In addition, our country also has obligations under the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Trans-boundary context. Countries that signed the Espoo Convention in Finland are obliged to inform each other if the planned activities in one country may have a trans-boundary effect in another.

The construction of a NPP in Belarus is an issue that concerns Belarusians as well as the neighbouring countries: Russia, Ukraine and the Baltic States. Therefore officially the Belarusian authorities are bound to comply with their international obligations and follow democratic procedures, such as ensuring public consultations while making decisions on crucial issues for the country.

The construction sight not approved yet though hearings will take place in Ostrovets

A sociological poll in 2007 (the one the officials refer to) showed that 59 % of the inhabitants of Belarus supported the construction of a Nuclear Power Plant. The authorities promised to set up in 2009 – 2010 a supplementary assessment in order to complement this data.

Although the final decision with regard to the construction sight for the NPP has not been adopted yet, there are three sights under consideration: Kukshtyny, Krasnopolie in Mogilev Oblast and Ostrovets in Grodno Oblast. The priority is given to the Ostrovets sight, which is extremely close to the border with the European Union. In the meantime, a leading production engineer of the Direction of the construction of a Nuclear Power Plant, Mikhail Zhuk, said it was too early to talk about Ostrovets as about the final option, due to the fact that public hearings were still to take place in this regard.

Public consultations regarding the environmental impact assessment of an NPP on the environment were planned to take place on 9 October. They will be held in a village Ostrovets. Activists of the Belarusian Anti-Nuclear movement show their concern and consider these hearings as ‘pro forma’ only - they believe the authorities have already made their decision without consulting with the population.

They have two arguments:

Firstly, on 27 August 2009 Mr. Aleksander Lukashenko said in the course of a meeting with the Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, “in 2010 we shall start a joint project on the construction of a power plant”.

Secondly, in Ostrovets region in the section between the village Goza and Mikhalishak in the direction of Valeikuny, a large-scale road construction works were started already. The alleged construction sight for NPP is located near Valeikuny.

What about our neighbours?

Public hearings related to the environmental impact assessment of the construction of a NPP constitute a usual international practice. In the neightbouring Russia, for instance, a year ago took place public hearings on the usage, deactivation and placement of nuclear wastes of the Novovoronezhsk NPP. On 4 September 2009 public hearings took place with regard to the construction of Nizhegorodsk NPP. Prior to the construction of the gas pipeline Nord Stream in the Baltic Sea (which would affect Russia, Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Germany), over 30 public hearings took place in all of these countries. As a result, proposals and amendments were taken into account and the initial project has been changed substantiallly

Full support from the Ministry of Environment

The main goal of the hearings in Ostrovets, claim the Belarusian authorities, is to take into account to the maximum possible extent opinions of the wide range of the society, scientist and experts in order to minimize the negative impact of the construction and later exploitation of the NPP on the environment. Today state institutions involved are preparing their assessment, proposals and remarks.

The Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection has already prepared its assessment, “Overall a NPP is environmentally sound. At a stage of pre-construction preparations of the territory and during the construction there is a possibility of insignificant impact on soil, flora and fauna… However the mentioned above changes will not have a negative impact on the ecosystems adherent to the borders of the NPP sight”.

“Scientists for nuclear-free Belarus” against

The civil sector is also working on its assessments, proposals and remarks. In spring 2009 a civil movement “Scientists for nuclear-free Belarus” was founded, its members list a prominent expert on tectonic faults and micro-seismic zoning professor Pavel Ontrushkevich, a liquidator of the consequences of the Chernobyl NPP accident, Ph D in technical science Georgy Lepin, a liquidator and a correspondent member of the National Academy of Sciences Ivan Nikitchenko, ex-President of the National Academy of Sciences, Academician Aleksandr Voytovich, a Nuclear Physicist Yego Fedushin. At the moment they are working on serious scientific justifications, calculations and studying possible consequences.

Whether authorities are bound to listen to the voices of the public

A lecturer of the Civil Law Department of the Law Faculty of the Belarusian State University, a lawyer and a consultant of the Belarusian Aarhus Centre Elena Layevskaya says, “It is difficult to say whether the authorities will hear. In accordance with the international conventions there is a concrete obligation, i.e. to hold public hearing, to organize a discussion and to listen to the people’s remarks. However there is not a country in the world where there were requirements to take into account every single remark of the society. Entire world practice in this regard, both in Europe and in America, is constructed around a requirement to hold public hearings at different stages”.

The practice shows that some remarks are taken into consideration, others are simply ignored. Public hearings is not the only opportunity, it is a part of the numerous other democratic instruments. Those who do not agree with the results of the public hearings have a right to address to the judicial institutions, including international courts and to demand the abolishment of the decision that did not comply with the ecological legislation. Unfortunately citizens of Belarus have a negative attitude with regard to court proceedings, considering it as additional barriers. a lawyer and a consultant of the Belarusian Aarhus Centre Elena Layevskaya believes these stereotypes need to be broken, “Trial is a normal procedure for solving a conflict. Another positive moment, another benefit of a trial is that it allows disseminating information, attracting attention to the issue, encouraging other people’s interest to the matter. Besides Belarusian courts, there is also an International Committee on the compliance with the Aarhus Convention. Belarus has an obligation to comply with its international commitments. Therefore one should go till the end in order to reach his/her goals. One should not have illusions that he or she will be heard. One should look for experts who could briefly, correctly and convincingly formulate all the contradictions with the existing legislation. All objections should be scientifically justified and in a written form. General politicized criticism and picketing would only make things worse”.

Unfortunately few Belarusian citizens are aware of their right for favourable environment and believes in the power of this right, stated in the article 46 of the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus.

Ludmila Korsak