacionalni pravni sistem. Prav tako še vedno čakamo na prvi podnebni pravni spor in razvoj pravnega znanja, ki bi obravnaval obstoječe pravice z vidika podnebnih sprememb. Istočasno vidimo porast takšnih aktivnosti v tujini – te širijo obveznosti držav in korporacij za zagotovitev varnega podnebja. Nekatere novosti v tujini vsebinsko vplivajo tudi na slovenski pravni sistem, na primer prek pravnega sistema EU in odločitev Evropskega sodišča za človekove pravice.
Načrtovani podnebni zakon bo sicer predstavljal pomemben napredek. Ne glede na to pa vsebuje precej pomanjkljivosti tako z vidika prilagajanja kot tudi podnebnih pravic. Določa namreč mehke in nejasne cilje, preredko obnavljanje strateških podlag, pomanjkljivo vključevanje lokalne ravni v odločanje glede prilagajanja ter odsotnost prioritizacije najbolj ranljivih sektorjev. Prav tako pomanjkljivo obravnava razvoja znanja na področju prilagajanja podnebnim spremembam. Z vidika podnebnih pravic v predlogu podnebnega zakona poleg nejasnih in pomanjkljivih ciljev manjka eksplicitna navedba uveljavljanja odgovornosti za neizpolnitev zavez oziroma za neučinkovito načrtovanje, ki bi zagotavljal njegovo učinkovito izvedbo.
Študijo si preberite TUKAJ.
ENGLISH VERSION:
We prepared a legal study on the system of climate change adaptation and legal instruments for climate rights under the terms of the project Discussions and Actions on Climate and Environment (DACE) which is financed by the EU. We investigated international and regional legal contexts and framed the current situation in these fields in the Republic of Slovenia.
Slovenia did not establish an effective climate change adaptation system. The main strategic document, Strateški okvir prilagajanja podnebnim spremembam, dates from 2016 and remains predominantly unimplemented. Due to the absence of a dedicated general framework, the sectoral strategies remain incoherent and unaligned whilst people in Slovenia stay exposed to the effects of climate change.
Similarly, in terms of the development of climate rights, Slovenia lags behind other European states due to the absence of a legal basis for governance of climate change which would enshrine climate action in the national legal system. Furthermore, we are still to see the first climate legal dispute and increased development of knowledge regarding the climate dimension of existing rights. Concurrently, we see an increase of such activity abroad which widens the obligations of states and corporations to ensure a safe climate. Some novelties from abroad also substantively affect the Slovenian legal system, for instance, through the legal system of the EU and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights.
The envisioned climate change act will act as an important advancement in this area, although it is riddled with several shortcomings regarding climate change adaptation and climate rights. It sets bland and ambiguous goals, scarce renewal of strategic documents, lacks inclusion of local perspectives in decision-making about adaptation and a priority order for the most vulnerable sectors. Moreover, it falls short in setting a robust approach to development of knowledge regarding climate change adaptation. In terms of climate rights, apart from unclear and lacking goals, the proposal lacks an explicit accountability system for compliance shortfalls which would ensure efficient implementation of the climate regime.
Read the study HERE (in Slovene).
