This subtitle aims to sum up the findings of this chapter and provide evidence on the arguments drawn up in the dissertation. To be able to demonstrate the required outcomes of the fieldwork it is necessary to present the answers of the chosen thesis questions derived from the research data analysis. More detailed discussion of these findings will follow in the last chapter of thedissertation.
4. What is the required documentation to be submitted for EIA project?
There were questions about the documentation of the development projects directed to all the participants referred in the field research. The questions are listed together with the data analysis in tables of SPSS analysis.538 The analysis of the feedback gives approximate results of course, however, we see that the documents were not provided in case of villagers at all, as they had heard about the development from each other orally and had never seen
537 This information is written by hand on the questionnaires and translated into English for further usage in this thesis.
538 Sub-title 4.6, page 134.
173
any development project document presenting the upcoming operations in the context of the particular development project. Similar information had been received from the well informed participants of the survey. The lawyers, NGO members and environmental activists also confirm that they have lack of information for each development project that has been announced and presented in the context of the environmental impact assessment. The developers present their project on the board and explain it in technical point of view as it was implemented in the case of Geoteam LLC, the representative of Lidian International for Amulsar Gold Mining development project. The only document provided was a summary of the topic without detailed discussion of the project.539
5. Whether the EIA decision-making procedure is transparent in Armenia?
According to the answers gathered in the process of the fieldwork, it is evident that the decision-making process is not transparent. In particular, it is clear from the responses of environmental activists who asked for the information about development projects and received the answer that the information regarding developments is confidential. 540The transparency has been an issue in Armenia since its independence. The Pan-Armenian Environmental Front provided two examples of information request letters sent to the RA Ministries and the feedback received. These letters with answers are presented in chapter 6 of this thesis.541
Only recently, the Ministry of Nature Protection in Armenia has started uploading the files of development project proposals in the context of environmental impact assessment process into their official web site.542 The issue of transparency revealed during the whole process of this research work as it was difficult to obtain information from the state authorities of
539 Geoteam, 'Amulsar:responsible mining, sustainable development' (n502).
540 Question b) page 32 chapter 4.
541 n885
542 Ministry of Nature Protection of the Republic of Armenia, 'Nature Protection: Expertise'
174
Armenia in frames of this research work to be able to create the objective picture of ongoing environmental decision-making process in Armenia. 543 6. What are the law enforcement mechanisms that make the
developer to be accountable against public and government?
In the Law on Environmental Impact Assessment of the Republic of Armenia the provisions present the order of the assessment process that the developer has to follow. It presents the duration and obligations both for the developer and authorities; however there is not a provision that allocates any penalties and punishments in case either developer or the authorities violate the requirements.544 Both the old EIA law and the new one lack the requirements for the enforcement of the law.545
This question was implicitly referred in the questionnaires in the context of public awareness and the impact of the opinions in the decision-making process. In the scope of this research there is an interest to find out whether the public participation can be seen as one of the enforcement mechanisms of the law. As the results of analysis show, the public participation has not been held properly in most cases and many times public has complained against the violations of the regulations. However, the development projects have been approved by the authorities and been carried on despite the opposing views of public.546
The State Environmental Inspectorate is a state body acting under the authority of the Ministry of Nature protection. It is entitled to control the ongoing environmental development projects and sanction the violations.
‘The State Environmental Inspectorate carries out supervisory
543 The information has been sought from web sites of ministries and government.
544 Հայ աստանի Հանրապետության Օ ր ե ն ք ը Շրջակա Միջավայրի Վրա Ազդեցության Գնահատման Եվ Փորձաքննության ՄասինՀՕ-110-,ՀՀՊՏ 2014.07.30/41(1054) Հոդ.636 (RA Law on Environmental Impact Assessment and Expertise 2014/HO-110-N/ main source ՀՀՊՏ 2014.07.30/41(1054) Art.636).
545 The Law of the Republic of Armenia on Environmental Impact Assessment of 1995,Հայ աստանի Հանրապետության Օ ր ե ն ք ը Շրջակա Միջավայրի Վրա Ազդեցության Գնահատման Եվ Փորձաքննության ՄասինՀՕ-110-,ՀՀՊՏ 2014.07.30/41(1054) Հոդ.636 (RA Law on Environmental Impact Assessment and Expertise 2014/HO-110-N/ main source ՀՀՊՏ 2014.07.30/41(1054) Art.636).
546 General questions pages 28-30 of this chapter.
175
responsibilities for functions and application of environmental protection and natural resource use in reproduction.’547 The question about the Inspectorate has been addressed mainly to the participating lawyers and NGO members of this research.548
7. Whether the public participates in environmental decision-making and in what extent the voice of public is considered?
Both the case studies and field research questions refer to the issue of public participation, which is viewed as one of enforcement mechanisms of the law in this dissertation. Majority of respondents had never participated in public hearings as the field research results show. Those who participated have their own approach to this issue and think that participation is not considered seriously and out of the frames of the RA EIA Law. Even if in some cases the participation procedures were followed by the developers and authorities, the impacted communities were not involved. Instead more interested individuals were participating who shared the ideas of developers and do not oppose the decision makers. Those opinions that opposed or presented arguments on errors of the development projects were not considered in general. Although the Head of Legal Drafting Department at the Ministry of Nature Protection in Armenia says that sometimes, the regulations are being impacted by the opinions of experts and specialists who notice the errors in legislation or in implementation.549 Environmental activists believe that the public hearings are formal and the developers never take them seriously, as it is in the rule of law systems.
In the process of this doctrinal research, it is revealed that there have not been issued any governmental orders or decisions which regulate the process of identification of the impacted communities in the decision-making process. During the operation of the RA EIA Law of 1995, there were no particular orders or decisions made by the government in this regard. It is inferred that the impacted communities were identified based on
547 The Government of the Republic of Armenia, 'Structure' (The Government of the republic of Armenia, 2015) <http://www.gov.am/en/structure/5/> accessed 22/01/2015.
548 Fig.21S.
549 See subtitle 4.6, sub-sections 4.6.1 and 4.6.2 of this chapter.
176
the location of the proposed development projects before. However, the RA EIA Law of 2014 is supported with new governmental decisions, which provide instructions on the EIA process.550 The point 14 of the Decision # 399 of the Ministry of Nature Protection issued on 9 of April 2015, provides the approximate implementation of the public participation and names the authority in charge of announcing and organising the public hearing procedure. It says in particular:
the EIE centre posts the information about the development project on its web site 7 days after receiving the application and informs about that to the head of the region or head of the Yerevan city and to the impacted community leader in the process of assessing the baseline documents. In the process of impact assessment the EIE centre informs the impacted community leader about the project, who is in charge of organising further information spreading and public hearings in the community.551
Evidently, the requirements are changed and improved in the RA EIA law of 2014; however, it is not to say that the implementation of the new law will vary from the implementation of the old law dramatically. Chapter 5 discusses the International Environmental Law common procedures for further recommendations on improvements in the RA EIA Law.
550 These decisions are published in Armenian only. They can be found in www.arlis.am web site. One of them is the Decision #399 referred below. Gayane Atoyan translateդ the relevant paragraph.
551Հայ աստանի Հանրապետության Կառավարություն Ո Ր Ո Շ Ու Մ 9 Ապրիլի 2015 Թվականի N 399-Ն Հիմնադրութային Փաստաթղթի Եվ Նախատեսվող Գործունեության Շրջակա Միջավայրի Վրա Ազդեցության Փորձաքննության Իրականացման Կարգը Հաստատելու Մասին (The #399 Decision of the Government of The Republic of Armenia on 9 April, 2015 on Establishing the Regulations on the Implementation of Concept Documents and Proposed Activity Environmental Impact Assessment procedure ).
177