Scholarly record

BELARUSIAN NUCLEAR POWER PLANT IN ASTRAVYETS - PROBLEMS WITH PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND PERMIT PROCEDURES

I. Jancarova, L. Montvilas

Abstract

History has shown that a high risk of accidents happening exists when a state operates an atomic power plant. It is widely agreed that the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant accident of 1986 is one of the two worst accidents of this type ever to happen. The Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant itself was situated around 15 kilometres away from the Belarusian border and Belarus was the country affected the most by the disaster. One would rationally expect that such lessons are taken into account by the governments of various countries planning similar activities, especially those which had suffered the effects first-hand. Yet, in 2016, on the 30th anniversary of the disaster, we have the same country, Belarus, actively constructing a new nuclear power plant in Astravyets in close vicinity to its border (20 km). The location of the construction site was delimited in early 2009; the nuclear power plant was to be built just 45 kilometres (28 mi) from Vilnius, Lithuania. In case of an accident at the Astravyets Nuclear Power Plant, there is no doubt that Lithuania would be one of the most affected states. Due to this reason it is not surprising that the Republic of Lithuania is greatly interested in this matter and both the public and the authorities are mostly against it. This article is dealing with problems in implementation of Espoo Convention that both Belarusia and Lithuania are party to. It is focused on problems with participation of the public in transboundary environmental impact assessment procedure and in consequent permit procedure that occurred in relation to construction of Belarusian nuclear power plant in Astravyets. The case discovered problems with interpretation and enforcement of specific provisions of Espoo Convention. The main problems lie in requirements for “reasonable time”, in the gap in procedural rules leading to affected party public’s inability to participate in foreign EIA similarly to the public of the party of origin, in the lack of rules ensuring solid and clear communication between the two states and rules ensuring good quality of EIA documents and translations of EIA documents. Specific provisions of Espoo Convention were analysed to show that problems with their interpretation result in possible non-compliance with the international law requirements.

Publication Impact Profile

No metrics available.

PLUMX see details

DOI resolver: doi.org/10.5593/sgemsocial2017/12/S02.044

Publication details

Back to publication list