Regional Overview: Central and Eastern Europe

Access to Environmental Information

Legislation on Access to Information/Environmental Information

In the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the "right to timely information" about the condition of the environment is provided for, but the explicit right of citizens to directly access information or environmental information is not given (Constitution of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, 1992, Article 52, as well as in the constitutions of the Republic of Serbia, Article 46, 1992, and Montenegro, Article 19, 1992). Information is provided through the media, as explained in the Federal Law on the Basis of Public Information Systems (Article 3, 1990), in the Republic Law on Public Information of Serbia (Article 13, 1991), and in the Environmental Protection Law of Montenegro, 1996.

In addition to a general right to information, the Slovak Constitution also provides a right to timely and complete information on the state of the environment and on the cause and consequences of such a state (Slovak Constitution, Article 45, Act. 460/1992). However, because legislation setting the conditions for access to information is incomplete and because the new Act on Access to Environmental Information is still under preparation, the practical effect of this constitutional provision is rather limited.

Polish citizens enjoy a constitutional right to environmental information (Article 74/3) based on the "every person" principle. Latvia is the only country in which constitutional law guarantees a specific right of access to environmental information both to "freely acquire and disseminate information," for example regarding the environment and activities with possible impact on the environment (Constitutional Law of Latvia on the Rights and Obligations of a Citizen and a Person, 1991).

In most CEE countries, the right of access to environmental information is provided by general environmental protection laws, other environmental laws or regulations. Only a few countries have general laws on access to information (i.e. Hungary, Lithuania) and none of them has specific laws on access to environmental information. Hungary's Law on the Protection of Personal Data and on Accessibility of Public Interest Data (Act LXIII) was adopted in 1992 and includes the institution of a Data Protection Ombudsman. The legislation provides a basis for access to any kind of public information (see further explanation below). In Lithuania, the Public Information Law (No. I/1418) was adopted in 1996, but does not contain proper regulations for the practical aspects of citizens' access to information. The Hungarian law, together with the provisions of Act LII (1995) on Environment Protection (Article 2), is the only one in the region that provides a relatively well-functioning system of access to environmental information.

The general environmental protection laws or specific laws such as nature conservation laws usually provide everyone the right to information related to the state of the environment (i.e. current state, impacts, consequences or effects) and to information on planned or existing activities or measures that might have an impact on the environment. The laws in some countries also refer to the cases in which information can be refused or exempted.

In the absence of general access to information laws or specific environmental information laws, the procedures to provide information are either lacking or they are not always clear in most CEE countries. The procedures do not contain practical arrangements for how to provide information or for how citizens can get access to information, nor do the procedures outline remedies available if access is denied. The vague, general provisions often enable officials to avoid providing information, and there are no guidelines for implementation. In several countries where there are no specific procedures, the provisions of the administrative law are applied, for example concerning time limits and appeals. (See below for more details section on Time-frames to Provide Information, and Refusal of Provision of Information)

Recently, the Ministry of Health and Environment of the Republic of Albania has adopted a Regulation on Obtaining Environ-mental Information and Public Access to Environmental Information (January 1998, No. 7). Several CEE countries including Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Latvia have started to draft specific laws on access to environmental information. In Poland, the prepared Draft General Environmental Act has a specific, rather detailed chapter on access to environmental information which could be adopted as a separate act, but the government prefers to have it within the General Environmental Act. These draft laws on access to environmental information provide the right to every person of access to environmental information and documents possessed by the public authorities (i.e. governmental and self-governmental administration and other bodies performing public duties and services). They also provide a definition of environmental information, and list statutory exemptions.

These draft laws are already based on the Directive 90/313/EEC on freedom of access to environmental information (further EU Directive) and the Polish one also takes into consideration the relevant provisions of the Aarhus Convention. The Sofia Guidelines also had an impact, albeit indirectly, on the content of the drafts.

In Hungary, the prevailing view is that there is no need for a special law, but rather a need to develop normal and court practices. There is an intention, though, to harmonize the general law on access to information with the EU Directive in the process of EU accession and with the upcoming Aarhus Convention.

Passive Provision of Information or Environmental Information

Only a few countries have a legal definition of environmental information. In Albania, Bulgaria and Slovenia, a detailed explanation of what is considered to be "environmental information" is listed in the environmental protection laws. In Lithuania only a concise reference is given: ecological information includes all data about the state of environmental quality (EPL, 1992, Article 1).

The definition in Albania, Bulgaria and Slovenia includes information related to the state of the environmental elements and factors, changes in the environment (i.e. pollution or damage), and activities taken to protect the environment. In Albania, data on the state and exploitation of natural resources are also included in the definition, as are also explanations about possible negative consequences on the environment and people's health (Article 32, Law on Environmental Protection, No. 7664/1993). In Slovenia, the definition also includes the procedures and activities of bodies of the state and local authorities, as well as of the parties involved in the delivery of public services and those with public authorizations relating to the environment. However, there are no provisions defining more closely what environmental information covers in detail; what exactly the factors, changes or activities having an impact on the environment are; or what "activities taken to protect the environment" means.

In Albania, the way to establish what could be qualified as "environmental information" is based on different laws or regulations on environmental protection or on environmental information. For example, the provisions of the Regulation on Obtaining Environmental Information and Public Access to Environmental Information adopted in January 1998 (No. 7) specify what types of information the agencies and research institutes are to obtain and provide to the ministries. (see Chapter 1)

In other countries, the definition of environmental information is usually deduced from the general definition of environment (i.e. Hungary and Poland) or of environmental quality. In Hungary, administrative decisionmakers usually accept the more practical option of starting from the definition of the scope of the General Act on Environmental Protection (KVTV, Articles 2 and 3), which as the main environmental code encompasses all the environmental issues. This reasoning concludes that the scope has to do with the definition of environmental matters, naturally involving the definition of environmental information, too. This logic includes: radioactivity, mining, energy, forests, built environment, soil, fisheries, transport, catastrophe control, regional planning, gaming, water management, waste management, dangerous substances, nature protection, animal protection and animal health care, plant protection and plant health care and monuments. However, in practice it often may happen that "environment" is strictly understood by some public authorities and they refuse disclosure of information which they do not consider to be "environmental".

Therefore, it is useful that the recommendation developed by the Hungarian Data Protection Ombudsman (i.e. access to information ombudsman) gives practical guidance concerning the definition of environmental information. The ombudsman was asked recently to respond to citizens' complaints and give an interpretation of what kind of environmental information must be publicly disclosed. This recommendation included much more than emission data. It clearly stated that environmental information is qualified "public information," and therefore all information handled by the environmental authorities has to be disclosed to anyone. The ombudsman even suggested that environmental authorities must make accessible, or regularly publish, the list of companies that are polluting or causing damage to the environment, including the type of pollution they are causing and the fines, if any. Following this recommendation, the Ministry of Environment issued a position paper in the same spirit to interpret this issue for its own practice which the ministry must follow in the future.

The new draft laws in Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Poland include a definition that is similar to that of the EU Directive on freedom of access to environmental information (Directive 90/313/EEC). These definitions are inclusive and more complex, and they contain a reference to the impact of the state of the environment on human health. The definition in the Czech draft law also includes "underlying data used for evaluation of the causes and consequences of the state of the environment and the influence of this state on society and living organisms." It also includes information in written materials about administrative proceedings related to the environment, environmental impact assessment, petitions and complaints related to the environment and their solutions.

However, if compared with the best international standard (i.e. the definition of the Aarhus Convention), none of the existing definitions contain as detailed and specific a description of the types of information which can be qualified "environmental information" in terms of the individual elements of the environment, the interaction among them, the factors affecting or likely to affect the elements of the environment, and their impacts on "the state of human health and safety, conditions of human life, cultural sites and built structures, inasmuch they are or may be affected by the state of the elements of the environment or, through these elements, by factors, activities or measures referred to." None of the CEE laws contains explicitly GMOs among the elements of the environment, nor does any of them enumerate as extensively as the Aarhus Convention what kind of activities or measures should be included. The convention's thorough definition includes information on "administrative measures, environmental agreements, policies, legislation, plans and programs, affecting or likely to affect the elements of the environment" and "cost-benefit and other economic analyses and assumptions used in environmental decisionmaking".

The definitions existing in a handful of countries are far too general and vague. This creates a great deal of uncertainty about what specific information is covered and causes difficulties and even confusion, both for the authorities (in what kind of information they should collect or provide to the citizens) and for citizens (in what kind of information they can access).

Conditions for Obtaining Information and/or Environmental Information

Most CEE countries provide legal guarantees to access to information or environmental information without discrimination based on citizenship, nationality, domicile or interest, except for Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, where such right is not given.

The constitutions and the general environmental laws or general information laws provide the right to information to every person in Slovakia, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Estonia, Macedonia, Latvia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. In Poland, the constitutional right to general information is based on citizenship, but the "right to information about the state and protection of the environment" is given to every person (Article 74.3). The Slovenian Constitution provides a general right to obtain information of a public nature, provided the person shows sufficient legal interest (Article 39, Paragraph 2, 1991); however, the 1993 Environmental Protection Act grants such interest to the general public with regard to environmental information (EPA, Article 14, Paragraph 1).

In the Czech Republic, the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms also gives a constitutional right to access to environmental information for everyone (Article 35). In addition, Act No. 17 (1992) on the environment (II/A/1) gives citizens further rights: "Every citizen has right to true and appropriate information about the state and development of environment, causes and impacts of this state, information about the activities in preparation which can lead to change of the environment and information about the measures taken by a public authority to prevent or remedy damage to the environment." In Lithuania, the general right to information is provided to everyone in the territory of Lithuania, but environmental information is only given to the citizens and NGOs (EPL, Article 7, Paragraph 2, 1992).

The CEE countries, except Croatia, Lithuania and Bosnia and Herzegovina, are basically in line with the international standards, both with the EU Directive on Access to Information (Directive 313/1990/EEC), which provides the right to receive environmental information upon request to anyone "without having to prove an interest," and with the Aarhus Convention, which contains the even less strong wording "without an interest having to be stated."

There is no legal requirement to show an interest in Albania, but because regulations for obtaining environmental information are missing and much of the information is obtained orally in person rather than in written correspondence, it is normal practice that parties have to show they are affected by different activities - or at least that they have an interest in the activities - to receive information about them.

Obligation for Public Authorities to Provide Information and/or Environmental Information

In the majority of the CEE countries, there is no one public institution or office charged specifically with providing environmental or other information to the public. Where general access to information laws exist, all governmental agencies or institutions financed by public funds have the duty to provide information to the public as well as persons or bodies performing state or municipality functions or public services (Hungary and Lithuania).

The obligation to provide access to environmental information is put on the environmental authorities and is regulated in the environmental protection laws in most of the CEE countries. These environmental authorities might include bodies of the state and local authorities, parties involved in the delivery of public services, and those with public authorizations related to the environment, as well as all private bodies that perform public services at different levels. The main responsibility for providing environmental information is usually with the main environmental authorities, the ministries of environment and its national, regional or local agencies or offices.

Bosnia and Herzegovina is the only country where there is no explicit obligation for any public authority to provide information directly to citizens on environmental issues. The Federal Ministry for Urban (Physical) Planning and Environment has the obligation toward the Federal Assembly, the Federal Government as well as through this procedure indirectly towards the citizens, to prepare and submit a report on environmental issues each year. The district authorities also have the same responsibilities consistent with the scope of their competence.

In some countries, there are special bodies to inform the public as fully as possible and whose task is to gather and publicize information, for example the Secretariat of Information of the Republic of Montenegro. However, the main activities of these institutions are aimed more to promote the politics of the government and not to keep citizens informed. They are also focused on general information provision or dealing with citizen complaints in general rather than with provision of information on the environment. Similar offices exist in Macedonia and Serbia.

Because in most countries (except Hungary) there is no uniform access to information, the government authorities are obliged to provide information according to the different specific environmental or other laws and each field may have its own regime of access to information. In several cases (e.g. waste and water management), the public is obliged to "perform authorized interest," for example in the Czech Republic. There, state bodies have the possibility to refuse access to information for general reasons. In some countries, only the information that is covered by the environmental protection act or for which environmental authorities are responsible is considered to be "environmental information," and other authorities may deny access (Bulgaria, Romania).

In most of the countries there are no specific conditions, rules, procedures or guidelines, either for the public on how to get access to information, or for the officials on how to provide information. However, access to information for participants in pending procedures seems to be implemented rather well in Poland and Hungary, judging from the extremely low number of court cases dealing with this issue. There are mainly practical problems of insufficient technical arrangements (i.e. lack of separate and quiet places to inspect the files, lack of copying facilities, etc.) or problems of how to interpret the regulations. In other countries, like Slovakia, the public faces many problems when trying to obtain information related to a concrete administrative proceeding (e.g. siting, permitting, licensing); drafts of land-use and forest management plans and information on the current stage of the drafting process; and information on the preparation of development policies. The majority of requests for these types of information are refused on the basis of trade and state secrets. Moreover, requests for many other types of important information have been refused (e.g. data from water quality monitoring, requests for the organizational structure of the Ministry of Agriculture, etc.).

Outside pending proceedings, access to information is regulated in some countries, such as Poland, separately for governmental officers (Code of Conduct, which does not carry clear legal force) and self-governmental officers (the Act on Self-Governmental Officers [1990]). The Code of Conduct (i.e. Code of Conduct of Public Administration Officials and Rights of Citizens and Duties of Officials in Public Administration [1984]) applies to all governmental officers. Implementation in practice varies from office to office and from case to case but generally the code is followed. A similar code was recently drafted in Hungary.

Specific Information Services

In recent years, special services, divisions or departments have been set up to inform the public or to keep contacts with the public and the NGOs in many CEE countries. The information departments usually are responsible not only for informing the public but also to set up and operate an information system to monitor and to disseminate or publish information. Often, the information for the public is handled by another department or a special unit. In addition, in some countries, information centers, libraries or special services have been established for facilitating the access to environmental information. Such institutions exist in all CEE ministries, except for Bosnia and Herzegovina. Several of them only provide previously published information and operate like a library, for example in Bulgaria, Romania and Albania.

In some countries an information request to the ministry previously had to go through the higher level officials in the ministry, for example the minister or deputy minister. This practice has been changing in the past years.

Information stored within information centers or units can be accessed directly or with the help of public officials, or also may be obtained from all institutions either by sending a written question or visiting the office during the visiting hours.

Usually, these departments or departments dealing with the relations with the public are also responsible for providing information to NGOs, for arranging meetings and consultations with NGOs, and sometimes even for environmental education. The Bureau of Public Communication of the Polish MoE, for example, gets information from all relevant units within the ministry and informs the NGOs regularly. Similar is the case with the departments of public relations in Hungary and the Czech Republic. The activities of the Information Department of the Czech MoE was seriously limited between 1992 and 1996, and it often had financial problems, especially during the past year. Currently the department is undergoing major changes in its dealings with the public.

An interesting example of informing the public comes from Hungary. In July 1997, the Department of Relations with the Public in the Ministry on Environment and Regional Planning launched its Public Information Office, whose sole aim is answering requests from the general public for environmental information. By March 1998, the office had answered 2,500 requests from local enterprises, regional and municipal authorities, students and the general public. The ministry concluded a cooperation agreement with 18 NGOs to assist in operating similar local information centers at 16 localities starting January 1, 1998.

In several other countries, however, the lack of consistent methods of providing information due to the quick and frequent changes in the public administration, the lack of internal procedures, and the absence of an administrative law to stabilize the internal operations framework might constitute significant problems for accessing information. In Albania, the new decree on environmental information recently approved by the Ministry of Health (which is responsible for the environmental field through its Committee of Environment Protection) calls for a better infrastructure within the ministry to provide information (i.e. a library, a public relations official and facilities to copy the necessary information). So far, only one official has been trying to provide access to information and keep contacts with the NGOs as well. In Croatia, according to informal communication by the officials of the State Directorate of Nature and Environment Protection, drafting of an internal regulation is under way to establish an information service within the directorate.

The operation of these special departments or units has certainly improved access to certain types of information, fostered better communication with public officials, and demonstrated a progressive step toward making information accessible to the public. However, these centers alone do not solve the problem of access because of the limited scope of information accessible through them and because they lack the specific information needed in the local communities, or related to a specific development project or pollution problem. The centers also are not accessible from the countryside, although the Hungarian system seems to solve this problem.

There is often discrepancy between the type and form of information that the citizens need and that which is available at the information centers. While some of the information is available at the municipalities, other information is only available at the regional inspectorate level or at the level of national institutions, agencies and bodies. Therefore, the key issue is to establish an integrated information system that links the different agencies and institutions that collect information and makes available all the information relevant to the environment in a user-friendly way.

Obligation for Business to Provide Information

Legal persons whose activities pollute the environment also have an obligation to provide information in most CEE countries, although this obligation is usually to give information to the public authorities, not directly to the public. There are reporting requirements put on the polluters in all CEE countries, and this information must be submitted directly to the authorities. Regular monitoring and reporting is also required concerning discharges released by individual polluters into the air, waters and soil, and concerning waste production and waste disposal.

In Slovakia, for example, the Clean Air Act includes an obligation for operators of pollution sources to report on the source of the pollution emissions and compliance with emission limits, and the Water Act requires reporting on water usage and pollution by polluters. According to the Waste Act, waste producers are required to report on their production, quantity, characteristics and manner of recycling or disposing wastes to state agencies both in Slovakia and the Czech Republic. In the Czech Republic, according to the Air Pollution Act, such information has to be provided to the public and to the regional authorities for individual producers. In Albania, information on discharges into the environment from private activities must be provided regarding all activities that could create changes or potential damage to the environment. However, there is no clear definition of specific activities about which information must be reported. There are countries (Bulgaria) where there is no mechanism to ensure the flow of environmental information from the private sector to the responsible public authorities.

In Estonia, data on pollution loads from activities are collected four times per year by local authorities and are forwarded to the Information Center of the MoE once a year. These data however, are not for public use. In Montenegro, enterprises that are large polluters (i.e. engaged in the activities obliging them to make an environmental impact assessment) are bound to submit reports on the realization of the program of environmental protection to local authorities. These reports are then submitted to the Ministry of Environmental Protection in regular annual reports (Article 27 [1996] of the Law on Environmental Protection).

In all CEE countries, however, the public can access this information only through the competent environmental authorities, or, in the case of municipalities, through competent institutes or officials.

Businesses have an obligation to inform the public directly only in case of emergency or about pollution in several countries. For example, polluters in Slovenia must provide public access to the information if their "business operations cause in any way or in any form an environmental strain" (EPA, Article 70 and 71). In Hungary, the "users of the environment" are obliged to provide information "in respect to their loading, utilization, as well as posing hazards to the environment" (KVTV., Article 12, Paragraph 4). However, this information is only accessible through the data-collecting authorities. In Bulgaria, businesses are obliged to provide information to the public in case of pollution or nuisance caused by natural or industrial accidents or by fires, or in case of imminent danger of substantial pollution of the environment (Environment Protection Act, Article 13). Romania also requires businesses to actively provide information in case of accidental pollution and major environmental accidents (EPL, Article 79). Similar regulations exist in Serbia and Montenegro, although time limits for this procedure are not provided for and there is not much practice yet in this field.

In Poland, under the Press Law (1984), a business has a duty to inform the public only in relation to its external activities, for example about the volume of its emissions. In Estonia, businesses are not obliged to give environmental information upon public request, but there are good examples when they reply to the information requests as far as they consider it useful for their activities.

With regard to obligations put on businesses to provide information on the environment, the countries of the region do not go beyond the requirements of the EU Directive on freedom of access to environmental information (Directive 313/90/EEC), the Sofia Guidelines and the Aarhus Convention, which require only access to such information through the public authorities or bodies with public responsibility and only encourage businesses to report directly to the public if their activities have significant adverse impact.

The problem in practice is that often the public cannot access this information even through the public authorities due to the fear of infringing business confidentiality and the prevailing mentality that business secrecy should be protected even if there is pollution involved. One of the many reasons for the lack of public access to such information is due to the uncertainty of environmental officials on how to interpret certain regulations or laws concerning business confidentiality. It is of utmost importance therefore that the Aarhus Convention exempts the "information on emissions which is relevant for environmental protection" (Article 4, Paragraph 4/4) from the confidentiality of commercial and industrial information and provides for an obligation to disclose such information.

Time Frames to Provide Information

Except for Hungary and Albania, in most countries there is no specific regulation or procedure concerning the time limits for public authorities to provide information. In some countries, the environmental protection law (i.e. Slovenia, Romania) or the administrative code regulates how requests should be handled. Usually, there is only one deadline for answering a request or providing the information requested. The deadline for provision of information is within 15 days in Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia and Montenegro, and in the rest of the countries authorities have up to 30 days or one month. In addition, in a number of countries there is a possibility to extend this relatively short deadline up to an additional one month (Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia) or an additional two months (Albania, Serbia). In Estonia, if the authorities are overloaded, the time limit for replying to an inquiry may be extended even to three months.

The best legal framework and practice can be seen in Hungary, where a request must be answered as soon as possible but within 15 days, and there is no possibility for extending this deadline (Law on the Protection of Personal Data and Accessibility of Public Interest Data, 1992).

Because of the lack of specific regulations or procedures in many countries of the region, requests for environmental information are generally considered to fall under the administrative procedure of "handling cases." This usually means a deadline of one month or 30 days, but in some countries, such as in Poland, simple requests (e.g. inspection of documents) are usually handled in a much shorter time. According to Article 35 of the Polish APA (1960), all requests in Poland (including those concerning access to information) have to be handled without delay: simple cases immediately, those requiring inquiry within one month, and extremely complicated cases within two months. In practice, there is generally a tendency in Poland to provide information immediately if the request concerns inspecting documents. As far as written requests are concerned the deadlines are being met, but the information provided is not always full and sufficient. Often the applicant only gets a rather formal answer.

In several countries, requests for information are handled the same way as public complaints or public requests. For example, in Albania, the Law on Addressing and Solving Requests, Complaints, Remarks and Proposals Coming from Citizens is applied; in the Czech Republic, the Decree on Treatment of Public Notices applies; and in Lithuania, the procedure follows the provisions of the Government Decision Concerning the Order of Examination of Residential Appeals, Complaints and Proposals in the Governmental Institutions. These are rather outdated regulations, some of which come from the early 1950s and have several drawbacks. For example, although the Decree on Treatment of Public Notices in the Czech Republic gives a 30-day time limit for answers and is still binding for all civil servants, it does not provide adequate "access to justice." According to this regulation, the response does not have to answer the issues mentioned in the complaint, nor is there any way to complain against late response by the public official. In Albania, a response must be given immediately for requests, complaints or remarks that do not need to be verified.

When a request for information is refused, the deadlines are much shorter in Albania and Hungary. In Hungary, the applicant should be notified of the rejection in writing within eight days, and the reasons for refusal must be stated. The new regulation in Albania (Decree No. 7) requires a refusal to be issued within one week. In Lithuania, a public authority should issue a refusal to the "Organizer of Public Information" within one day, but this is not the case for the general public. In many other countries, the deadline for refusal of a request is the same as for provision of information: in Latvia and Macedonia up to 15 days; in Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Czech Republic up to one month.

During an administrative procedure, parties generally have additional rights including the right to inspect all files concerning the case and to make copies of those files. This right is granted not only to the parties but also to associations (NGOs) participating "with the rights of the party" in some countries (i.e. Poland and Hungary).

The old, outdated regulations are being changed in several countries. The new draft laws usually follow the EU Directive (90/313/EEC), although often criticized for not representing the international ideal. The new draft law prepared in the Czech Republic sets the time limit for answering requests between 15 and 30 days with the possibility to extend the deadline up to 60 days in some cases. The new Slovakian draft law on environmental information, which is still under discussion, contains a provision to provide information without delay but at latest within two months of the request. However, contrary to the EU Directive, the current draft gives the possibility to prolong the deadline beyond two months, and it does not explicitly require public authorities to give the reasons for such an extension. The recent Slovakian draft law also would allow the period to issue a refusal to be prolonged up to two months.

Altogether, the present legal framework of the CEE countries in general seems much better than that of the EU Directive or the Sofia Guidelines. While the directive states responses must be given "as soon as possible but at latest within 2 months," the Sofia Guidelines contains "at latest within six-weeks", all the CEE countries have either up to 15-day or one-month deadlines. There will be no problem implementing the Aarhus Convention's provision, which contains a one-month deadline for provision of information, with a possibility of extension up to 2 months. However, this does not mean the practice is as good as the formal framework. In several countries there is either no well-functioning practice or the authorities often do not provide the requested information in time. Hungary is the only country in which most of the practice complies with the positive legislation.

Refusal of Provision of Information

There are several allowable reasons to refuse information in all the CEE countries, and it is generally the constitution that states when the right of access to information may be limited. These constitutional provisions are supposed to be laid out and implemented in ordinary legislation, but in most countries there is no clear-cut legal situation in this respect. Instead, there are a number of separate laws introducing different specific secrets without much correlation among them. However, the types of exceptions to the right of access to information tend to show a certain pattern.

The notion of "state secret" and its different interpretations can be found in every CEE country at the top of the exemption list, an indication that the tradition of secrecy inherited from the past still lingers. "State secret" usually includes information whose release could adversely affect or endanger, among other things, national defense, national security, public security or public order, foreign or international relations, important economic interests, national monetary and currency policy, investigation and prevention of crimes, judicial proceedings, etc. The list can be shorter or longer from country to country, but normally state secrets are defined by a specific law and procedure.

In Lithuania, for example, the list of state secrets appears in the Law on State Secrets and Protection of State Secret (No. I-1074, 1995.10.25, Article 6). The law also provides a definition of levels of secrecy: "utterly secret," which applies to information whose disclosure could cause serious harm to state interests, and "secret," which applies to information whose disclosure could cause harm to state interests. In Hungary, the annex of Act LXV (1995) on the State Secrets and Official Secrets (also known as "TTV") defines which data can qualify as state secret. However, a specific piece of information must be declared a state secret by a qualified senior executive, defined by the law as a minister, an undersecretary of state, a deputy undersecretary of state, the head of an organ of national powers, the deputy head of the organ or the head of certain judicial organs (Ttv, Article 6, Paragraphs 1, 2 and 5). The procedure is similar in other countries. In several countries, including Montenegro, Serbia, Hungary and Croatia, the minister or the head of the state agency in question has a discretionary right to either allow or forbid access to classified information or its publication.

The second exemption to the right to information often mentioned is "official secret," whose definition is quite similar to that of state secret. This category is not only wide ranging but often vague. It usually gives a high degree of discretion to high-level public officials because the scope of secrecy is determined by the person entitled to qualify data. In most countries, the list of data or information that can be made secret is not required to be put together or to be made public. As a result, the person who has the right to classify data officially can determine any scope of secrecy.

For example, in Hungary the person can declare classified any data whose release could contravene the operation of organs with national and public responsibilities or could interfere with the officials' ability to exercise their scope of activity and competence free from undue influences (Ttv., Article 4, Paragraph 1). In some countries, there are stipulations and procedural institutions that restrict the vagueness of "official secret." However, in Hungary, areas in which there is an obligation to actively supply information cannot be subject to official secrecy (Ttv., Article 4, Paragraph 2). Also, when declaring official secrecy, an official must seek the opinion of the Data Protection Ombudsman (Paragraph 4). Another deterrent to arbitrary declaration of official secrecy in Hungary is that a list of classified documents must be published in the official gazette, Magyar Kozlony. The Administrative Code also includes an exception to the rule of official secrecy according to which, "Under the pretext of official secret, inspection into or photocopying of such documents cannot be excluded when the decision is based on the merits"(Article 41, Paragraph 3). Still, the category of "official secret" can prevent access to certain information for 30 to 50 years, and it leaves the possibility of serious misuse or abuse of power. The outdated legal institution needs restriction and public control to avoid misuse, and ideally it will disappear.

The third category of secrets highly ranking on the priority list of exemptions is "commercial confidentiality" or "economic secret." This also causes widespread problems because the definition is usually too broad, too general or overly vague. Except for Hungary, which does not list this as a legal exemption to providing information, the CEE countries place a strong priority on protecting business interests, sometimes even to the detriment of access to information about pollution or damaging business activities.

Several countries have tried to balance the justified protection of business secrets, the right of access to information, and the interests of environmental protection. In Poland, where trade secret was just recently introduced by a 1997 amendment to the Environmental Protection Act (1980), public authorities must carry out a public-interest test whenever they have any discretion in such cases. In Slovenia, the Law on Business Entities says business secrecy cannot be invoked regarding data that already has been declared by law to be public (i.e. accessible to the public) or data that presents a breach of law or good business practices. In addition, data concerning an environmental strain caused by business operations of any person cannot be declared a business secret, according to the Slovenian Environmental Protection Act (Article 14, Paragraph 3).

In Hungary, "trade secret" is covered by the Civil Code, as it is considered to be a concept basically connected to the pecuniary interest of citizens and business organizations. A decision on whether information can be withheld on the basis of trade secret is made on a case-by-case basis after the authorities have considered all the interests involved. Trade secret is covered by the Civil Code (Article 81), which states, "personal rights are offended if mail secrecy is offended, or privacy, or industrial or trade secret is acquired and published illegally or misused in other ways." The concept of trade secret in the Hungarian legal interpretation gets close to that of possession, and it bears a close relationship with intellectual property. The mere acquisition of information is not deemed as disclosure of a secret, nor is the legal publication of the acquired information. Despite this situation, there is a great deal of uncertainty on behalf of the public officials regarding how to interpret "trade secret," and only practice can help orient them. The actions of the Data Protection Ombudsman have helped in this respect. In his yearly report, he has taken a favorable stand with respect to civil disclosure of information about pollution by businesses, saying that no polluter should be allowed to hide behind the legal institutions of commercial or industrial secret. The Data Protection Ombudsman ruled that such information should be public and open, even if its dissemination could harm the economic and competitive interests of the enterprises (see the chapter on Hungary for more details).

In Poland, recently there have been a lot of complaints from businesses that public authorities disclose business secrets too negligently. Although the complaints are related to disclosing information to competitors and are not related to public requests for environmental information, the very debate about it may result in tighter control over information in general and could affect public access to environmental information.

Despite the legal exemptions to the right to information, the practice of some countries is rather favorable. In Poland and Hungary, there is a presumption toward disclosure, and information may only be refused if the law explicitly requires it to be withheld. In Hungary, an authority must prove a refusal was reasonable and complied with law (Atv., Article 21, Paragraph 2). In other countries, like the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro, there are no specific rules that state when a request for information can be refused, and there are no established lists of exemptions either.

The institution of a public interest test exists formally only in Poland; however, it is limited to trade secrets. The other exemptions are not subject to discretionary power. Several other CEE countries have provisions which give priority to disclosure of public interest environmental information over other interests, and this can be interpreted as a public interest test. However, in most countries such interest tests apply only in emergency situations.

Therefore, the Sofia Guidelines, and the Aarhus Convention, which contain a relatively strong public interest test, will be a major improvement. The CEE countries also fall behind the EU Directive on freedom of access to environmental information, Sofia Guidelines and the Aarhus Convention because they lack specific provisions regulating the reasons for refusing provision of information and because they have a broad scope of state secrets and official secrets. On the other hand, many of the countries do not list specific exemptions at all, or if they do the exemptions are detailed enough to consider adverse affects on personal confidentiality, intellectual property, the confidentiality of proceedings of public authorities, or the interest of third party, which will probably be added to their existing lists as a result of the convention (although the existing category of official secrets is broad enough to cover nearly everything).

Except those countries that have prepared new draft laws or recent decrees based on the EU Directive (i.e. the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Albania), most CEE countries do not have established provisions that allow the possibility to formally refuse a request for information because "the public authority does not hold the information," because the request "is manifestly unreasonable or formulated in a too general manner," because it is "material in course of completion," or because it "concerns communications of public authorities." The new Czech and Slovakian draft laws on access to information already allow a public interest test. The Czech draft says secret information "will be refused with the exception of cases where the public interest in accessibility of information markedly outweighs any interest in its concealment" (Article 8). In this respect, it is interesting that the new draft law of Slovakia, which is still being debated, adopts several provisions from the EU Directive but contains additional exemptions which are not in line with the EU Directive and which broaden the scope of refusal even more. The latest Slovak draft law includes exemptions for "information that is the subject of unfinished administrative proceedings"; and for requests that are "manifestly unreasonable, exaggerated, or the information presents abuse of the right to access the information, specifically if the request is to obtain a database of the authority or expert organization, or the request causes unreasoned burden to the authority's activity or the request is evidently focused on obtaining data other than environmental information." The draft law also contains exceptions based on copyright law protection (see Slovakian country report for more details).

Charges

Charges do not seem to present a great obstacle to obtaining information, perhaps because there is not yet any clear legal framework for regulating them in many CEE countries. In practice, even voluminous information is often provided free of charge. The costs of provision of information are not regulated at all in many of the countries (i.e. Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Croatia, Macedonia and Bosnia and Herzegovina). A few countries have regulations or practice like those of Lithuania, according to which all official information generated using funds from the state budget should be provided free of charge (Public Information Law, No. I/1418, Article 12, Paragraph III [July 2, 1996]). State and municipal authorities may only charge for copying of documents or other necessary services. Such charges cannot be considered an obstacle to the general access to information, but they could slightly restrict access to information for some social groups or citizens.

In Hungary, the head of the authority may decide whether to charge expenses. The applicant has to be notified about the amount of expenses in advance (Hungarian Law on the Protection of Personal Data and on Accessibility of Public Interest Data [Atv], Article 20, Paragraph 3). These charges are usually reasonable. There are also rules about exemption from charges based on the characteristics of the information or of the applicant. The law contains no rules about free services, but there are several fee exemptions outlined in the code of litigation. For example, NGOs and foundations are exempt from charges in Hungary unless they pursued taxable business activity in the year preceding the request for documents. Additional exemptions from charges are detailed in some 30 points in Article 33 (Paragraph 2) of the code of litigation fees. In Slovenia, environmental information requested by the public must be provided at price which may not exceed the material costs of the provided information (EPA, Article 14, Paragraphs 1 and 2). There are no other detailed rules to specify what these costs include. According to available resources in two cases (at the end of 1997) where environmental information was requested by individuals and answered as well, public authorities did not charge for provision of such information.

Self-operated copying machines for obtaining copies of information upon payment are rare, and getting copies of documents from public authorities can take a long time in some countries. When copy machines do exist, they are usually operated by the officials who manage the information centers or registers. Charging schemes for copying, where available, are usually displayed so the likely total fee is known in advance. In some countries, the infrastructure is not yet in place to support adequate facilities for copying. This is a problem in Romania, where information provided by the public authority is in most cases free but books and publications available in the Information Center of the MoE must be purchased.

It is more costly to obtain information from scientific or other institutions having mixed funding. These institutions charge fees for provision of information not only to the public but also to the public authorities. Changes in the institutional structure of agencies and organizations that collect or possess data and the necessity that their operations be based partly or fully on market conditions have further hindered access to information. Because the organizations receive money from outside (i.e. non-public) sources, the information is no longer directly paid for by the public and it loses its "public interest" classification. In addition, the ability to receive money for information services strengthens a trend whereby part of the information can only be accessed upon payment. In order to avoid such cases, it needs to be clearly regulated what are the obligations of institutions when they perform "public service functions" but also it is necessary to make sure that there is funding available for such services.

There are also opinions that say charges could present an obstacle to the regulation on access to environmental information because charges can be treated by state officials as a pretext and hindrance to giving information (e.g. in Bulgaria).

Because so few countries of the region have a regulated approach for dealing with charges or costs of obtaining information, the provisions of the EU Directive on freedom of access to environmental information (90/313/EEC), Sofia Guidelines and of the Aarhus Convention could immediately create a clearer situation. The EU Directive allows public authorities to charge for supplying information but puts a limitation that charges "may not exceed a reasonable cost." The Sofia Guidelines calls for "inspection free of charge" when the environmental information is "contained in public registers", and for "payment of cost of reproduction and dissemination" when obtaining copies. Meanwhile, the Aarhus Convention goes a bit further and states public authorities that intend to charge must "make available to applicants a schedule of charges which may be levied, indicating the circumstances in which they may be levied or waived and when the supply of information is conditional on the advance payment of such a charge" (Article 4, Paragraph 8). Although the documents to a great extent give discretion to public authorities in this regard, they also allow for the possibility of waivers and levies. However, even these provisions do not give any guidance on what "reasonable costs" or "amount" means.

If the Public Authority Does Not Possess the Information

Public authorities in several countries are obliged to forward a request for information to the institution that possesses the information (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Hungary, Lithuania, Macedonia, Serbia, Czech Republic and Poland) or to provide the contact to the relevant institution (Albania, Romania, Lithuania, Serbia and Macedonia). This obligation comes mainly as part of the usual administrative law or practice, or from the laws dealing with citizens complaints and requests. Albania is the only country in which a specific provision exists about such a situation in the Regulation on Obtaining Environmental Information and Public Access to Environmental Information (No. 7, 1998). In Hungary, requesting information is a special "part administrative case" (i.e. a procedural issue, sometimes standing alone), where the rule of the Administrative Code (Article 7, Paragraph 1) also requires public authorities that do not have the authority or competence in a certain case to forward the request without delay to another organ with authority and competence, and at the same time to inform the client about the transfer.

There is no legal obligation to forward requests in Estonia, Latvia, Serbia, Montenegro, the Czech Republic or Slovakia. In these countries, it is mainly up to the good will of authorities whether they will forward a request or even give the contact address of the agencies or institutions that have the requested information. The practice varies. In some countries, the agency is obliged to forward a request within the agency to the relevant department (i.e. cases in which the procedure is governed by an administrative act, which excludes EIA procedure in the Czech Republic). In practice, officials usually provide information about possible sources of requested information if they know where the information could be obtained, or they even forward the request to the appropriate agency. There are positive experiences in Estonia, the Czech Republic, Serbia and Montenegro. In cases when another state agency is the client searching for information, the situation is usually different and there is a legal obligation to submit data and information within a given period of time in several countries.

In practice, although forwarding is observed - whether or not it is required by law - it often may be abused. Citizens asking for information are frequently referred several times to different authorities or individuals within one office, and in the end full information still is not given in some cases.

While the EU Directive on freedom of access to environmental information (90/313/EEC) or the Sofia Guidelines do not contain a forwarding requirement, the Aarhus Convention already contains an advancement in this regard and gives a proper instruction on the necessary behavior of public authorities. The convention places an obligation on each public authority to "as promptly as possible, inform the applicant of the public authority where it believes it is possible to apply for the information requested or transfer the request to that authority and inform the applicant accordingly" (Article 4, Paragraph 5). The implementation of the convention therefore would improve the situation in a number of CEE countries.

Form of Information

One restriction to be found in several countries is that the public does not have the right to specify the form in which the environmental information is provided. Most of the legal acts refer simply to "inspecting documents" or to "providing information." Although there is no explicit right to specify the form of information provided, in some countries information is often provided in the requested form (e.g. Poland and Hungary). In other countries, the lack of an explicit right to request a copy of a particular document or the right to inspect documents has often resulted in cases where the public has not been allowed to do so. In Romania, this problem has been brought to the Supreme Court but the court has not settled the issue.

In Hungary, the regulations on the form in which data must be provided are written in a general way in the Law on the Protection of Personal Data and on Accessibility of Public Interest Data. The Administrative Code does not contain definite regulations relating to the form of data, but in legal practice it is generally accepted that information not stored in written form is accessible under the same conditions and in the same form as it exists.

Data provided in electronic form has appeared relatively rarely so far, especially information given in the form of computer disks. In several countries e-mail or other electronic networks have been established only recently, but in some countries there is a regular supply of information provided electronically through existing NGO and other networks (Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and Estonia). This form of reply to information requests is given to individuals only in limited cases in the form of direct e-mails.

Active Provision of Information/ Environmental Information

Access to information could be vastly improved by the establishment of a coherent and integrated information system that would ensure the flow of information among the government, the private sector and the public (and within and among the different governmental authorities) and that also would create a framework for provision of information.

One problem is the confusion over which authorities are responsible for providing information, which authorities are obliged to collect and update the information, and which authorities are requested to report them. These questions are supposed to be regulated in the general environmental protection laws. However, in several countries, there is no general legal obligation for the public authorities to collect and update adequate environmental information or to disseminate it actively. Most countries have legal obligations to set up environmental information and monitoring systems that usually include information on air, water, waste, emissions, protected natural areas, soil, etc.

In every CEE country, there are a great number of different ministries and state agencies or institutions that are responsible for collecting different information, and many of them also are obliged to inform the public, although not necessarily directly or in an active way. The obligation to disseminate information actively, which exists in different environmental protection laws or other environmental laws only in some countries, is usually vague and does not provide for any specific procedural rules.

In Poland, for example, the State Environmental Protection Inspectorate is bound by law to collect and update environmental information through the so-called "Monitoring System". However, in the State Environmental Protection Inspectorate Act there is no such obligation (Article 28, Paragraph 1). In Albania, the Law on Environment requires all relevant scientific institutions, other ministries and local governments to collect environmental information and deliver it to the Committee of Environment Protection. However, there is no legal obligation to provide this information to the public. In Slovenia, the Environmental Protection Act requires the public authorities to regularly provide to the public and local authorities through mass media or by other means information related to the monitoring of natural phenomena and emission monitoring of the soil, water, air, noise, radiation, flora, fauna and health-related ecological conditions, as well as data related to intervention monitoring (e.g. in case of ecological accidents) and emission monitoring of diffuse sources of pollution (e.g. traffic pollution). However, regulations needed to implement such monitoring, had not been adopted as of the end of 1997, except in cases of emergency, when ecological, industrial or other accidents occur. The case is similar for the information and monitoring systems in almost all other CEE countries.

In the event of emergency, public authorities must actively spread information in all CEE countries. This usually includes an obligation to actively notify people in case of air pollution, dangerous smog levels, immediate health threats or health hazards, effects of chemicals, hazardous and toxic materials, waste management or effects of hazardous or toxic waste, etc. For example, in the Czech Republic, both public authorities and private bodies (i.e. enterprises) and all state organs dealing with the protection of the atmosphere - from the MoE to local municipalities - are obliged to actively notify the public about high smog levels and to advise the public on ways to protect their health (Clean Air Act, No. 301 [1991]). In Slovakia, similarly, the Act on Protection of the Air from Pollutants (No. 309/1991) requires the responsible authorities to make available complete and timely information about the quality of the air and the contribution of individual sources to its pollution. (See country reports on Czech Republic and Slovakia.)

A basic problem of collecting and updating environmental information is the lack of coherence and integration of existing information systems. The current systems either leave some types of information outside their scope, thus limiting access to and the collection of environmental information only to those done by the environmental authorities, or the various systems lead to a number of different databases in fragmented form. Such problems not only lead to difficulties in the provision of information, whether passive or active, but also present an obstacle to the decisionmaking process because they do not provide full and usable information.

The Sofia Guidelines do not contain obligations to actively disseminate information. Instead, the guidelines focus on ensuring the information is gathered and stored, requesting that "public authorities should regularly collect and update adequate information" (Article I, Paragraph 5), and encouraging establishment of an "adequate flow of information about activities significantly affecting the environment to the public authorities." The Aarhus Convention contains an obligation for public authorities to ensure they "possess and update environmental information which is relevant to their functions," and that they establish "mandatory systems" for "adequate flow of information to public authorities about proposed and existing activities which may significantly affect the environment." The convention also makes it clear that it is the task of the public authorities to make information available and accessible to the public and set out a number of options regarding what practical arrangements the authorities must take to this end and what kind of information should be actively disseminated in addition to the emergency situation. The implementation of these provisions will require substantial changes both in the legislation and existing information mechanisms in the CEE countries.

Methods of Dissemination of Environmental Information

The main method of active information dissemination is the publication of state of the environment reports, which are distributed widely in the form of brochures or made accessible in electronic form through information centers or services. There is a legal obligation to prepare and publish a report about the state of the environment in all CEE countries except the Czech Republic. Despite the lack of such provision, the report is published regularly even there. In Lithuania, a four year report is also published. In most countries the content of the report is defined by law.

In Slovenia, for example, the annual national environmental report is to be prepared by the Ministry of Environment, it must be adopted by parliament and published in manner accessible to the general public. The report is to be a complex and comprehensive document containing, among other things, data related to the state of and changes to the environment (including public health, environmental damages and performed rehabilitation programs), necessary and priority tasks and measures in the field of environmental protection, environmental research and the introduction of new technologies and products, and the significant international events in the field of environmental protection. The report must also contain data on financial transactions in the field of environmental protection in the country and on activities of state and local agencies and providers of public services as well as information on the implementation of the National Environmental Protection Program and its working plans (when the are adopted). The first official proposal of the report was presented to parliament in 1996, but at the end of 1997 it had not yet been adopted.

In Hungary, it is required that "on the basis of the data collected, the environmental minister shall submit a report annually to the government on the trends in the state of the environment in the country" (Article 51, of the General Law on Environmental Protection [Kvtv]). This report is generally public. In addition, the government is also required to submit a comprehensive report to parliament every second year about the state of the environment and the implementation of the National Environmental Protection Program (Kvtv, Article 41, Paragraph 3). The National Environmental Protection Program report is supposed to outline the environmental goals and target states to be attained; the related tasks to be performed; the order and deadline of implementation; the means for attaining the goals set, including the indication of the planned sources of necessary funding; and the designation of areas in which special environmental measures are required. In Hungary, local authorities also must prepare regular reports on the environment "as required, but at least annually." The National Heath Service is also obliged to regularly publish data "about environmental pollution endangering life or health, and facts about epidemics," and "data about environmental pollution and the position of epidemics are open to everybody" (Act XI [1991] on the National Health Service, Article 4, Paragraph 3).

The Sofia Guidelines as well as the Aarhus Convention require among other means of dissemination, the publication of national reports on the state of the environment "at regular intervals, not exceeding three or four years." The CEE countries are already publishing such reports regularly, most of them with yearly intervals. Although these reports are available to the public, they are not always organized in a way that is easily understood, and also there are great differences in their content. Some countries fill this report with public relations information while others use this tool as a method for providing regular, comprehensive information for the general public. However, even these reports are not always in an easy to understand format. It would be a great help if authorities in every country were required to add intelligible commentary on the published environmental information.

Besides the state of the environment reporting, some countries are fairly active in disseminating environmental information. Several countries publish brochures, newsletters and different publications about the environment. Hungary is one of the leading countries in the region in this regard. The Ministry of Environmental Protection in Hungary, besides publishing environmental information regularly in the official journal (Environmental Protection and Building Affairs Gazette), also disseminates information on the Green Spider, an electronic network used by more than 200 environmental NGOs and numerous other related organizations. The ministry regularly posts all the draft statutes for which they are responsible on the Green Spider. The list of draft statutes are made public twice yearly in accordance with the legislation schedule of the ministry. (See the section on Public Participation and the Hungarian report for more details.)

Obligation to Make Accessible Information and/or Environmental Information in Electronic Format

A recent good example is the public notice on the website of the Environment Ministry of Poland, encouraging public to give suggestions about the new ecological policy to be adopted.

A special unit has been established in Macedonia in the Ministry of Urban Planning, Construction and the Environment for setting up and operating an environmental database and a website. Electronic channels are not used yet by the public authorities in Albania, Romania, Montenegro or Bulgaria. Separate from the ministries, governments may operate their own websites (Montenegro), and parliaments in several countries (Czech Republic, Slovenia, Poland and Hungary) operate databases that are accessible electronically and provide information about the activities of environmental and other committees, draft laws and adopted legal acts, and policy documents.

The Aarhus Convention (Article 5, Paragraph 3) contains an obligation for parties to ensure that "environmental information progressively becomes available in electronic databases which are easily accessible to the public." The convention also contains a list of recommended types of information that should be made available, including reports on the state of the environment, text of legislation "as appropriate, policies, plans and programs on or relating to the environment, and environmental agreements," and other information "to the extent that the availability of such information would facilitate application of national law implementing this convention." The implementation of these provisions would significantly broaden access to certain categories of environmental information, even though some countries (e.g. Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic) already provide this added opportunity to access information to NGOs or to the public.

Mechanisms to Ensure Flow of Information from the Private Sector to the Public Authorities or the Public

The Aarhus Convention calls on parties "to take steps to progressively establish...a coherent, nationwide system of pollution inventories and registers on a structured, computerized and publicly accessible database compiled through standardized reporting." The Convention also tries to set standards for the content of such registers, although this is more of a recommendation than a strong obligation. The convention considers such registers to be tools for actively disseminating information to the public. However, the convention does not clarify whether such facilities should be directly accessible or not. The Council Directive 96/61/EC concerning integrated pollution prevention and control contains provisions on access to information and public participation in the permit procedure for the operation of a facility, including requirements on what information should be made available to the public (Article 15). According to this directive, "applications for permits for new installations or for substantial changes are made available" so the public can comment before the authority decides on them. The directive also states, "the decision, including at least a copy of the permit, and any subsequent updates, must be made available to the public," and the results of monitoring of releases as required under the permit conditions must also be made available to the public. In addition, an inventory of the principal emissions and sources responsible shall also be published every three years by the commission. This directive is not yet implemented even in the EU countries, but will definitely improve public access to pollution information.

These PRTR-type registers are a relatively new phenomenon in the CEE region, and there is not much practice of their operation so far. Only Poland has established emissions permit registers, PRTR-type registers and a register of non-compliance fines (i.e. enforcement register). In many countries, the data is collected through reporting by the public authorities and is published in the form of annual or quarterly reports. Poland has only made these data publicly accessible in form of public PRTR registers since the 1997 amendment of the Environmental Protection Act. A draft regulation is being prepared that would regulate all practical issues related to maintaining registers. Most likely, the regulation will be similar to rules governing other public registers, which operate like libraries and where the applicant needs to ask an official in charge to find the file requested to be inspected.

There is also a pilot project taking place in the Czech Republic to introduce PRTRs in the framework of the UNITAR. The Ministry of Environment also sponsored the project and authorized the NGO Association for Sustainable Life to implement the project. The work was terminated after the first year and renewed at the governmental level again at the end of 1995².

There are, though, in several countries public-register type facilities that provide for inspection of information for the public free of charge. For example, in Hungary, data on hazardous waste materials collected in accordance with the Governmental Decree No. 102/1996 can be inspected for free. According to the decree (Point VI/8/1), a fee must be paid for special data or for calling, sorting and processing data. The amount of the fee depends on the service supplied. Such facilities are operated in almost every country, although they are not always called "registers."

Several CEE countries plan to establish PRTRs or similar reporting obligations for polluters in their draft laws on environmental protection. Those countries that have become members of OECD (i.e. Hungary and Slovenia) are especially studying the possibility of establishing such systems. Croatia, in the Law on Waste (1995) and the Regulations on Register of Emissions into Environment (1996), prescribes the establishment of PRTR-type systems. Similarly, in Bosnia and Herzegovina the Draft Law on Environment Protection promotes the regular flow of information through re-establishing the current practice of obligatory registration of all facilities and installations every second year, for all activities that jeopardize or may jeopardize the environment (Article 41, Point 3, chapter entitled "Registration and Control of Activities Jeopardizing Environment"). Also, Article 23 of the Law on Environmental Protection of Montenegro calls for the Ministry of Environmental Protection to maintain a registry of pollution although it is still not in existence, mainly due to financial reasons.