The biggest problem with the current application of the Aarhus Convention (AC), a key document that guarantees citizens that they must know information about the state of the environment and decide on the impacts on it, is the attitude of the judiciary towards environmental crimes.
While the situation regarding access to information about the environment and public participation in decision-making is relatively good, the judiciary failed, because the courts, so to speak, did not even deal with criminal acts of endangering the environment, although they are extensively treated in the Criminal Code.
The Aarhus Convention is the common name for the UN Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Areas and has 47 members, one of which is the EU. It has three pillars: that institutions inform citizens and provide them with access to information, enable their participation in decision-making on issues related to the environment, and provide them with access to justice for the legal protection of environmental rights.
It has been applied in Montenegro since 2010, where four Aarhus centers have been operating: in Podgorica as an organizational part of the Environmental Protection Agency, in Nikšić managed by the NGO "Ozone", founded with the support of the OSCE in 2011, in Berane, which has the epithet of regional for the north and in Pljevlje, which was founded on its own initiative by the NGO "Breznica". The two Aarhus centers run by NGOs are quite agile, unlike the two state ones, which until now existed more formally than as a service for citizens.
In the original version of the Criminal Code, environmental crimes were general and difficult to understand, so in 2013 the Code was amended and the Directive on eco-crime was introduced. For now, there is no information on how many cases of environmental endangerment ended up in court and how many perpetrators were punished. There is no obligation of the courts to provide feedback and inform the inspector or the Ministry of the fate of the reports.
"Criminal Code in the part of environmental protection measures is not recognized by the courts at all. It has an excellent article that says that it is a misdemeanor punishable by law if someone uses an official duty to pretend that he is not competent, that is, to abuse the authority to do nothing. It all boils down to to the inspection, which submits a criminal or misdemeanor report, but it is not completed," said the director of "Ozone" Aleksandar Perović.
In the Criminal Code, a special chapter is devoted to crimes against the environment. Thus, for example, it is stipulated that whoever violates regulations on the protection, preservation and improvement of the environment releases, introduces or disposes of a certain amount of matter or ionizing radiation into the air, water or soil which causes a danger to life, body or health of people or danger of significant damage to the quality of air, water or land or to animal or plant life, shall be punished by imprisonment from one to 12 years.
Similar penalties are provided for, among other things, pollution of the environment with waste, damage to the ozone layer, failure to take measures to protect the environment, illegal construction, commissioning and operation of facilities and plants that pollute the environment, damage to the environment, abuse of genetically modified organisms, destruction of plants, killing and torture of animals and destruction of their habitat, destruction, damage and theft of protected natural property, export and import of protected natural property and specially protected plants and animals and trading in them, export and import of dangerous substances, illegal hunting and fishing... .
In the section "Violation of the right to information about the state of the environment", the Criminal Code states that whoever violates the regulations will withhold data or provide untrue data about the state of the environment and phenomena that are necessary to assess environmental hazards and take protective measures life and health of people, shall be punished with a fine or imprisonment for up to one year. The same punishment awaits anyone who publishes untrue information about the state of the environment and thus causes panic or significant disturbance of citizens.
Despite the lack of verdicts, the only thing mentioned in the EC reports on the progress of Montenegro in a positive sense are the Aarhus centers.
"If we look at the Aarhus centers that function within non-governmental organizations, they not only fulfilled their purpose, but also fulfilled much more than what was expected of them, since the centers within our organization took on the responsibility that the Aarhus centers of the Agency for environmental protection", assessed Perović.
The center, which was opened within the Environmental Protection Agency, is responsible for free access to environmental information, encouraging citizen participation in the process of initiating and making decisions, improving information about this area, as well as public participation and networking of local governments, protection services nature and individuals dealing with these topics. Perović clarified that earlier the Agency's leadership did not recognize the importance of Aarhus centers and completely put them on the sidelines, but that now there is an initiative to promote the centers within the Agency a little more.
"The Aarhus center in Podgorica did not live up to expectations. They also have an office in Berane, which worked all the time with two employees, who worked as well as they could in the local community, where the local government is essentially responsible for all environmental issues," he said. Perovic.
On the other hand, the "Ozone" Aarhus center in Nikšić had 25 cases from almost all cities
They regularly know how to defend the "privacy" of poachers
According to the data of the international organization Birdlife, about 200 thousand birds are killed in Montenegro almost every year, and among them is a huge number of those for which hunting is prohibited. The Center for the Protection and Study of Birds is very active in filing criminal charges, but every charge has failed in court.
They received absurd explanations from that NGO, from the fact that it was a photomontage, to the fact that they would not accept the photos of poachers because they were taken without authorization. Although the activists took a photo of the poacher with the killed birds, with a gun and plastic baits, this is not relevant to the court, with the explanation that they threatened his privacy and took his picture.
Most cases end up in court due to illegal logging, but that too sporadically. The most recent example is from July 2017, when the Special State Prosecutor's Office established a case to check the actions of Rožaj Forestry Administration officials in the case of illegal cutting of over 600 trees with the use of smuggled stamps. It also happened that forest thieves were convicted of a misdemeanor, and later acquitted.
Gallery
Bonus video:
