A/HRC/25/53 handled with participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level… Each individual shall have… the opportunity to participate in decision-making processes.” In 2012, in The Future We Want, the outcome document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20 Conference), States recognized that “opportunities for people to influence their lives and future, participate in decision-making and voice their concerns are fundamental for sustainable development” (A/CONF.216/16, para. 13). Environmental treaties that provide for public participation include the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (art. 10), the Convention on Biological Diversity (art. 14(1)), the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (arts. 3 and 5), and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (art. 6(a)). The Aarhus Convention has particularly detailed requirements (arts. 6–8).31 39. The rights of freedom of expression and association are of special importance in relation to public participation in environmental decision-making. The Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders has said that those working on land rights and natural resources are the second-largest group of defenders at risk of being killed (A/HRC/4/37), and that their situation appears to have worsened since 2007 (A/68/262, para. 18). Her last report described the extraordinary risks, including threats, harassment, and physical violence, faced by those defending the rights of local communities when they oppose projects that have a direct impact on natural resources, the land or the environment (A/68/262, para. 15). 40. States have obligations not only to refrain from violating the rights of free expression and association directly, but also to protect the life, liberty and security of individuals exercising those rights.32 There can be no doubt that these obligations apply to those exercising their rights in connection with environmental concerns. The Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders has underlined these obligations in that context (A/68/262, paras. 16 and 30), as has the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples (A/HRC/24/41, para. 21), the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,33 the Inter-American Court of Human Rights,34 and the Commission on Human Rights, which called upon States “to take all necessary measures to protect the legitimate exercise of everyone’s human rights when promoting environmental protection and sustainable development” (resolution 2003/71). 3. Duty to provide access to legal remedies 41. From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights onward, human rights agreements have established the principle that States should provide for an “effective remedy” for violations of their protected rights. Human rights bodies have applied that principle to human rights infringed by environmental harm. For example, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has urged States to provide for “adequate compensation and/or alternative accommodation and land for cultivation” to indigenous communities and local farmers whose land is flooded by large infrastructure projects, and “just compensation [to] and resettlement” of indigenous peoples displaced by forestation.35 The Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders has stated that States must implement 31 32 33 34 35 MEA report, sect. III.A.2. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 2; Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, arts. 2, 9 and 12. ICESCR report, sect. III.A.4. For example, Kawas Fernández v. Honduras, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgement dated 3 April 2009 (Ser. C No. 196). For other cases, see Inter-American report, sect. III.A.4. ICESCR report, sect. III.A.3. 11