International Courts versus Compliance Mechanisms through the Lens of the Gabčíkovo–Nagymaros and Bystroe Canal Cases

Abstract

Recent developments in international environmental law are increasingly characterized not only by the concern to ensure the effectiveness of existing international environmental obligations, but also by a growing awareness of the need to adopt a comprehensive and integrated approach to the management of natural resources. The latter implies the consideration of environmental protection as a collective interest, having due regard to the interdependence between local and global ecosystems, on the one hand, and to the integration of community legal interests into the management of natural resources shared by two or more States, on the other.Non-compliance mechanisms (NCMs) are generally assumed to be a better mechanism than judicial settlements for achieving both the abovementioned aims. This chapter intends to assess the correctness of this assumption through the analysis and comparison of two cases, which are characterized by some common features: the Gabc ˇíkovo-Nagymaros (G/N) and the Bystroe Canal cases. Both relate to the planning of great infrastructure projects (the construction of a dam and a canal, respectively) with a possible environmental impact on the same water system (the River Danube and the Danube Delta, respectively). Both gave rise to international disputes, that, despite a judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) (in the G/N case) 1 and the triggering of 1 ICJ, Case concerning the Gabc ˇíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v Slovakia), judgment of