Press Announcement
Speakers:
Dmitry Skrilnikov, EcoPravo-Lviv, Ukraine
Olga Speranskaya, Eco-Accord, Russia
Magda Toth Nagi, Regional Environmental Center, Hungary
Svitlana Kravchenko, IUCN Commission for Environmental Law, Ukraine
Anna Tsvetkova, Mama-86, Ukraine
Sergey Vykhryst, Kharkiv City Public Organisation "EcoPravo-Kharkiv", Ukraine
Alexander Kodjabashev, Demetra, Bulgaria
Environmental non-governmental organizations have taken part in all negotiation sessions for the three Protocols to be signed in Kiev on 21 May afternoon. NGO lobbying efforts and active position at negotiations allowed to improve substantially the content of three protocols, strengthening their provisions on access to information and public participation. However, many progressive provisions were blocked during negotiations.
The Protocol on Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers (PRTR) to the Aarhus Convention requires companies to reveal to the public their annual output of 86 pollutants. PRTRs are public information systems consisting of data on the sources and amounts of individual chemicals and pollutants released to air, water, land, or transferred in waste. Public information on pollutants can play a crucial role in stimulating pollution prevention and reduction, since people living in the vicinity of polluting factories will be able to find out what their industrial neighbours are releasing and will push for the reduction of emissions.
"A number of progressive suggestions did not survive into the final text of PRTR Protocol. We did not manage to get nuclear sector and radioactive substances, water, energy and resource use into the list of items to be reported. Moreover, storage of pollutants, on-site transfers of pollutants, transfers of pollutants through products would not be reported as well. In the course of reporting, the companies would not be obliged to distinguish between extraordinary and routine releases. The Protocol does not provide for the establishment of a centralized regional register. The Ministers should make clear commitment to work further to improve the content of the Protocol in the future", - Dimity Skrilnikov stresses.
"It is very important that although the Protocol has been developed under the UNECE, it will be open to accession by any country. It is a tool for every country to apply for providing information pollutant release and transfer that will further result in reducing negative impact on people's health and the environment. And any country can go further than the requirements of the Protocol - as for the parent Aarhus Convention the Protocol provides minimum standards only. However, the establishment of PRTRs will require significant resources, both human and financial. We must understand that countries with economies in transition, especially smaller ones, need assistance for the implementation of the Protocol. Kiev Conference should result in clear commitments in this area", - Olga Speranskaya says.
"The REC has organized a series of roundtable meetings to provide a forum for dialogue among stakeholders in nine Accession and six Southern European countries, to inform them about the content of the Protocol, to gain feedback from them and to contribute to the discussion on the future ratification and implementation of this instrument. These aim to help develop national PRTR systems, to discuss the strategies to implement these registers in harmony with the PRTR protocol. After its adoption in Kiev, the focus of the REC activities will be to support both the early implementation of the Protocol and further work on issues which could not be accompanied at this stage by the UN ECE Working group", - Magda Toth Nagy says.
The Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (the SEA Protocol) allows assessing and preventing the negative impact of "strategic" decisions and avoiding negative impacts of future concrete projects that follow from such strategic decisions. Thus, it prevents negative environmental impact at the earlier stage, such as during preparation of a plan of development for the cement industry or the energy policy for the whole country. This broader view is what SEA can bring to the process.
Environmental citizens' organisations are quite disappointed that in its final edition the SEA Protocol is limited to only plans and programs. Countries of Eastern Europe and the European ECO-Forum tried to include policies and legislation in the scope of the Protocol, but the final text has only one soft provision on policies and legislation.
"The ECO-Forum team put a lot of energy and wisdom into the negotiations, trying to keep alive the spirit of the Aarhus Convention. We did not achieve our goal of making provisions on public participation in policies and legislation stronger than in the Aarhus Convention. We lost our battle on access to justice - there no such provisions in the Protocol. However, we have reasonably strong provisions for public participation in preparation of plans and programs, of which we can be proud. What we have now is a building block for a sustainable future and better decision making. We should welcome it and advocate the ratification of the SEA Protocol", - Svitlana Kravchenko says.
The Protocol on Civil Liability and Compensation for Damage Caused by the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Incidents on Transboundary Waters gives individuals affected by the transboundary impact of industrial accidents on international watercourses a legal claim to compensation and makes operators of industrial installations liable for damage depending on the risk they pose.
"The Civil Liability Protocol will draw the attention of operators to the need to minimize risk and prevent damage that they will be liable for. So it will help to prevent industrial accidents from happening in the first place and limit their adverse effects on people and the environment", - Anna Tsvetkova says.
"We have taken active part in the negotiations to include in the Protocol the key principles of the Aarhus Convention to guarantee public access to information and justice, and we succeeded to incorporate such guarantees in Civil Liability Protocol. We failed to expand the scope of the Protocol to include the potential adverse impact from the accidental release of bacteria, viruses and genetically modified organisms, since it goes beyond the scope of legal regulation of the parent conventions. However, the Preamble mentions the desirability to review the Protocol at a later stage to broaden its scope of application. We are convinced that the current text may be significantly improved at a later stage", - Sergey Vykhryst stresses.
For more information: European ECO-Forum Information Center