Domesticating the exotic species: international biodiversity law in Canada.

• Author: Affolder, Natasha

While a significant body of international and regional agreements now addresses habitat preservation, wildlife protection, and biological diversity, these advances on the international level often fail to be effectively translated into domestic law. In this article, the author argues that international biodiversity law is being treated in Canada as "exotic". It is peppered into parties' submissions without a principled explanation of its role in Canadian law, receives little consideration from the courts, and must ultimately rely on non-legal means of enforcement.

The author examines jurisprudence dealing with four major biodiversity treaties. She notes that the judicial treatment of these conventions ranges from silence, to declarations of inapplicability, to limited usage in statutory interpretation. This impoverished view of international biodiversity law in Canadian courtrooms is contrasted with the richer understanding of the relevance of this body of law demonstrated by its usage in environmental advocacy campaigns.

The author focuses on two case studies: the 1992-2002 campaign for federal endangered species legislation, and the ongoing Cheviot mine campaign. In these campaigns, compliance with international biodiversity law is pursued through various shaming strategies. The author concludes that both the judiciary and environmental advocacy groups have an important role to play in identifying where Canada fails to give domestic effect to the obligations it assumes under ratified biodiversity treaties, and in addressing this failure.

Meme si un nombre important de traites regionaux et internationaux ont pour objet la preservation de l'habitat, la protection de la nature et de la diversite biologique, ces avancees a l'echelle internationale ne sont pas effectivement retranscrites dans le droit domestique. Dans cet article l'auteur soutient que le droit international sur la biodiversite est considere comme > au Canada. Ce droit est parseme dans les soumissions des parties sans qu'aucune explication de principe ne soit donnee quant a son role dans le droit canadien. Les tribunaux portent par consequent peu d'attention a ce droit, ce dernier ne dependant ultimement que de mesures non legales pour son execution.

L'auteur examine la jurisprudence liee a quatre traites majeurs sur la biodiversite et remarque que le traitement judiciaire accorde a ces conventions varie du silence, a l'usage limite de 1' interpretation statutaire, a des declarations d' inapplicabilite. Cette approche reductrice des tribunaux canadiens a l'egard du droit international sur la biodiversite est contrastee par une comprehension plus profonde de la pertinence de ce droit par les milieux envirormementaux, ce qui ressort clairement de l'utilisation qui en est faite dans les campagnes de lutte pour la defense de l'environnent.

L'auteur se penche ensuite sur deux etudes de cas : la campagne federale de 1992-2002 sur la loi sur les especes en voie de disparition et la campagne Cheviot sur les mines. Dans ces campagnes, le respect du droit international sur la biodiversite est obtenu par differentes strategies instrumentalisant le sentiment de honte. L'auteur conclut que le milieu judiciaire et les groupes de lutte pour la defense de l'environnement ont un double role a jouer pour determiner pourquoi le Canada ne parvient pas a se conformer a l'echelon domestique aux obligations qu'il a contracte en ratifiant les differents traites sur la biodiversite et comment remedier a cette situation au niveau national.

Introduction I. International Biodiversity Law in the Courtroom A. The Application of International Law in Canadian Courts B. Methodology--Case Selection Criteria C. The Cases 1. Judicial Silence 2. International Law Is Not Applicable As It Is Not Implemented in Canadian Law 3. Judicial Uncertainty 4. International Law As An Interpretive Aid in Statutory Interpretation D. The Practice of Environmental Appeal Boards E. The Role of Environmental Advocacy Groups in Arguing International Law II. International Law Arguments Outside the Courtroom A. The Campaign for Federal Endangered Species Legislation (1992-2002) 1. Public Opinion and the Media 2. Transnational Litigation and Foreign Appeals a. North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation b. Appeals Under the Pelly Amendment 3. Market Pressure B. The Cheviot Mine Campaign 1. Public Opinion and the Media 2. Appeal to the World Heritage Committee 3. Market Pressure Conclusion Introduction

International biodiversity law is easily viewed in Canada as an exotic species of law: not only does it advance the protection of endangered species such as the hairy-eared dwarf lemur in Madagascar, the maned three-toed sloth in Brazil, and the sandbar shark in Equatorial Guinea, but treaty negotiations occur in Ramsar and Rio. But the consequence of treating this branch of law as "exotic" is perilous. It allows international biodiversity law to be regarded in Canada as something other than law, something "to be avoided if at all possible," (1) something to be peppered into submissions and judgments without a principled explanation of its role in Canadian law. Indicted as being "interesting" rather than binding law in Canada, (2) international biodiversity law receives only limited consideration in recent Canadian judgments.

The lack of engagement with international biodiversity law in Canadian judicial decisions contrasts with the proliferation of international biodiversity treaties. While a significant body of international and regional agreements now addresses habitat preservation, wildlife protection, and biological diversity, these advances on the international level often fail to be effectively translated into national law. Where international biodiversity norms fail to be implemented in Canadian law through statutes or incorporated as customary international law, internationally-minded lawyers optimistically look to domestic courts as the vehicles through which international treaty and customary norms may enter the Canadian legal system. (3)

This article suggests that, in the case of international biodiversity law, such optimism may be misplaced. An analysis of Canadian judicial decisions between 1990-2005 reveals an extremely limited role of the courts in internalizing international biodiversity law norms. Analysis of these judicial decisions also reveals that the majority of arguments involving international biodiversity law before Canadian courts originate in the submissions of environmental advocacy groups. Given the limited role of courts in giving effect to international biodiversity norms in domestic litigation, environmental advocacy groups attempt to foster compliance with these norms through wider campaign strategies.

In elucidating the role of Canadian environmental advocacy groups in fostering compliance with international biodiversity law, I explore how these advocacy groups use international law both inside and outside the courtroom. The first section of this article discusses the use of international biodiversity law in domestic litigation and disaggregates judicial responses to these arguments. This analysis reveals an impoverished view of international biodiversity law in Canadian courtrooms. A richer understanding of the relevance of international law is gained by examining this litigation in the context of environmental advocacy campaigns. In these campaigns, Canada's failure to give effect to its international law obligations is articulated in a manner that uses shame to foster compliance. Canada's reputation both as a law-abiding member of the

international community and as an environmental leader is attacked. The second section of this article examines the use of international biodiversity law in advocacy campaigns. In these campaigns, international law arguments are deployed in shaming strategies that include media and public relations campaigns, transnational litigation, and market-based campaigns. This analysis reveals that Canadian advocates and the judiciary have a greater role to play in engaging with international biodiversity law sources in a principled manner, ensuring that Canada lives up to its international law commitments.

1. International Biodiversity Law in the Courtroom

   1. The Application of International Law in Canadian Courts

      Understanding the potential role for international biodiversity law in Canadian courtrooms demands an appreciation of how public international law is applied in Canadian courts. This area is not uncontested and remains ripe with nuance and uncertainty, much of which is usefully explored in detail elsewhere. (4) A few central tenets of reception law require elucidation to appreciate the case discussions below. First, with respect to treaties, international treaties must be implemented in Canadian domestic law to be binding. (5) Further, the federal nature of the Canadian state requires that treaties that concern matters of provincial jurisdiction may only be implemented by provincial legislatures. (6) As treaties may be implemented in multiple ways, questions arise as to what counts as transformation. (7) Moreover, what is the status of a treaty that has been signed and ratified by Canada but not implemented by domestic statute? How does it differ from the status of a treaty that has not been ratified by Canada?

      The Supreme Court has taken some steps in addressing these questions in recent cases outside the international environmental law context. Following this jurisprudence, a role for ratified (but not implemented) treaties exists where "the values reflected in the international convention may help inform the interpretation of the domestic statute." (8) This role is not uncontested. (9) Central to the approach of Canadian courts to international law sources is the presumption of legislative conformity with international law. This presumption demands that judges interpret statutes in a manner consistent with...