Skip to main content

Selected problems of implementation of the Espoo Convention in Ukraine (based on the example of Bystroe Canal Case)

Victoria Rachynska

elni Review 2014, Issue 1, pp. 20-26. https://doi.org/10.46850/elni.2014.003

The Espoo Convention provides an indispensable framework for international cooperation in assessing environmental impact, particularly in a transboundary context. This Convention facilitates the realization of the several principles stipulated by the Rio Declaration.
Ukraine ratified the Espoo Convention by adopting the Law of Ukraine “On ratification of the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context” No 534-XIV of 19.03.1999. However, Ukraine fails to undertake the necessary legislative, regulatory and other measures to establish and maintain a clear, transparent and consistent framework to implement the provisions of the Espoo Convention, as it is required under art. 2 para. 2 of the Convention.
Different general issues related to the compliance mechanism of the Espoo Convention and (less so) the Aarhus Convention are explored in specialized literature (including the analysis of distinct aspects of the Bystroe Canal Case). The problems of Ukraine’s implementation of the Espoo Convention have been explored in some research papers. However, the issues of Ukraine’s non-compliance with the Espoo Convention with, in particular, the aim of revealing the reasons for it, have not been the subject of any recent in-depth research. Therefore, this article aims to analyze the approach of the Ukrainian government toward the compliance process under the Espoo Convention and problems of the implementation of the Espoo Convention in Ukraine using the example of the Bystroe Canal Case as well as the possible preconditions of these problems.

Access full article

References

  1. Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, February 25, 1991 (entered into force Sep. 10, 1997).
  2. Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (in) Report of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm, 5-16 June 1972 (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.73.II.A.14 and corrigendum).
  3. Zakon Ukrainy “Pro Ratyfikatsiju Konvencii pro Ocinku Vplyvu na Navkolysnie Seredovyscie u Transkordonnomu Konteksti” No 534-XIV of 19.03.1999. Vidomosti Verhovnoj Rady Ukrainy, 1999, No 34, p. 296.
  4. Konstytucija Ukrainy of 28.06.1996 No 254K/96-BP.
  5. Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, June 25, 1998, 38 I.L.M. 517 (entered into force Oct. 30, 2001).
  6. Theory and Practice of Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment. Edit.: Brill/Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden/Boston, 2008, p. 397.
  7. Governing International Watercourses: River Basin Organizations and the Sustainable Governance of Internationally Shared Rivers and Lakes. Susanne Schmeier. Routledge, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203105160.
  8. Nerina Boschiero, Tullio Scovazzi, Cesare Pitea, Chiara Ragni, 2013, International Courts and the Development of International Law: Essays in Honour of Tullio Treves. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-894-1.
  9. Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, 2013, Fresh Water in International Law. Oxford University Press.
  10. Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment in the European Union: The Espoo Convention and its Kiev Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment. Edit.: Simon Marsden, Timo Koivurova, Routledge, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315067254.
  11. Ole Kristian Fauchald, David Hunter, Wang Xi, 2011, Yearbook of International Environmental Law Volume 20 2009, Oxford University Press, pp. 229-231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/yiel/20.1.xvii.
  12. Caroline E. Foster, 2011, Science and the Precautionary Principle in International Courts and Tribunals: Expert Evidence, Burden of Proof and Finality. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511973680.
  13. The Aarhus Convention and Innovations in Compliance with Multilateral Environmental Agreements. Svitlana Kravchenko. (in) Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy, Vol. 18, No. 1, 2007.
  14. Beyond Territoriality: Transnational Legal Authority in an Age of Globalization. Edit.: Gunther Handl, Joachim Zekoll, Peer Zumbansen Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004227095.
  15. Brad Jessup, Kim Rubenstein, 2012, Environmental Discourses in Public and International Law. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139094610.
  16. Jerzy Jendrośka, Practice and Relevant Cases that Emerged in the Context of the Espoo Convention Implementation Committee. (in) Non-Compliance Procedures and Mechanisms and the Effectiveness of International Environmental Agreements, T.M.C.Asser Press, The Hague, 2009, p. 328- 331.
  17. Yelyzaveta Alekseyeva, Once again about the Aarhus Convention and Ukraine’s failure to comply with its obligation. (in) Environment People Law Journal No 9-10 (49-50), p. 9-12.
  18. Olga Melen‘, Dunajs’ka Sprava Tryvaje. (in) Visnyk Ekologicnoji Advokatury No 28-29, 2005, p. 40-41.
  19. Olga Melen‘, Kanal Dunaj-Chorne More - Nevyriseni Pytannia. (in) Visnyk  Ecologicnoji Advokatury No 30, 2006, p.21-23.
  20. UNECE, 2001, Report of the second meeting of the Parties to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessmentin a Transboundary Context held in Sofia from 26 to 27 February 2001 at the invitation of the Government of Bulgaria, ECE/MP.EIA/4.
  21. United Nations, Economic Commission for Europe, 2008, Report of the Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context on its Fourth Meeting, held in Bucharest from 19 to 21 May 2008 (ECE/MP.EIA/10).
  22. Amendment of the operating rules of the Implementation Committee. decision V/4 of the Meeting of the Parties on Review of compliance, doc. ECE/MP.EIA/15.
  23. UNECE, 2004, Case EIA/IC/S/1 Danube-Black Sea Deep-Water Navigation Canal in the Ukrainian Sector of the Danube Delta (the ‘Bystroe Canal Project’), Romania vs Ukraine.
  24. Report of the Compliance Committee of the Aarhus Convention on its seventh meeting.
  25. Report of the Compliance Committee of the Aarhus Convention on its thirty- first meeting.
  26. United Nations, Economic Commission for Europe, 2011, Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context. Report of the Meeting of the Parties on its fifth session, held in Geneva from 20 to 23 June 2011 (ECE/MP.EIA/15).
  27. Letter to Mr Nemyrya, Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine, from Mr Kubis, Executive Secretary of UNECE.  
  28. UNECE, 2014, Meeting of the Parties to the Espoo Convention, 6th session and Meeting of the Parties to the Protocol on SEA, 2nd session (2 - 5 June 2014).
  29. Andrij Andrusevych. Ukraine’s Compliance with its Obligations under the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters. (in) Environment People Law Journal No 1 (31), p. 9-14.
  30. Marsden, Timo Koivurova, 2013, Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment in the European Union: The Espoo Convention and its Kiev Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315067254.
  31. Angel V. Horna, Procedural Aspects Concerning Jurisdiction and Admissibility in Cases of Maritime Delimitation Before the ICJ. International Courts and the Development of International Law: Essays in Honour of Tullio Treves. Edit.: Nerina Boschiero, Tullio Scovazzi, Cesare Pitea, Chiara Ragni. Springer, 15 March 2013 - 990, pp. 176-177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-6704-894-1_13.
  32. Edith Brown Weiss, Harold K. Jacobson A framework for Analysis. Engaging Countries: strengthening Compliance with International Accords. Edit.: Edith Brown Weiss & Harold K. Jacobson, 1998, p. 1-11.