Chapter 3: Moldova

MAPPING AND EVALUATION OF OPPORTUNITIES

International Decisionmaking

As was already mentioned, the law does not provide the possibility for the public to participate in decisionmaking. However, some opportunities to do so lie in the use of lobbying. The practical example of lobbying the environmental interests in the international level is given in the description of HAEPS case (see Best Practices).

The post-decision monitoring and enforcement by the public of the international level decisions does not exist in the legislation, but theoretically, can be realized in practice, even taking into account that public authorities of Moldova do not inform the public about possibilities to report to international organs about non-compliance of international rules by Moldova (Espoo Convention mechanism).

Taking into consideration the present situation with public participation in international decisionmaking, the following recommendations can be suggested to improve it. At first, some amendments should be added to the Law "On Environmental Expertise and EIA" to establish the possibility of international environmental expertise and EIA with the involvement of the public from all states concerned. Secondly, the incorporation of international conventions in domestic legislation of the country is needed to increase their image and effectiveness within the national legal system and to ensure the real implementation of the principle of international rules' priority. Thirdly, the legislation dealing with access to information/environmental information should undoubtedly fix the access of foreign natural and legal persons to the information in Moldova. The signing by Moldova of bilateral and multilateral agreements with neighbor countries on the problems relating to all parties (for example, Dniester (with Ukraine) Prut (with Romania), multilateral conventions on the Danube fate with the involvement of the public in this process can also be recommended.

Preparation and Approval of National Laws and Regulations

The obstacles in public participation on the level of national laws and regulations include: the absence of legal regulation of the access to drafting materials, the absence of the requirement to obligatory consideration of the suggestions of the public on the drafts. Moreover, there is no mechanism which would guarantee access to participation in the work of parliament and the government for those persons (or NGOs) who made their suggestions on the drafts of laws (regulations). The legislation of Moldova does not give the right to legislative initiative to the public. However, to the author's opinion, this does not seem to be an obstacle for the public, which can easily find other ways to bring reasonable draft proposals for consideration by the highest public authorities.

The public participation in the preparation and approval of national laws and regulations can be improved by the creation of the system of free provision of the information about the drafting process and drafts (for example, by electronic mail). The introduction of public hearings in the legal act regulating the activity of parliament and Government would contribute to the better realization of public participation rights.

Preparation and Approval of National Strategies, Programs, Plans

In relation to the right to be informed and the right to access to information, it should be mentioned that the majority of important drafts of national strategies and policies are usually published in the newspapers and, generally, accessible to the public. For example, in 1996 the Government of Moldova approved the National Environmental Actions Plan. Before the approval, some consultations with NGOs were organized. However, NGOs representatives were not adequately prepared for the meeting, and thus it had just a formal character.

Preparation and Approval of Local Rules and Regulations

It could be recommended to make it obligatory to publish the agendas of local authorities' sessions in local newspapers and to provide the possibilities for the public to attend these meetings with minimum conditional requirements. The acts which regulate the procedure in local authorities should include the mandatory procedures of public hearings, at least for specified areas of human activity. The obligation of public authorities to take into account public opinions while considering an issue shall be introduced in the legislation; the non-implementation of this duty shall be subject for legal liability. The better conditions for real access to information should be organized (accessibility of all drafts upon request, publication of the information on the drafting process).

The mechanism of publication and distribution of the local authorities' decisions should be created. In present, the majority of local authorities' decisions are not made known to the public.

Preparation and Approval of Local Policies

EIA

The public participation in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) represents one of the best opportunities for the public to influence decisionmaking. Certainly, this does not mean the right to decide or the right to joint decisionmaking - these rights are not provided by Moldova's legislation. However, the legislative background and practical examples show that the EIA is almost the only opportunity for the public to be heard, and have its comments seriously taken into account. The public is not usually refused access to information on the EIA when it requests it.

At the same time, several negative aspects should be mentioned to adequately reflect the situation with public participation in the EIA in Moldova. The Law on Environmental Expertise and EIA of May 29, 1996 requires that the legislative acts shall also be subject to environmental expertise procedure. However, this legal requirement is very rarely followed in practice. The recent example for this is the Law on Power Engineering passed by parliament without the observance of the requirements stipulated by the Law on Environmental Expertise.

The Law on Environmental Expertise and EIA unreasonably restricts the sphere of application for EIA (not environmental expertise) provisions, because when it was under elaboration the drafters were guided by analogous laws from the other countries that are bigger than Moldova, and they did not take into account the specificity of Moldova's small-scale industrial and power actors. This, consequently, restricts the opportunities for public participation in EIA.

It can be recommended to expand the legal sphere of EIA in Moldova by incorporation of the possibilities and procedures of international EIA in the legislation.

Better opportunities for public participation could be created by cancellation of several requirements that restrict them. For example, under Moldovan legislation if two or more NGOs want to undertake a public environmental expertise, they can only do it together. The other restricting point is that if two public expertises have already taken place, another one cannot be undertaken. In relation to EIA, it could be suggested to reduce the number of citizens (which is now equal to 100 persons) that are able to initiate the EIA procedure. The revision of these requirements would allow better opportunities for public participation in the EIA.

Siting

Management of Environmental Funds

Permitting