Aarhus centers filed a lawsuit to protect the river Bistrica in Foča!
The Aarhus Center in Bosnia and Herzegovina, i.e. the Aarhus Center in Sarajevo, and the Center for Environment, i.e. the Aarhus Center in Banja Luka, filed a lawsuit against the Ministry of Spatial Planning, Construction and Ecology of Republika Srpska, in relation to the issued decisions approving Environmental Impact Studies for the construction of hydropower plants “B-2a”, “Bistrica B-1” and “Bistrica B-3” on the river Bistrica. The lawsuit primarily highlights the violation of the RS Environmental Law, the Rulebook on projects for which environmental impact assessment is carried out and the criteria for deciding on the obligation to carry out and the scope of RS environmental impact assessment, the Aarhus and ESPOO Conventions.
We would like to remind you that the Republika Srpska entity’s Electric Power Company (ERS) hired the Chinese national aero technology corporation for international engineering – AVIC for the construction of hydropower plants “Bistrica B-1”, “Bistrica B-2a” and “Bistrica B-3” on the Bistrica river. In December 2021, the official start of the works was made even though the project did not have a valid environmental permit at that time, and the existence of an environmental permit is a prerequisite for the existence of an urban planning and construction permit, after which, in accordance with the law, the construction of these buildings can only begin.
“It is scary to realize that the construction of a large complex with three hydroelectric power plants is currently being prepared, while the process of obtaining and renewing all the necessary permits for their construction is still ongoing. Unfortunately, retroactive legalization is usually carried out afterwards, which is a common practice in these cases, and which degrades the strength of the law and the importance of judicial institutions. Namely, the relevant ministry only issued environmental permits for these facilities a few days ago, and the facilities are already being built, ie. construction is being prepared. So, we can ask ourselves: if the republican institution narrowly applies the chronology of issuing permits, what is the purpose of the existence of these permits and laws, and the very law on which the work of that institution is based? There is also the question of whether it would be more credible for its purpose if the Ministry of Spatial Planning, Construction and Ecology of RS was renamed the Ministry for the Needs and Economic Development of Investors, given that this and many other similar cases signal that this ministry is does not really stand for adequate protection of the environment. It is important to point out that according to the law, this lawsuit does not delay the execution of the defendant’s decisions, and that is why I think that, based on the example of such cases, it is inappropriate to work on amending the Law on Administrative Disputes in both entities,” says Emina Veljović, executive director of the Aarhus Center in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Residents of the settlements next to the Bistrica River near Foča have repeatedly pointed out that they do not want the construction of these facilities and are announcing protests if the works are continued. Many objections were expressed at public hearings as well as submitted written comments, which also include remarks from relevant institutions. Namely, the Public Institution “Vode Srpske” in its opinion dated 19.10.2021. pointed out remarks and concerns regarding the possibility of ensuring an environmentally acceptable flow, especially in relation to the technical solution for fish migration and the proposed “fish lift”, which it labeled as an “unreliable” solution.
“Before filing this lawsuit, we submitted several petitions to the republic inspection, demanding the suspension of activities that were not accompanied by valid environmental permits. However, although in other cases, with an identical factual and legal background, we succeeded in effecting the suspension of illegal construction, in the case of the implementation of Åhydropower plants have a total power of over 34 MW, and three accompanying accumulations, which will have a significant cumulative negative impact, which is why it was it is necessary that all parties, potentially affected by that cumulative impact, be consulted in a timely manner by the defendant with, above all, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Serbia, and Montenegro. Also, and since we still don’t have an epilogue to the court proceedings that we initiated earlier and against the construction permits that were previously issued for these plants, we will consider contesting the now issued environmental permits, among other things, due to the existence of the previous issue,” points out the legal advisor, Redžib Skomorac from the Center for Environment from Banja Luka. Source: (aarhus.ba)