1 / 14

Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making

Explore the scope and application of public participation in environmental decision-making, including historical development, activities and decisions covered, subjects of obligations and rights, and the requirement for early public participation. Understand the approach to judicial review and the legal nature of obligations in the Aarhus Convention.

jadaz
Télécharger la présentation

Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Jerzy JendrośkaPublic participation in environmentaldecision-making – scope of application PARTICIPATORY AND PROCEDURAL RIGHTS IN ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS Warsaw, 4-6 March 2015

  2. Content • Genesis and historical development • Public participationpillar in the AarhusConvention • Activitiescovered • Decisionscovered • Subjectsof obligations • Subjectsof rights • Requirement for „earlypublic participation, when all options are open” • Approach to judicialreview

  3. Public participation in environmentalprotection – historical development • German medievallocalregulations • noxious and strenuous activities could not be carried out without the consent of the neighbours • PrussianIndustrialCode 1845 • public participation in granting industrial licenses for potentially harmful activities • Directive 84/360/EEC of 28 June 1984 on the combating of air pollution from industrial plants • applicationsfor authorization and the decisions of the competent authorities are made available to the public concerned in accordance with procedures provided for in the national law • Directive 85/337/EC EIA • Directive 96/61/EC IPPC • napplications for permits for new installations or for substantial changes are made available for an appropriate period of time to the public, to enable it to comment on them before the competent authority reaches its decision.That decision, including at least a copy of the permit, and any subsequent updates, must be made available to the public. • AarhusConvention -1998 • Public Participation Directive 2003/36 amends EIA and IPPC Directives to implementAarhusConvention

  4. Public participationpillar in the AarhusConvention • Decisions on individual activities/projects „which may have a significant effect on the environment” – Art. 6 • GMO decisions – Art. 6 bis • Plans/programs „relating to environment”– Art. 7 • Policies „relating to environment” – Art. 7 • Normative acts/legally binding rules „that may have a significant effect on the environment” – Art. 8 • MaastrichtRecommendations on PromotingEffective Public Participation in Decision-making in Environmental Matters(documentECE/MP.PP/2014/8)

  5. Legalnature of obligations • Individual decisions • Art.6 permits – „shall” • Art.6 bis GMO decisions – „shall” • Strategic decisions • Art 7 - Plans and programs - „shall” • Art.7 – Policies - „shall endeavor” • Art. 8 - Executive regulations and other legally binding rules - „shall strive to promote” and „should”

  6. Public participation in EU law • Specificactivities • EIA Directive • IED Directive • Habitat Directive • Seveso III Directive • otherdirectives • Plans and programs • Public Participation Directive • SEA Directive • Water Framework Directive • Seveso III Directive • otherdirectives

  7. Activitiescovered • Art.6.1 a) - list of activities in Annex I • based on EIA Directive Annex I and IPPC Directive • any other activity subject to domestic EIA (point 20) • Art. 6.1 b) - other activities „which may have a significant effecton environment” • language to cover EIA Directive Annex II projects • „Parties shall determine...” = screening and test (para 43-47 of Maastricht PP Rec) • Changes and extensions

  8. Concept of activity • ProposedactivityunderAarhusand „proposedactivity” underEspooConvention and „project” under EIA Directive • Definition of porjectunder EIA Directive (art. 1.2.(a): - the execution of construction works or of other installations or schemes, - other interventions in the natural surroundings and landscape including those involving theextraction of mineralresources • Broaddefinition of „construction” • modernisation of existingroad (C-142/07 CODA) • demolitionworks (C-50/09, Commission v. Ireland,) • Otherinterventions - for example: afforestationordefforestation, storage of scrap iron, intensivefishfarming

  9. Decisionscovered • Multiple decisionmaking • Public participation only once? • Public participation with each decision? • Criteria • Regulatory vs financing • Regulatory vs agreements (ACC/C/22 France) • „Whether to permit” • Significance test (ACC/C/17 –EU ) • EU requirements • PP required for development consent with EIA and IPPC (IED)permit • EIA seen in the context of Crystal Palace (C-508/03) • Reconsiderations and updates • habitat assessment

  10. Reconsiderations and updates – art.6.10 Aarhus • Currenttendency to restrictiveinterpretation of the concept of project vs art.6.10 (and caseACC/41/Slovak Republic) - physicalchange vs change in the environment and change in legalconditions) • Extension of consent for operation of the landfill ((C-121/11, Pro-Braine and Others) • Extension of consent for operation of the airport ((C-275/09, Brussels Hoofdstedelijk Gewest and Others,) • Approaches • Changesinterpretedboadly – not only to coverphysicalchange in the projectitself (AG Kokot in Case Krizan) • Extension of lifetime as newactivity (Espoo IC in caseRivne) • ACC in caseSlovakia

  11. Subjects of obligations • Public authorities • Competent authority vs otherauthorities • Delegation of tasks • Specialisedbodies • Localauthorities • Role of developers • ComparetablesatMaastrichtPP Recommendations

  12. Subjects of rights • Public vs public concerned • Public concerned –impact not onlyroutine but also in case of accidents • Non discriminationclause art. 3.9 • Participation of NGOs in advisorygroups(ACC/51/Romania) • Foreignpublic (ACC/71/Czech Republic) Temelin NPP • Non-discrimination– equalopportunities to participate • Espooand Aarhus(ACC/71/Czech Republic) Temelin NPP, Hinkley Point NPP cases

  13. Requirementfor „early public participation, when all options are open” (art.6.4) • Does „early…when all options are open” • relates to sequence of decisions (Delena Wells Case)? • relates to particular decision (scoping in EIA)? • both? • Can public participation after construction is finished be considered „early” (C-215/06EC vs Ireland – for EIA and ACC-17 for IPPC) • Concept of tiereddecision-making (para 17-19 of Maastricht PP Rec) • Socalled O option(para 16 of MaastrichtPP Rec) • Need for repeated public participation (para 15 of MaastrichtPP Rec)

  14. Approach to judicialreview • Indicationregardingtransposition and implementation • Originaldirective • Amendingdirectives • Directive • Textincludingrecitals (preamble) • Guidance • CJEU verdicts • EC Guidance • Recitals(preamble)– reference to Aarhus • Aarhus • Textincludingrecitals (preamble) • Guidance • Findings of ACC • Implementation Guide • MastrichtRecomendations

More Related