Contemporary International Environmental Law: The Precautionary Principle and Reversal of the Burden of Proof

Assessing the burden of proof concerning the safety of human activities for both health and the environment presents a nuanced and intricate challenge. This paper delves into the evolving standards of burden of proof, examining the application and consequences within international environmental law. It addresses the issue of the allocation of the burden of proving harmlessness between developers and those impacted by activities. Employing a doctrinal research approach, this paper observes a shift in the allocation of the burden of proof in contemporary international environmental law. The paper synopsises that debate over the burden of proof is primarily bifurcated into two perspectives: traditional or treaty and judicial or contemporary approaches. The former posits that the responsibility to prove harmlessness rests with the developer be it private entities or the state to ensure that activities conducted within their jurisdiction do not harm the environment. Conversely, the latter marks a shift where opponents of an activity bear the obligation to furnish evidence of the harmful implications of an activity to be halted.