2023-06-30 12:07:18
Environmental groups must be involved in proceedings. Greens demand that wolves and otters be stopped in Salzburg.
In its current decision regarding the Lower Austrian Otter Ordinance 2019, the Administrative Court (VwGH) made it clear, according to a WWF broadcast, that recognized environmental protection NGOs must in principle already be involved in official procedures in which norms of EU environmental law are affected.
In addition, there must be effective legal protection in court, regulations for the killing of wolves & Co. would not be legally compliant. Because the VwGH decision also applies to procedures for issuing regulations, such as the current one for killing wolves, which means that the decision has far-reaching consequences for the numerous regulations for killing strictly protected species, wrote the WWF and also named cases of beavers and otters in several states.
WWF: “Milestone for species protection.”
“This is a milestone for the crumbling species protection in Austria and a clear signal for a legally compliant and solution-oriented policy in the federal states,” says Christian Pichler, species protection expert at WWF Austria. However, the most recently issued regulations are not automatically overridden by this, WWF spokesman Nikolai Moser explained to the APA.
The Aarhus Convention makes it clear that environmental protection organizations must not only have the right to be involved in the removal of strictly protected animal species, but also to have these checked for their compatibility with Union law. The right of appeal was recently undermined by the regulations. The organizations WWF Austria and Ökobüro – Alliance of the Environmental Movement have therefore appealed to the Supreme Court with an extraordinary appeal.
“In view of the long-standing infringement proceedings in connection with the implementation of the Aarhus Convention in Austria, this finding is not a surprise. Circumvention structures such as the ordinance practice in species protection law have recently been explicitly criticized by the European Commission,” explained environmental lawyer Lisa Schranz from Ökobüro.
On the occasion of this decision, the WWF and Ökobüro are therefore calling for a change of course from those state governments that currently allow the shooting of species protected under European law by means of ordinances and have not even allowed objections from environmental protection organizations in the first place.
Greens: “Salzburg ordinances are also illegal.”
On the part of the Greens, their environmental spokeswoman Astrid Rössler was pleased with the administrative court’s decision. “It is finally clear that the Salzburg ordinances on shooting wolves and otters are illegal. The responsible hunting officer is well advised to stop the shooting immediately.” Thanks to the years of commitment by environmental organizations such as the WWF and the Ökobüro, it is now clear that the federal states cannot ignore EU law at will.
Svazek: “Regulations remain in force.”
LH Deputy Marlene Svazek (FPÖ) says the verdict has no effect on Salzburg for the time being. This means that the two ordinances that allow the shooting of problem wolves in Pinzgau and Tennengau remain in force. The judgment refers to a otter ordinance in Lower Austria. “The fact that it applies to all regulations in Austria is an interpretation of the WWF.” In addition, the NGOs were given a one-week period to comment on the Salzburg regulations. Whether that is enough to comply with the Aarhus Convention will probably have to be clarified again by the courts. Svazek hopes that the EU in Brussels will now become aware of the problem.
1688127481
#current #judgment #Administrative #Court #wolf #ordinances #legally #compliant