250
Organization (WTO) with respect to free trade. A number of other UN or UN-related
institutions with weaker trusteeship functions exist also. Quite obviously, states
have been capable of, expressively or implicitly, creating international trusteeship
institutions. These developments—and in particular the existence of supranational
organizations such as the European Union—demonstrate that sovereignty of states
can be transferred to international levels.
The UN Trusteeship Council could quite easily be revived as an Environmental
Trusteeship Council following proposals by the Global Governance Commission in
1995 which were supported by a number of states and particularly championed by
the former UN Secretary General, the late Kofi Annan. A combination of environmental activism and new political alliances (e.g. between particularly motivated
progressive states) can make a crucial difference. Chances are that such combined
effort will be very powerful as our global ecological, financial, political and democratic systems continue to disintegrate.
We cannot expect trusteeship governance being initiated by the “top”, i.e. the UN
and its member states themselves, but rather by forces outside the system, in particular global civil society. To this end, we can build on many years of activism and
proposals for institutional change. Nor should we advocate states to be in charge of
running and controlling global trusteeship institutions such as a World Environment
Organization or a Global Atmospheric Trust or a UN Earth Trusteeship Council.
Rather their governance must be jointly formed by representatives from global civil
society, UN and states with an equal say in decision-making.
Essentially, there are three requirements of the institutionalization of earth trusteeship in a form that does not entirely overthrow state sovereignty. Firstly, the nation
state must recognize a legal responsibility for the global commons and Earth as a
whole. Secondly, redesign these so that rather than belonging to states or individuals, they belong to all of humankind. This would be sufficient to shift the current
anthropocentric focus of environmental law to an earth-centred approach. Thirdly,
this law must identify and hold to account the inalienable normative duties of states
as reconciled with intra- and inter-generational equities. Whatever form this took, it
would inevitably refocus state sovereignty towards challenges to environmental priorities. However, this is necessary in order to encourage consistency and trust in all
interactions with the environment and to begin attempts to restore ecological integrity (Wood 2007, 2013; Sand 2004; Sand 2013, p. 21; Barnes 2001, 2006).
The inextricable connections between rights, responsibilities and trusteeship are
at the heart of the Earth Trusteeship Initiative, a consortium of social and environmental justice organisations aiming for legal innovation. Its first objective has been
achieved now, i.e. a joint declaration on trusteeship responsibilities for both, human
rights and sustainability called the “Hague Principles for a Universal Declaration on
Responsibilities for Human Rights and Earth Trusteeship” (Earth Trusteeship
Initiative 2018). The “Hague Principles” were launched at the Earth Trusteeship
Forum in the Peace Palace, The Hague, on 10 December 2018 to mark the 70th
anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The Hague Principles define three different kinds of responsibilities, i.e. those
that humans have for each other in order to protect human rights, human
K. Bosselmann
Organization (WTO) with respect to free trade. A number of other UN or UN-related
institutions with weaker trusteeship functions exist also. Quite obviously, states
have been capable of, expressively or implicitly, creating international trusteeship
institutions. These developments—and in particular the existence of supranational
organizations such as the European Union—demonstrate that sovereignty of states
can be transferred to international levels.
The UN Trusteeship Council could quite easily be revived as an Environmental
Trusteeship Council following proposals by the Global Governance Commission in
1995 which were supported by a number of states and particularly championed by
the former UN Secretary General, the late Kofi Annan. A combination of environmental activism and new political alliances (e.g. between particularly motivated
progressive states) can make a crucial difference. Chances are that such combined
effort will be very powerful as our global ecological, financial, political and democratic systems continue to disintegrate.
We cannot expect trusteeship governance being initiated by the “top”, i.e. the UN
and its member states themselves, but rather by forces outside the system, in particular global civil society. To this end, we can build on many years of activism and
proposals for institutional change. Nor should we advocate states to be in charge of
running and controlling global trusteeship institutions such as a World Environment
Organization or a Global Atmospheric Trust or a UN Earth Trusteeship Council.
Rather their governance must be jointly formed by representatives from global civil
society, UN and states with an equal say in decision-making.
Essentially, there are three requirements of the institutionalization of earth trusteeship in a form that does not entirely overthrow state sovereignty. Firstly, the nation
state must recognize a legal responsibility for the global commons and Earth as a
whole. Secondly, redesign these so that rather than belonging to states or individuals, they belong to all of humankind. This would be sufficient to shift the current
anthropocentric focus of environmental law to an earth-centred approach. Thirdly,
this law must identify and hold to account the inalienable normative duties of states
as reconciled with intra- and inter-generational equities. Whatever form this took, it
would inevitably refocus state sovereignty towards challenges to environmental priorities. However, this is necessary in order to encourage consistency and trust in all
interactions with the environment and to begin attempts to restore ecological integrity (Wood 2007, 2013; Sand 2004; Sand 2013, p. 21; Barnes 2001, 2006).
The inextricable connections between rights, responsibilities and trusteeship are
at the heart of the Earth Trusteeship Initiative, a consortium of social and environmental justice organisations aiming for legal innovation. Its first objective has been
achieved now, i.e. a joint declaration on trusteeship responsibilities for both, human
rights and sustainability called the “Hague Principles for a Universal Declaration on
Responsibilities for Human Rights and Earth Trusteeship” (Earth Trusteeship
Initiative 2018). The “Hague Principles” were launched at the Earth Trusteeship
Forum in the Peace Palace, The Hague, on 10 December 2018 to mark the 70th
anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The Hague Principles define three different kinds of responsibilities, i.e. those
that humans have for each other in order to protect human rights, human
K. Bosselmann