European environmental groups press for court representation Eight European environmental organizations are lobbying on behalf of citizen organizations for the right to take their concerns to the European courts. They say organizations and individuals defending collective interests are prevented access to justice; the European Court of Justice only recognizes the European Commission (EC), member states, and people with direct interests in a case. The lobbyists cite an April 1998 case involving construction of a power plant on the Canary Islands. Greenpeace and local environmental groups objected to European Union (EU) funding for the project, claiming infringement of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive. They brought their case against the EC to the European Court, but the court ruled Greenpeace had no standing. The project has since been approved and gotten underway. According to John Hontelez, secretary general of the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), several EU countries have more receptive policies. "In these countries, environmental organizations are recognized as defending the common interest and can object to violations of law," he said. Given the importance of EU legislation for the environment these days, the EEB sees this as an indispensable part of democracy. The eight organizations— Birdlife International, Climate Network Europe, European Environmental Bureau, European Federation for Transport and Environment, Friends of the Earth Europe, Friends of Nature International, Greenpeace, and the World Wide Fund for Nature European Policy Unit—plan to campaign throughout the EU to mobilize support for their position. Their first objective: persuade the new Portuguese presidency of the EU to include this issue in the new round of negoti-
ations for the European Treaty scheduled for adoption in December 2000. Last December, the EU Council of Ministers gave its negotiators a strictly limited mandate, one that did not include this issue. But the environmentalists are undeterred. In a statement sent to European ministers and the commission, the coalition says: "This demand is fundamental for the proper enforcement of EU environmental rules, both in alleviating the burden upon the commission and in filling the gap in enforcement that exists
because the commission cannot reasonably be expected to enforce rules against itself; it is now appropriate to make clear reference to it in the treaty." "We want the new European Treaty to oblige the courts to accept citizens and public interest organizations. They must have the possibility to defend environmental and other shared community interests before the European Court of Justice. It is vital for the long-term survival of the European community. People are getting dissatisfied," said Hontelez. —MARIA BURKE
Toxicity Activists hope to raise the heat on EPA with publication of their own dioxin report The Center for Health, Environment, and Justice (CHEJ), an environmental group in Falls Church, VA, released a report summarizing the scientific research on dioxin's toxicity. The group published the report in an effort to "raise the temperature on EPA" to finalize its nine-year dioxin reassessment, said Lois Gibbs, CHEJ executive director. The report's main scientific conclusions are in line with those in EPA's draft reassessment, but the policy recommendations go much further than what the U.S. government is likely to endorse. CHEJ's report America's Choice: Children's Health or Corporate Profit, released in January, concludes that dioxin can disrupt sexual development, affect gender, promote birth defects and cancer, affect development of the immune and nervous systems, and change cognitive and learning abilities. Top EPA scientists agree with these conclusions, saying they parallel the forthcoming reassessment. "Their technical report appears to be a fairly accurate review of the literature," said Linda Birnbaum, director of experimental toxicology in EPA's Office of Research and Development, although it does not include all of the studies in the EPA document. "While things could change, I think their conclusions are in agreement with where I think the EPA reassessment is." EPA plans, after nine years in the making, to release its entire reassessment document for public review this spring, predicted Bill Farland, director of the EPA's National Center for Environmental Assessment, which is compiling the science behind the agency's report. The report, which now consists of approximately 3000 pages, should be available either on CD-ROM or on the Internet, added Birnbaum. CHEJ's report indicates that fad diets that are low in fat may ultimately help reduce dioxin levels in humans. But the report does not suggest that legislators recommend low-fat diets as a policy for curbing dioxin intake. The CHEJ report recommends that any federal policy on dioxin include a provision on the "public right to know the extent of dioxin contamination" and advocates that producers remove chlorine from their products. —DEBRA SCHWARTZ
MARCH 1, 2000 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS • 1 1 3 A
