for that reason, this instrument highlights as fundamental components of the exercise of
democracy, “transparency in government activities, probity, responsible public administration
on the part of governments, respect for social rights, and freedom of expression and of the
press.” (Article 4).
93.
Freedom of expression is, in fact, a fundamental pillar of the democratic system, as it
allows citizens to exercise the control over the government’s actions, to question, investigate
and monitor compliance with public functions. Both in its individual dimension and its
collective or social dimension, freedom of expression makes it possible for people to take part
in the decision-making process and for their opinions to have a real impact on these decisions.
B.2 Importance of freedom of thought and expression on environmental
issues in a democratic society
94.
The Court has recognized that the rights specifically linked to the environment can be
divided into two groups. On the one hand, rights whose enjoyment is particularly vulnerable
to environmental degradation, also identified as substantive rights (for example, the rights to
life, personal integrity, health or property). On the other hand, rights whose exercise supports
better environmental policymaking, also identified as procedural rights. The latter category
includes the freedoms of expression and association, the right to information, participation
and to an effective remedy.110
95.
However, the Court has considered that the procedural obligations in matters of
environmental protection also arise from the systematic interpretation of the obligations to
respect and guarantee the rights to life and personal integrity, as well as other rights provided
for in the American Convention.111
96.
The Court also recalls that participation is a mechanism for addressing the concerns of
citizens and using their knowledge in public policy decisions that affect the environment. It
increases the capacity of governments to respond to public concerns and demands in a timely
manner, and helps build consensus and improve acceptance of and compliance with
environmental decisions.112 In particular, public participation enables communities to demand
accountability from public authorities when taking decisions and, also, improves the efficiency
and credibility of government processes. This is because democratic control by society,
through public opinion, fosters transparency in State activities and promotes the
accountability of State officials in relation to their public activities.113
97.
In this regard, the Court has reiterated the views expressed by other international
bodies for the protection of human rights. The European Court of Human Rights has underlined
the importance of public participation in environmental decision-making as a procedural
guarantee of the right to private and family life.114 It has also stressed that an essential
element of this procedural guarantee is the ability of individuals to challenge official acts or
Cf. Advisory Opinion OC-23/17, supra, para. 64. The Court has also ruled on procedural rights with respect
to the environmental impact of a forest industrialization project, referring both to access to information as well as to
public participation. Also see Case of Claude Reyes et al. v. Chile. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of
September 19, 2006. Series C No. 151, para. 86.
111
Cf. Advisory Opinion OC-23/17, supra, para. 125.
112
Cf. Advisory Opinion OC-23/17, supra, paras. 64, 226 and 228, and Case of Palacio Urrutia et al. v. Ecuador,
supra, para. 87.
113
Cf. Case of Claude Reyes et al. v. Chile, supra, para. 87, and Advisory Opinion OC-23/17, supra, para. 226.
114
Cf. Advisory Opinion OC-23/17, supra, para. 229, and ECHR, Case of Grimkovskaya v. Ukraine, No.
38182/03. Judgment of July 21, 2011, para. 69.
110
30