Activites

• 2003/02/14 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Directive 2003/4
  • OJ L 041 14.02.2003, p. 0026-0032
• 2003/01/28 Final act signed
• 2003/01/28 End of procedure in Parliament
• 2002/12/18 Decision by Parliament, 3rd reading
  • T5-0622/2002 summary

    The European Parliament adopted a resolution approving the joint text agreed by the Conciliation Committee. (Please refer to the document dated 08/11/02). �

• 2002/12/17 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• #2476
• 2002/12/16 Council Meeting
• #2473
• 2002/12/09 Council Meeting
• 2002/11/08 Joint text approved by Conciliation Committee co-chairs
  • 3667/2002
• 2002/11/07 Final decision by Conciliation Committee
• 2002/11/06 Report tabled for plenary, 3rd reading
  • A5-0435/2002
• 2002/09/12 Formal meeting of Conciliation Committee
• 2002/05/30 Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading
  • T5-0262/2002 summary

    The European Parliament adopted the report drafted by Anneli KORHOLA (EPP-ED, Finland) and adopted several amendments to the Council's common position. (Please refer to the document dated 23/04/02.) Parliament stipulated that public authorities may be permitted to refuse a request for environmental information only in exceptional cases. The public interest served by disclosure should be weighed against the interest served by the refusal to disclose, and access to the information requested should be granted if the public interest served by disclosure outweighs the specific interest protected by non-disclosure. Information on emissions, discharges and other releases into the environment should not be withheld by virtue of the protection of commercial, industrial or other interests. Parliament wants free access to the information requested. Examination in situ of the information requested is also to be free of charge. Public authorities may, however, make a charge for supplying information, so long as the charge does not exceed the actual cost of reproducing the material requested. It should not include the cost of staff time spent on searches. Parliament went on to emphasise the importance of improving the quality of information made available upon request, in the interest of making that information comprehensible, accurate and comparable. The method used in compiling the information should be disclosed, as this is an important factor in assessing the quality of the information supplied and determining whether it is misleading. Finally, the European Parliament wants the Directive to be evaluated every four years after submission of the relevant reports by the Member States.�

• 2002/05/29 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2002/04/23 Vote in committee, 2nd reading
  • A5-0136/2002
• 2002/02/06 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 2nd reading
• #2406
• 2002/01/28 Council Meeting
  • 11878/1/2001 summary

    On 14 March 2001, the European Parliament adopted all 30 amendments that had been tabled. In general, the Commission accepted those amendments seeking to make the proposal more consistent with the Aarhus Convention. Other amendments which usefully clarified some provisions of the proposal were accepted in principle or in part. However, those amendments which substantially deviated from the Aarhus acquis or which fell outside the scope of the proposal were not accepted. The Council's common position, whilst maintaining the approach proposed by the Commission, modifies the provisions of the proposal in order to clarify or to strengthen them in order to make them more practicable. Many modifications aim at re-instating the original text of the Aarhus Convention. The common position widens the definition of "information relating to the environment" contained in Directive 90/313/EEC so as to cover not only written, visual, aural or data-base information, but also electronic information. The definition not only covers the elements of the environment and the activities and measures affecting or protecting them, but also genetically modified organisms, the interaction among the above elements, economic analyses and the state of human health, conditions of life, cultural sites and built structures affected by the environment. Where the former directive only addressed public administrations with the responsibilities relating to the environment and private natural or legal persons having public responsibilities in relation to the environment under the control of administrations, the common position also covers all governments and public administrations as well as private persons independently performing public administrative functions in relation to the environment. Regarding the "passive right of information", the common position shortens from two months to one month the period within which information in the format asked by the applicant, unless it is already publicly available and unless it is reasonable to provide it in another form, and requests defining practical arrangements for making the information available. If the requested information is held by another authority, the request has to be transferred to that authority or the applicant has to be informed of the identity of the authority that is believed to hold the information. A refusal must be notifed in writing if the request was in writing or if the applicant requested a written reply. If a request is formulated in too general a manner, the public authorities will within the one-month period ask the applicant to specify his request and assist in doing so. As under the 1990 Directive, charges must be publicised and be of a reasonable amount. The common position adds that they may not cover the consultation of publication registers nor the consultation in situ of the information. The administrative or judicial review of Directive 90/313/EEC is replaced by an administrative and judicial review in two stages. Regarding the "active right of information", Directive 90/313/EEC only required providing the public with general information on the state of the environment by such means as the periodic publication of descriptive reports. The common position aims atdisseminating, in addition, legal texts, policies, progress reports, data from monitoring, information about preventing or mitigating harm arising from imminent threats to human health or the environment etc, through several means, but in particular, through telecommunication technology. In a public statement for the minutes, the Council agrees to undertake steps in order to apply to the Community's Institutions the same rules as those laid down in the "information" pillar of the Aarhus Convention and calls upon the Commission to present a proposal for that pillar, taking into consideration the more extensive requirements of the present Directive. This should contribute to enabling the Community to ratify the Aarhus Convention.�

• #2355
• 2001/06/07 Council Meeting
• 2001/06/06 Modified legislative proposal published
  • COM(2001)0303 summary

    Of the thirty amendments adopted by Parliament, only one relating to the alignment of the proposal with the Aarhus Convention was accepted in full by the Commission. Nine amendments were accepted in part, including the following: - the definition of "information held by a public authority" - grounds for refusal to disclose information to be interpreted restrictively. Seven were accepted in principle, including - the directive to be reviewed four years after the deadline for implementation. - clarification and assistance in reformulating requests that are too general. - the name of the official completing the information requested and the estimated timetable for completion. Seventeen were rejected, the following being noteworthy: - the reference to future developments in the area of information and communication technologies. The Commission takes the view that reference to technology which does not currently exist is inappropriate in a legislative measure. - the amendment extending scope to the EC institutions is rejected. - for complex requests, the Commission regards two weeks and six weeks deadlines as being too short. - the requirement that public bodies supply information in the format or form requested by the applicant is rejected, since the Commission believes that such bodies should be allowed some flexibility in this matter. - since this is a framework directive, the practical arrangements under which the information should be made available to the applicant is left to the Member States. - public bodies must be able to refuse access to specific internal documents. - the amendment seeking to prevent public authorities from invoking any of the exceptions provided for on emissions and discharges is rejected. - the introduction of positive silence is rejected, since the proposal provides redress mechanisms for failure to reply within the deadline. - the amendment preventing public authorities from making charges when the information is for educational purposes is rejected, since this is a matter for Member States. This is also the case for the amendment referring to access to justice, and active dissemination of environmental information. A degree of flexibility in transposition of the directive should be granted to Member States. - a twelve month deadline for transposition is considered too short. �

  • DG [{'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/environment/', 'title': 'Environment'}],
• 2001/03/14 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • T5-0136/2001 summary

    The European Parliament adopted the report by Mrs Eija-Riitta Anneli KORHOLA (EPP/ED, FIN) with 502 votes in favour, no votes against and two abstentions. The aim is to adapt existing legislation to reflect developments in information technologies such as the internet and to pave the way towards ratification of the UN/ECE Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters. (Please refer to the previous text). More specifically, the 30 amendments that were adopted seek to broaden the defintion of public authorities to include natural persons performing administrative functions under national law. With regard to the dissemination of information, Parliament wants the Internet to be explicity mentioned and adds that account should also be taken of the future development of information and communication technologies, points which are not mentioned by the Commission. It wants Member States to create publicly accessible data bases where environmental documents would be held. Search aids should be provided to make it easy for the public to locate information. In addition, quality criteria are laid down regarding the information, to be provided, which must be up-to-date, comprehensible and scientifically sound.�

• 2001/03/13 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 2001/02/26 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • A5-0074/2001
• #X013
• 2000/12/18 Council Meeting
  • X013
• 2000/07/07 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 2000/06/29 Legislative proposal published
  • COM(2000)0402 summary

    PURPOSE : to present a proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on public access to environmental information. CONTENT : this proposal for a Council Directive on access to environmental information, which upon adoption will replace Council Directive 90/313/EEC on the freedom of access to information on the environment has been prepared in accordance with Article 8 of that Directive, which calls upon the Commission to submit any proposal for revision it may consider appropriate in the light of experience gained in the operation of the Directive. The experience gained since 1 January 1993, the latest day of the transposition of Directive 90/313/EEC by Member States, shows that this Directive initiated a process of openness as regards public access to environmental information. It was a catalyst for change in the way that public authorities approach the process of openness and transparency. Individuals and organisations throughout the Community have made use of the possibilities. Improved access by the public to environmental information has contributed to an increase in public awareness of environmental matters. The objective of the proposal is two-fold. On the one hand, it aims at ensuring a right of access to environmental information held by or for public authorities and to set out the basic terms and conditions of its exercise. On the other hand, it also aims at ensuring that, as a matter of course, environmental information is made available and disseminated to the public, in particular, by means of available computer telecommunications and/or electronic technology. In contrast with Directive 90/313/EEC which only ensured freedom of access to environmental information, it was felt more appropriate to establish a right of access to environmental information. The establishment of such right will enable Community legislation to be aligned with the Aarhus Convention.�

  • DG [{'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/environment/', 'title': 'Environment'}],
• #2056
• 1997/12/04 Council Meeting
• 1995/01/30 Additional information

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: COM(2000)0402
• Debate in Council: X013
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A5-0074/2001
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T5-0136/2001
• Modified legislative proposal published: COM(2001)0303
• Council position published: 11878/1/2001
• Committee recommendation tabled for plenary, 2nd reading: A5-0136/2002
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading: T5-0262/2002
• Report tabled for plenary, 3rd reading: A5-0435/2002
• Joint text approved by Conciliation Committee co-chairs: 3667/2002
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 3rd reading: T5-0622/2002
• : Directive 2003/4
• : OJ L 041 14.02.2003, p. 0026-0032

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)