Environment lawsuit limit extended

May 06, 2014 | 09:43
(0) user say
The extension of the timeframe for filing lawsuits involving environmental pollution should make it much easier for the public to sue for damages according to a clause in the proposed amendment to the Law on Environmental Protection.


The new environment law should empower communities Photo: Duc Thanh

The draft amendment to the existing Law on Environmental Protection (LEP) issued in 2005 stipulates that the window for filing cases involving individuals or organisations that had suffered from environmental pollution would now be calculated from the time that the environmental damage was discovered.

“This is a quite valuable change in this law, when compared to the previous drafts and the existing LEP, because it can help protect the interests of those hit by pollution,” said lawyer Vu Thu Hanh, who is currently engaged in the United Nations Development Programme project to analyse the new draft LEP.

She explained that under the current regulation, the public could only file a case for compensation within a two-year time-span as from the day their legal rights and interests were found  to be affected. This, however, failed to reflect the reality of many cases, in which environmental pollution might not be discovered for many years.

“The current regulation doesn’t help the public as it is sometimes quite a while before the prolonged effects of pollution are discovered. This meant that it is difficult for affected communities to even realise that they are being affected. As a result, the public would have no rights to file such a lawsuit if after two years they failed to prove how their rights and interests have been affected,” said Le Huu Thien, vice head of the Dong Nai Provincial Farmers’ Association. 

“The new regulation would be a big change, as it would help ensure the public’s interests are upheld in environmental lawsuits. The current regulation is quite unsuitable, because the effects of pollution are often long-lasting, while it can take decades for the public to realise their health had been affected. For example, in the case of Vedan, if the company had refused to provide compensation for its pollution in the Thi Vai River, the public might have entirely lost out because of the short time frame they had to file the lawsuit,” said lawyer Nguyen Van Hau, head of Nguyen Van Hau and Associates law firm in Ho Chi Minh City and vice chairman of the city’s Lawyers’ Association.

In 2008, the Taiwanese-backed company was found to have been discharging untreated waste water for many years into the Thi Vai River which runs through Ho Chi Minh City, as well as Dong Nai and Ba Ria-Vung Tau provinces. The firm’s action affected the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of poor farmers. It was not until late 2010 that Vedan paid compensation to affected farmers due to massive public pressure, a boycott of its products and huge media coverage.

Hau said many European nations had much longer timeframes for environmental lawsuits. “For example, France’s Environmental Law allows a 30-year timeframe. Vietnam should learn from other countries, so that its people’s environmental interests can be further ensured.”

Lawyer Vu Thi Duyen Thuy, who is also engaged in the United Nations Development Programme project, said in many cases, the public could not sue polluters as their timeframe for launching a lawsuit was only two years, which was too short for the public to calculate the damage caused by pollution.

“Pollution destroys the environment in many ways, but the public’s health isn’t always affected immediately. When they discover they’ve been affected it could be years later. So it is vital to lengthen the time frame for lawsuits to be filed,” Thuy said.

By By Khoi Nguyen

What the stars mean:

★ Poor ★ ★ Promising ★★★ Good ★★★★ Very good ★★★★★ Exceptional