At a news conference on Tuesday, Silva Adamyan, a coordinator for Ecological Alliance, said both the local NGOs and the Aarhus Center in Armenia have voiced their complaints in a letter to the president, pointing out to conflicting provisions between the law and the Aarhus Convention.
“The law does not stem from the principle of democracy and does not offer any solution to environmental problems. In the letter, we particularly focused on public participation and the notification timeframes and highlighted that the amendment in question does not raise public participation,” he noted.
Speaking further, President of the Armenian Forests NGO Nazeli Vardanyan said the law does not stipulate for public participation in decision-making processes (which she described as the most important component).
“The law divides all types of activities into three groups, so there have to be different levels of public participation in the three groups. In case of the small hydropower plants, for example, there is no need for organizing a debate with the society; evaluation alone is enough for licensing procedures. I need also to mention that the law is written in a very complicated language, whereas the Aarhus Convention requires that its wording be easily readable and understandable to an average individual,” she said.
Lavon Galstyan, a member of the Pan-Armenian Environmental Front who was initially involved in the elaboration of the law, said he finds the absence of a liability provision a major drawback.
“We raised the problem so many times while the law was under preparation, but it was no use. We weren’t able to introduce the ideology requiring the Nature Protection Ministry’s negative conclusion in case of the society’s negative attitude to a proposed project,” he said, considering further efforts meaningless.
