The Access Initiative

Change in the Environmental Law -TAI Macedonia

By Kiril Ristovski (Posted: January 13, 2009)

In the last period one of the cases which was subject of research in Macedonia was the case of the big polluter Refinery OKTA. One of the recommendations of the TAI report related to the legal legislator was the change in the Environmental law Article 212 i.e. increasing the minimal fines to 100 000 euros for the legal and natural persons who cause pollution or harm the environment.

The changes in the environmental regulations should be credited to the citizens. In Skopje massive strikes and blocades were organized for more than ten days. We at Florozon reacted heavily in the media and by influencing the media managed to influence the central government. What is important is that we call on our work i.e. the conducted research in the case of OKTA. Florozon lit the fire against the polluters when we published several TAI stories in the daily newspaper Dnevnik. In December, our organization carried out events, TV programs, and interviews in order to change things for better.

The first recommendation in the TAI Report in Macedonia has been implemented. Massive protests organized by the local inhabitants and Florozon’s lobbying influence brought the issue media attention. Through increased media attention and meetings with the government on the basis of the data from the TAI Research changes were achieved in the legal environmental regulation.

On 19th December the changes were implemented in the Environmental law. In the Environmental law in Article 212 bullet 1 the amount from 8000 -10 000 euros was changed with the amount from 70 000 100 000 euros. Also, the Government obliged to set up several stations for measurements in order to measure the pollution coming from Refinery OKTA.

We are pleased with this decision and the improvement that was made concerning the Environment in Macedonia.

Has Public Participation Been Terminated?

By David Heller (Posted: January 9, 2009) 

In an effort to keep his state fiscally afloat amidst turbulent economic times and an imminent budget crisis, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is jeopardizing longstanding policies designed to both protect the state’s environment and facilitate public participation in government.

His first priority is to temporarily revoke the 1970 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Under this Act, developers are required to submit documentation of their projects’ potential environmental impact to the government for public review. The Governor is requesting that this process be skipped to accelerate the construction of a dozen highways throughout the state, which he argues will bring money and jobs to struggling citizens.

State Democrats have acquiesced to this first request, conceding that immediate economic needs supersede those of conducting extensive environmental reviews on already somewhat vetted transportation projects.

But Schwarzenegger has not stopped there. The Governor is also seeking to acquire federal money that will be exempt from similar national environmental regulations. As reported in Greenwire,

“This week, Schwarzenegger sent the president-elect a letter urging him to consider funding $44 billion in transportation, energy and water projects when Congress takes up an economic stimulus package. He also requested action to ‘waive or greatly streamline National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) requirements consistent with [California’s] statutory proposals to modify the California Environment Quality Act for transportation projects.’ ”

Lastly, Schwarzenegger has sought to indefinitely establish a three-member “super Cabinet,” comprised of his own Cabinet members. They would hold the power to approve and initiate any development project normally submitted for review, thereby bypassing standard environmental impact analysis.

Unlike the first request, the second two systemically threaten the ideals of environmental protection, public access to information, and public participation in government.

One could argue that relaxing CEQA and using money for specific projects despite their environmental impact is a necessary evil given these economic times. But ultimately, it must not set a precedent for pervasive regulatory exemption. Schwarzenegger’s second request – granting California billions of federal dollars for a slew of projects that have yet to be created or fully planned – opens the door for rampant environmental abuse and ought to be avoided at all costs.

The new presidential administration should not approve California’s request to bypass NEPA regulations on forthcoming stimulus money. While conducting reviews might slow down the process of pumping money back into the state’s economy, the environmental damage caused by poorly planned development will outlast this current recession.

Likewise, the creation of a “super-Cabinet” is a potentially catastrophic development for environmentalists, and luckily has been met with overt hostility by Californian policymakers. As Greenwire reported,

“Alicia Trost, spokeswoman for state Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D), said the super Cabinet and a provision that would grant contractors “immunity” from the judicial process are nonstarters with Democrats in the state capital. ‘We’re not quite sure what that has to do with us running out of money in three weeks,’ Trost said.”

These new plans are a step back for Schwarzenegger, and a clear product of political calculation rather than prudent foresight. The Governor’s recent decision to raise taxes and generate income has angered many of his business-owning constituents, who, already facing hard times, are being unabashedly appeased by efforts to pervasively waive important environmental review and promote unfettered development.

This immediate need for political support and fiscal growth must not blind Schwarzenegger to the timeless importance and value of opening up development projects to review, where the public can learn of proposed action and petition their representatives for changes that they believe ought to be implemented. In the long term, a knowledgeable, engaged public, as well as a preserved environment, are much more valuable than the speedy implementation of development policies. Moreover, while the economy will rebound, a disengaged and apathetic public or a devastated environment will be much more stubborn to change. California must proceed with these facts in mind and resist their Governor’s strong-arm approach to political maneuvering.

THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND SMALL FISHERS OF SOUTHERN PALAWAN: A CASE OF LOCAL COMMUNITIES’ EXCLUSION FROM THE MANAGEMENT AND UTILIZATION OF MUNICIPAL FISHERIES AND AQUATIC RESOURCES

Published: 2008

Locked up, hungry and confused, the two young men from the Molboc Tribe were finally released. They do not regret what they did. They will likely do it again if they have a chance to do so… just to put food on the table, as how their ancestors, as native fisherfolk in Balabac, Palawan, had done before.

For over two decades, members of the Molboc tribe, as well as local communities in the southern Palawan of town of Balabac, have had to endure harassment and ill-treatment from the security forces of a pearl farm corporation, which was prohibiting them, unjustly, and without any legal basis, from fishing in their traditional fishing grounds.

Calls for the local government unit (LGU) to mediate and facilitate a system for the peaceful co-existence of the pearl farm and the fisherfolks were ignored. Instead, in early 2005, the Municipality of Balabac enacted an ordinance declaring the entire municipal waters as a “Protected Eco-Region”, where fishing activities are prohibited but pearl farming is allowed.

The Ordinance came to pass notwithstanding the constitutional mandate of substantive and procedural due process, and the various legal provisions of guaranteeing citizen’s right to informed and meaningful participation in the formulation of policies concerning the management and conservation of their community’s natural resources.

In 2005, TAI – Philippines conducted a case study following the TAI Methodology that focused on (a) public access to information on the grounds for the Subject Policy, and (b) the opportunities for participation extended to the public in the enactment of the Subject Municipal Ordinance. Primarily, the actions of two government agencies – the LGU of Balabac and the Sangguniang Panlalawigan (Provincial Board) of Palawan, which reviewed and approved the Subject Municipal Ordinance – were evaluated. A total of 43 indicators (20 for access to information and 23 for opportunities for participation) were examined.

TAI – Philippines also conducted a re-assessment of the case focusing on access to justice as one of the pilot case using the Poverty Tool Kit. It was written from the point of view of the poor groups, small fishers and indigenous peoples in the Balabac case.

The importance of access to information and opportunities for participation cannot be overemphasized in this case. Given the affected communities’ history of disenfranchisement and repression, any environmental measure that would have the effect of depriving them of their traditional fishing grounds, or restricting their use of the same, requires intensive social preparation.

Widespread information dissemination and extensive community consultations must be undertaken not only to ensure that the proposed policy will be understood and well received by the individuals and communities affected, but also to make sure that substantive rights are not run over rough shod, and equity in access is ensured.

In this case, not only did the Municipality of Balabac fail to observe the foregoing processes, it also adopted a policy, purportedly for environmental protection purposes, that goes against international principles, Philippine statutory provision and established coastal resource management practices (i.e., it allowed pearl farming in a core or strict protection zone). The confluence of these circumstances has given rise to a public perception, whether rightly or wrongly, that the Subject Policy was adopted solely to accommodate Jewelmer’s Co. (the pearl farm) interests and to legitimize the prohibition that it has, for many years, foisted upon the affected communities without the sanction of law.

As things stand, it appears that the court case is the affected communities’ last remaining legal remedy. However, given the existing realities, resort to judicial action has not proven to be a speedy and adequate remedy. To date, the case remains pending, almost one year since its inception, and the Affected Communities continue to languish in poverty as they await its resolution.

It may be concluded that this predicament can be attributed to two main factors, namely: (a) gaps in existing laws; and (b) the failure of political will, the lack of a deep-seated orientation on, and capacity to implement, principles on access to information and opportunities for participation, on the part of the concerned government agencies.

It is hoped that policy reforms, enforcement actions and capability building measures, if implemented, will not only provide the affected communities with means for immediate relief, but will also prevent other IPs and fishing communities from being placed in a predicament similar to theirs, and render the processes involved less susceptible to manipulation to favor vested interests.

TAI – Philippines Case Study Writer: Atty. Jose Florante Pamfilo

See: TAI – Philippines Poverty Case Report
TAI – Philippines Case Study attached.

Smokers Dying Younger – What If Non-smokers Are Also Dying Younger?

By Ram Charitra Sah (Posted: November 21, 2008) 

Approximately half the world’s population and up to 90% of rural households in developing countries still rely on unprocessed biomass fuels in the form of wood, dung and crop residues. These are typically burnt indoors in open fires or poorly functioning stoves. As a result, there are high levels of air pollution to which women, responsible for cooking, and their young children, who mostly stay with their mother during the cooking hours, are most heavily exposed.

The extent, to which such a large mass of population is continuously exposed to heavy indoor air pollution, in the absence of harnessing technologies of alternative energy readily available in most rural areas of Nepal, is severe. Poverty is one of the main barriers to the adoption of cleaner fuels. These days, the affordability and accessibility of cleaner fuels is getting harder and harder. The standard family possesses at least two to three gas cylinders: one under use, one in the queue at a gas station, and one as a reserve. The slow pace of development in many countries suggests that biomass fuels will continue to be used by the poor for many decades.

There is consistent evidence that indoor air pollution increases the risks of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and of acute respiratory infections in childhood, the most important cause of death among children less than 5 years of age in developing countries, including Nepal. The lung is the most common site of injury by airborne pollutants. In the case of Nepal, the problem is not limited to only direct exposure related problem to indoor air pollution. It is an integrated problem with daily drudgery of women who collect the fuel wood from the ever-increasing distance of forest. Nepalese women suffer a high incidence of uterine prolapse that is likely due to carrying heavy wood loads soon after delivery. In rural India, women are engaged for six hours daily in collection of fuel wood & fodder and cooking. (Issue No. 3, December 2000).

Fuel wood constitutes 78% of the total fuel consumption, and it is one of the main causes of forest depletion. This is basically due to the absence of alternative energy harnessing technology. Most of the rural people have to depend on forest fuel wood, agricultural residues, and dung for cooking. As a result, distances from the villages to the forest have increased.

The government has so far been focusing on urban outdoor air pollution, to which only 15 % of the total country’s population is exposed. Thus, if we consider the value of life in the rural area and the urban area to be the same, there is an even more serious situation of the health hazards caused by indoor air pollution in the rural areas, which is inhabited by 85 % of the total population. Women, who are considered responsible for the cooking and collecting the fuel wood, share half of this total population. Moreover, 12 % of the child population below 5 years of age mostly stays with their mothers while cooking. Thus more than 60 % of the total populations are heavily exposed to the indoor air pollution, with poorly ventilated houses as well as inefficient cooking stoves. There is a high health impact – sickness and forest reduction is enough for the government attention to focus and address the indoor air pollution problem. It calls for greater policy reforms and will be significant for a large percentage of the population. It is also equally important in terms of gender equity and the right to live in a healthy environment, especially for children. There is a need to prioritise government policy to focus on indoor air pollution in a similar manner that it has given to urban air pollution.

The story of Kanchhi Maya Nepali began just to represent the early demise of small kids with the continuous exposure to the heavy indoor air pollution, who cannot afford processed fuel and do not have enough food to sustain the daily caloric intake recommended to remain healthy. Acute effects, however, may also include non-respiratory signs and symptoms, which may depend upon toxicological characteristics of the substances and host-related factors. Key Signs/Symptoms of the indoor air pollution are dizziness or headache, confusion, nausea/emesis, fatigue, tachycardia, eye and upper respiratory tract irritation, wheezing/bronchial constriction, persistent cough, elevated blood, carboxyhemoglobin levels, increased frequency of angina in persons with coronary heart disease. So not only are people like Kanchhi Maya Nepali, who lost her beloved son affected by this problem, but it is also the history of most rural Nepalese – non-smokers dying earlier

Ram Charitra Sah

India’s Environmental Impact Assessment Process & Failure to Protect the Yamuna River from the Thirst of Development

By Seema Kumar (Posted: October 30, 2008) 

The Environmental Impact Assessment Notification of 2006 (amended in July 2004 to incorporate new and expansion/modernization projects; originally enacted in 1994) under the Environment (Protection) Act of 1986 requires that a scheduled list of projects and activities must provide for public consultations and receive prior environmental clearances from the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), the environmental arm of India’s Central Government. However, there are blatant loopholes in this spineless attempt to prioritize the welfare of the environment over the continuous blossom of construction for the sake of economic development.

It has been cited in several case studies that the Yamuna River suffers from severe anthropogenic pressures, such as civic construction, alteration in landscape pollution, change in nature of vegetation, and over-exploitation of species and agriculture, which has severely diminished the river’s capacity to be a reliable source for drinking or agricultural purposes. Increasing levels of urban runoff and sewage from Delhi’s booming population contribute to Yamuna’s polluted waters and flood phenomenon, and the Yamuna floodplains are struggling to recharge its groundwater resources. Thus, it has been strongly recommended to halt civic construction in the vicinity of the river and suspend the channelization of its water, as such actions could prove fatal in the river’s ability recharge itself of its groundwater supply.

This brief note will illustrate how effortless it is for project proponents to exempt themselves from obtaining environmental clearances and holding public consultations through the lens of two development projects upon the Yamuna River (a 22km stretch of the river that flows through Delhi’s eastern border), i.e. the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. and the Commonwealth Games Village.

Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (DMRC)

Phase II of the DMRC project involves the construction of several railways that will, upon completion in 2011, connect Delhi and the immediate regions outside of its territory. One particular railway traverses over the Yamuna River, in addition to the construction of a Depot that would sit upon the banks of the Yamuna. The DMRC contracted with a consultancy organization called RITES to conduct the EIA study. RITES is a Government of India Enterprise, established under the aegis of Indian Railways. In 2004, RITES, to no shock, concluded that since railway (urban transportation) projects are not specified in the scheduled list of projects requiring environmental clearances, an environmental clearance and public consultations are not mandated in order to proceed construction. While public transport is a cleaner, efficient development strategy, its environmental impact must be taken into consideration.

Commonwealth Games Village (CGV)

In 2010, Delhi will host the Commonwealth Games that are held every four years in one of 53 Commonwealth countries. In preparation for the Games, the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) granted a Dubai-based real estate developer, EMAAR, the bid to construct a, 63.5 hectare, residential and commercial complex to accommodate visiting athletes and gaming officials on the Yamuna River floodplain. DDA, created under the Delhi Development Act of 1957, possesses the power to acquire, hold, manage, and dispose of land to promote and secure the development of Delhi.

In 1998/’99, the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) was commissioned by the DDA to prepare an Environmental Management Plan with the overall objective of rejuvenating the Yamuna River. NEERI’s ’98/’99 report suggested that recreational areas and camping sites should not be allowed to interfere with the floodplains. At this time in EIA history, it was not necessary for the DDA to obtain an environmental clearance for the CGV structure, as the schedule list had not been amended to include new construction and buildings.

Fearing the CGV structure would be considered a recreational construction, in 2005, NEERI was commissioned again to submit a similar report to the DDA on the Yamuna River. This time, the report expressly prohibited residential and industrial facilities requiring permanent structures on its riverbed. It is important to note that the DDA now needed an environmental clearance for the construction of the CGV because of the 2004 EIA Notification amendment. However, the DDA concealed this 2005 report from the MoEF until 2006, which lead to the Expert Appraisal Committee (EAC) of the MoEF, the committee that appraises EIA proposals, recommending another study be conducted on this issue by the Central Water and Power Research Station, Pune (CWPRS), a R&D organization, affiliated with the Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India.

Meantime in late 2006, the MoEF granted an environmental clearance for the CGV structure on the condition that it would not be permanent in nature. In early 2007, the CWPRS report was submitted, and based on its findings, the 2006 environmental clearance was ‘renegotiated’ between the MoEF and the DDA to essentially allow permanent structures in the Yamuna riverbed.

In January 2008, a court visit was made to the site in dispute, and immediately following this site visit, the Ministry of Science and Technology (NEERI is apart of this Minstry) and the DDA coerced NEERI to publish a report to appease the court, which concluded that a man-made bund type structure around the project would shield itself from affecting the floodplain.

It is imperative to note that not once during this entire EIA process were public consultations sought or mandated by the EIA Notification Process.

Recommendations

Based on the DMRC and CGV development projects, there are two recommendations that, if adopted, would add integrity and transparency to the EIA process (There are several other recommendations to be made – these are specific to the above examples).

First, an Independent Oversight Committee should be established as the binding authority over the MoEF. As it presently stands, the MoEF can be easily threatened by government pressure and seek out loopholes to grant environmental clearances. The EIA process should be free from political agendas and manipulative gestures and instead concentrate on the task it was enacted to do. This Committee should be comprised of environmentalists, scientific experts, construction experts who can ascertain the actual damage of development projects, representatives from tribal and/or rural communities (who are most affected by development projects because their land is resource rich), and public interest organizations who have a record of providing unbiased factual information. The Oversight Committee, by assessing MoEF grants and having the power to override the MoEF’s decision, can ensure the public that environmental clearances are granted as a result of diligent appraisal as opposed to business-as-usual tactics.

Second, public consultations should be required for all development projects and occur at various stages of the EIA process. Under the current EIA Notification, several projects, such as mining projects, modernization of existing irrigation projects, projects located in designated as special economic zones and industrial estates/townships, are exempt from public consultations. Many projects, therefore, are strategically labeled as one of the allowed exemptions to avoid public participation. Such exemptions should be eradicated from the EIA Notification, and it should be mandatory that all projects be subject to public consultations.

In addition, public consultations should be conducted at intervals during the EIA process and not simply after the EIA Report has been prepared. Public consultations should also be held after scoping and assessment of alternative sites and after impact predictions and mitigation measures have been considered to allow the public to understand and raise educated concerns throughout the EIA process. As the procedure exists now, the public consultation is a formality without any bearing on the outcome of environmental clearances. The public receives only one limited opportunity to convene to ask questions and assert their positions. Often times, they are overwhelmed with details and do not have enough background information about the project for the hearing to be meaningful.

Conclusion

The public is distrustful of the Indian government’s environmental protection commitments and rightfully so, as their concerns are secondary to economic development. The DMRC and CGV are only two of the countless examples of where the environment has lost its battle for survival because the environmental evaluation process is slanted toward private interests. In order for the EIA Notification to become a reliable act of government, substantial reformations will have to be made.

Access to Environmental Information in Uganda

Published: 2008

Access to environmental information is becoming increasingly important, especially in countries where people rely heavily on natural resources. International norms can make a significant difference in this respect, by pushing public authorities towards better environmental governance. FIELD is committed to the progressive development of international law and its effective implementation at the national and local level. FIELD has been involved in environmental law reform projects in different African jurisdictions as well as the international negotiations on climate change, biodiversity and trade. The report draws on these diverse experiences and analyses the Ugandan law and its implementation in the wider international context. It takes into account lessons learnt in other jurisdictions and uses a set of universally applicable indicators. We hope it will generate further discussions between civil society organizations and government – not only in Uganda.

Joy Hyvarinen Director, FIELD

New WRI Publication – Good Governance in the U.S. Executive Branch

By Remi Moncel (Posted: October 18, 2008) 

How will the United States’ President-elect run his administration? The answer to this question will have direct impacts on the American people’s health, safety and the quality of their environment.

The 44th President of the United States will enter office faced with an unprecedented set of complex and urgent challenges, including a fragile financial system, spiraling energy and food prices and renewed demands for leadership to combat global warming. The President will need to respond by leading an administration driven by principles of good governancetransparencyinclusiveness and accountability.

In advance of the election, voters should ask where the candidates stand on such issues as checks and balances, signing statements and scientific integrity. After the election, the transition team of the winning party should ensure that these principles of government openness drive the selection of federal agency heads and the new President’s governing style.

new WRI policy note reveals the link between an unchecked presidency and poor policy. It reviews the practices of previous administrations in the context of relevant constitutional and legislative provisions, and attests to the vulnerability of a system of delicate checks and balances to abuse of power. In addition to the legal abuses they constitute, these cases bring to light significant negative impacts that have resulted from an opaque presidency and make the case for better governance in the next administration.

The cases examined include:

  • Abuse of signing statements. President have issued these pronouncements upon signing bills into a law to brush off important environmental, safety and civil rights provisions mandated by Congress. In 2005 for example, President Bush dismissed important whistleblower protections which Congress had included in the Energy Policy Act. The provisions granted protections to federal employees who would report safety violations in nuclear waste management.

  • National policies designed behind closed doors. Devising the country’s energy policy or health care reform in the open serves several purposes. It enables confrontation of the nation’s top experts and visions with a view to enacting the most effective policies. It guarantees the public’s right to take part in the decision and voice their priorities. Finally, transparent decision-making increases public acceptance of policies and ensures that it meets the interests of the majority over those of an influential, well-connected few. President Clinton’s Task Force on National Health Care Reform, for example, conducted its discussions and activities behind closed doors without releasing the names of the participants. Pharmaceutical companies and justice groups decried the lack of openness surrounding the President’s task force. Ultimately, the lack of political viability and public trust of the initiative caused its demise and the failure the reform the United Sates’ health care system.

  • Distortion of scientific findings. In February 2007 a report by the Union of Concerned Scientists documented “widespread political interference in federal climate science.” Almost half of the 1,600 climate scientists working in government agencies who were surveyed indicated having perceived or personally experienced pressure to eliminate the words “climate change,” “global warming” or other terms from a variety of communications. Effective environmental and health regulations and standards rely on the research and recommendations of scientific experts. Yet, in March 2008, President Bush illegally intervened in the establishment of standards for smog-forming ozone. By law, this decision rested in the hands of the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and its scientists. The President nonetheless overruled their decision and, in doing so, backed more lenient requirements for a gas proven to have negative effects on human health and wildlife.

Our research puts forward a set of practical recommendations for the President-elect:

  • Government-held information should be made available to the public unless limited and clearly articulated exceptions apply. Task forces and ad-hoc committees, not otherwise governed by formal rules, should conduct their work in a transparent and inclusive manner by making publicly available the content of their deliberations as well as the names and affiliations of the participants.

  • The President should not issue signing statements to disregard or decline to enforce a law or to interpret it in a manner inconsistent with the will of Congress. In addition, executive branch officials and agencies should cooperate with Congress in its oversight duties, limit the exercise of discretionary power and abstain from asserting executive privilege to shield the administration from legitimate congressional oversight and requests for disclosure of information. Congress on the other hand should reaffirm its oversight responsibility and take necessary measures to exercise its duty even when faced with a reluctant executive branch.

  • The President should guarantee the non-partisan enforcement of the law and the scientific integrity of federal agencies by appointing administrators that will respect the advice of technical and scientific experts, pursue the non-partisan prosecution of the law and interpret legal provisions in a non-partisan and even-handed manner. The President should protect the right of scientists and researchers to publicly review and comment on documents that use their research or work. Finally, the political review and communication of findings should not undermine the integrity and independence of scientific data and analysis.

Despite the principle of checks and balances enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, Presidents retain a great deal of discretion in the exercise of power. In fact, the executive branch has been reluctant to relinquish the authority and discretion it gradually took over from the other branches of government. Neither major candidate made his views clear on all of these issues in the 2008 presidential election. On Constitution Day, over 35 public interest groups across party lines called upon the candidates to clarify their views on the constitutional issues delineated in this paper.

Voters, supported by the media, may still ask Senators Obama and McCain how they would run their administration as President. After the election, it will be the President-elect’s responsibility to ensure that these principles of good governance are implemented across federal agencies and inform his new leadership.

Original story here

Heavy Metals in the Water of Kriva Reka, Macedonia

By Kiril Ristovski (Posted: October 13, 2008) 

The waters that are close to the mine have indicated pollution of a level-5 category, and the concentrations of lead have been above the allowed maximum level.

Presence of the heavy metals above the maximum allowed level can be found in the waters of Kriva Reka. This is a clear assessment of the results under the State Inspectorate Kumanovo, even though the assessment is late by a few months. The pollution is closest to the manufactured capacity and to the arid part of the ROC “Toranica,” according of the toxicological analysis that has been obtained from the Institute for Health Protection on the Initiative of the Fishery Organization, “Mrena” from Kriva Palanka. Measurements were taken from the location across the mine, the exact spot of the waters of Toranicka Reka.

The presence of lead was 144 000 mg,kg, which is 5 times over the maximum allowed concentrations of 30 000. These examples correspond with level-5 category of water quality. The measurements of the Kriva Reka around the arid place were showing classification on waters that belong to level-3 and level-4 water quality category .But there is one important missing part in this analysis, which is there have not been measurements of lead or zinc. The waters of Kriva Reka that are close to the pumps for drinking water are in correspondence with level-2 category of water quality.

The State Inspectorate for the Environment has announced information about results which were showing much higher presence of heavy metals on the river around the mine Toranica, but they did not give more detailed answers about the pollution. The company, “Indo minerali I metali,” will be supplied agreements, with directions about the methods and procedures regarding the regulation and taking sanctions on the pollution in that region. This was the last response directly from the State Inspectorate for the Environment.

This company has claimed that from the beginning of the pollution of the river, they had been working under regular ecological standards, taking care of the environment protection, and that their analysis has been regular. They also said that if anything goes wrong by cause of their work, they would take care of everything to protect the natural resources.

The Governmental Institutions have been inaccessible for information The residents have been reacting for three months, and they did not have adequate official information. Also, Florozon, the NGO from Skopje (under the project TAI assessment in Macedonia), has been conducting assessment for the impact of the biggest polluters of the environment in Macedonia, and ROC “Toranica” has been taken under examination through this project.

Their assessments were focused on the public access to information, public participation and access right to justice, national transparency and Government contribution regarding the environmental protection and peoples’ rights. This initiative is the biggest net in the entire world and has commitments for citizen’s insurance regarding their rights and opportunities for participations in the decision making processes related with environmental issues.

The State Inspectorate for the Environment did not respond on the official request letter regarding the results from the conducted measurement and results of the water quality of Kriva Reka. They did not act according to the law, and after one month, no one has managed to get information from the State Inspectorate for the Environment. This kind of non-compliance is not acceptable because Macedonia is party to the Aarhus Convention. This convention is based on the access right to information, public participation in the decision-making process regarding the environmental issues, according to Florozon.

According to Florozon, the assessment for the access right to information, which have been obtained by Octa, Feni, Sasa and Pollution of Kamenicka Reka, has had a bad experience, so their final report that will be delivered to the European Institutions will contain negative values.

The next step after this assessment, according to Florozon, will be the implementation of the recommendations from the TAI assessment, with an aim for capacity building of the government and of the civil associations, in order for a strong national capacity to be built. The legal recommendations are directed toward changing the law’s articles and changing government practice.

Kiril Ristovski Skopje 02.10.2008

See Also:

Zinc and Lead Flowing Into the River of Kamenicka Reka

Our Rights Our Information

Published: 2008

Empowering People to Demand Rights Through Knowledge

In an age where information is available at the click of a button, lack of information continues to frustrate people’s ability to make informed choices, participate in governance and hold their public authorities accountable for their actions. Governments need information to act on people’s behalf. The information they gather using public funds are for public purposes and meant for the public’s benefit. This information is a public good that we own collectively .

The right to information is a fundamental and pivotal human right. It is enshrined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and protected in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It lies at the centre of the human rights discourse as it is more than simply a freestanding right – it is also a practical tool by which people can come to understand their rights and demand that they are fulfilled.

Knowledge educates and empowers. Knowledge forms the basis for the full development of the human personality, enabling people to form opinions, to make informed decisions and to participate fully in public decision making from a position of equality. Implementing legislation which provides a legally enforceable public right to information can be the key to establishing participatory democracy and can be a crucial step towards engendering more systematic protection for human rights.

“Our Rights, Our Information”, in its collection of case studies from across the globe, testify to the power of right to information laws in bringing about the practical realisation of human rights for everyday people. Time and time again, these stories demonstrate how access to information has provided the means for people to demand respect for their rights, from the right to food, health care and education, to the right to be free from gender discrimination, torture and inhuman treatment.

Assessing Access in Yunnan, China

Posted by Monika Kerdeman

The Yunnan coalition started their TAI assessment process during a training workshop from Jan 13-15, 2008, led byTAI core team partner Thailand Environment Institute. The coalition of civil society groups includes Eco-WatchYunnan Academy of Social Science (YASS)Yunnan Institute of Environmental Science (YIES)Yunnan Environmental Science Society (YESS) and Centre for Mountain Ecosystem Studies ICRAF-China, the coalition’s lead organization.

At the workshop, coalition members were trained on the TAI Assessment Toolkit. Since the training, the Yunnan TAI coalition translated the indicators in the TAI Assessment toolkit into Chinese, and gathered information and relevant documentation, laws, regulations and guidelines for review.

As part of their research, Yunnan coalition members met with the Provincial Water Bureau, Yunnan Provincial Environment Protection Bureau, Agricultural Bureau, Yunnan Provincial Forestry Department, Vegetative Protection Station, Air Quality Monitoring Station, local agricultural stations, environmental protection stations and other related sectors to acquire more information. Interviewees included experts, villagers, and consumers as well as local authority staff.

The Assessment in Yunnan examines eight case studies on access to information. These studies are on various environmental issues including; the state of environment report of Yunnan Province, air quality monitoring in Kunming city, accidental explosion at a sulfur depot and vitriol factory of the Sanhuan chemical company, noise quality monitoring in Kunming city, environmental information of Yuntianhua International Chemical Company in Yunnan, monitoring of drinking water quality in Songhuaba reservoir in Kunming, GMO information monitoring in Yunnan, and paraquat herbicide accidents in Yunnan.

Five case studies on public participation are: public participation in environment protection decisions in eco-tourism policy in Diqing prefecture, public participation in the urban agglomeration development plan in south of Yunnan, public participation in the extension project of the 2nd hospital of Kunming, public participation in the water saving regulatory of Kunming city, public participation in decision-making of Provincial Forestry Development Strategy and public participation in the environmental impact assessment of the construction of Honghe Steel Factory..

The research also looks at access to justice. The access to justice case studies are on pesticide residue information in food – claimed by people to the people’s congress, public’s claim on the dam building on Salween River, local residents’ collective claim on old trees felled by a company in Baiyu Village, Xishan District of Kunming, and the claim on the pollution accident of Longma Phosphorous Chemical Company in Xundian, Yunnan.