Chinese Environmental Human Rights

Environmental Rights Framework

The right to a healthy environment is not expressly recognised as a constitutional right in China, but it is protected through a combination of constitutional provisions, statutory law, and judicial interpretation. Article 26 of the 1982 Constitution provides that the state protects and improves the living environment and the ecological environment, and prevents and controls pollution and other public hazards. Article 9 provides that the state ensures the rational use of natural resources and protects rare animals and plants.

The Environmental Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China (effective 2015) strengthened the legal framework for environmental rights. Article 6 provides that all entities and individuals have the duty to protect the environment. Article 53 provides that citizens have the right to obtain environmental information and to participate in and supervise environmental protection. These provisions, while not creating an individually enforceable right to a healthy environment, establish the legal foundation for environmental claims.

Public Interest Litigation

Environmental public interest litigation (gongyi susong) in China has developed rapidly since 2012. The 2012 revision of the Civil Procedure Law introduced Article 55, which authorises “state organs and relevant social organisations” to bring public interest litigation for conduct that pollutes the environment or infringes the lawful interests of consumers.

The 2014 revision of the Environmental Protection Law expanded standing for environmental public interest litigation. Article 58 authorises social organisations that meet specified conditions to bring public interest environmental litigation: the organisation must be registered with the civil affairs department at or above the municipal level; must have been engaged in public interest environmental protection activities for at least five consecutive years; and must not have any record of violating laws or regulations.

The Supreme People’s Court issued judicial interpretations on environmental public interest litigation in 2015, addressing standing, burden of proof, remedies, and costs. The interpretations confirmed that qualified organisations may seek injunctive relief (cessation of pollution, remediation of environmental damage) and damages (compensation for ecological damage). The defendant bears the burden of proving the absence of causation and the absence of environmental harm once the plaintiff has established a prima facie case.

The Supreme People’s Procuratorate (SPP) was authorised to initiate environmental public interest litigation in 2015 through a pilot programme. The 2017 revision of the Civil Procedure Law and the Administrative Procedure Law codified the SPP’s standing. The procuratorate may initiate public interest civil litigation where no qualified organisation is willing to sue, and may initiate public interest administrative litigation where a government agency has failed to perform its environmental protection duties.

Right to a Healthy Environment

Chinese courts have adjudicated cases in which plaintiffs asserted a right to a healthy environment. In Chen v Chemical Plant, the Hunan court recognised that the plaintiff’s right to live in a clean environment was protected by the Environmental Protection Law and ordered the defendant chemical plant to cease emissions that had caused illness among local residents.

The SPC’s 2014 Opinions on Strengthening Environmental Protection Adjudication directed courts to “protect the right of citizens to a clean and healthy environment” and to “give full effect to the function of environmental justice in protecting environmental rights.” The Opinions encouraged courts to accept environmental disputes even where the plaintiff could not demonstrate direct economic loss, recognising the intrinsic value of the environment.

Environmental Information Disclosure

The Measures for Environmental Information Disclosure (Huanjing Xinxi Gongkai Banfa), effective 2008 and revised 2020, require government agencies and polluting enterprises to disclose environmental information. Article 10 requires the Ministry of Ecology and Environment and local environmental authorities to publish environmental quality monitoring data, pollution source monitoring data, environmental impact assessment information, and enforcement data.

The 2020 revision expanded disclosure requirements. Enterprises listed as key pollutant-discharging units (zhongdian wuran paiwu danwei) must publish information on pollutant discharge types, concentrations, volumes, and compliance status. Enterprises that exceed discharge standards must publish remediation plans.

Citizens have the right to request environmental information from government agencies under the Regulations on Open Government Information (2008, revised 2019). The agency must respond within 15 working days and may refuse requests only where disclosure would harm state secrets, commercial secrets, or personal privacy. Environmental NGOs have used this right extensively to obtain information about pollution sources, environmental impact assessments, and enforcement actions.

Cancer Villages

China’s “cancer villages” (ai zheng cun) — rural communities with abnormally high cancer rates attributed to industrial pollution — have become a focus of environmental human rights advocacy. Researchers have documented over 450 cancer villages across China, concentrated in regions with heavy industrial development including Henan, Jiangsu, Hebei, and Guangdong.

Cancer village residents have used legal mechanisms to seek redress, including administrative reconsideration of pollution permits, civil litigation against polluting enterprises, and petitions to the environmental protection authorities. The legal claims have been largely unsuccessful due to difficulties in proving causation, the limited resources of rural plaintiffs, and the economic importance of polluting enterprises to local governments.

The cancer village phenomenon has driven policy changes. The Ministry of Environmental Protection conducted a national survey of cancer village incidence and established a programme to relocate residents of the most severely affected villages. The 2019 Soil Pollution Prevention and Control Law requires the investigation and remediation of contaminated agricultural land.

NGO Advocacy

Environmental NGOs have played a significant role in Chinese environmental human rights advocacy. The All-China Environment Federation (ACEF) (Zhonghua Huanjing Baohu Lianhehui), established in 2005 under the supervision of the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, is the most prominent environmental NGO and has standing to bring environmental public interest litigation.

The Friends of Nature (Ziran Zhi You), founded in 1994, was the first environmental NGO registered in China and has brought landmark public interest environmental cases. Friends of Nature v Plastic Company, decided by the Yunnan High People’s Court, established the standing of NGOs to seek ecological restoration for damage to public environmental resources.

Environmental NGOs in China operate within constraints. The Registration and Management of Social Organisations Regulations require NGOs to register with the Ministry of Civil Affairs and to accept the “supervision and guidance” of a professional supervisory unit. NGOs that address politically sensitive environmental issues — particularly pollution cases involving state-owned enterprises or local government officials — face registration challenges and operational restrictions.

Conclusion

Environmental human rights in China have developed through the interaction of statutory provisions, judicial activism, NGO advocacy, and public pressure. The environmental public interest litigation regime, the environmental information disclosure requirements, and the recognition of environmental rights by the SPC have created a framework for environmental claims. The cancer village phenomenon illustrates both the severity of environmental harm in China and the limitations of the legal mechanisms available to affected communities. The All-China Environment Federation and other NGOs have used the legal framework to bring significant environmental cases, but their capacity is constrained by regulatory limitations and the economic and political interests aligned against strong environmental enforcement.