To ensure the norms not included in the 1922 Constitution, parliament has adopted supplementary laws intended to be of constitutional force, such as the 1992 Constitutional Law related to the Rights and Obligations of a Citizen and the Rights and Obligations of Individuals. Art.44 of the Law provides that necessary restrictions to rights and freedom may be determined by law in order to, inter alia, guarantee state security, public order and peace. The Law related to the Rights and Obligations does not contain the right to a healthy environment, however, instead, Art.43 determines that each person, as well as the entire society and state, are responsible for environmental protection. The right to a healthy environment is provided in the Law related to Environmental Protection, discussed below.
Everybody has the right to free association in organizations (provided their goals and practical actions are not contrary to law), the right to information and the right to lodge petitions and complaints. The right to free expression is also constitutionally provided under Art.30 of the law related to Rights and Obligations - until now, there have been no reported cases where this right has been violated.
The law related to Rights and Obligations also provides the right to free assembly, with the reservation that the local government may change the time or place of such events, if it is in the interests of public safety and order (Art.32) - in some cases the local governments have changed the place and time of the events, but there has always been a profound reason for it - there have been no reported cases of this reservation being abused.
The Constitutional Law (Art.34) also provides that each person has the right to turn to the institutions of the state government and administration with individual or collective submission or proposal and to receive an answer in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law - experience proves that this right is observed in practice, provided the application is addressed to the responsible institution - proposals, however, do not legally need to be adopted.
According to the right to access of information, the environmental laws do not clearly define when information should be available to the public. There are cases involving civil servants where access to information has been denied because of doubt or confusion and if the NGO or interested person is not well-versed in the matter, no objections will be raised. In those cases, it is advisable to submit a written application, thus obliging the civil servant to answer in some form.
It should be taken into consideration that the Constitution of Latvia proclaims that the sovereign power of the Latvian State shall belong to the people of Latvia (Art.2), yet no separate constitutional court has been founded in Latvia. Regular courts, the highest of which is the Supreme Court, may instead decide on issues of constitutionality, while debates related to the necessity of a Constitutional Court have been going on for a long time. A draft law has been prepared, but the law has not yet been adopted.
Clearly, environmental and public participation issues are not fully regulated in the Constitution and Constitutional Laws, but this requires time.
Occasionally, parliamentary commissions hold public hearings on specific issues, but generally few NGOs are invited and usually as experts in the field, not representatives of the public. On the whole, the public can follow the activities of parliament on prior request, however, parliament can decide on closed sessions.
At local government level, public participation can be substantial. To ensure the implementation of the rights and responsibilities of local governments concerning environmental issues, the local government of Ventspils (one of the largest cities in Latvia) adopted Environmental Protection Licensing Regulations. The Regulations state that in order to receive a permit to start an activity harmful to the environment, the public should be informed and public hearings held. Ventspils is the first to adopt the regulations, though some other local governments intend to introduce similar regulations.
The government is also working on public participation issues. In March 1995, the Council of Ministers adopted The Conception of the Reform of Administration in the State of Latvia. One aspect of the reform is the relationship between the public and the state - it is the duty of the state administration to provide the public with information related to its work. It determines that both the state and the public have certain rights and duties.
The reform envisages the promotion and development of public organizations, while transferring some state responsibilities to local government, public organizations and the public, thus increasing the importance of public organizations. This means practically that the opinion of public organizations must be taken into consideration in the decisionmaking process of the state administration, while the principle of openness within the state institutions determines how far an individual and the public can gain access to information.
In a democratic country, the state's responsibilities should be promoted to ensure a more effective state administration. State security, order, defense and international relations should remain a responsibility of the state.
The courts are heavily overworked and legal proceedings take a long time (up to one year), thus, not only do people not want to become involved in proceedings, but the increase in the number of laws and regulations makes it too difficult for them to initiate proceedings without the help of a lawyer.
According to Art.13, the public and public organizations have the right to demand information related to the influence on the environment of proposed constructions, and to demand that competent state institutions publish and announce the results of environmental impact statements and inquiry results related to environmental problems.
The local environmental protection institutions have a duty to regularly inform the inhabitants about the condition of the environment (Art.14). As to the access to information, it depends on where we want to get information from. One of the duties of state institutions is to provide the public with information. For instance, the Ministry of Justice collects all legal regulations adopted once independence was restored in Latvia. Some regulations have not been published before and thus the public has not had access to them.
It is much more difficult to get information from enterprises polluting environment, primarily because they may have no information since they are not interested in environmental protection. It is easier for them to pay the fines and not take any responsibility. Until now, the newspapers in Latvia have not publicized cases of environmental damage.
There are future plans to create an EIA institution which would coordinate projects and monitor EIA requirements and recommendations. The institution would coordinate both environmental and regional development demands, to be carried out by licensed experts and designers.
Public participation in the control and supervision of EIA requirements in this case could be much more effective. Under the existing legislation, lack of information inhibits public participation. Enterprises often ignore the requirements of the EIA and the public do not always realize the possible impact on human health and the social consequences of certain activities. It is also important to know if the environment protection measures recommended by EIA are observed in practice.
Though the law on the EIA envisages public participation, the public cannot legally influence the decision of EIA. In one example, the public objected to a state proposal for a site for the Riga City Waste Polygon, but none of the regions around Riga agreed to its placement in their territory. The state environmental minister repeatedly met local inhabitants and explained the need for the polygon, assuring the public that the environment would not suffer. However, the public was not to be persuaded and it rejected all proposals until the final decision was made by the State to locate the waste polygon at Olaine, since there are already chemical and plastic industries located there.
Public participation can also be exercised through other, existing procedures. For instance, Art.10 of the law related to hazardous waste states that persons working with hazardous waste shall provide information to interested persons, thus, the public can organize meetings and protests against activities harmful to environment and turn to state environmental institutions with their claims. The Civil Law states that a person can protest as an individual or as a member of society, but in most cases, people react to activities only if they bring harm to them personally.
The law related to protected conservation areas does not include public participation norms, but does not prohibit NGOs from drawing public attention to environmental problems. The law determines specially protected areas in which activity is restricted, such as determined areas around the Baltic Sea shore. This is one of the few fields in which NGOs strictly monitor the preservation of the law. Thus, Talsi VAK, a branch of the Environmental Protection Club (the biggest NGO in Latvia), actively protects the dunes of the Baltic Sea at Kurzeme. In June 1995, the Talsi VAK and CCB organized a seminar at the Baltic Sea, inviting representatives from NGOs, GOs, local government and business organizations. The participants formulated resolutions related to Baltic Sea shore protection and sent them to parliament, government, the MoE and the Union of Municipalities, proving that common effort can solve problems more effectively.
There is, of course, a difference between theory and practice - the existing regulations provide possibilities for the public to participate in various fields, but in practice, the public is not aware of this. Besides, there is a lack of basic general legal mechanisms, such as regulations on state servants and access to information. An NGO or citizen has no legal guarantee to information on whether the enterprise has or has not a permit to exercise the polluting activity.
Public participation is not always effective, as the responsible environmental institution cannot always fine the possible violator on the basis of the information provided by the public because it is not always easy to prove that the possible violator is to blame. The most important missing legal instrument is the absence of a regulation related to public participation in the environmental laws - a true mechanism to involve the public. There are some basic general legal mechanisms that are missing, such as guarantees for quick and effective procedure, an independent environmental ombudsman and the ensurance of security for the environmental officials who have made a decision to prohibit an activity.
There have been almost no court cases in Latvia concerning the environment and public involvement, most cases refer to small violations. For instance in the regions of Latvia, there are often cases of illegal tree felling, fishing and hunting, and there are cases in which witnesses inform the environmental protection inspector about the violation. If the latter manages to catch the violator red-handed, he/she may impose a fine. If the violator does not pay the fine, proceedings may be started at court, although it is difficult to force the violator to pay the fine, even in these cases, because such persons are often out of work. Thus, the problem of who should pay for the damage has not been solved. This does not promote public participation, but rather decreases it, as the public does not believe that the violator will be held responsible.
In early 1987, the Environmental Protection Club (VAK) was formed as a grassroots and networking environmental NGO. VAK involved many politically active people and tried to implement ideas of democracy and independence. They represented very different political parties, groups and social organizations. Also, at that time, the Youth Ecological Center was established, based on the work of Student Green Units at the University of Latvia. In 1988, it was established as the Ecological Center, a professional environmental NGO.
There were also several other groups and clubs that had been active for a shorter period (1987-1989). By 1986, international cooperation with green members had been initiated. The Youth Ecological Center joined the Central and Eastern European countries and the network Greenway.
In January 1990, the Green Party of Latvia was established - the first green political organization. In 1991, the Latvian Fund for Nature was established - the first NGO coalition, and the Latvian Coalition for a Clean Baltic was formed in 1992.
There is also cooperation among NGOs, GOs, local governments, local communities, business organizations and academic experts in organizing joint seminars and workshops related to environmental protection and other issues.
Networking is more common among NGOs belonging to the same umbrella organization. NGOs in Latvia could be divided into two groups, those striving to work professionally, organize seminars and projects, cooperating with both Latvian and foreign NGOs, GOs, local government, business organizations and the public. The second group, however, merely organized campaigns, but often without any follow-up activities.
NGOs are invited to participate in some Governmental bodies and committees that discuss strategic environmental issues, environmental policy documents or draft laws, but the invitations are not widely publicized. For instance, the Ministry of Environment organized workshops to construct an Environmental Policy Plan for Latvia in 1995. Only a few NGO representatives were invited, but there were many representatives from various ministries at the workshops.
The most successful example of the Seventies was a group organized by the famous poet, Imants Ziedonis, which focused on the preservation campaigns and were aimed at saving and protecting endangered nature objects, historical and cultural monuments.
In 1983, a group for the preservation of monuments was created which organized campaigns, meetings, concerts, exhibitions in Riga, at Limbazi, Madona, Cesis, Jekabpils, Jelgava, Dobele, Tukums and Talsi. They held clean-up campaigns, focusing on old castle mounds, pre-Christian sacred sites and parks, saved abandoned and neglected churches at Zemite, Usma, Cesvaine, Renda, Tervete and Annenieki. In 1987, a meeting was organized by VAK in Riga and people in gasmasks and respirators protested against air pollution. NGOs protesting against the construction of the Underground in Riga were supported by the public, and thousands of people took part in a demonstration which successfully halted construction.
An example of a successful non-formal public participation practice was the action against the Sloka Paper Pulp factoryÐthe greatest polluter of the river Lielupe and Jurmala City. The demonstrators surrounded the factory and blocked all the roads and the railway. The action resulted in closing the factory up to the time when the reconstruction of the water treatment system was completed. VAK works also on protection of lakes from the pollution. One of the main achievements was the protest action against the eventual construction of the asphalt concrete factory at Dobele at the biggest lake which is located close to a unique Zemgalian sacred site. Another example, the Youth Ecological Center organized a demonstrationÐi.e. a boat rally on the Daugava RiverÐon the flooded plain for use after the Daugavpils Hydropower Station was completed.
In 1988, several hundred thousand people participated in an action, Prayer for the Baltic Seas. Many inhabitants of Estonia and Lithuania also took part in this circle around the Baltic Sea. The main goal of this action was to revive the prehistoric belief of the Sea as a living being: it took for granted that a true improvement of the environment is impossible without the revival of the public morale and ethic ideals.
Public attention is focused also on environmental identification and solving of the problem caused by waste mismanagement. Here the desperate public attempts did not bring the expected results. In Olaine Forest, there is still an open dumping ground with chemical waste. Also, the open huge gydron dumping site at Incukalns is an unresolved issue. Numerous actions have taken place regarding the black gydron lake, but the officials have not fulfilled promises because of technical and financial problems. It would be undesirable to ask the publicÕs opinion before a concrete plan is worked out and possible sources of financing found. Of course, here we can enumerate only some cases of public participation. Summing up the experience of the last 5-7 years, the number of public participation cases would exceed a 1,000. Green exhibitions, concerts trips, camps, conferences and seminars also promote public participation and influence decisionmaking processes.
For instance, a short article appeared in the Riga Region local newspaper. It gave information that at last a foreign firm will work on gypsum deposits in the Salaspils District. Some representatives from the VAK Green Tribunal got interested in the information and a small group of people started working on this issue. For several months, the group worked on collecting additional information, involved experts in the work and submitted the information to Parliament and the Government. Several meetings were held with local inhabitants that supported the project (new working places, etc.), municipality, regional deputies until finally this gypsum deposit project was stopped.
In April 1995, the Iecava local government ordered a socio-economic program, which was first publicized in the local newspaper so that the public might become acquainted with it. For a period of one week, the local inhabitants could express their opinion and present their proposals, but only eight people came forward, apparently because most people feared their opinions would not be taken seriously. Obviously, it is necessary to educate the public regarding their right to participate in the solution of problems connected with their future.
Another example of the involvement of the public is by educating them. Between May and August 1995, the Center of Environmental Science and Management Studies (CESAMS) organized a multi-modular seminar on the topic Ôterritorial social economic development and environmental planningÕ at Preili. The seminar consisted of several workshops, each lasting 1-2 weeks. The representatives of local governments and the local inhabitants were invited to participate in the seminar. One of the problems discussed was public participation in territory planning. It was explained to the representatives of local governments why public participation was important in the planning of the development of territory. It was explained to the public that public participation might influence the decisionmaking process, which is important as the public can attain their aims this way. The cooperation between the public, local governments and scientists was highly significant for further joint problem solving. A new development is that the module can be used in other local regions.
In the non-formal field, one of the main problems is that, following Latvian independence, NGOs are no longer coordinated, but it is important that the NGOs work more professionally and together. It is not enough to organize protests and campaignsÐregular work should follow these actions. NGOs have to work out well-grounded proposals for the Government if they want the Government to consider them.
As for the public, in most cases it is interested only in the issues concerning them directly. That is why it is important to educate the public so that it can take part in the decisionmaking process. At present, business organizations in Latvia are the ones that take the most skeptical view of public participation.
On their part, NGOs need to show more initiative and should define their ultimate goals to stir the indifferent and passive attitude of people towards public participation.
To conclude, it should be noted that there should be cooperation based on mutual understanding among the Government, NGOs, the public and business organizations.