How does this information link with the recommendations? This information highlights potential limitations in member countries on the recognition of a right to an environment of a particular quality when the putative right is justified on the basis of treaty or customary international law: recommendations 1.1, 2.1, 2.2. Do the Constitutions of APF Member States guarantee a right to environment or related rights? The Constitutions of many Member States variously guarantee a right to life (Malaysia); specific environmental rights (Republic of Korea); or both human rights and environmental rights (Afghanistan, India, the Philippines and Thailand). Conversely, some Constitutions do not provide any explicit human rights or environmental guarantees (Australia and New Zealand). For those with specific protection: • • • • • • The Constitution for the Republic of Korea explicitly recognises that ‘[a]ll citizens have the right to a healthy and pleasant environment’ (art 35(1)); however, the benefits associated with this right are yet to be fully realised because the right can only be recognised when its content is defined in domestic legislation. This has not yet occurred. The Constitution of the Philippines recognises the right to environment by imposing an obligation on the state to ‘protect and advance the right of people to a balanced and healthful ecology’. The Constitution also recognises a right to health and a right to life. 130 The recently passed Thai Constitution recognises ‘the rights and freedoms of life and person’.131 In addition to substantive rights, the Constitution guarantees relevant procedural rights: e.g., the right of the community ‘to participate in the management, maintenance, preservation and exploitation of natural resources and the environment’. For example, a person has a right ‘to receive facts, explanation, and reason from [the state]’ and ‘to voice [their] own opinion’ before a project, which could affect that person’s environment, health and quality of life, is approved and implemented. These procedural rights are expressed as individual and community rights. 132 Article 48A of the Indian Constitution provides that ‘[t]he State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country’. 133 Article 51A imposes a similar obligation on citizens – ‘[i]t shall be the duty of every citizen of India … to protect and improve [t]he natural environment’. In addition to these constitutional environmental protections, art 21 of the Constitution contains an expansive right to life and personal liberty. The Indian Supreme Court has decided that the right to life includes ‘a right to [a] healthy and pollution free environment’. The Malaysian Constitution recognises a person’s right to liberty. The Malaysian NHRI notes this right operates in such a way that it is ‘the responsibility of the government to provide for quality and clean air, [and a] healthy environment’. 134 The Afghan Constitution recognises the right to life and liberty. The Afghan Constitution imposes an obligation on the State ‘to adopt necessary measures for safeguarding forests and the environment’.135 As mentioned, neither the Australian Constitution nor the documentary sources of New Zealand’s Constitution136 guarantee a general right to environment or related right. 137 130 Ibid 156. Thai Constitution 2007 (informal English translation) art 50. 132 Asia Pacific Forum, above n 4, p. 176-8. See also Thai Constitution 2007 (informal English translation) arts 55–9, 61, 65–6. 133 Ibid 106 134 Ibid 122. 135 Ibid 93. See Constitution of Afghanistan 1382 arts 23, 24. 136 Ibid 137. Note: New Zealand’s Constitutional provisions are found in a range of documents. 137 Ibid 94, 137, 141. 131 - 39 -