A/HRC/28/61 quality, toxic releases and/or other environmental matters are good practices for the protection of the many human rights that depend on a healthy environment. However, this section focuses on practices that link strong environmental standards more explicitly to human rights. 73. Perhaps the most important example in this category is the proliferation of constitutional rights to a healthy environment. More than 90 national constitutions now recognize some form of this right. (Many other constitutions include references to the importance of environmental protection.) About two-thirds of these constitutional rights refer to health, and another one-quarter refer to an ecologically balanced environment. Alternative formulations include rights to a clean, safe, favourable or wholesome environment. 74. Experts have identified many potential benefits of adopting a constitutional environmental right, including that the recognition of such rights can lead to the enactment of stronger environmental laws, provide a safety net to protect against gaps in statutory environmental laws, raise the profile and importance of environmental protection as compared to competing interests such as economic development, and create opportunities for better access to justice and accountability. 6 75. Both country visits undertaken by the Independent Expert were to States with strong records of enforcement of constitutional environmental rights, as the separate reports on Costa Rica and France describe in more detail. Judicial decisions in many other countries have also interpreted constitutional environmental rights to require substantive environmental protections. Notable examples include decisions by the Supreme Courts of Argentina and the Philippines.7 76. In some States, courts have interpreted other constitutional rights to incorporate environmental protections. A leader in this regard has been the Supreme Court of India, which has interpreted the right to life in the Indian Constitution as applying to environmental threats.8 The Supreme Court of Pakistan has taken a similar approach. 9 77. Constitutional environmental rights can lead to actions by actors other than courts and government agencies. In 2014, the Finnish Ministry of the Environment encouraged all interested actors, including communities, corporations and individuals, to make commitments towards greater sustainability, in accordance with the Finnish Constitution, which states that “nature and its biodiversity, the environment and the national heritage are the responsibility of everyone”. The Ministry provided guidance on how commitments can be developed and registered online, as well as examples and indicators for monitoring implementation. 78. Of course, whether or not States have adopted a constitutional right to a healthy environment, they can and should adopt strong environmental laws. A good practice relating to such laws is their regular review and strengthening, including through the 6 7 8 9 See the report on regional consultation on constitutional rights, Johannesburg, 23-24 January 2014, available at http://ieenvironment.org/2014/11/21/report-on-constitutional-environmental-rights. See also David R. Boyd, The Environmental Rights Revolution: A Global Study of Constitutions, Human Rights, and the Environment (Vancouver, UBC Press, 2012) and James R. May and Erin Daly, Global Environmental Constitutionalism (New York, Cambridge University Press, 2014). Mendoza Beatriz Silva et al. v. State of Argentina et al., 8 July 2008 (Argentina); Minors Oposa et al. v. Fulgencio Factoran, 30 July 1993, and Metropolitan Manila Development Authority v. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay, 18 December 2008 (Philippines). RLEK v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, 12 March 1988; Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar and others, 1 September 1991; M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, 18 March 2004. Shehla Zia and others v. WAPDA, 12 February 1994. 15