However, the DNSH principle is not exclusive of the European Union Law. It first emerged within the international legal order.3 DNSH is a well-established environmental principle in international law that comes from the general ‘goodneighborhood’ principle.4 As has been pointed out, under the international law point of view, the DNSH implies ‘the responsibility, or obligation, not to cause damage to the environment of other states or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.”5 In 1996 the International Court of Justice established that this principle is customary.6 Internationally, the importance of the DNSH is shown by the fact that it is codified in Principle 21 of the Stockholm Declaration, according to which “States have the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental policies, and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction”.7 More recently, Article 17 of the Global Pact for the Environment makes provision for the “Non-regression” principle. According to this provision, “The Parties and their sub-national entities refrain from allowing activities or adopting norms that have the effect of reducing the global level of environmental protection guaranteed by current law.”8 Over the last years, the DNSH is acquiring a central role within the EU legal system. Sustainability is central to the European Union project and both the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) reflect its social and environmental dimensions. “Fit for 55”, p. 62; I. Costanzo, Il principio Do No Significant Harm (DNSH) nel processo di transizione ecologica: un itinerario di riflessione, in Rivista Italiana di Diritto Pubblico Comunitario, No. 4/2023, p. 701 ff., esp. par. 2.1. 3 See, among others, M. Prieur, G. Sozzo (sous la direction de), La non règression en droit de l’environnement, Bruylant, Bruxelles, 2012; M. Prieur, Une vraie fausse création juridique: le principe de non-régression, in Revue Juridique de l’Environnement, No. 41/2016, No. extra 1 on “La doctrine en droit de l’environnement”, p. 319-326; Id., Le noveau principe de non régression en droit de l’environnement, in A. Postiglione (ed.), Global Environmental Governance: The Need for an International Environmental Agency and an International Court of the Environment, Bruylant, Bruxelles, 2009; M. Vordermayer-Riemer, Non-Regression in International Environmental Law. Human Rights Doctrine and the Promises of Comparative International Law, Intersentia, Cambridge, 2020. 4 R. Famà, cit., p. 63. 5 P. Sands, J. Peel, Principles of International Environmental Law, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012, p. 191. 6 The Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Advisory Opinion). On this point, see R. Famà, cit., p. 63. 7 Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm Declaration) 1972. 8 See L. Colella, Il principio di «non regressione ambientale» al centro del Global Pact of Environment. Il contributo dell’esperienza francese al diritto ambientale comparato, in Diritto e Giurisprudenza Agraria, Alimentare e dell’Ambiente, No. 2/2019, p. 1 ff. For a critique of such new instrument see L.J. Kotzé, D. French, A critique of the Global Pact for the Environment: a stillborn initiative or the foundation for Lex Anthropocenae?, in International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Vol. 18, 2018, p. 811-838.; J. Raith, The «Global Pact for the environment»: A new instrument to protect the planet?, in Journal for European Environmental and Planning Law, Vol. 15(1), 2018, p. 3-23. 112 FRANCESCO GASPARI
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==