A Glimpse of Environmental Procedural Democracy in Poland: Thwarting the Civil Society’s Pursuit of Legal Action Against Environmental Plans

• Authors: Karolina Karpus

Abstracts

EN

Public participation in environmental matters through access to justice is an indispensable aspect of environmental democracy. It has become increasingly evident that this type of democratic social control over the activities of public authorities should also encompass legislative acts. This poses a significant challenge for the contemporary political-legal system, as is demonstrably evident in the case of Polish environmental plans. Civic control of the legality of such general acts, enacted by public administration bodies in legislative or special procedures, is implemented in two steps. Firstly, it takes the form of participation through comments or questions on the draft of a plan submitted by civic society during the preparatory stage of the law-making process. Secondly, the control focuses on the plans after they are enacted. At this point, it takes the form of legal actions brought by members of the public before national courts in order to investigate the material and procedural legality of environmental plans. However, at present the access to justice in this respect is limited. The aim of the article is to analyse the legal reasons for this deficiency of Polish environmental procedural democracy and to assess it in the light of Poland’s international obligations.

Keywords

EN

environmental democracy; legislation; environmental plans; public participation; access to justice

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
• Journal: Polish Political Science Yearbook
• Year: 2025
• Issue: 2(54)
• Pages: 91-106

Dates

published

2025

Contributors

author

Karolina Karpus

• Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń (Poland)

• https://orcid.org/0000000235757949

References

• Akerboom, S., & Craig, R. K. (2022). How law structures public participation in environmental decision making: A comparative law approach. Environmental Policy and Governance, 32(3), 232–246.
• Araos, M. (2023). Democracy underwater: public participation, technical expertise, and climate infrastructure planning in New York City. Theory and Society, 52, 1–34.
• Bándi, G. (2014). Introduction into the Concept of ‘Environmental Democracy’. In G. Bándi (Ed.), Environmental Democracy and Law. Public participation in Europe (pp. 3–20). Europa Law Publishing.
• Barnes, P. M., & Hoerber, T. C. (2013). Linking the discourse on sustainability and governance. In P. M. Barnes & T. C. Hoerber (Eds.), Sustainable Development and Governance in Europe (pp. 19–33). Routledge.
• Boyd, D. R. (2011).The environmental rights revolution: a global study of constitutions, human rights, and the environment. UBC Press.
• Buttel, F. H., & Larson, O. W. (1980). Whither environmentalism? The future political path of the environmental movement. Natural Resources Journal, 20(2), 323–344.
• Caranta, R., Gerbrandy, A., & Müller, B. (Eds.). (2017). The making of a New European legal culture: the Aarhus Convention: At the crossroad of comparative law and EU law. Europa Law Publishing.
• Craik, N. (2019). The Assessment of Environmental Impact. In E. Lees & J. E. Viñuales (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Environmental Law (pp. 876–899). Oxford.
• De-Shalit, A. (2000). The Environment Between Theory and Practice. Oxford.
• Dryzek, J. S. (2002). Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford.
• Ebbesson, J. (2011). A Modest Contribution to Environmental Democracy and Justice in Transboundary Contexts: The Combined Impact of the Espoo Convention and Aarhus Convention. RECIEL, 20(3), 248–257.
• Elliott, L. (2023). Environmentalism. In Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/ environmentalism
• Engelman Lado, M. (2017). Toward civil rights enforcement in the environmental justice context: Step One: Acknowledging the problem. Fordham Environmental Law Review, 29(1), 1–49.
• Fischer, F. (2017). Climate Crisis and the Democratic Prospect: Participatory Governance in Sustainable Communities. Oxford.
• Gellers, J. C., & Jeffords, Ch. (2018). Toward Environmental Democracy? Procedural Environmental Rights and Environmental Justice. Global Environmental Politics, 18(1), 99–121.
• Gouritin, A. (2016). EU Environmental Law, International Environmental Law, and Human Rights Law. The Case of Environmental Responsibility. Brill.
• Hallock Morris, M. (2008). When it Works and Where it Fails: Spatial, Temporal, and Budgetary Constraints to Civic Environmentalism. Social Science Quarterly, 89(5), 1252–1276.
• Haładyj, A. (2015). Udział społeczeństwa w strategicznej ocenie oddziaływania na środowisko jako instytucja prawa ochrony środowiska. Lublin.
• Hammond, M. (2020). Democratic deliberation for sustainability transformations: between constructiveness and disruption. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 16(1), 220–230.
• Hayward, B. M. (1996). The Greening of Participatory Democracy: A Reconsideration of Theory. In F. Mathews (Ed.), Ecology and Democracy (pp. 211–231). Frank Cass.
• Hayward, T. (2004). Constitutional environmental rights. Oxford.
• Iwańska, B. (2013). Koncepcja „skargi zbiorowej” w prawie ochrony środowiska. Warszawa.
• Jans, J. H. (2011). Who is the referee? Access to justice in a globalised legal order. Review of European Administrative Law, 4(1), 87–99.
• Jasanoff, S. (1996). The Dilemma of Environmental Democracy. Issues in Science and Technology, 13(1), 63–70.
• Kalisz, A. (2021). Right to Court in Climate Matters in the Light of the Aarhus Convention and the Case Law of Polish Administrative Courts. Studia Iuridica Lublinensia, 30(5), 275–293.
• Konopelko, A. (2011). Demokracja partycypacyjna w samorządzie lokalnym. Samorząd Terytorialny, 12, 86–94.
• Korzeniowski, P. (2010). Zasady prawne ochrony środowiska. Łódź.
• Kotzé, L. J. (2014). The Anthropocene’s global environmental constitutional moment. Yearbook of International Environmental Law, 25(1), 24–60.
• Krämer, L. (2018). The EU and Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making. In J. Jendrośka & M. Bar (Eds.), Procedural Environmental Rights: Principle X in Theory and Practice (pp. 121–142). Intersentia.
• Łyszkowski, M. (2015). Proces konstytucjonalizacji ochrony środowiska w Polsce. Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis. Przegląd Prawa i Administracji, 103, 343–371.
• Mathiesen, A. S. (2003). Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in EC Environmental Law: the Case of Certain Plans and Programmes. European Energy and Environmental Law Review, 12(2), 36–52.
• May, J., & Daly, E. (2014). Global Environmental Constitutionalism. Cambridge.
• Meadowcroft, J., & Fiorino, D. J. (2017). The Birth of the Environment and the Evolution of Environmental Governance. In J. Meadowcroft & D. J. Fiorino (Eds.), Conceptual Innovation in Environmental Policy (pp. 53–76). The MIT Press.
• Nadal, C. (2008). Pursuing Substantive Environmental Justice: The Aarhus Convention as a ‘Pillar’ of Empowerment. Environmental Law Review, 10(1), 28–45.
• Parola, G. (2013). Environmental Democracy at the Global Level: Rights and Duties for New Citizenship. London.
• Pickering, J., Bäckstrand, K., & Schlosberg, D. (2020). Between environmental and ecological democracy: theory and practice at the democracy environment nexus. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 22(1), 1–15.
• Poncelet, Ch. (2012). Access to Justice in Environmental Matters – Does the European Union Comply with Its Obligations? Journal of Environmental Law, 24(2), 287–309.
• Radecki, W. (1997). Konstytucyjne podstawy ochrony środowiska w Polsce. Problemy Ekologii, 5, 147–151.
• Schlosberg, D. (2004). Reconceiving Environmental Justice: Global Movements And Political Theories. Environmental Politics, 13(3), 517–540.
• Selman, P. (1999). Three decades of environmental planning: what have we really learned? In M. Kenny & J. Meadowcroft (Eds.), Planning Sustainability (pp. 148–174). Routledge.
• Shahar, D. C. (2015). Rejecting Eco-Authoritarianism, Again. Environmental Values, 24(3), 345–366.
• Sikora, A. (2020). Constitutionalisation of environmental protection in EU Law. Europa Law Publishing.
• Sommer, J. (2005). Prawo a koncepcja zrównoważonego rozwoju. In A. Papuziński (Ed.), Zrównoważony rozwój: od utopii do praw człowieka (pp. 76–93). Bydgoszcz.
• Squintani, L., & Plambeck, E. J. (2016). Judicial protection against plans and programmes affecting the environment: a backdoor solution to get an answer from Luxembourg. Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law, 13(3–4), 294–324.
• Stech, R. (2013). A Carrot and Stick Approach? An Analysis of the UK Government’s Proposals on Environmental Judicial Review. Environmental Law Review, 15(2), 139–151.
• Suškevičs, M. et al.(2023). Public participation in environmental assessments in the EU: A systematic search and qualitative synthesis of empirical scientific literature. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 87(1).
• Weis, L. K. (2018). Environmental constitutionalism: Aspiration or transformation? International Journal of Constitutional Law, 16(3), 836–870.
• ACCC. (2017). ACCC/C/2017/154 (Polish forest management plans). https://unece.org/env/pp/cc/accc.c.2017.154_poland
• CJEU. (2008). Case C-237/07 Dieter Janecek v Freistaat Bayern, ECLI:EU:C:2008:447.
• CJEU. (2018). Case C-441/17 Commission v Poland ECLI:EU:C:2018:255.
• CJEU. (2022). Case C-61/21 Ministre de la Transition écologique and Premier ministre, ECLI:EU:C:2022:1015.
• CJEU. (2023). Case C-432/21 Commission v Poland, ECLI:EU:C:2023:139.
• EC. (2020). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Improving access to justice in environmental matters in the EU and its Member States. COM/2020/643 final, eur-lex.eu
• EC. (2022). Air quality: Commission calls on Poland to remove barriers to access to justice. https:// ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/INF_22_5402
• EU. (1992). Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, pp. 7–50.
• EU. (2008). Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe. OJ L 152, 11.6.2008, pp. 1–44.
• EU. (2012). Treaty on European Union. OJ C 326, 26.10.2012, pp. 13–390.
• EU. (2012a). Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. OJ C 326, 26.10.2012, pp. 391–407.
• PL. (1991). Ustawa z dnia 28 września 1991 r. o lasach, tekst jedn. Dz. U. z 2022 r., poz. 672 ze zm.
• PL. (1997). Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej z dnia 2 kwietnia 1997 r., Dz. U. z 1997 r., nr 78, poz. 483 ze zm.
• PL. (2000). Ustawa z dnia 9 listopada 2000 r. o dostępie do informacji o środowisku i jego ochronie oraz o ocenach oddziaływania na środowisko, Dz. U. z 2000 r., nr 109, poz. 1157.
• PL. (2001). Act of 2001 Environmental Protection Law, tekst jedn. Dz. U. z 2022 r., poz. 2556 ze zm.
• PL. (2002). Oświadczenie rządowe z dnia 30 marca 2002 r. w sprawie mocy obowiązującej Konwencji o dostępie do informacji, udziale społeczeństwa w podejmowaniu decyzji oraz dostępie do sprawiedliwości, Dz. U. 2003 nr 78, poz. 707.
• PL. (2008). Ustawa z dnia 3 października 2008 r. o udostępnianiu informacji o środowisku i jego ochronie, udziale społeczeństwa w ochronie środowiska oraz o ocenach oddziaływania na środowisko, tekst jedn. Dz. U. z 2022 r., poz. 1029 ze zm.
• TK. (2021). Wyrok Trybunału Konstytucyjnego z dnia 1 lipca 2021 r., sygn. akt SK 23/17. OTK A/2021/63.
• UN. (2012). Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 27 July 2012: The future we want, A/RES/66/288.
• UNECE. (1991). Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (adopted 25 February 1991, entered into force 10 September 1997) 1989 UNTS 309 (Espoo Convention).
• UNECE. (1998). Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (adopted 25 June 1998, entered into force 30 October 2001) 2162 UNTS 447 (Aarhus Convention).
• UNECE. (2003). Protocol on Strategic Environmental Assessment to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (adopted 21 May 2003, entered into force 11 July 2010) 2685 UNTS 140 (Kiev Protocol).
• UNECE. (2012). Effective Justice? Synthesis Report of the Study on the Implementation of Article 9, paras. 3 and 4, of the Aarhus Convention in Seventeen of the Member States of the European Union – prepared by Jan Darpö. https://aarhusclearinghouse.unece.org/resources/synthesis-report-studyimplementation-article-9-paras-3-and-4-aarhus-convention-seventeen
• UNECE. (2017). Budva Declaration on Environmental Democracy for Our Sustainable Future, Budva, Montenegro, 14 September 2017, ECE/MP.PP/2017/16/Add.1 – ECE/MP.PRTR/2017/2/Add.1.
• UNGA. (1992). Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (Rio de Janeiro, 3–14 June 1992), Annex I: Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, A/CONF.151/26 (Vol. I).

Identifiers

DOI

10.15804/ppsy202520

Biblioteka Nauki

62644817