Protected Areas Law, BIRN: Government Ignores Protesters’ Demand for Its Repeal! EIA Draft a Bureaucratic Tool to Justify Damage

Ignoring calls for the repeal of Law 21/2024, the government is proposing legal amendments to Environmental Impact Assessment procedures to satisfy Brussels, but experts warn that the measure could simply serve to justify damage.

The repeal of Law 21/2024 on Protected Areas is one of the most persistent demands of the marathon protest known as the “Flamingo Revolution,” which has continued for three months outside the prime minister’s office on the “Martyrs of the Nation” Boulevard in Tirana.

The amendments to the Protected Areas Law demanded by protesters also coincide with the requirements Albania must meet in aligning its legislation with European Union law.

Amid this clash, the Ministry of Environment has put forward for public consultation a draft decision proposing changes to Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) procedures. According to the explanatory report accompanying the draft law, the measure establishes a procedure called “Appropriate Assessment” for projects that may affect special areas of conservation.

“The purpose of this draft decision is to integrate requirements for the protection of biodiversity and special areas of conservation into environmental impact assessment procedures, through the inclusion of appropriate assessment as part of the process for examining projects that may affect these areas,” the report states.

On paper, the amendment aims to integrate biodiversity protection requirements and implement the requirements of European Union Directive 92/43/EEC. However, experts and environmental organisations warn that this mechanism risks becoming a bureaucratic tool to retroactively legitimise projects that have already been approved or launched within the network of protected areas.

“The Protected Areas Law, following the 2024 amendments, remains the subject of serious criticism for its non-compliance with EU standards,” said Olsi Nika, head of the environmental organisation Eco Albania.

“Appropriate Assessment cannot be treated separately from the legal framework on biodiversity and protected areas,” he stressed.

Questions over the draft law

Environmental Impact Assessment, or EIA, is one of the most essential preliminary procedures for projects affecting nature. EIAs are prepared by experts hired by companies or investors and must analyse the potential consequences of a development project for the environment and biodiversity, as well as outline the steps that should be taken to protect and rehabilitate the environment.

Despite their importance, EIAs for major projects in Albania have frequently been criticised by environmental activists as superficial and often lacking complete scientific data.

The Ministry of Environment’s report suggests that the approval of the measure setting out how the “Appropriate Assessment” will be carried out will change this situation in protected areas.

During the implementation of EIA procedures to date, the need has been identified to more clearly define the steps related to projects that may have an impact on or affect special areas of conservation. In the past, according to the report, there was no such specific instrument and the issue was not addressed uniformly within the EIA process.

“In the absence of detailed procedural provisions, appropriate assessment has not been addressed uniformly within EIA procedures,” the report states.

The proponents say the amendment aims to raise the standard of environmental decision-making and guarantee effective protection.

But environmental organisations view it with suspicion.

According to Olsi Nika of Eco Albania, alignment should not remain merely at the terminological level, but should genuinely guarantee European Union standards in environmental protection.

“There is a legitimate concern that introducing the ‘Appropriate Assessment’ mechanism now, without first addressing the fundamental conflicts in legislation on protected areas, could turn it from an instrument for preventing harm into a procedural mechanism for the ex post legitimisation of development projects that have already been planned, approved or launched,” Nika said.

This concern over the law’s real impact is also shared by the EDEN Environmental Centre, which has formally submitted its comments as part of the consultation.

While welcoming the establishment of a minimum quality standard in the procedure, EDEN has identified concrete risks in the legal and territorial implementation of the measure.

“An important issue we identify in the proposed draft as a whole concerns the legal and territorial application of the draft decision, as well as the risk of creating a gap in the legal protection of potential Natura 2000 areas,” EDEN argues.

According to EDEN’s analysis, the biggest problem is the fact that Albania still does not have an officially approved list of areas proposed for the Natura 2000 network. This absence raises the fundamental question of which territories and areas the Appropriate Assessment procedure will specifically apply to during this transitional period.

Furthermore, the EDEN Centre has raised several procedural concerns, noting that the draft measure assigns functions to the “authority responsible for managing special areas of conservation,” without explicitly identifying which institution this is. According to the organisation, this lack of identification leaves room for uncertainty over institutional competence.

In addition to regulating responsibilities, the organisation has recommended greater transparency, requesting that the Appropriate Assessment Report and the related decisions be published and made accessible to the public. According to EDEN’s comments, the lack of a clear methodology on the basis of which the need for an appropriate assessment will be determined at the preliminary stage remains another weak link in the submitted draft. /BIRN