On Friday 23 April, the European Parliament’s Environment Committee (ENVI) adopted by a large majority (61 votes in favour, 7 against and 7 abstentions) the report by Christian Doleschal (EPP, Germany) on the revision of EU Regulation 1367/2006 to improve citizens’ access to justice in environmental matters and thus bring this regulation into line with the international Aarhus Convention which it transposes (see EUROPE 12704/11).
Currently, NGOs and the public have very limited access to EU courts to challenge illegal decisions. The Doleschal report considerably broadens the types of administrative acts that may be subject to review. This would cover not only acts with an individual scope, but also general acts as well as acts that contravene environmental law rather than those taken under environmental law.
In addition, MEPs insist that the costs of the review procedure should be limited, in order to allow NGOs more affordable access to justice.
The committee wants not only NGOs, but also members of the public who meet the criteria set out in the regulation, to have the right to submit a request for internal review to an EU institution or body that has adopted, or should have adopted, an administrative act, on the grounds that this act or omission contravenes environmental law.
The criteria that members of the public other than NGOs will have to meet in order to be able to exercise this right will be established by the European Commission by delegated act no later than three years after the adoption of the amended Regulation.
“The report will ensure the Union’s compliance with its international obligations. Our solutions ensure respect for the EU treaties and provide legal certainty. We clarified that court proceedings should not be prohibitively expensive. We increased transparency. The new text gives businesses and public authorities the right to be heard”, Doleschal stressed with satisfaction.
Environmental NGO Client Earth welcomed a significant improvement in the Commission’s proposal. “This version would ensure that all administrative decisions taken by the EU institutions can be challenged, if they violate environmental laws. For example, decisions approving dangerous pesticides, setting dangerously high fishing limits or allowing cars to exceed emission limits could be challenged”.
“It is important to note that the same applies to Commission decisions on state aid that infringe environmental legislation. This is a significant step forward”, commented ClientEarth’s environmental democracy lawyer Anne Friel in a statement.
The European Parliament will vote in plenary session in mid-May, after which inter-institutional negotiations can begin (see EUROPE 12625/2).
See the compromise amendments voted: https://bit.ly/3dLqcvr (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)