1. Arhuska konvencija: Prikaz
Stiven Stek
Srbija, maj 2010

2. Arhuska konvencija: Nova vrsta konvencije
Pristup zasnovan na pravima
Veza sa ljudskim pravima
Osnaživanje javnosti i civilnog društva

3. Od Stokholma do Rija
Prvi princip Stokholmske deklaracije (1972) govori o pravu svakog pojedinca na zdravu životnu sredinu i o dužnosti zaštite životne sredine
Deseti princip Deklaracije iz Rija (1992) ukazuje da je put koji pojedince i grupe vodi ka dostizanju zdrave životne sredine kao krajnjeg cilja uključivanje u proces donošenja odluka
Deseti princip predstavlja osnov za tri stuba Arhuske konvencije

4. Kofi Anan, bivši generalni sekretar Ujedinjenih nacija
“...Usvajanje Arhuske konvencije predstavlja džinovski korak u razvijanju međunarodnog prava u ovoj oblasti...Premda je Arhuska konvencija regionalnog karaktera, njen značaj je globalnog karaktera. Ona predstavlja najimpresivniju razradu desetog principa Deklaracije iz Rija...Kao takva ona predstavlja najambiciozniji poduhvat u oblasti “ekološke demokratije” koji je do sada preduzet pod okriljem Ujedinjenih nacija...”

5. Zašto je potreban sporazum o ekološkoj demokratiji?
Pragmatična (ekološka) motivacija:
ekološka održivost zahteva učešće svih aktera
veće učešće vodi ka donošenju boljih odluka: kritika ojačava kvalitet predloga
veće učešće vodi ka boljem sprovođenju odluka: veći udeo, veća uključenost
Idealistička (demokratska) motivacija:
pitanje demokratskih prava: pravo na reč u pitanjima koja se tiču nečijeg života
reprezentativna demokratija nasuprot participativne demokratije
tekući odnos između vlade i civilnog društva

6. Poreklo i razvoj Konvencije
jun princip Deklaracije iz Rija
 preuzet u okviru procesa Životna sredina za Evropu
okt 1995 Usvajanje UNECE uputstava u vezi sa Dostupnošću informacija i učešćem javnosti u donošenju odluka vezanih za životnu sredinu (Smernice iz Sofije)
Pregovori o nacrtu Konvencije
jun 1998 Usvajanje Konvencije na IV ministarskoj konferenciji “Životna sredina za Evropu” u gradu Arhusu u Danskoj. Potpisale 39 države i EZ
okt 2001 Stupanje na snagu Konvencije
okt 2002 Prvi sastanak Strane (Luka, Italija)
maj 2003 Vanredni sastanak Strana (Kijev, Ukrajina) u cilju usvajanja Protokola o registru ispuštanja i prenosu zagađenja
maj 2005 Drugi sastanak Strana (Almati, Kazahstan), usvajanje amandmana u vezi sa genetski modifikovanim organizmima (GMO)
jun 2008 Treći sastanak Strana (Riga, Latvija)

7. Status ratifikacije Ukupno: 43 Strane Litvanija Albanija Jermenija
Austrija
Azerbejdžan
Belorusija
Belgija
Bosna i Hercegovina
Bugarska
Hrvatska
Kipar
Češka
Danska
Estonija
Finska
Francuska
Gruzija
Nemačka
Grčka
Mađarska
Italija
Kazahstan
Kirgistan
Latvija
Litvanija
Luksemburg
Malta
Moldavija
Holandija
Norveška
Poljska
Portugal
Rumunija
Srbija
Slovačka
Slovenija
Španija
Švedska
Tadžikistan
Bivša jugoslovenska Republika Makedonija Turkmenistan
Ukrajina
Velika Britanija
Evropska zajednica
Ukupno: 43 Strane

8. Arhuska konvencija uticala je na zakonodavstvo EU
Direktiva o proceni
uticaja na životnu sredinu
Direktiva o informacijama
Direktiva o strateškoj proceni uticaja na životnu sredinu
Informacije koje poseduju institucije Zajednice
Protokol o registru ispuštanja i prenosu zagađenja (evropski
registar emisija zagađivača, integralna kontrola zagađenja)
GMO
Standardi odraženi u mnogim sektorskim direktivama

9. Sadržaj Konvencije Cilj, definicije, opšte odlike (članovi 1-3)
DOSTUPNOST INFORMACIJA (članovi 4-5)
UČEŠĆE JAVNOSTI (članovi 6-8)
DOSTUPNOST PRAVOSUĐA (član 9)
Završne odredbe (članovi 10-22)
Aneksi

10. Okvir Priznavanje građanskih prava
Proceduralna prava na dostupnost informacija, učešće javnosti i pravdu
 materijalna prava sadašnjih i budućih generacija da žive u okruženju koje je adekvatno za njihovo zdravlje i blagostanje (član 1)
Šire definicije ‘javnosti’, ‘organa javne vlasti’ i ‘informacija o životnoj sredini’
Bilo koje fizičko ili pravno lice, plus neformalne grupe (član 2.4)
Svi sektori i nivoi vlasti, ne uključujući tela ili institucije koje postupaju u sudskom ili zakonodavnom svojstvu (član 2.2)
Stanje životne sredine, faktori koji utiču na stanje životne sredine, zdravlje ljudi vezano za životnu sredinu

11. Član 3 - Opšte odredbe Organi vlasti treba da pomažu i upućuju javnost
NVO treba da budu prepoznate i podržane u okviru Konvencije
Ukoliko je neophodno zakonodavni sistemi treba da budu prilagođeni
Konvencija predstavlja “pod”, a ne plafon
Uspostavlja minimum standarda koji mogu biti prevaziđeni
Država mora da obezbedi da javnost ne bude kažnjavana, gonjena ili uznemiravana zbog ostvarivanja svojih prava
Bez diskriminacije po pitanju državljanstva, nacionalnosti ili mesta prebivališta

12. Članovi 4-5 - Informacioni stub
(biće detaljno razmatran u drugoj prezentaciji)
Član 4 – Obaveze u pogledu “pasivnog” pružanja informacija: naime, obaveze vlasti da na zahtev javnosti učine dostupnim informacije o životnoj sredini koje poseduju
Član 5 – Obaveze u pogledu “aktivnog” pružanja informacija: naime, obaveze vlasti da aktivno proizvode i sakupljaju informacije o životnoj sredini i da ih prenose javnosti.

13. Članovi 6, 7, 8 - Stub vezan za učešće javnosti
Projekti, specifične aktivnosti (član 6)
spisak pokrivenih aktivnosti (Aneks I)
blagovremeno i efikasno obaveštavanje
razumni vremenski okviri
zainteresovana javnost ima pravo na slobodan pregled svih relevantih informacija
komentari u pisanoj formi ili javna rasprava
uzimanje u obzir ishoda učešća javnosti
odluke objavljene i javno dostupne

14. Ko je odgovoran za procedure vezane za učešće javnosti?
Primarna odgovornost
„nadležni organi vlasti”
Praktični angažmani
posebni službenici (poverenici)
specijalizovani privatni konsultanti (ponekad NVO)
lokalni organi vlasti
Uloga podnosilaca (predlagača projekata)
Primary responsibility
Under the Convention primary responsibility for assuring that public have possibility to participate rests on „competent public authorities” – that is the authority which is competent to take a decision whether to permit certain project.
In most countries these authorities – before making a decision - directly conduct public participation: notify the public, provide access to relevant documents (application, EIA report etc) and collect comments from the public.
In some countries however there are certain practical arrangements to help them do it.
Practical approaches
Some countries came to the conclusion that conducting public partiicpation procedures requires special skills and should be designated to persons independent from the agency which issues decison. Such persons usually have very broad powers (almost investigative) and their task is to hear all interested parties, verify evidence and reports(including EIS) and give recommendations to the decision maker. Their taks include to:
Notify and make the public aware about the project
Facilitate submision of comments
Arrange and conduct public hearing
Write a report for a decision-maker („competent authority”)
In the U.S. this role is fulfiled by administrative law judges, in the U.K. for example by planning inspectors (in particularly controversial or important cases well known barristers are commissioned to undertake this role - and they getting paid up to GBP for one case), in France there are so called commissaires enqueters designated by the president of competent administrative court. In France this role is often fulfiled by NGOs.
In Czech Republic there is similar practice, though not formally provided by law. Local authorities hire specialised NGOs to conduct entire consultation process in relation to controversial planning permissions. The role of such NGOs is to make sure that local community is acurately informed about all aspects (ecological, economic, social) ofproposed development project, and that findings of EIA are acurately understood, and that local community is able to make unprejudiced and not emotional decision whether they want or not the proposed project.
Role of applicants (developers)
The Convention in art. 6.5 requires that applicants should enter into discusions with public before thy actuually submit their application to the authorities. This discussion should precede and be in addition to the obligations concerning notification and possibility to inspect releavant information and submit coments to the competent authority.
In some countries however both obligations are somehow mixed up and the law makes the project proponent primary responsible not only for entering into discusions before submitting applications (art.6.5) but also for notification under article 6.2, provision of releavnt information under article 6.6 and collecting coments under article 6.7.

15. Neophodne odlike procedure vezane za učešće javnosti
Razumni vremenski okviri koji pružaju dovoljno prostora za
obaveštavanje javnosti
pripremu javnosti za efikasno učešće
U ranoj fazi procesa donošenja odluka
onda kada su sve opcije otvorene
onda kada učešće javnosti može biti efikasno
Reasonable time-frames
Early in decision-making when all options are open:
Public participation is required when deciding on a case-by case basis if projets needs full enviornmental assessment and preparation of environmental report (so called „ screening” projects for environmental assessment) - in Indonesia, some EU countries
Public participation is required when defining the scope of environmental assessment 9ie defining the scope and extent of information to be included in the environmental report)- in USA and many EU countries

16. Obaveštavanje – član 6.2 Javno obaveštenje ili pojedinačno
U ranoj fazi donošenja odluka
Način:
adekvatno
blagovremeno
efikasno
Article 6.2 of the Aarhus Convention requires that this information shall be done in “an adequate, timely and effective manner”
And such clear obligations may be of utmost importance in practical implementation of the Convention.
To illustrate the possible problem one can have a look at a practical example in Poland. The law (Articles 3.19 and 31.3 of the Environmental Protection Law) require the public to be informed, inter alia by “provision of information in a customary manner at the seat of the authority which is competent in the matter” and by “bill-posting in the vicinity of the proposed project” and also by “placing of the information on the www homepage of the authority competent for making the decision”.
This will work perfectly in case of a project located in big cities or urban areas in well-off regions. In case however of a project located well outside human settlements, in a poor region where most people have no access to Internet, and with the seat of competent authority being in a town located 15 km from the respective area the situation may look differently. The key issue would be how to interpret the phrase “vicinity of the project”. If the “vicinity of the project’ were interpreted literally - the legal obligation would be met by bill-posting in the middle of countryside. In such case, even if the information was put “timely” , in practice no one from the local public would have a chance to ever learn about the project and thus - to participate in decision-making. And this will all be in line with the requirements of both the EIA Directive and Polish provisions transposing it, which both do not require clearly that the public is informed about the proposed activity in “adequate” and ‘effective” manner? But the Aarhus convention does - and this makes a difference. In order to meet such requirement the notice would have to be put in places where the public concerned would be able to see it. Such a clear legal requirement involve some degree of active consideration on the part of authorities which should carefully consider which means of notifying the public would be ‘adequate’ and “effective”. In different situation such means can be different but always subject to judicial control.
Bearing this in mind lack of the above requirements clearly mentioned in a national legislation may well be treated as significant deficiency in implementing the Aarhus Convention.
Notification should be designed to reach a wide public audience. Unless potentially interested persons are made aware of a proposed project, they will be unable to express their views on it, and public participation in the decisionmaking will be effectively defeated
Public notice of a proposed project should generally accomplish two objectives. First, it should provide complete and comprehensible information about the project and the process for submitting comments. Notice of any proposed projecte should enable non-experts to understand how the project might affect them, and how they may communicate their views or objections to the agency.
Second, notice should be published in a manner thatreaches the widest possible audience. Public participation in decisionmaking is a meaningless exercise unless citizens are made aware of a proposed project at a time when they can still affect its outcome.

17. Elementi obaveštenja Predložena aktivnost
Priroda mogućih odluka ili nacrt odluke
Odgovorni organ vlasti
Predviđena procedura
Način učešća
Gde i koja vrsta infomacija je dostupna
Prekogranična procena uticaja na životnu sredinu – ukoliko je primenjivo
The notice should provide a clear explanation of how the public parties can find out more about the project, and how they can communicate their views to the competent authority.
The notice should identify the relevnt documents and place where they will be open for public inspection and also should indicate where, when, and how the public may submit comments on the proposed project, and should list the names and addresses of the persons within the agency who are responsible for the project. Equippedwith this information, members of the public will be able to submit their views to the appropriate individuals in the agency within the time period specified.

18. Član 6.6 - Obezbeđivanje relevatnih informacija
besplatno
u što kraćem vremenskom roku one informacije koje su na raspolaganju
izuzetak od opštih pravila vezanih za dostupnost infromacija u skladu sa članom 4
veza sa članom 6.2
Article 6.6 of the Convention requires
“the competent public authorities to give the public concerned access for examination (...) free of charge and as soon as it becomes available, to all information relevant to the decision-making (...) that is available at the time of the public participation procedure”.
This provision is meant to provide a certain exemption from general rules of access to information in Article 4 of the Convention. It requires that certain information useful for the public to participate effectively should be made available to it without applying certain limitations envisaged in Article 4: this includes in particular:
time limits (Article 4.2) and
possibility to charge for supplying information (Article 4.8).
It allows only to apply exemptions envisaged in Article 4.3 and 4.4 (“ without prejudice to the right of Parties to refuse to disclose certain information in accordance with article 4, paragraphs 3 and 4”).
Article 6.2 there is an obligation to actively inform the public about commencement of the procedure and details of envisaged procedure, in particular to inform the public where it can inspect the relevant information (Article 6.2.d) iv), while Article 6.6 supplements this provision with clear obligation to actually make available (upon request where so required) such “relevant information” and provides a minimum list that such information should contain in Articles 6.6 letters a)-f).

19. Član 6.6 – Sadržaj relevantnih informacija
Sve informacije relevantne za donošenje odluke
Opis lokacije, efekata i mera
Netehnički rezime
Nacrt glavnih alternativa
Izveštaji i preporuke
The relevant information that should be made available is listed in article 6.6. The list in the Convention is not an exhaustive one.
The list in fact resembles closely contents of the EIA documentation. In addition to it the public should also have access to main advice and reports (including opinions of other authorities cncerning the project) and obviously also to the application for a decision.

20. Uzimanje u obzir – član 6.8
Komentari javnosti moraju biti uzeti u obzir
obaveza vlasti da pročita i ozbiljno uzme u razmatranje
ali ne uvek i da prihvati sve komentare
Bilo koji komentari nasuprot prihvatljivih komentara
Zaštita
Public participation in rulemaking makes sensonly if the agency actually reads and considers the commentsit receives. It does not have to accept all comments but need to have reasons for not accepting them.
Different legal and institutional safeguards function to ensure that agencies give careful consideration to comments. For example, agencies may be required by law to consider fully all submissions about proposed project,and to document that consideration in writing. The agencies may also be prohibited from adopting a final decision until the time for receiving comments has expired. Institutionally, agencies appoint the appropriate personnel responsibleforthe consideration of the annouced comments. Staff members can segregate those comments and organize similar categories of comments, or summarize comments.

21. Objavljivanje odluke - član 6.9
Donete odluke moraju biti
objavljene
dostupne javnosti
Zajedno sa izjavom o:
razlozima
obrazloženjima
After the agency has considered comments by the public and has decided on the final version of the decision, it publicize the final decision. This involves notifying the public about taking the decision and about places wher the decison is made available for the public.
In addition to reprinting the full text of the final decision, the agency should provide a concise written statement explaining the legal, factual and policy reasons for the decision.
The statement shall summarize the comments submitted by the public, and explain why the comments were either accepted or rejected. This statement helps the public understand why the project was accepted and it also forces the agency to examine carefully the comments it receives, and reconsider the decision in light of those comments.

22. Članovi 6, 7, 8 - Stub vezan za učešće javnosti
Programi i planovi (član 7)
“odgovarajuće praktične i/ili druge mere za učešće javnosti tokom priprema planova i programa vezanih za životnu sredinu”
razumni vremenski rokovi, blagovremeno učešće onda kada su sve opcije otvorene
uzimanje u obzir ishoda učešća javnosti
Politika (član 7)
obaveza da nastoji da obezbedi mogućnosti za učešće javnosti u pripremi politike vezane za životnu sredinu “u odgovarajućoj meri”
Pravila i procedure (član 8)
obaveza da nastoji da promoviše efektivno učešće javnosti tokom pripreme izvršnih propisa i drugih opšte primenjivih zakonski obavezujućih pravila koja mogu imati značajan uticaj na životnu sredinu

23. Stub vezan za dostupnost pravosuđa
(detaljno razmatran u drugoj prezentaciji)
Dostupnost pravde (član 9)
Mehanizmi za sprovođenje pravnog režima
9.1 – Dostupnost informacija
9.2 – Učešće u donošenju odluka
9.3 – Javna “odbrana” ekoloških zakona

24. Aktivnosti u okviru Konvencije
Protokol o registru ispuštanja i prenosa zagađenja: usvojen u Kijevu maja godine, potpisalo 36 država i EZ, od novembra ratifikovalo 12 Strana
Genetski modifikovani organizmi: smernice usvojene na I sastanku Strana, amandmani usvojeni na II sastanku Strana uspostavljanjem procedura za učešće javnosti u proces donošenja odluka vezanih za GMO (član 6 i Aneks I)
Dostupnost pravosuđa: osnovana radna grupa u cilju razmene informacija i promovisanja primera dobre prakse
Elektronska informaciona sredstva: osnovana radna grupa u cilju razmene informacija i promovisanja primera dobre prakse
Učešće javnosti: na III sastanku Strana osnovana ekspertska grupa koja će prerasti u radnu grupu

25. Aktivnosti u okviru Konvencije
Mehanizmi procene usaglašenosti: Odbor za praćenje sprovođenja uspostavljen, njegov mandat podrazumeva razmatranje prepiski koje dobija od javnosti
Mehanizmi izveštavanja: Nacionalni izveštaji o sprovođenju koji se izrađuju uz učešće javnosti i podnose na sastanku Strana
Izgradnja kapaciteta: različite aktivnosti, okvir za saradnju sa regionalnim i međunarodnim organizacijama, koordiniran od strane Sekretarijata
Primena Arhuske Konvencije u međunarodnim forumima: Uputstva iz Almatija usvojena na II sastanku Strana u vezi sa sprovođenjem člana 3.7
Arhus sistem prikupljanja i razmene podataka za ekološku demokratiju: otpočeo sa radom jula godine na stranici

26. Otvoren, transparentan i sveobuhvatan proces
U izradi teksta Konvencije aktivno i sveobuhvatno su bile uključene nevladine organizacije u meri u kojoj to do sada nije zabeleženo u izradi ijednog međunarodnog akta
Od njenog usvajanja, NVO kao posmatrači učestvuju na sastancima Strana i u radu svih pomoćnih organa, uključujući i rad Biroa
Uloga NVO delimično je formalizovana kroz proceduralna pravila, premda su procedure uglavnom neformalne

27. Hvala vam na pažnji Stiven Stek Centralno-evropski univerzitet
Earthconsult LLC