PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AND CITIZENS' ROLE IN ENFORCEMENT: RESULTS AND MISTAKES IN BULGARIA
EVGUENI POPOV
Institute of Ecology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 2 Gagarin str., 1113 Sofia, BULGARIA
SUMMARY
Setting up democratic traditions in Central and East European countries is a complicated and continuous process, which involved all spheres of public life, including environmental protection. Protest against the ruining of the environment was one of the most outspoken forms of social discontent against the former regime. Both the direct threat to human health in a number of cases and the fact that it was one of the very few possible legal and organized forms of protest, account for this.
To understand the present social behavior and the legal rights of Bulgarian citizens (including those in the field of environmental protection), it is necessary to know the history of environmental movement in Bulgaria.
1 SITUATION IN BULGARIA
The first Bulgarian Society for the protection of nature was founded in 1896 and its activity resulted in the formation of the first reserve - "Parangalitsa" in 1933, as well as of the first National park "Vitosha" in 1934. These facts illustrate the existence of certain traditions and once again point out that, to a great extent, the processes in Central and Eastern Europe aimed at the reestablishment of these traditions.
During the communist rule in Bulgaria the primary non- governmental organization was Ecoglasnost. This organization was founded in 1989, mainly by intellectuals. The interests and activities of Ecoglasnost addressed a broad range of issues, including the environment and human rights. It also contributed to the overthrowing of the communist regime. Ecoglasnost was one of the key forces which founded the present ruling coalition, the Union of Democratic Forces (UDF).
The role and significance of ECOGLASNOST in the Bulgarian society in 1989 and 1990 were so prominent that people were more willing to join this organization than to establish new ones. Therefore the existence of one strong environmental NGO is one of the most characteristic features of the environmental movement in Bulgaria In this sense the development of environmental NGOs in Central and Eastern Europe can be presented as broad range: with one pole occupied by Bulgaria and the other - by Hungary with its nearly 300 NGOs. The presence of a strong environmental NGO solicitates the formation of public opinion on a number of problems. This, of course, presumes a continuous period of internal discussion within the NGO for working out a final decision. If large number of environmental NGOs exist, the coordination in forming a common public opinion becomes considerably more difficult. Coordination between the NGOs in Central and Eastern European countries is a tangible problem which often hampers the participation of citizens in the enforcement process.
The romantic period of their development, when all activities were based on the enthusiasm of individual members, is over for most Central and East European environmental NGOs. The first crisis in the organization was related to the transition from a destructive approach (protests, human chains, polluters' shut-down actions, etc.) to a constructive one (participation in expert groups, working out statements and analyses, etc.). This is certainly not an easy process as it requires professional skills in the management of the organization's affairs. Still it is the only way to survive.
A growing number of Bulgarian NGO's are demonstrating interest in expanding the existing system of protected areas and lending their support to the enhanced management of the system.
Public opinion in Bulgaria is very sensitive towards the problem of former damage caused to the environment and human health as a result of pollution. This is considered to be one of the most serious crimes of the former regime. At present, former party leaders face legal prosecution on different charges. It is worth nothing that the first court case of this type which was completed dealt with damages caused by Chernobyl accident in Bulgaria. The delivery of information on the accident to the population was deliberately delayed by the government "to prevent confusion and chaos". Since no prevention action was taken, the radiation exposure of the Bulgarian population was one of the Highest in Europe. Grigor Stoichkov - former member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party and chairman of the Commission on Natural Disasters and Big Industrial Accidents at that time and prof. Shindarov - Chief Sanitary Inspector of the Republic were brought to court and sound guilty. This is a good example of public disclosure in Bulgaria.
2 ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION
Before analyzing how environmental legislation defines the citizens' rights and obligations and public participation in the, it is important to emphasize one specific characteristic of the Bulgarian legal reform compared to other Central and East European countries. This reform started in Bulgaria with the endorsement of a new Constitution. Subsequently the laws on the environment; Local Administration and Local Self-government; Statistics and Public Information, were adopted by Parliament. What is important for the public disclosure and the citizens' role in enforcement process is the fact that the adoption of these laws preceded the endorsement of the basic economic laws.
In October 1991 The Bulgarian Parliament passed a new, comprehensive Law on Environmental Protection. This act supplemented the Law of Nature Protection in 1967 and replaced the Law on the Protection of Air, Water and Soil from Pollution in 1963. The 1991 law introduced pollution charges within permissible limits and made Environmental Impact Assessments an obligatory procedure. The new law incorporates the International Union of Conservation of Nature (IUCN) criteria for designation of protected areas and specifies minimum staffing requirements for protected areas based on their size.
Finally, the legislative reform dealing with environmental issues in Bulgaria also includes changes in the new Constitution, as well as in the Land-Use Law, the Law on Statistics and Public Information, and in the Accounting Law. In December 1992 the proposed amendments to the Environmental Law have been adopted. They increase the levels of the sanctions and enforce new regulations for financial management of the Environmental Fund as well as for Environmental Impact Assessment.
There is no doubt that 1991 Environmental Law needs additional amendments and addenda, specifically as regards the chapters on information and liability. Greater attention should also be devoted to the role and place in environmental protection activity of non-governmental organization and movements, as well as the role of individual citizen whose rights in this field are guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria (1).
Active involvement of the citizens in working out of the new laws is not yet current practice. This is also true in the case of environmental legislation. Work on the amendments of the Environmental law with only symbolic public participation illustrates that fact. Citizens' involvement in the development of regulations to implement the law does not exist yet.
The procedures of public participation in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is specified by the law in very general terms. Section 20 just mentions that "all physical and judicial persons concerned shall have the right to participate in the consideration of the results of EIA,...". Neither the law nor the expected amendments provide for the existing three ways of public participation in EIA procedure (3):
when the company that is proposing the project first determines that it must conduct an EIA, it must conduct public hearings to determine what types of environmental impacts of the project are of public concern and should be reviewed;
when the company has prepared a draft of its EIA, the company must allow the public to submit written comments on the report and must also conduct public hearings to receive oral comments on the draft report;
after the final EIA has been written and before the government agency takes action based on the assessment, the public will have the opportunity to have one final input into the decision-making process.
3 INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
Another important point for public participation in the enforcement process is that in order to continue their support (financial and moral) for the changes in Central and Eastern Europe people from the Western countries want to see democratic structures similar to the Western ones come into existence. One of the mechanisms of Western democracy concerns the relationship and collaboration between governmental agencies and private consulting companies, NGOs, etc. Unfortunately this is not only the situation in Bulgaria and in my view in other Central and East European countries. Our governmental bodies are trying to do as much as possible of the professional work on their own, instead mainly to coordinate and control the activities. This is fully valid also for the field of environment. This tendency is reflected mainly in the international projects while the bureaucrats are trying to keep their positions and staff and finally the old structures. Instead of focusing on planning, allocation of funds, coordination and control, i.e. on budget managements, state (esp. Ministry) officers in this country think that they must complete the whole work on their own. This results in the isolation of government agencies and minimizes the participation of independent experts, private consulting companies, NGOs and citizens. Contracting of private consulting companies is a very important element in the development of the private sector. However too often the governmental declarations for support of the democratic process and of the private sector are in contradiction with the actual practices.
It is unfortunate that official Western agencies sometimes unintentionally support these tendencies, because they probably find it easier to collaborate with governmental institutions in Central and Eastern Europe which are already in existence. Creation of new private independent institutions is an extremely important element in the enforcement process in our countries. This is rather difficult but is required by a number of international projects.
Another problem related to public participation refers to the fact that in Central and East European countries we lack the tradition of official support to private citizen's initiative. Usually the state officials want to know what organization stands behind the initiative. They feel much more comfortable when dealing with organizations rather than individuals.
4 ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION
A system of environmental management requires not only technical and administrative competence, but also an acceptance of the legitimacy of the process by which decisions are reached by the people. The Ministry of the Environment appears to be restricted in its outreach by the current organizational structure (there are only two people working in the public relations department), limited funding and, perhaps most important, by the lack of real traditions of public involvement in environmental decision making through regular dissemination of information. Despite explicit mention of the issue of increased public participation in environmental policy making in the draft environmental legislation, it is still a new and, understandably, a somewhat alien concept.
Of course some positive experience also exists. For example, an Environment Strategy Study for Bulgaria, a joint report of the Government of Bulgaria, the United States Government and the World Bank was completed on November 26, 1991. The Strategy was discussed in January 1992 with large participation of the public. A similar but not so successful example was the discussion of the Bulgarian National Report for the UN Conference in Rio de Janeiro.
Another example of public involvement in the enforcement process is an 18-moth long community-based demonstration project in Troyan, Bulgaria beginning in January 1992 and funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guided by the Institute for Sustainable Communities (ISC), citizen committees are identifying, analyzing and ranking the environmental problems facing their community and developing appropriate clean-up strategies (2).
The shift from national to local control offers an opportunity to institutionalize a national program to assist communities in addressing their environmental problems. Citizens can identify the most serious issues facing the community, select clean-up strategies which are the most appropriate to meet their local needs, and finance these projects tailored to their specific financial capabilities. These solutions should be based upon meeting national environmental standards while implementing unique community or regional level solutions.
The following six principles should be considered in designing an effective nationwide program to assist the municipalities (obshtini) address their environmental problems:
PRINCIPLE #1: A municipality-based environmental assistance program should be founded upon broad public participation in environmental decision-making. Citizen participation is a fundamental tenant of a democratic society and is critical to consensus building and to obtaining support for environmental solutions. In addition, public participation encourages public commitment to environmental enforcement and the economic implications of responsible environmental decision-making. While effective environmental management demands technical and administrative competence, it can only be accomplished through a fundamental acceptance by the people of the legitimacy of the process by which (environmental) decisions are reached.
Public involvement should be solicited during the following phases of a community program: problem identification, problem prioritization, proposal of environmental solutions prior to seeking public approval for financing, and monitoring performance of clean-up strategies. A community-based environmental action program should also provide opportunities for NGOs and industries to constructively participate in the development of environmental policy formulation and implementation. Citizen advisory committees offer a viable model for soliciting and incorporating active public participation.
Effective public participation means effective public education on the present threats to health, ecology, and well-being. Further more, citizens need to be educated that effective solutions are contingent upon both individual responsibility and collective action.
The current situation gives the opportunity to use the process of privatization in order to compensate the registered damages. Our basic idea is that the polluters could pay directly by shares of their property. The affected population turn into shareholders with following advantages:
reduce the confrontation between the polluter and employees, who are trying to keep their jobs from one side and the population in the neighboring areas from other;
as shareholders this population will be interested to play more constructive role because of participation in the decision making process to certain extent.
For example: the Plovdiv area is on of the richest agricultural regions in Bulgaria but a huge lead and zinc smelter have been built. An interesting fact is that more than sixty plants is possible to grow there. This is unique for the European climatic conditions and explains the potential capabilities of the region. There are enough data available to estimate the direct losses of the yield of crops as a result of pollution in the various distant areas from the plant. The farmers' losses could be compensated by directly giving a definite amount of shares.
PRINCIPLE #2: Communities and citizens should have access to information about their environmental problems.
PRINCIPLE #3: Environmental priority setting should be a fundamental first step in developing long-term environmental solutions.
PRINCIPLE #4: NGOs should play a critical role in educating and involving the public and in raising the public's environmental awareness. NGOs can also provide independent information on problems and solutions and serve as a watchdog for compliance with environmental laws.
PRINCIPLE #5: Environmental clean-up strategies should emphasize the implementation of low-cost and cost-effective solutions for improved environmental protection.
PRINCIPLE #6: Municipalities need adequate funding to implement cost-effective environmental solutions.
REFERENCES
Bojanov, S., Bulgarian Nature Protection Legislation, Paper prepared for the International Workshop Institutional Design for Environmental Protection in Bulgaria, Shtarkelovo Gnezdo, Bulgaria, September 5-7, 1992.
Markowitz, P., Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development at the Local Level: Empowering Bulgarian Obshtinas, Paper prepared for the International Workshop Institutional Design for Environmental Protection in Bulgaria, Shtarkelovo Gnezdo, Bulgaria, September 5-7, 1992.
Bowman, M., Law as a tool for citizen involvement in environmental protection, Working paper of Environmental Law Institute, 1991.