CYIL vol. 7 (2016)

370

BIRUTĖ PRANEVIČIENĖ – VIOLETA VASILIAUSKIENĖK

CYIL 7 ȍ2016Ȏ

As to the right to information, the relevant question from the ones mentioned

above is that of the contents of the notification and the information provided in

other steps of the EIA procedure. On 15 September 2009, Belarus sent Lithuania

and the other affected Parties “a preliminary EIA report” including justification

of the selection of the Ostrovets site as the priority site for the planned activity

made “on the basis of research results and according to International Atomic Energy

Authority (IAEA) standards”.

But later it became known that the preliminary EIA

report is only a shortened version of the full report that is available in Minsk, on

governmental premises, and is accessible only during working hours.

The Committee noted that there were problems with the translation of the

documents provided to Lithuania and stated that “a better translation of the documents

would have allowed for proper public participation, by ensuring a non-discriminatory

process of participation in line with Article 2, paragraph 6 [of the Espoo Convention]”.

The burden of translation falls upon the state where the activity is planned. The scope

of the information to be translated is agreed upon by the concerned parties when

responding to the initial notification starting the transboundary EIA procedure.

The Committee stated in its conclusions that “the documentation to be translated

should, as a minimum, include the non-technical summary and those parts of the

EIA documentation that were necessary to provide an opportunity to the public of

the affected Party to participate that was equivalent to that provided to the public of

the Party of origin. The Committee recommended that EIA documentation should

include a separate chapter on transboundary impact to facilitate translation.

The

final conclusion of the Committee was that Belarus was in non-compliance with

Article 4, paragraph 2 because it did not inform Lithuania of the availability of the

final EIA report and did not submit it for comments to Lithuania.

In June 2014,

the sixth meeting of the Parties to the Espoo Convention further acknowledged

that Belarus was implementing the NPP project in non-compliance with the Espoo

Convention and identified key issues to correct and to eliminate the non-compliance.

2.3 The Right to Information in the Convention on Access

to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making

and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters

The main legal act providing the right not only to the states but also to citizens

and their groups to get information about the environment is the United Nations

Ibid

., 13.

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. ‘Decision IV/9b on compliance by Belarus with its

obligations under the Convention’ (Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on Access to Information,

Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, Fourth

session. Chisinau, 29 June –1 July 2011) ECE/MP.PP/2011/2/Add.1, 4.

Ibid

, para 64.