remove pollution law

[jasonoeriksen]

This law is not necessary. All property is owned, whether by private entities or by the government of Liberland (capitol grounds for instance). Pollution in these casess is covered under the law that covers Damage to property.

In a free society, pollution is largely a civil matter. If I damage somebody else's property by polluting it, the courts can determine appropriate compensation. In rare instances where it rises to the level of criminal negligence (my laboratory releases a toxic cloud and kills people) it can and should be punished as a criminal matter with appropriate penalties and compensation to the victims.

[ghost]

what about the river and air?

[jasonoeriksen]

If I understand correctly, the Danube is an international waterway. It would be subject to the same laws that govern international waterways. It is appropriate for the government of Liberland to make laws forbidding polluting the river in that case, because the river is not privately owned. In the event of a privately owned river or body of water, private property rights would determine the rules.

Air pollution is a more complex matter, but the principle of private property rights still holds. I'm not an expert on how these matters should be handled in a free society, and exact implementation of this is a matter that legal experts should weigh in on, but I would refer you to some possible answers:

Ayn Rand: http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/pollution.html

Von Mises Institute https://mises.org/library/libertarian-manifesto-pollution

[ghost]

yes air is a very complex subject, let's leave it for now; I meant international waters of Danube so we need some protection here

[jasonoeriksen]

Putting aside our differences on air pollution for the moment, the law specifically mentions a broad range of things other than air pollution and the Danube.

Under this law, I could be prosecuted for a lot of things:

Bulldozing trees on my property and putting up a concrete foundation (polluting the green space with my ugly concete building).

Building a fire even if it doesn’t bother my neighbors (polluting the air with CO2).

Building a street (CO2 emissions from the process of building the road, polluting the ground by putting asphalt on top of it).

Building a landfill on my property and filling it with trash, even if it doesn't affect the groundwater (polluting the ground with trash).

Digging a well (drawing down the aquifer).

Harvesting rainwater (polluting waterways by interfering with their natural function).

Armed with this law, a preservationist would be legally justified in challenging any construction project.

I would also challenge this law on a constitutional basis:

"§6. No law shall abridge the right of each person to do as he or she chooses with his or her own person and property, so long as he or she does not interfere, by force or fraud, or the threat thereof, with the equal right of others to do as they choose with their own persons and property.”

On May 8, 2015, at 1:48 PM, KacperZajc notifications@github.com wrote:

yes air is a very complex subject, let's leave it for now; I meant international waters of Danube so we need some protection here

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/liberland/laws/pull/7#issuecomment-100358448.

[ghost]

yes you are right it is too wide, can you propose something narrow but protecting the river at least?

[jasonoeriksen]

The Danube is an interesting topic. Liberland will be subject to International treaties governing its use, and will have to forge agreements with Croatia and Serbia about how much water it is allowed to draw from the Danube, what kind of ships are allowed on it, etc.

If anybody with a better understanding of laws governing international waterways wants to weigh in with something that would be great, but in the mean time, here's something very rough to start with:

---

International Waterways

The usage of International Waterways is subject to agreed upon treaties between Liberland and other nations of the world. No person or entity may pollute, draw from, or interact with an International body of water except where allowed by International treaty.

---

Practice of this would need to be implemented by the government of Liberland. For example, if Liberland is allowed by treaty to draw 10 million gallons a day from the Danube, the government will need to ensure that Liberland is in compliance. I think the homestead principle is the way to proceed, so if I'm the first to build a pump on the shore of the Danube and start drawing 10,000 gallons per day for my farm, hot tub, or whatever, that would be an extension of my property rights which could be sold separately from my land, etc.

The same rule would apply to pollution of the Danube. If by International treaty, the water is (purely speculative since I don't know about these things) not allowed to exceed 10ppb of nitrates, then runoff from farmland into the Danube could be prohibited if it exceeds a certain level which would cause Liberland to be in violation of international treaty.

Obvious things like dumping containers full of trash into the river would be prohibited by International treaty (presumably), and enforcement of those rules would be part of the job of the government of Liberland.

[jasonoeriksen]

Closing this in favor of an updated PR