Chapter 10: former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
(continued)
Thus, along with the institution of ombudsman, there is a good basis for receiving environmental information. On the other hand, there have been no ecological cases in which the ombudsman has taken part. The ombudsman is more active on civil cases.
Moreover, the few nongovernmental organizations are not particularly active concerning the environment and obtaining the necessary information. On this basis, the effectiveness of public participation in decisionmaking is very low.
Access to justice is relatively well organized in Macedonian legislation. But the practice of using it is rare in cases of public participation. The population avoids solving their problems in courts, and in large part pessimism prevails. Although the ombudsman exists, there are doubts about his competence. The reason for this is that the ombudsman is chosen by the National Assembly.
Another obstacle in public decisionmaking is the low level of environmental awareness. People do not care about the environment, or its protection. They are more concerned with solving economic difficulties in the process of transition to a free trade economy.
The development of a free flow of environmental information is further impeded by the lack of lawyers specialized in the field of environmental law. Although it is incorporated in the national legislation of former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the mechanics should enable better public access to environmental information and public participation in environmental decisionmaking.
If in the national legislature the procedure for public hearings included the executive authorities, this could contribute to better realization of the proclaimed rights. Public participation might appear, and people would be more interested if there were regular information on drafts of laws and any legal rights related to the environment. Meanwhile, precedents in public involvement seem to be facilitating public participation with regard to environmental cases in former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
NOTES
The text of this report was revised by Mihail Dimovski.
