protection and therefore no conflict existed with the aims of the Act.
Hnuti DUHA (Friends of the Earth Czech Republic), a regional environmental NGO, filed administrative complaints in response to both the Ministry’s granting of the permit and the Sumava Park Authority’s approval of logging in Zone 1.
Procedural history
Every year when Sumava Park managers applied to log in Zone 1, the NGO participated in the attendant deci-sion-making proceedings.
In response to the park authority’s approval of logging, the NGO filed administrative appeals to the Ministry. Each year, the following assertions were made:
• Procedural Violations — The conflict of interest in hav-ing park authorities decide whether park managers can conduct logging prevented independent decision-mak-ing and was in violation of the Czech Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Moreover, the NGO asserted that delays in initiating public proceedings, suppressing information, and the commencement of logging amid judicial appeals also contravened the APA.
• Environmental Substantive Violations of Law — The approval of logging in Zone 1 was in violation of the Sumava National Park Act and Landscape and Nature Protection Act.
Each year, the Ministry ruled in favour of Sumava authorities. Subsequently, the NGO filed complaints before the High Court in Prague, reasserting the above arguments and the following:
• undue prejudice by the Ministry in allowing logging to commence; and
• denial of the right to a fair administrative hearing in vio-lation of Declaration of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, article 36.
Ministry exceptions to the Landscape and Nature Protection Act for logging
The NGO filed a complaint before the High Court in Prague, seeking judicial review of the Ministry’s decision to allow an exception to the Landscape and Nature Protection Act for logging purposes. To have its complaint considered by the court, the NGO argued that, as the Ministry had a duty to “act/proceed according to law,” the right must therefore exist for participants in related decision-making processes to ensure that this duty is carried out, citing section 3 of the Administrative Procedure Act.
The High Court did not grant the NGO standing,
holding that “the rights of NGOs could not have been violated, because NGOs have no substantive rights in similar administrative processes.” The court further added that violating the law in itself does not constitute interfer-ence with the substantive rights of NGOs.
Using its constitutional right to bring a complaint to the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic against interfer-ence with basic constitutional rights, the NGO filed an appeal asserting a violation of the Declaration of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, article 36 (right to a fair trial). The NGO argued that a substantive right existed in the right to a lawful decision-making process (again citing section 3 of the Administrative Procedure Act).
The Constitutional Court ruled against the NGO, holding that participants in such matters have only “proce-dural rights,” which do not include the right to a lawful decision-making process.
Additionally, the NGO filed a complaint with the National Environmental Monitoring Agency and later filed a criminal complaint against the responsible employees of the Sumava National Park Authority.
Final outcome
In response to the Constitutional Court’s ruling, the NGO filed a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights (application) under article 34 of the European Convention of Human Rights, asserting that the Czech court acted in violation of article 6, section 1 of the Convention — denying it a right to a fair trial. The complaint was refused.
The National Environmental Monitoring Agency found that there was a violation of law and imposed a financial penalty on the responsible bodies. The criminal proceeding was still ongoing in August 2002.
Related actions and campaigns
In 1999, Hnuti DUHA organised a three-month, non-violent blockade of Zone 1. The Environmental Law Service provided legal counsel to participants and repre-sented eight of the accused in settlements with authorities.
In ensuing lawsuits, the law service defended the individ-uals. Misdemeanour proceedings against the individuals eventually ended due to the statute of limitations.
In 2001, members of the Czech Parliament, dissatisfied with the Sumava National Park Authority’s actions, proposed reducing the area of the national park. In the meantime, the Environmental Law Service (ELS), the NGO’s legal counsel, prepared an alternative bill proposing exclusion of Zone 1 from logging, while addressing the factors motivating the clear cuts. Neither bill was passed and the matter was expected to be taken up by the new Czech government formed in July 2002.
Access to justice techniques
The NGO attempted to challenge the government’s decision through participation in approval proceedings, administrative appeals, and by filing legal complaints for judicial review. The case was finally appealed to the European Court of Human Rights. In related actions, the NGO filed criminal complaints.
Case study analysis
To hold that citizens only have a procedural right to participate in proceedings but no vested interest in seeing that the procedures are lawful is to frustrate the very purpose of citizen involvement. The right to speak alone is an empty grant to citizens and a substantial barrier to accessing justice. By their rulings, the courts relegate citizen participation to a “feel good” gesture rather than allowing it to be an effective safeguard and check on government action.
Contacts (Environmental Law Service):
Concerning administrative processes Vitezslav Dohnal, EPS Tabor
Kostnicka 1324 39001 Tabor Tel: +42-361-256-662 Fax: +42-361-254-866 E-mail: eps.tabor@ecn.cz
Concerning complaint to the European Court of Human Rights
Pavel Cerny, EPS Brno Bratislavska 31
60200 Brno Tel: +35-42-575-229 Fax: +35-42-210-347 E-mail: eps.brno@ecn.cz
C Z E C H R E P U B L I C C A S E 1