Campaigners rally outside Court of Session as Scottish government misses access to justice deadline
Environmental and human rights campaigners rallied outside the Court of Session yesterday to mark the Scottish government missing a crucial deadline for compliance with the with the UN Aarhus Convention’s access to justice requirements.
The rally featured speeches from the Environmental Rights Centre for Scotland (ERCS) and community campaigners who have faced unaffordable legal expenses when taking environmental cases to court. Participants symbolically ‘blockaded’ the court with traffic barriers to highlight ongoing barriers to justice, and called on the Scottish government to remove all the financial obstacles that prevent people from taking environmental cases to court.
In October 2021, the Aarhus Convention’s governing bodies adopted Decision VII/8s – requiring Scotland, as part of the UK, to, “as a matter of urgency” meet six recommendations to make access to justice “fair, equitable, timely and not prohibitively expensive” by 1 October 2024.
The Scottish government has made only minor amendments to court rules which do not fully address the issues relating to court costs, and the First Minister’s 2024-5 Programme for Government dropped both a Legal Aid Reform Bill and a Human Rights Bill, both of which would have improved access to justice.
Shivali Fifield, ERCS chief officer, said: “Upholding our environmental rights in court is the ultimate guarantee of the rule of law. Without this credible threat, polluters can act with impunity.
“The Scottish government must take immediate action to replace the ‘loser pays’ rule, reduce courts costs, and expand legal aid, so that we can meet the access to justice requirements of the Aarhus Convention and make our legal system affordable.”
Phil Taylor, director at Open Seas, said: “Open Seas took Scottish ministers to court because they were failing to consider their own Marine Plan, when making decisions about fishing.
“Taking legal action like ours is incredibly expensive – equivalent to the annual cost of nearly three members of staff. Our costs were exacerbated by the government’s appeal, which was weak and sought only to re-litigate the same arguments.
“The environment needs strong voices to stand up for it and we need the burden of challenging governmental failures to be reduced.”