Environmental control reform is one of the conditions for Ukraine’s accession to the EU
One of the key reforms in the environmental sector may take place in Ukraine, which has been on pause for years, but in 2024 finally got off the ground.
Environmental control reform is one of the conditions for Ukraine’s accession to the EU, so its priority and chances of implementation are quite high. At the same time, the reform project is criticized by a number of stakeholders - due to a significant expansion of the powers of environmental inspectors, which carries corruption risks and potential abuses.
Why Ukraine has failed to pass an important environmental reform for years, what problems there were in considering the key bill, what exactly it envisages and what the risks are - in the analysis of “Honestly”.
The State Environmental Inspectorate is a key body that monitors the implementation of environmental legislation in Ukraine, the state of the environment and environmental safety. However, it still operates under an outdated and ineffective system and is considered one of the most corrupt in the environmental system.
It is this problem that the long-awaited reform, which is launched by Bill No. 3091 “On State Environmental Control,” should solve. It was on pause for years, but in 2024 it finally got off the ground. The reform is also one of the conditions for Ukraine's accession to the EU.
The bill was adopted in the first reading more than two years ago, and the authors promised a complete restart of the State Environmental Inspectorate. But with each passing month, hopes for real reform faded. Recently it became known that now the entire reform can only be reduced to renaming the State Environmental Inspectorate into the State Environmental Inspectorate. In addition, the liquidation of the Inspectorate will suspend the recording of environmental crimes in Russia, which will affect the collection of reparations.
However, in December last year, the bill became a key issue at a meeting of representatives of international organizations (OECD, IMPEL, OSCE and UNDP) with members of the relevant environmental committee of the Verkhovna Rada. Then a meeting of the working group on the implementation of environmental standards and EU recommendations into Ukrainian legislation took place.
The bill on environmental control reform was registered in the Rada back in February 2020. It was developed by the then Deputy Chairman of the Ecological Committee, Alexander Marikovsky, and in July 2021, the Rada adopted it in a second first reading as a basis. The document was almost unanimously supported by people's deputies from Servant of the People and Golos. But representatives of the banned pro-Russian faction OPZZH did not appear in full force at the meeting. Also, with some exceptions, he was not supported by members of the EU factions, Batkivshchyna and the Doverie group.
And already in October 2021, the head of the public council at Mindovkill, Svetlana Berzina, stated that a number of amendments had been made to the document from experts and the public. In February 2022, the team of the then Deputy Minister of Environmental Protection Roman Shakhmatenko, who was involved in the reform of the State Environmental Inspectorate, prepared a version of the bill for the second reading. However, due to Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, work was paused.
Bill No. 3091 provides for the launch of the most ambitious reform in the field of environmental control, namely the liquidation of the State Environmental Inspectorate and the creation in its place of a new structure with broader powers.
As of the end of March, the updated version of the bill for the second reading was not published on the Rada website. However, the version that passed the first reading provides:
- the fine for not allowing an environmental inspector to carry out inspections will be increased from the current 760 UAH to 1.8 million UAH for the largest polluting enterprises and up to 600 thousand UAH for enterprises with an insignificant degree of risk to the environment;
- the basic salary level for inspectors will be UAH 13,134 (currently UAH 5,500), which should reduce the risks of bribery;
- carrying out inspections at any time of the day and on weekends, if the enterprise is open at that time, even without the participation of managers, if they do not appear within four hours;
- environmental inspectors will be able to inspect not only enterprises, but also state and local authorities;
- environmental inspectors will have chest cameras for video and audio recording of the inspection;
- inspectors will receive additional control tools (in particular, the ability to make requests to enterprises);
- the control functions of all state environmental authorities will be combined into one body;
- resolving existing conflicts and legal uncertainties in the legislation, eliminating gaps in calculating losses.
In addition, a number of other innovations are being introduced, in particular the risk-based principle of control and the establishment of the 4th category of enterprises. The duration of inspections will be up to five days for companies with medium and low risk, and for enterprises with a significant risk – up to 15 days.
The bill came under a barrage of criticism after registration, most of all from representatives of industry and specialized associations. In particular, due to the significant expansion of the powers of environmental inspectors, which potentially contains corruption risks, and also creates pressure on business and does not contribute to improving the state of the environment.
Criticism was often voiced in the media in the form of categorical statements like “the bill will stop industry” or “The Ministry of Natural Resources is creating a monster that can close any enterprise, even a metallurgical plant, without trial.”
In particular, according to the European Business Association, the State Environmental Inspectorate should not be a lever of pressure. After all, the proposed reform allows you to indicate only the address of enterprises in the inspection order, that is, to check all the companies that are located there. In addition, the bill does not strengthen the fight against poaching, illegal logging and mining.
But the Ukrainian Association of Business and Trade stated that the bill does not comply with the basic regulatory act in the field of control of economic activities and grossly contradicts it.
However, the main opponent of the bill from the very beginning was the Professional Association of Environmentalists of Ukraine (PAEU, later the Association of Environmental Professionals PAEW).
According to PAEW President Lyudmila Tsyganok, the bill does not comply with the declared principles of reducing regulatory pressure on business and opens up a wide field for corruption. In particular, it provides for a stop of work for three days during the inspection, although at some enterprises the process is continuous and interconnected with others.
The Professional Association of Environmentalists noted that the bill monopolizes control functions in the hands of one government body and gives it too broad rights to interfere in business activities. The organization also accused the Ministry of Natural Resources of failing to correct the crisis of environmental control and suspected that the ministry was only imitating reform. This aggravates the problem, and about UAH 2 billion from the budget have been spent on previous unsuccessful reform attempts since 2018.
Also in 2021, the All-Ukrainian Association of Local Governments “Association of Ukrainian Cities” criticized the bill for narrowing the powers of communities and creating new executive bodies.
In the environmental community, bill No. 3091 is supported by only a few organizations. One of them is “Ecology-Right-Human”, which participated in its development. They note its European integration value and the need for early consideration and adoption.
The head of this structure, Elena Kravchenko, noted that now the State Environmental Inspectorate cannot prevent the destruction of nature. The reform will create an effective body that will work to prevent pollution, and not to punish, and will cooperate with communities and businesses.
The bill is also supported by the NGO “Ecodia”, in particular due to the possibility of inspection without a director and at any time, which eliminates the possibility of failure of the inspection.
“This bill is a good path and a good step. But it must not happen that a corrupt inspector comes who does not protect the rights of people and whose task is not to conduct an honest or legal inspection, but to demand a bribe, for example. Deputies must make certain safeguards in the law,” noted the former acting. Chairman of the State Environmental Inspectorate Egor Firsov.
According to Firsov, such safeguards should be the renewal of personnel and the establishment of decent salaries.
Also, the reform of environmental control before the full-scale war was supported by the State Environmental Inspectorate, in particular for colossal fines for not allowing inspection.
However, in 2023, its concept was not supported for the formal liquidation of the State Environmental Inspectorate, because this would require:
- significant funding, which is impractical during war;
- a number of new laws and acts that have not yet begun to be developed.
Also, such a “degeneration” will delay the calculation of environmental losses from the war and may complicate the payment of reparations.
In May 2022, the author of the bill, Alexander Marikovsky, said that the State Environmental Inspectorate needs to be liquidated and some of its functions transferred to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, because because of the war, the reform is “not in time.” However, the initiative was not supported.
Already in October 2022, Marikovsky left his post in the environmental committee, and the bill was transferred to the deputy chairman of the committee, Elena Krivoruchkina. Subsequently, the deputy stated that it is categorically impossible to “disperse” the Inspectorate, because it is the only body that is currently recording environmental damage from the war: “We can calculate the losses later, but the key thing is to record them.”
A complete restart of the State Environmental Inspectorate, according to her, will temporarily stop the registration process and play into the hands of the aggressor, but will not bring Ukraine closer to the EU environmental control requirements. And the version of the bill that passed the first reading no longer corresponds to Ukrainian realities due to the war and needs to be redone.
In particular, on March 27, at a meeting of the working group on the implementation of EU environmental standards into Ukrainian legislation, its members agreed on the need to finalize the bill.
Chairman of the Ecological Committee Oleg Bondarenko also noted the urgent need to update environmental legislation and create a single environmental control body with maximum powers. After all, liability for a violation must be such that the following does not happen, that is, so that the economic benefit from the violation is less than the amount of the fine. For this we need a framework law.
It is worth noting that the Minister of Environmental Protection Ruslan Strelets said: the reform of the State Environmental Inspectorate is one of the priorities for 2024. In addition, in March, the State Environmental Inspectorate developed a draft order of the Cabinet of Ministers on the Strategy for reforming the state environmental control system and its implementation plan for 2024-2026, which should:
- create conditions to protect the environment and prevent deterioration of its condition;
- ensure recording and identification of environmental damage (in particular as a result of Russia’s armed aggression) and holding them accountable for it.
So, the all-important environmental control reform has finally moved forward and is back on the parliamentary agenda. It is supported by international experts, and its implementation is monitored by European partners. However, it is still unknown whether the new version of the bill will contain compromise provisions without corruption risks and instruments of pressure on business.
