IWRA Proceedings

< Return to abstract list

PROTECTING THE AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT IN COMMUNITY LAW AND INTERNATIONAL LAW: A FRENCH PERSPECTIVE

IWRA World Water Congress 2011 Pernambuco Brazil
3. Governance and water law (co-convened by IWRA and AIDA)
Author(s): Jacques Sironneau

Jacques Sironneau, French Ministry of ecology, sustainable development, transportation and housing, Water and biodiversity Directorate, jacques.sironneau@developpement-durable.gouv.fr



Keyword(s): European Directives on water (transposition into national law),Transboundary waters (Rhine, Mosel, Meuse),Transboundary waters (Rhine, Mosel, Meuse),New York Convention 1997 (ratification)
Article: PDF

Abstract

In the early 90’s, the French Ministry of the Environment still considered that Community Law was part of international law rather than a separate, autonomous, legal order applicable to and mandatory for its institutions. This was despite the fact that the Treaty itself, supported by a constant case law from the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and lately from the French Conseil d’Etat clearly asserted such an autonomy. In 1989, the European Commission therefore had to notify France that it had to report on the implementation of the first set of water directives which the Commission had issued in the 70’s. These directives, known as the “Aquatic Ecosystem – Water Uses Directives” internalized crude waters designed to be transformed into drinking water (75/440 EEC, 15 July 1975 ) but also bathing waters ( 76/160 EEC, 8 Dec. 1975), fishing waters (78/659 EEC, 18 July 1978) as well as shellfish waters (79/923 EEC 30 Oct. 1979) . Once the Member States have transposed the provisions of the Community Law (directives) into their national legal system, they are bound to establish, within two years, a pollution reduction program according to the modalities they find most appropriate to fulfill the mandatory provisions of each directive. The Commission considered the answer given by the French authorities as insufficient which resulted in a reasoned opinion against France in 1990. France's answer included on-going pollution reduction programs supposed to fulfill the aims of the directives. Such programs were based upon a framework of territorial maps with quality objectives for each area, approved by prefectural orders, water management plans established by administrative circulars and multiannual intervention programs set up by the river authorities (Agences financières de Bassin, replaced by Agences de l’Eau). They could be revised at all times, including downward...

Key words: European Directives on water (transposition into national law); Transboundary waters (Rhine, Mosel, Meuse); New York Convention 1997 (ratification). 

IWRA Proceedings office@iwra.org - https://www.iwra.org/member/index.php