A/HRC/28/61  The Women’s Human Rights Defenders International Coalition, a network of 28 organizations, provides many support services, including maintaining an online directory of organizations that can assist defenders.  The Goldman Environmental Prize amplifies the voices of selected grassroots environmentalists by providing them international recognition and financial support. E. Obligation to provide access to legal remedies 55. Human rights agreements have established that States have an obligation to provide for an effective remedy for violations of protected rights, and human rights bodies have applied that principle to human rights whose enjoyment is infringed by environmental harm (A/HRC/25/53, para. 41). 56. States have adopted a wide range of good practices in the provision of access to effective remedies for environmental harm, from dedicated environmental tribunals, to procedural rules that facilitate access to courts by environmental plaintiffs, to the increasingly important roles of national human rights institutions, ombudspersons and regional tribunals. 57. A number of States have found that one way to ensure that environmental claims are heard by courts with relevant expertise is to establish dedicated environmental courts. The Land and Environment Court of New South Wales, Australia, which was created in 1980, can claim to be the first specialist environmental superior court in the world. The court has jurisdiction over a wide variety of issues, including appeals from environmental permits, Aboriginal land claim cases, criminal proceedings for offences against planning or environmental laws, and mining issues. Other examples of dedicated tribunals with jurisdiction to hear a broad spectrum of environmental claims include Costa Rica’s Environmental Administrative Tribunal, established in 1995, and India’s National Green Tribunals, established in 2011. 58. In most States, environmental cases continue to be heard by courts with general jurisdiction. There are too many instances of such courts deciding environmental disputes through the application of human rights norms to cite them all, but some examples are provided in the next section, on good practices in the use of substantive obligations. 59. However, it is important to note here some good practices taken by States to facilitate access to courts by environmental plaintiffs. The Land and Environment Court of New South Wales, for instance, which is located in Sydney, has assisted individuals who live in rural areas within its jurisdiction by allowing cases to be filed in more than 150 local courthouses or through the Internet, and by conducting preliminary hearings by telephone and final hearings at the site of the dispute. It also has a comprehensive website that provides information on how individuals can represent themselves before the court. In the Philippines, the Supreme Court has adopted rules of procedure for environmental cases that allow plaintiffs to bring cases on behalf of others, including minors and future generations. Similarly, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Costa Rica has broadened standing by allowing individuals to bring actions on behalf of the public interest, including in the interest of environmental protection. Moreover, any person may file a case regarding a constitutional right in Costa Rica without an attorney, with no filing fees, in any language, at any time, and in any form, including handwritten filings. 60. The Philippine rules of procedure also address “strategic lawsuits against public participation” (SLAPP) suits – that is, countersuits by defendants against environmental plaintiffs, which are designed to discourage them from seeking legal remedies. The Philippine rules allow affected plaintiffs to call possible SLAPP suits to the attention of the 12