FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY - Article 19

ARTICLE 19GLOBAL CAMPAIGN FOR FREE EXPRESSIONIn Sloviansk, in the Donetsk oblast, public officials blamed the public for not being informed.They said people in their constituencies were not sufficiently politically active and did not requestinformation about developments unless they were directly affected. Public officials also blamedpeople for their lack of engagement in current issues. The Donetsk regional environmental authoritiesnoted that, despite the publication of between 100 and 150 EIAs, the public failed to comment.However, a representative of the Sloviansk city authorities stressed their failure to involve effectivelythe public in decision-making regarding the implementation of environmental policies.Public officials in Donetsk reported instances where people were consulted on theconstruction of new residential buildings and on the reconstruction of a square near the railroadterminal. A large-scale Ukrainian-British project called ‘Rosa Vetrov’, engaging the public inenvironmental decision-making, terminated in 2003, although the project implementers established anNGO (also called Rosa Vetrov) at the end of it. At the time of the project, a number of publicconsultations were organised on several initiatives, especially on new construction projects. However,according to the officials, public interest in environmental matters and NGO activism in this fielddecreased after the project ended. The head of Rosa Vetrov saw as the main reason for people’spassivity their frustration at the very minimal impact resulting from their efforts, primarily due topublic officials’ failure to respond to request for public participation.Public officials in Donetsk also complained of the media’s shortcomings, stating that inpractice media outlets agree to collaborate with environmental authorities (and cover environmentalissues) only if paid.Public officials in Kyiv admitted that corruption is a key obstacle for Kyiv residents trying toaccess environmental information. They pointed out that the head of the State Department of theEnvironment of the Kyiv Administration had apparently staffed his department with well-knownfigures linked to corporate interests. The situation is further aggravated by the extremely high demandfor land for new buildings and escalating land prices.Lack of resources and materials were also identified by officials as a significant problem. Thehead of the State Department of the Environment for the Donetsk oblast stressed that they had limitedhuman and financial resources, which restricted their activities. 303 He noted that their annual budgetwas insufficient to implement many of the much-needed environmental measures in the oblast.Another factor quoted by officials was the difficulty experienced by public bodies in gatheringor accessing the information themselves. For instance, in Donetsk, the public officials interviewedstated that no city or regional authority had a single copy of the national report that the MEP is303 Meeting with Serhiy Vladimirovich Tretyakov, Head of the Department of the Environment in the DonetskOblast. This was an additional interview by ARTICLE 19, conducted in January 2007.For Internal Use Only. Is Post-Chornobyl Ukraine Ready for Access to Environmental Information?ARTICLE 19, London, 2007(%