Transcript STUDY ON ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS IN THE EECCA COUNTRIES (AVAILABLE REMEDIES, TIMELINESS AND COSTS): problems and issues requiring additional attention “IMPLEMENTING THE.

STUDY ON ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN ENVIRONMENTAL
MATTERS IN THE EECCA COUNTRIES
(AVAILABLE REMEDIES,
TIMELINESS AND COSTS): problems and issues requiring
additional attention
“IMPLEMENTING THE AARHUS CONVENTION TODAY: PAVING THE WAY TO A
BETTER ENVIRONMENT AND GOVERNANCE TOMORROW”
SUBREGIONAL MEETING
Almaty, Rahat Palace Almaty
Kazakhstan
22-23 May 2012
Overview
1.
2.
3.
4.
Study background
Structure and methodology of the study
Key problems
Issues requiring additional attention
Background
• Objective of the study : to identify the impediments faced by
the Parties to the Aarhus Convention and other EECCA
countries in ensuring public access to justice in environmental
matters, especially concerning costs and remedies (see Article
9, paragraph 4 of the Aarhus Convention), and to make
recommendations to eliminate them
• Subject of the study: legislation and enforcement practice
(status on 1.02.2011) in 12 countries: Azerbaijan, Armenia,
Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Republic of
Moldova, Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan,
Uzbekistan, Ukraine
• Authors: Elena Laevskaya and Dmitro Skrylnikov with the
assistance of national experts
Structure and methodology
of the study
•
•
•
•
•
SECTION I
ANALYTICAL SUMMARY
ISSUES REQUIRING ADDITIONAL ATTENTION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
SECTION II
INFORMATION ON 12 EECCA COUNTRIES
Methodology: analysis of the legislation, practice of its
application in the EECCA countries, and case studies
submitted by the national experts together with answers to
the questionnaire. Results of other similar studies, decisions
of the AC Compliance Committee and practice of the
European Court on Human Rights in relation of the EECCA
countries have been used in this study.
Key problems
• Insignificant number of cases determined by numerous barriers in
access to justice
• «Narrow» standing for the public
• Long period of case proceedings
• Substantial trial financial costs/expenses (court fees, fees for expert
services, legal aid )
• Rare chance to get qualified legal and expert aid
• Applying principles “Loser pays” in court decisions (including
reimbursement the defendant for the losses caused by using injunctive
relief)
• Inefficient use of injunctive relief
• Low level of awareness among judges of the legislation related to
environment (especially the international treaties) and rights of the
citizens and NGOs in this area
Issues requiring additional attention
• Transparency of decision-making process
• Establishing and activity of independent and impartial
administrative bodies
• Standing for the public (including actio popularis)
• Courts competence to consider claims or complaints from NGOs
• Administrative abeyance of decision in case of its appeal in the
court
• Clear criteria for injunction relief in case of on-going activity
• Application of “Loser pays” principle with an exemption in cases to
protect public interests
• Support of lawyers / NGOs acting to protect public interests
• Registers of court decisions, raising awareness of judges and
prosecutors