Ulv, miljøparagrafen i Norges grunnlov og vernet av truede dyrearter

Abstract

There is a dearth of judicial deliberation on article § 112 of the Constitution of Norway, the so-called environmental paragraph. It is consequently a need to examine to what extent this article protects endangered species on the basis of its more general provision of the right of “everyone”, including future generations, to a natural environment where diversity is maintained. As the legislative history is always pertinent for the understanding of Norwegian legislation, it is of particular importance to examine how the environmental paragraph was directly based on a number of specific recommendations. Most prominently in the formal parliamentary deliberations was the emphasis on the 1987 World Commission on Environment and Development (Brundtland Commission) and how this held that “states have a responsibility towards their own citizens and other states … to maintain ecosystems and … biological diversity by ensuring the survival and promoting the conservation in their natural habitats of all species of flora and fauna.” This legislative history must thus be taken into consideration for the proper judicial interpretation of the article’s relevance for the protection of endangered animals both in general and in connection with the preservation of species in their original ecosystems. The legislative history also has relevant bearings in connection with the state’s responsibility towards future generations and other states, the understanding of other legislation concerning the environment, and the official practice of limited geographical “wolf zones” and maximum number of each of the species of predators. Moreover, the way the rights set forth in this article are explicitly considered human rights according to its legislative history, wording and placement in the Constitution, raises the question to what degree any limitation of these rights must be in accordance with how human rights generally only may be limited when there is an objective and reasonable justification and a reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim sought to be realized.