Source: Blic
Each individual ecological incident reminds us of the necessity of reliable relationship towards the environment. A series of such incidents, as we unfortunately had this summer, does especially so. It amongst else also remind us that we (still) haven't accepted Kyoto Protocol and Arhus Convention - two fundamental international documents pertaining to environment. It is good that we shall soon ratify Kyoto protocol, but it is good and we have evaluated that we have due to lateness skipped the chances for important foreign investments into clean technologies? As well as how much would accepting the Arhus Convention shall bring us closer to the most qualitative mechanism of environmental protection?But even without Kyoto and Arhus we have the Environmental Protection Act and Act on Integrated Prevention and Control of Environmental Pollution, as well as the Law on Estimating Environmental Impact. We however, lack sufficient information about the real effects of the application of new laws. And those are necessary as the basis for their most important evaluation - not evaluation of the abstract quality of the Law, but the evaluation of possibilities, readiness and capability to implement the laws into life. The public has the right to evaluate. And it also has the power by which it can efficiently influence the improvement of that mark. Exactly therefore an efficient environmental protection system must come from the widest accession base of the public to all relevant information.
