Both of these areas require a measure of environmental justice. In the case of the reconstruction and clean-up, the responsibility for environmental devastation must be apportioned fairly. The NATO action has wiped out the pre-existing situation on the ground, making the solutions applied in other countries meaningless and providing an opportunity for a fresh start in sustainable development. The NATO countries should consider taking on much of the responsibility for environmental cleanup and rebuilding the infrastructure. In this way, they can prove in real life that their intervention is not aimed at the general public in Yugoslavia and the neighbouring countries and can stimulate fast transition to a more sustainable development pattern.
Reconstruction is more than physical clean-up, however.
This is where cleanup and reconstruction meet the institutional capacity of the society. The drafters of the Aarhus Convention understood that only through the guarantee of rights to information and to participation can the people actually begin to take control of the way their societies deal with the environment. The environmental empowerment of the people also requires there to be a fair and efficient system of administration and working justice system. The Aarhus Convention is therefore like the Helsinki Final Act in that it internationalises what was formerly a part of domestic law the treatment by authorities of the public in respect of their exercise of basic rights relating to the environment. Our experience also shows that a lot can be achieved in transboundary cooperation by supporting joint NGO, governmental and business activities within the areas of shared environmental values.