Next, this document is signed by the prime minister, then the Parliament ratifies it through a special law. During all these procedures, the signing or ratifying can be with specific reservations or conditions as per the regulatory provisions of the convention and based on the specific conditions of the country. Nowhere in the laws or regulations is the possibility to participate in the compilation or ratification process mentioned even indirectly.
| TABLE 4: International Decisionmaking | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initiation of DM (problem/ proposal) | Defining the scope, issues and stakeholders (pre-decision scoping) | Defining the scope of DM (impacts and alternatives) | Evaluation of the alternatives | Selection of the alternative (DM about the selected alternative) | Execution of the selected alternative | Post-decision monitoring & enforcement (feedback/ adjustment) | |
Phases of Decisionmaking LEVELS OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION |
|||||||
| Control of decisionmaking (right to decide) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Decisionmaking power is shared (right to joint decisionmaking) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Comments are seriously taken into account (right to be heard) | 2 | 2 | 2 | - | - | - | - |
| Adequate notification (right to be informed) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Access to information (right to access to information) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Let us consider the first phase of this process, the compilation. Under the current process, a treaty or convention is considered an unfinished document while it is still being compiled, and therefore it is not accessible to the public. During this phase, the best the public can hope for is that the media will report on the participation of a delegation in compiling the agreement. This coverage depends on the field to which the document is related or by the political aspects of the issue. The media's interest in environmental issues is somewhat low compared with the media's interest in other issues that appear more pressing.
During the signing and ratifying process of the treaty, the public has the same limited opportunities to participate as in the case of laws and other internal regulations. In these cases, the public can give its opinion on the treaty through petitions, demonstrations and meetings with officials. Because NGOs involve a great number of experts and have good knowledge of the concrete problems in their fields, they are well-equipped to advise the government and the parliamentarians through different meetings and seminars to which officials are invited. These meetings may lead to reserved approval of the treaty contingent upon fulfillment of certain concrete conditions. For example, in the process of approving the Convention on Access to Information and Public Participation in Decisionmaking, an NGO organized a roundtable discussion that concluded the existing legislation relating to the issue was insufficient.
There are problems also relating the enforcement of the current law. When helping draft an international accord, Albanian representatives should remember this before approving the document. Once the treaty is approved, the public and NGOs particularly have only to deal with the evaluation of the treaty enforcement. So, these NGOs might carry out research to find out if there are existing other treaties or laws relating to the negative effects of different activities on the environment where we are as a party and have obligations.
This evaluation would also make the authorities sensitive to correctly apply the obligations assumed by them. It can be said that very little is done and is going on to be done by NGOs in the legislative and research field and in the revelation of the problems into the practice.
| TABLE 5: Preparation and Approval of National Laws and Regulations | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initiation of DM (problem/ proposal) | Defining the scope, issues and stakeholders (pre-decision scoping) | Defining the scope of DM (impacts and alternatives) | Evaluation of the alternatives | Selection of the alternative (DM about the selected alternative) | Execution of the selected alternative | Post-decision monitoring & enforcement (feedback/ adjustment) | |
Phases of Decisionmaking LEVELS OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION |
|||||||
| Control of decisionmaking (right to decide) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Decisionmaking power is shared (right to joint decisionmaking) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | - | - | - |
| Comments are seriously taken into account (right to be heard) | - | - | - | - | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Adequate notification (right to be informed) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | - | - | - |
| Access to information (right to access to information) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
The only case in which the right to participate in the decisionmaking process is sanctioned by law is when an EIA is done and the interested public can participate in its evaluation. But, as mentioned earlier in this report, there is no existing procedure to apply it. As a consequence, the only method of participation is informal.
Following a new trend different from that of the former government, the media have recently began broadcasting informative emissions and debates. However, these do not generally concern environmental problems as apparently this increased political coverage is limited more within the political context and is used for political aims.
Nevertheless, it can be said that a high number of NGOs are not only informed when they ask to be, but they are also informed actively on new laws and regulations. This information about the draft guidelines and regulations still being drafted comes from employees of the CEP. Officials do not consider opinions and comments on these issues, but they are to be praised for providing the information.
As for the approval of these drafts, the only sign of public participation would be pressure or continual requests by NGOs addressed to authorities to run the decisionmaking process more quickly. This is done through the different meetings and activities.
The tendency to procrastinate on enacting legislation is widespread. One example is a set of draft guidelines relating to the right of the public information, which has been sitting for two years waiting to be signed.
An initiative to be praised was undertaken by two NGOs which, with the help of foreign experts, compiled a draft for the Law on Biodiversity. Unfortunately, the draft has been waiting a long time for parliamentary approval.
| TABLE 6: Preparation and Approval of National Strategies and Policies | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initiation of DM (problem/ proposal) | Defining the scope, issues and stakeholders (pre-decision scoping) | Defining the scope of DM (impacts and alternatives) | Evaluation of the alternatives | Selection of the alternative (DM about the selected alternative) | Execution of the selected alternative | Post-decision monitoring & enforcement (feedback/ adjustment) | |
Phases of Decisionmaking LEVELS OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION |
|||||||
| Control of decisionmaking (right to decide) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Decisionmaking power is shared (right to joint decisionmaking) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Comments are seriously taken into account (right to be heard) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | - | - | - |
| Adequate notification (right to be informed) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Access to information (right to access to information) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
With the change to democracy, it was seen as a necessary step to centralize authority in the hands of the national government because the local and regional authorities were not experienced enough to confront the different situations of the country.
| TABLE 7: Preparation and Approval of Local Rules and Regulations | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initiation of DM (problem/ proposal) | Defining the scope, issues and stakeholders (pre-decision scoping) | Defining the scope of DM (impacts and alternatives) | Evaluation of the alternatives | Selection of the alternative (DM about the selected alternative) | Execution of the selected alternative | Post-decision monitoring & enforcement (feedback/ adjustment) | |
Phases of Decisionmaking LEVELS OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION |
|||||||
| Control of decisionmaking (right to decide) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Decisionmaking power is shared (right to joint decisionmaking) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Comments are seriously taken into account (right to be heard) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Adequate notification (right to be informed) | 2 | 2 | 2 | - | - | 2 | - |
| Access to information (right to access to information) | 2 | 2 | 2 | - | - | 2 | 2 |
The situation is no longer the same. The centralized power structure has become an obstacle for the development of the zones. It is a fact that these bodies have better knowledge of the reality and problems in the zones they lead. If the central government and other national bodies would delegate some of the important competence to the local bodies, the local bodies would have a greater responsibility in the public eyes, and the public would have more opportunity to control or to affect the decisionmaking process.
Government officials have promised in publicized debates that the Parliament would begin considering laws to decentralize power early in 1998. Another arrangement could come from approval of the administrative code. There are provisions in this code that deal with public information and participation. Also, more rights are foreseen for the public to appeal administrative decisions. Up to now, there has been no official information disseminated about this.
| TABLE 8: Preparation of Local Policies | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initiation of DM (problem/ proposal) | Defining the scope, issues and stakeholders (pre-decision scoping) | Defining the scope of DM (impacts and alternatives) | Evaluation of the alternatives | Selection of the alternative (DM about the selected alternative) | Execution of the selected alternative | Post-decision monitoring & enforcement (feedback/ adjustment) | |
Phases of Decisionmaking LEVELS OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION |
|||||||
| Control of decisionmaking (right to decide) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Decisionmaking power is shared (right to joint decisionmaking) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Comments are seriously taken into account (right to be heard) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Adequate notification (right to be informed) | 2 | 2 | 2 | - | - | 2 | - |
| Access to information (right to access to information) | 2 | 2 | 2 | - | - | 2 | - |
| TABLE 9: Environmental Impact Assessment | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initiation of DM (problem/ proposal) | Defining the scope, issues and stakeholders (pre-decision scoping) | Defining the scope of DM (impacts and alternatives) | Evaluation of the alternatives | Selection of the alternative (DM about the selected alternative) | Execution of the selected alternative | Post-decision monitoring & enforcement (feedback/ adjustment) | |
Phases of Decisionmaking LEVELS OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION |
|||||||
| Control of decisionmaking (right to decide) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Decisionmaking power is shared (right to joint decisionmaking) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Comments are seriously taken into account (right to be heard) | 1 | 1 | 1 | - | - | - | 1 |
| Adequate notification (right to be informed) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Access to information (right to access to information) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
There is no public participation during siting or licensing. In one recent case, the local authorities in Tirana gave questionable permission for construction that would destroy green areas and upset the town planning.