The operating license for Formosa Chemicals & Fiber Corp’s coal-fired plant in Changhua County expired in September after it failed to meet sulfur dioxide emissions standards.
Earlier this month, the Taichung High Administrative Court rejected a provisional injunction request filed by the company to continue the plant’s operations. The shutdown might lead to more than 1,000 employees and downstream vendors losing their jobs.
The corporation’s labor union mobilized its members and their families to protest to the Changhua County Government, asking to be allowed to resume work, while environmentalists and some local residents complaining about the air pollution have come out in support of the local authority. The relationship between workers (blue) and environmentalists (green) is often described as an everlasting conflict.
Legal and policy commentators have largely overlooked the conflicting aspect of human rights and environmental protection. One obvious example of this exclusion is the absence of any direct reference to such conflicts in the UN Human Rights Council’s official report Analytical Study on the Relationship between Human Rights and the Environment.
This issue cannot be resolved in the abstract, for example by the general concept of sustainable development, but only in a concrete sense, whether for a specific policy or in a specific legal case.
In global adjudication practices, tensions between environmental policy and social development considerations — such as health, labor and indigenous people — have been addressed to strike a balance between various interests.
Many courts achieve that by implying environmental rights in other constitutional or treaty-based human rights, in effect eradicating any hierarchy through interpretation, such as in Kitok versus Sweden, African Commission versus Kenya and Turgut versus Turkey. They express that the purposes of environmental protection and human rights are largely synergetic, as both aim to assure human well-being.
A number of global alliances and win-win solutions can be found outside the courtrooms. A recent study by the Sierra Club shows that labor unions representing employees of coal-fired plants in Connecticut and Maryland have supported the closing of their highly polluting workplaces, since governmental officials and environmentalists support a just and fair transition program to protect common interest of human survival and sustainable livelihoods.
Similarly, in the recent Keystone XL pipeline controversy in the US, some climate advocates worked with labor unions to campaign for divesting funds from fossil-fuel corporations to invest in creating climate-friendly jobs. They say every environmental campaign should also address the other two pillars — namely social and economical — of sustainable development.
As for the Formosa Chemicals case, reaching a tripartite environmental protection agreement between the company, the county government and affected communities could be a feasible solution. The legal foundation for such an agreement can be found in Article 30 of the Public Nuisance Dispute Mediation Act (公害糾紛處理法) and Article 28 of its enforcement rules.
The county is in a proper position to consider this collaborative approach and invite all the stakeholders to negotiate a sophisticated proposal not only for sake of the environment, but also for the livelihoods of working-class people.
Yang Chung-han is a doctoral candidate researching international environmental law at the University of Cambridge and a member of the Taipei Bar Association.
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) earlier this month said it is necessary for her to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and it would be a “huge boost” to the party’s local election results in November, but many KMT members have expressed different opinions, indicating a struggle between different groups in the party. Since Cheng was elected as party chairwoman in October last year, she has repeatedly expressed support for increased exchanges with China, saying that it would bring peace and prosperity to Taiwan, and that a meeting with Xi in Beijing takes priority over meeting
Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman for maritime affairs Rogelio Villanueva on Monday said that Manila’s claims in the South China Sea are backed by international law. Villanueva was responding to a social media post by the Chinese embassy alleging that a former Philippine ambassador in 1990 had written a letter to a German radio operator stating that the Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island, 黃岩島) did not fall within Manila’s territory. “Sovereignty is not merely claimed, it is exercised,” Villanueva said. The Philippines won a landmark case at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 that found China’s sweeping claim of sovereignty in
RSS