3 de Marzo de 2021, 18:42
The rule of law, one of the fundamental values of our European Union, has been a key aspect in the negotiations for the Multiannual Financial Framework and the Recovery Facility, the main instrument of Next Generation EU whose Regulation entered into force on 19 February 2021. Regulation on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the EU budget which aims to protect the rule of law was adopted last January to avoid the use of European funds by Member States violating the rule of law. Both financial instruments emphasize the need to avoid corruption, fraud and conflict of interests when executing both financial instruments as part of the rule of law.
Rule of law implies that all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, among other aspects. Therefore, the rule of law is not only about avoiding corruption, fraud and conflict of interest but it also covers respect to the EU environmental acquis (environmental Directives and Regulations) adopted since the 60s of the XXth century. This means that environmental rule of law has to be part of the Facility and of the National Recovery and Resilience Plans that Member States are preparing as well as of the assessment of those plans that European Commission has to undertake before being approved by the Council.
[Recibe los análisis de más actualidad en tu correo electrónico o en tu teléfono a través de nuestro canal de Telegram]
Among the legal obligations that those national plans have to respect are:
However, as occurred with the firsts National Energy and Climate Plans under EU Regulation on the Governance of the Energy Union and Climate Action, again an EU legal text do not require to subject plans to strategic environmental assessment.
In spite of these requirements under EU environmental rule of law, the preparation of National Recovery and Resilience Plans is not being subject to strategic environmental assessments and public consultation procedures are being poor or absent and not in line with the Aarhus Convention requirements. The do not significant harm principle enshrined in the so-called Taxonomy Regulation and which under the Recovery and Resilience Facility requires an explanation of how the national plans ensure that no measure for the implementation of reforms and investments included in the plan makes a significant harm to environmental objectives is not enough and nor a substitute of other environmental protection legislation.
Economic responses to Covid-19 are essential and necessary, but these cannot be at the expense environment rule of law and more when national recovery and resilience plans are meant to contribute to the EU Green Deal.
(For more info, click here)
Contra la pandemia, información y análisis de calidad
Colabora con una aportación económica