Latvia has also differed from its Baltic neighbors in one interesting respect. As a matter of national pride, the Parliament (called the Saeima) has insisted upon reviving the 1922 Constitution, a sparse document by today's standards outlining the governmental structure but containing no statement of fundamental rights, rather than adopting a new constitution as has been done in Lithuania and Estonia. The stubborn refusal to even amend the 1922 Constitution has resulted in adoption of supplementary laws "of constitutional force," such as a law on rights and obligations of citizens and persons.
While the rapid pace of law-drafting has produced substantial reforms, it has also resulted in hurried and problematic laws that will need revisions in the near future. Government and parliamentary sources have complained about the general quality of laws being passed and resent the extreme pressure the Parliament is under to whisk laws through the door. Meanwhile, although the pace of enacting laws has perhaps not diminished, action in the environmental law sphere has ground to a halt. The current Parliament has not passed a single significant environmental law during its term. The momentum for reform has passed to the Government, and specifically the Ministry of Environment and Regional Development, which have issued several relevant decrees, regulations and guidelines in the last two years.
At the time of Latvia's separation from the Soviet Union, as was typical of many countries in the region going through transition, environmental protection and the deteriorating state of the environment played significant roles in rallying the public behind the calls for changes in the system. At that time mass demonstrations were widespread. As the environmental movement was the most "legitimate" way of criticizing the system in general, it became extremely popular. In fact, the Popular Front of Latvia, the revolutionary party, arose out of the Environmental Protection Club. Today, Latvia has a Green Party. It was represented in the first independent parliament, but failed to win the necessary 4% of votes to give it seats in Parliament in the latest elections (June 1993), although members of the party have been elected on the local level. It is a member of the National Movement, a liberal coalition.
Once Latvia's independence was assured, one of the first items of business for the parliament was the 1991 Law on Environmental Protection. This law contains extensive public participation provisions, as do laws following it such as the law on EIA. In practice, however, the public participation requirements in these laws have gone virtually unimplemented, although the state claims that it uses the requirements of the law in practice. Moreover, the public has exerted little pressure towards making use of the provisions that exist. The current Parliament, dominated by the conservative Latvian Way, is considered less receptive to environmental protection initiatives.
Latvia's environmental movement in general still follows a somewhat traditional socialist-era path. Most environmental NGOs are nature clubs and the like. Some are beginning to exhibit sophistication and are making international contacts. Examples include the Environmental Protection Club (VAK) and the Latvian Nature Foundation.
Nevertheless, Latvia seems to show a respect for environmental protection and public participation in particular due to an acknowledgement of the significant role played by related issues in the movement for independence. Latvia also has strong historical ties with other countries bordering the Baltic Sea, in particular Germany and Sweden, which can help to lead Latvia towards more active participatory democracy. European Community membership is not unattainable either, as Latvia enjoys a strong currency, has been fairly stable economically and politically and is moving steadily in the direction of privatization and market reforms.
As shown by the legislation described below, the Ministry of Environment and Regional Development is sensitive to requirements for public participation in legislation. Cooperation between the Ministry and the other governmental authorities is quite possible, since the Ministry was originally established as a result of the activities of the Ministry of State Reforms, which also oversees the privatization process and other significant transformations.
New laws for parliamentary and government procedure are currently under consideration. In debates held on the government procedure law, a serious topic of conversation has been the possibility of mandating public participation in the rulemaking process.
a. Right to Healthy Environment
The Law on Rights and Obligations does not contain a right to a healthy environment. Instead, Article 43 states that environmental protection is the responsibility of each person, the entire society and the State. The right to a healthy environment is contained in the environmental protection law, discussed below.
b. Right of Expression
c. Right to Information
See previous citation.
d. Right of Free Assembly
e. Right of Association
Article 31 of the Law on Rights and Obligations guarantees the right of association in such organizations whose goals and practical actions are not contrary to law. Latvia is a signatory to the Convention Concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize (1948).
f. Right of Petition
g. Government's Relationship to the Citizens
The Constitution itself includes no public participation provisions for deliberations either of the Parliament or of the Government.
Article 6 of Chapter 5 of the law "On the Procedures of Reviewing Legislative Drafts," however, allows for drafts of legislation to be sent to interested public organizations. Comments and suggestions received are to be discussed by the working group drafting the legislation and in the meetings of the committees of the Supreme Council. Although it is allowed, such public notification of proposed laws is not required. Moreover, there are no regulations on public participation through legislative advisory committees or lobbying. When public comments are accepted, there is no requirement that they be incorporated into law or that law makers explain why their decisions differed from the suggestions offered by the public.
The only requirements regarding public involvement in the development of national environmental policy are those discussed below under Article 13 of the Law "On Environmental Protection."
A serious handicap to public participation in environmental policymaking through the Parliament is the fact that the subject area of the Parliamentary Committee concerned with environmental issues includes social issues as well. Consequently this committee concentrates on issues like pensions, the broadcast media and social security. According to one MP on the committee, very little attention is given to the environment.
Article 14 imposes on local environmental protection authorities the duty to regularly inform inhabitants about the condition of the environment.
Also, the Law on State Environmental Impact Assessments states that the Supreme Council may solicit comments from additional ecological experts when conclusions of government appointed experts are challenged. It is unclear whether such challenges can be taken to court. The public can access final permits under Article 12 of the Law on Environmental Protection. Unless specifically requested, such information rarely becomes public. The media does not regularly report on the issuance of permits.
The same regulations that require public access to information regarding environmental regulations and permits (Articles 12 and 13 of the Law on Environmental Protection) also allow for the public to be notified of violations of environmental regulations. However, as above, such notification is only made in response to specific requests. The press occasionally reports on violations of environmental regulations. Public protest against the storage of radioactive waste in Baldone several years ago was a notable case of public demonstration against violation of environmental regulations. Protestors complained that regulations on safety at the storage station had not been observed.
Whether this right can be demanded by members of the public is unclear, although Article 13, paragraph 4 of the same law imposes an obligation on the State authorities to ensure the "openness of the assessment."
As is typical of civil and socialist legal systems, there is very little guidance about who may become a party to an administrative proceeding. Latvian government experts claim that there are no specific criteria that need to be met, that anyone who has any opinion on the matter can apply to the authority and express it. This analysis does not address who may have appeal rights, however. In general the criterion is that the party must have a "legal interest" in the case in order to have standing to appeal.
b. Intervening in Ongoing Case
According to standard notions of state administration, a party who proves a legal interest in a given case is considered to be an indispensable party to the case, and therefore can enter at any time.
Chapter 24.a. of the Code of Civil Procedures provides that if unlawful decisions are passed due to the misconduct of a public official, anyone adversely affected may submit a claim in court.
Article 15 of the same law contemplates that some claims for compensation for environmental damages should be submitted to arbitration. It should be recognized that the State Arbitrator is, as the name suggests, an organ of the state. There are no reported cases of environmental disputes being handled by arbitration under this provision.
a. Reconcideration
Letters asking for reconsideration of decisions are a little-used option in administrative procedure. More commonly, parties seek review at a higher administrative level.
b. Administrative Appeal
Article 14 of the Law on Environmental Protection places a duty on municipal governments and local environmental protection institutions to examine inhabitant and public organization complaints and proposals on ecological questions and to inform them about the resolution of such complaints and proposals.
According to traditional notions of state administration, parties dissatisfied with the results of an administrative proceeding create a file by writing letters of complaint to higher governmental authorities. Such authorities may include a local or regional director, a minister, or the Government. In such cases, the usual procedure is for documentation to be collected and for the file to pass from office to office, accumulating opinion letters from various authorities until a final consensus is reached.
c. Judicial Review of Final Administrative Decisions
Chapter 24.a. of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that if unlawful decisions are passed due to the misconduct of a public official, anyone adversely affected may submit a claim in court.
Article 38, last paragraph, provides that the Council of Ministers and municipal governments may invite "special services, organizations, and inhabitants" to observe the causes and consequences of "special ecological situations."
A maximum of three months, plus extensions, is allowed for the completion of EIAs. Art. 10.
The assessment reports issued by the state authorities are considered final. Only the Latvia Supreme Council may order the performance of additional expertise, and Article 16 indicates that this can occur upon a challenge of the findings of the state expertise by members of the public or others.
With respect to other aspects of environmental protection, including permitting and enforcement, the Law on Environmental Protection (August 6, 1991) designates the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development and the Council of Ministers as responsible authorities. See, e.g., Article 7. Paragraph 7 of Article 2 of the Regulation "On State Inspection over Environmental Protection in the Republic of Latvia" (October 10, 1990) requires that the chief inspector of environmental protection make decisions on pollution permits. This law contains no requirements for public participation in the permitting process. There is no requirement to inform the public about proposed permits.
Guidelines on EIA were issued by the Environmental Protection Committee in 1993. They give further details about specific public participation procedures in EIA.
Protection of commercial secrets may in some cases obstruct public monitoring. Article 7 of the Law "On the Press and Other Means of Mass Media" disallows the publishing or distribution of information regarding commercial secrets without permission of the concerned enterprise.
As previously mentioned, Article 56 of the Law on Environmental Protection provides that public organizations and movements may demand compensation for natural resource damages if such action is not initiated by the Ministry institutions or the Prosecutor.
Most often, public participation in enforcement takes the form of individuals acting as witnesses on behalf of public authorities acting against violators, although citizen initiatives such as the Green Tribunal (see Section V, below) are beginning to assist in the exercise of individual rights. In cases where the authorities have not taken action against a violator, Article 56 of the Law "On Environmental Protection" allows public organizations to claim damages. In cases where a public official has failed to enforce an environmental regulation, the public may appeal to higher authorities or to court.
Significantly, Article 56 provides that public organizations and movements may demand compensation for natural resource damages if such action is not initiated by the Ministry institutions or the Prosecutor. There is no statute of limitations for compensation. However, equitable doctrines under the readopted 1937 civil code such as laches and detrimental reliance may be used to bar stale claims.
The Entrepreneurial Law may conflict with the above provisions. This law specifically provides that entrepreneurial associations are liable for damages resulting from the failure to rationally use natural resources. Whether this law could be interpreted to absolve entrepreneurial associations from liability for damages caused in consequence of the rational use of natural resources is unclear. That is, if an entrepreneurial association secures a permit pursuant to Article 32 of the Law on Environmental Protection, it could claim that it is not liable for damages so long as it complies with the requirements of the permit.
Article 13, paragraph 7 of the Law on State Environmental Impact Assessments makes the State authorities responsible for losses to property resulting from errors made in environmental impact assessments.
Article 7 requires the territorial planning process to undergo expert evaluation in accordance with the law "On State Ecological Expert Evaluation" (so-called in the law Ð should be taken to mean the Law on State Environmental Impact Assessments) and other acts.
A natural or legal person whose objections to planning decisions have been "disregarded" may submit a written complaint to the Ministry of Environment and Regional Development within two months of the decision. Art. 11.
Specific procedures for the provision of information during the national and regional planning process are laid down in Article 20 of the Regulations. Under the regulations, the Ministry of Environment and Regional Development must give notice of public discussions on planning decisions in a newspaper eight weeks prior to the meeting. The notice must include a deadline for submission of written comments.
Although this meeting does not specifically provide for public participation, it is an open meeting and presumably could involve members of the public who took part in the Article 20 process.
Provisions mirroring Articles 20 and 21 with respect to district planning can be found at Articles 28 and 29.
Furthermore, the town planning part includes an additional provision with respect to the open meeting at which the plan is adopted. Article 43 includes a statement that "[d]uring the meeting, any interested person shall have an access to the materials submitted for public discussion." It is not clear why this provision is not also included with respect to national, regional and district planning.
A further public participation process takes place during the proceeding for the adoption of the "detailed plan, or a scheme for development of engineering communications." See Arts. 50-53.
At least one case has been reported in which individuals have been convicted of crimes for environmental endangerment under the current law. Environmentalists applied to the prosecutor, who brought a case against two individuals who dumped ammonia from a paper mill into the sea at night. They received sentences of two years probation.
b. Civil Code (Environmental Liability)
Chapter 24.a of the Civil Code provides that if unlawful decisions are passed due to the misconduct of a public official, anyone adversely affected may submit a claim in court.
As shown by the cases mentioned below, informal non-legal public participation has on occasion been rather effective. Perhaps this has contributed to the lack of recourse to the formal legal mechanisms for public participation contained in such laws as the Law on Environmental Protection and the Law on State Environmental Impact Assessments. These mechanisms, though legally quite sufficient, are reportedly not used often. This may be changing, however, as the Ministry of Environment and Regional Development is developing guidelines for implementation of public participation provisions. But even where such procedures are in place and an attempt is made to follow them, the public does not participate to any great extent.
The key constraint against public participation in the opinion of one former member of parliament is psychological. Under the Soviet system, people only became active when things were already in ruins. According to this source, the Soviet line was that nature was an unlimited source for humans and that humans could adapt nature to their needs. Thus, there appeared no need to develop a definite procedure and order to involve the public in an unacknowledged problem.
Once the public does become motivated, however, the general opinion of those involved is that the environmental authorities and the greens tend to cooperate with one another. Where public participation appears to be strong is in individual cases where the full range of legal and non-legal tools are considered. In these cases more times than not the public fora resolve the issue without the necessity of legal proceedings.
Privatization and development are occurring in Latvia. It enjoys a relatively stable currency and a long historical tradition of trade and commerce. The privatization process is administered by the Central Land Privatization Authority. Environmentalists and public activists complain about the failure of the State in the privatization process to secure any commitments for environmental improvements. The current privatization law does not require the new owner to take any measures to address environmental contamination. Under the Law on Environmental Protection, however, the new owner is responsible for environmental liabilities.
Because of the strategic importance of the Baltic states, the former Soviet military undertook a heavy buildup of facilities during the last half century. Much land that was seized during this time is being returned to its original owners and their heirs. Information about the environmental condition of this land, and possible compensation for unusable or damaged land is a hotly contested issue at present. In general, liability for contamination at former military installations is unresolved and a significant matter. Such sites are potentially usable for development projects.
As mentioned above, the current Parliament is relatively unconcerned with the environment. Meanwhile the Ministry and Government move ahead on law drafting. Perhaps the most significant to public participation is the National Environmental Protection Policy. This document, including public participation principles, will be adopted on the level of the Cabinet, probably in 1995. A law relating to minerals and other underground activities was in preparation in the Ministry of Environment and Regional Development at the beginning of 1995. Other drafts include a law on development buffer zones around environmentally critical areas, a law on natural resource taxes and a labelling law, none of which will include public participation provisions. The regulations issued by the Cabinet concerning territorial project planning mandated that the Ministry of Environment and Regional Development amend its instructions "On the Procedure of Organizing and Performing State Ecological Expert Analysis for Projects involving Economic Activity" before September 1995.
Perhaps it reflects a higher level of organization on the part of Latvian NGOs, but for some reason a relatively high number of cases where the public has influenced decisionmaking have been identified. As early as 1987, construction of the Daugavpils hydropower station was stopped through a citizen campaign including organization of public meetings, educational programs, demonstrations and expert studies. Another early "success story" was the abandoning of plans to construct a subway in Riga. More recently, however, such examples are rarer. The Ecological Center of the University of Latvia is currently conducting a campaign against exploitation of limestone deposits in Salaspils. Targets of demonstrations have included Soviet military bases, the pulp paper industry and Baltic Sea pollution. Grassroots campaigns have been directed at glass recycling and beach cleanups.
An interesting initiative of the Environmental Protection Club (VAK) is the Green Tribunal. This project pursues a multi-faceted approach to environmental action, by providing information and gathering petitions on environmental matters, undertaking grassroots inspections of facilities, and organizing mass media campaigns. On the legal side, the Green Tribunal also makes complaints to governmental officials in appropriate cases, and may seek recourse to the courts through the prosecutor or through a civil action.
Latvian legal experts reported one case proceeding under the liability provisions of the Law on Environmental Protection. The case began with public protests against hazardous waste storage by a paint and grease factory 40 km outside of Riga. After the protests, the Ministry of Environment and Regional Development became involved and began to gather information which was made available to the residents. An environmental NGO ultimately filed a claim against the managers of the plant. The court ordered the facility closed, awarded damages and required that the owner conduct monitoring of the site. Other cases in which courts acted have included stopping the construction of the Daugavpils hydroelectric project, and a current case involving illegal constructions on the Baltic.
A matter of keen public interest recently has been the problem of Riga's municipal waste disposal. Officials have involved the public extensively in discussions. The public has put questions to the authorities through various fora, including at public hearings and two live television "town meetings." Transcripts of the hearings have been published in newspapers.
One highly publicized public action involved a radioactive materials storage facility in Baldone. Local residents demonstrated and made claims for compensation. Local professionals and the municipal government got involved in support of the residents. The residents acted through an ad hoc association, which did not go through formalities of registering with the court.
Results of public participation in EIA proceedings have been mixed. The Ministry points to some meetings concerning local area management plans which were left unattended by the public. In other cases, however, such as the Jurmala city architecture project, the public is actively involved. Authorities are taking a more active role in trying to stimulate public involvement. Plans are underway to raise public awareness and the level of participation in the case of the Kuldiga management plan and the Liepaia waste water treatment project.
Other than VAK and the Latvia Nature Foundation, other significant NGOs include the Ecological Center of University of Latvia, Friends of the Earth - Latvia, the Latvian Association for Protection of Nature and Monuments (founded 1959, traditional and now unpopular because of its association with the socialist era, during which time it was even given some governmental functions), the Latvian Environment Foundation and the Latvian WWF. VAK organized a conference on public participation in June, 1994. Most environmental publications are government-subsidized, at least partially. One such magazine, "ELPA," is currently independent editorially, but discussions are underway about whether the magazine needs to become an organ of the Ministry of Environment and Regional Development in order to survive financially.
The Latvian Green Party is growing in membership and is a member of the National Movement, the liberal coalition currently in mild opposition to the conservative Latvian Way government.
Extra-parliamentary means of exerting public pressure have been used widely. Demonstrations, speeches on radio and television, and articles in the press have proved influential in many instances. A liberal draft law on the press would contribute to such pressure, since if enacted it would give virtually unlimited access to information to anyone with a press pass. In addition, the media currently is under no obligation to set aside time for public information announcements, or infomercials. Public interest groups, such as environmental NGOs, must pay standard advertising rates for access to media time.