Environmental public organizations analyzed the new draft law No. 8410 "On Amendments to the Law of Ukraine "On Environmental Impact Assessment" and called it the first systematic review of the law on environmental protection since its adoption in 2017.
The proposed changes are much broader and deeper than stated, and although most of them are positive, some of them cause serious concern, reports Ecology-Law-Human.
- Digitization of the procedure
Eco-activists emphasized that digitalization will narrow the access of people who do not use modern technologies. And EIA should be accessible to all Ukrainians.
"It is necessary to keep the requirement to submit one copy of the ATS report (as well as other documentation provided by the economic entity necessary for environmental impact assessment) intended for physical placement in a place accessible to the public in the premises of the authorized body," they stressed.
- Shortening the terms of the procedure
The authors criticized the shortening of the public discussion period to 12 working days and the impossibility of extending it. After all, the generally recognized international standard is at least 1 calendar month. In addition, such a reduction is a weakening of the norms of the Aarhus Convention.
In their opinion, shortening the terms will also have a negative impact on the completeness and effectiveness of the conditions for the report and the environmental conditions of the conclusions from the EIA, because:
- the terms given to the authorized body for the preparation of conditions regarding the scope of research and the level of detail of information will be reduced from 30 to 15 working days;
- the terms for preparing a conclusion from the ATS will be reduced from 25 to 15 days from the day of the end of the public discussion.
- By reducing the discretionary powers of the authorized body
It is noted that the draft law #8410 proposes to supplement the Law on EIA with a new article on the refusal to issue a conclusion on EIA, as well as a new part on the grounds for issuing a conclusion on the inadmissibility of the planned activity.
"Even in the first years of the implementation of the EIA procedure, practice showed the need to legislate the grounds for refusal and to provide a conclusion on inadmissibility, so such changes are long overdue and supported," the analysis emphasized.
- Changing the methods of providing access to reports from the EIA
Eco-activists criticized the norm regarding the production of paper copies of the report. Previously, expenses were borne by the entrepreneur, and the document proposes to supplement it with the condition "if there is a request from the public."
They noted that the mechanism of obtaining such copies becomes unclear. Also, such a norm is inconsistent with the provisions of the Law "On Environmental Impact Assessment". After all, according to the law, the public discussion begins only when the paper report from the EIA is available in the premises of the authorized body.
"It is absolutely unclear how the request fits into this algorithm of actions of the authority. After all, it turns out that until someone makes a request for the production of a copy, the public discussion does not begin, and the entire EIA procedure is suspended," the authors emphasized.
- Innovations regarding public hearings
The analysis criticized the new conditions for holding public hearings only if at least 10 people registered for them.
"The requirement to register for public hearings of 10 people, who are ordinary local residents and may encounter the EIA procedure for the first time in their lives, is excessive and unrealistic," eco-activists emphasized.
In their opinion, it is logical not to appoint a hearing if the public interest is completely absent. However, the interest of even one person is a sufficient indicator of the presence of public interest for the appointment of such hearings.
- Alignment with the Directive on WIA
It is noted that the EU Directive on EIA provides for consultations with interested bodies as a mandatory element of the EIA procedure. This element was not provided for in the initial version of the law on EIA. The draft law proposes changes to conduct (in parallel with public discussion) consultations with other authorities and local self-governments regarding environmental issues.
The authors emphasized that the vast majority of proposals concerning the EIA procedure itself seem appropriate and optimal.
"At the same time, it seems that the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources still does not share European positions on the weight and benefits of public involvement," the analysis states.
They emphasized that most provisions of the draft law are aimed at limiting or narrowing such participation, in particular through:
- reduction of terms;
- the need to submit a request to receive a report from the EIA;
- holding public hearings only if 10 people are registered with them.
Eco-activists called on the Ministry of Environment to review these positions, because European integration in the environmental sphere is directly related to the constant and progressive expansion of the public's opportunities to participate in the process of making management decisions.
As GMK Center reported earlier, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine approved the draft law "On Amendments to the Law "On Environmental Impact Assessment". The new regulations are intended to shorten the procedure from 216 days to 67, as well as to update the functionality of the electronic register of the EIA.
As EcoPolitic previously reported, the Professional Association of Environmentalists of Ukraine accused the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources of complicating the EIA procedure, while the European community is simplifying it.
