Apichart Sukhagganond said recently that his division had received about 100 cases since it was officially established last October.

"It is relatively less than I expected," he said.

"This could be interpreted as state agencies related to environmental issues having done their best in resolving the disputes without bringing them up to the court, or the lower courts issuing good verdicts acceptable to the defendants and plaintiffs," said Apichart, appointed as the first president of the division.

The division was established under the aegis of the Supreme Court to allow environmental cases to be reviewed and ruled on by specialised judges armed with knowledge and understanding of environmental and natural resource issues.

Apichart said setting up the division was the first step towards making it an environmental court.

The nature of environmental cases is different from ordinary criminal and civil cases, he said. For instance, natural resources belong to the nation, not individuals, and a single case might have many plaintiffs and defendants since environmental problems could affect the whole society.

Before the division was set up, environmental cases were considered as civil or criminal litigation.

"The impacts of environmental problems do not immediately show up. Sometimes it takes years to see their effects, so we can't review and rule on cases with the normal process of 'infringement' as in civil cases. In environmental cases, the defendants have to prove their innocence," Apichart said. In ordinary cases, the plaintiffs have to prove that the defendants are guilty.

Environmental cases are those related to 24 laws defined by the court as environmental laws.

Apichart said all 10 judges, including himself, in his division are not experts in environmental issues, just judges who have experience in reviewing cases related to the 24 environmental laws.

He encouraged the judges to develop their capabilities by participating in meetings and

discussions with environmental experts as well as by learning from the experiences of other countries.

If he could manage his time, he would like to take a course in environmental management at a leading university, he said.

Environmental lawyer Surachai Trong-ngam said Apichart was on the right track, but furthering the understanding of judges was not enough. The whole justice system had to be improved.

"Lawyers and state attorneys as well as the public at large have to understand environmental issues and the legal aspects," he said.

Apichart said most of the cases submitted to his division involved exploitation of natural resources. He said verdicts had been reached in all of the 100 or so cases since none of them were big scandals.

Many provocative environmental cases are among the total of about 20,000 cases before the Supreme Court.

Court officials have to separate environmental cases out of the docket and then ask the president of the Supreme Court to assign the division to take them over. The cases pending at the Supreme Court include one involving alleged environmental damage to Maya Beach.

The Ao Nang Tambon Administrative Organisation in Krabi had sought legal action against Pongpol Adireksarn, then agricultural minister, and Plodprasop Suraswadi, then director-general of the Forestry Department. The two were accused of breaching the National Park Act of 1961 by allowing a Hollywood film crew to transform Maya Beach for the shooting of "The Beach".

Pennapa Hongthong

The Nation