While the government's internal upheavals continue, Parliament has been actively working on passing some highly controversial legislative changes. This week, members of the Parliamentary Committee on Economic Policy and Innovation unanimously approved, without extensive debate, the proposals from the working group on the draft bill to amend and supplement the Investment Promotion Act. This bill was submitted by the Council of Ministers on February 9 and was passed in its first reading on March 7.
When this draft was approved by the government, the official explanation was that the new provisions reflected changes in Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 (the General Block Exemption Regulation). However, the civil initiative "Green Laws" sharply criticized amendments proposed by GERB and DPS to the draft bill, which were submitted on April 4.
According to experts from the organization, these amendments set a dangerous trend toward the destruction of Bulgaria's nature and small businesses. The civic organization warned that through covert proposals between the first and second readings of the bill submitted by the Council of Ministers, the two parties currently governing the country are pushing for radical changes in three key laws: the Environmental Protection Act (EPA), the Spatial Development Act (SDA), and the Renewable Energy Act (REA).
Analysts argue that this procedure is absolutely unacceptable under Parliament's rules. They emphasize that the proposals were submitted by prominent figures from both parties, including Delyan Dobrev, Stanislav Anastasov (Chairman of the Parliamentary Environmental Committee), Mladen Shishkov, Hamid Hamid, and Zhecho Stankov. The proposed amendments, according to the initiative, aim to eliminate key procedures from Bulgaria's environmental legislation.
The civic organization raised the alarm that the new texts are designed to fast-track major investment projects (i.e., those with high corruption risks). The problem is that these investments are not being promoted by increasing institutional capacity or improving opportunities for public oversight, but rather by eliminating environmental procedures that ensure effective protection of the environment and the public.
This includes a significant reduction of environmental procedures, such as Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEA), as well as the minimization of public and institutional oversight over the largest and most dangerous projects, including nuclear power plants, radioactive waste storage facilities, chemical plants, pipelines, highways, and more.
According to the organization's experts, if Parliament violates its own rules and allows changes to the Environmental Protection Act, the Spatial Development Act, and the Renewable Energy Act, it will pose enormous risks to both people and nature in Bulgaria.
The analysts argue that the evidence is clear. The proposed changes include halving the deadlines for environmental authorities to respond and even introducing the principle of tacit consent under the Environmental Protection Act for major investments such as nuclear power plants, dams, and highways. They warn that this could lead to situations where, if the Ministry of Environment and Water fails to respond within 14 days, it will be deemed to have approved a project, such as a new dam on the Danube River that could flood 40 settlements. This could happen with every other large project submitted to the environmental agency, given the ministry's current lack of capacity to handle even the current flow of investment proposals.
At the same time, the environmental procedures for small investors will become much longer and more cumbersome. The amendments also propose reinstating the validity of all expired EIA decisions since 2009 and extending the validity period of these decisions from 5 to 15 years, which would effectively halt all new investments in Bulgaria.
The organization warns that the environmental assessments of new projects will be negative due to the cumulative effect of hundreds of unrealized but environmentally threatening projects that were approved under dubious circumstances during times when the country was governed by BSP, DPS, and GERB.
The second risk to nature is that EIA decisions issued 10-15 years ago are no longer relevant, as many environmental factors (biodiversity, pollution levels, climate, etc.) have significantly changed during this time. Consequently, even European legislation requires updating environmental assessments through new environmental procedures.
The amendments to the Environmental Protection Act also propose introducing single-instance judicial control for the largest projects in Bulgaria, even though the second instance of judicial control was reinstated only a year and a half ago by the 47th National Assembly, with its implementation delayed until July 2024.
Environmentalists fear that the status quo majority is doing everything possible to prevent the re-establishment of this condition for citizens' access to environmental justice, which was abolished by the GERB government in 2017. The aim of limiting appeals to a single court is to minimize public and judicial oversight precisely over the most dangerous projects for nature and people, while small investment projects by citizens and small businesses will remain under stricter two-instance judicial control.
In the new texts of the Spatial Development Act, it is proposed that the general development plans of municipalities can be amended by orders from the minister or regional governor. Environmentalists believe this completely undermines the philosophy of spatial and strategic planning. They argue that this will lead to a dilution of responsibilities, as well as the elimination of the rights of local authorities and the public in the spatial development of municipalities.
Leave a comment