Governments across Europe, South Caucasus and Central Asia are increasingly failing to uphold the Aarhus Convention, a treaty that guarantees access to information, public participation in decision-making and environmental justice. Shadow reports prepared by civil society organisations ahead of this week’s Meeting of the Parties in Geneva show that while governments implement extensive changes of their legislative frameworks that look progressive on paper, their implementation is stagnating or deteriorating. The public faces growing secrecy, shrinking opportunities to influence decisions, and barriers to justice.
The Aarhus Convention, in force since 2001, is a cornerstone of environmental democracy for Europe, the EU and post-Soviet states, recently joined also by Guinea-Bissau as the first African country to do so. NGOs warn that the current reporting cycle clearly shows a widening gap between states’ commitments and the lived reality of citizens.
In the past, mainly post-Soviet and Western Balkan countries struggled with weak institutions, corruption and poor law enforcement. Today, worrying trends are also emerging in the UK and EU member states, where authorities intentionally reduce transparency and restrict public participation.
The most severe decline is reported in Georgia, which adopted a “foreign agents” law and practically eliminated independent civil society organisations, mirroring the earlier trajectory of Belarus. Bosnia and Herzegovinacontinues to struggle with weak digitalisation, inaccessible information and time-consuming administrative procedures. Ukraine, despite legislative progress, faces limits in the area of access to information due to martial law and the ongoing Russian aggression. Czechia is gradually shortening deadlines and narrowing the scope of procedures where the public can participate. Hungary has not published any report that would enable to assess its progress. In the United Kingdom, the public was excluded from consultations on post-Brexit environmental laws, while new measures restrict protest rights and access to justice.
“The problem is not the absence of legislation, but its practical application and enforcement. Many states introduce amendments and new laws, some of them in the name of transparency, yet the public still struggles to obtain information, participate meaningfully or seek justice,” explains Martin Skalský, expert on public participation from Arnika, a Czech non-governmental organization.
Out of 48 Parties, nine states did not submit their implementation reports for the 2021–2024 period: Azerbaijan, France, Guinea-Bissau, Hungary, Latvia, Netherlands, Serbia, Slovakia and Spain. This alone signals a worrying disregard for obligations under the Convention.
This week, Parties will review the findings of the Convention’s Compliance Committee and decide on measures for states and the EU that violated key provisions. According to the shadow reports, national legislation frequently guarantees environmental rights only formally, while access to information, meaningful public participation and the ability to challenge harmful projects remain limited in practice. NGOs emphasise that they work directly with communities and therefore see problems that official reports often overlook.
Beyond national contexts, civil society also warns of insufficient public participation at the global level. The ongoing negotiations on the new Plastics Convention are cited as the worst example: scientists, NGOs and Indigenous representatives are systematically excluded from closed-door talks, while petrochemical and plastics industry lobbies enjoy privileged access and outnumber state delegations.
NGOs call for clearer, more accountable reporting
Civil society organisations call for a clearer and more accountable reporting system. They recommend harmonising and standardising the format to make countries’ reports easier to compare, complementing qualitative descriptions with mandatory quantitative data and indicators, and providing stronger guidance for the national ministries of environment to ensure transparency, meaningful civil-society involvement and consistent data collection. Crucially, they stress that reporting should not stop at submitting reports, but must be followed by dialogue, feedback and concrete corrective measures wherever implementation gaps persist.
Notes and details:
(1) The Aarhus Convention, also known as the Convention on Environmental Democracy, entered into force on 30 October 2001. Its signatories are the countries of Europe and the former Soviet Union and the European Union as a party. Recently, Guinea-Bissau became the first party from Africa. Based on the example of the Aarhus Convention, the countries of Latin America recently adopted a similar Escazu Convention. The Aarhus Convention guarantees the right to environmental information, public participation in decision-making, access to justice, and protection of the defenders of the environment from persecution. More on the Aarhus Convention
(2) Statements of the experts from non-governmental organisations on the situation in specific countries: parties to the Aarhus Convention:
Belarus: “Although some recommendations of the Compliance Committee have been incorporated into national legislation in recent years – even after Belarus ceased to be a Party to the Aarhus Convention – the reality on the ground continues to worsen. Environmental defenders face severe persecution, all independent environmental NGOs have been dissolved, and public engagement is extremely limited due to the absence of organisational support and lack of accessible information.” - Marina Dubina, director of liquidated NGO Ecohome
Bosnia and Herzegovina: "Despite political or economic influences, Bosnia and Herzegovina has made some progress in environmental democracy. However, full implementation of the Aarhus Convention in practice is lacking. Ignorance and lack of capacity of officials in providing information; lengthy judicial and administrative proceedings; information that is unavailable to the public even though it relates to projects of public interest are only some of the obstacles thatrepeat themselves year after year. Only a close cooperation between civil society and authorities may change the situation." - Ratko Pilipović, lawyer, Center for Environment, Banja Luka
Georgia: „Georgia disregards its obligations under the Aarhus Convention. Major environmental decisions are made without genuine public participation, while key agreements remain secret. Environmental justice is virtually non-existent; courts often take months, and sometimes even years, to schedule a first hearing. Meanwhile, environmental defenders face various forms of repression, ranging from criminal prosecution to smear campaigns and harassment. As authoritarian tendencies deepen, their situation continues to deteriorate.” - Salome Shubladze, lawyer, Social Justice Center
Hungary: “The Aarhus Convention and its implementation have absolutely no importance for the current government. The most striking sign of it is that no effort whatsoever has been made by any government agency to prepare the National Implementation Report, let alone its public consultation. The position of the National Focal Point was vacant for many months while no national delegate represented Hungary at the relevant Task Force and WGP meetings for years. The Convention clearly does not fit into the policy of the current Government." - Csaba Kiss, Executive Director, EMLA
Moldova: “In preparation for membership in the European Union, the Republic of Moldova must integrate and ensure people's rights to access environmental information, to participate effectively in environmentally sensitive decision-making, and to defend their rights to a healthy environment in court. This requires a shift in decision-making, an independent judiciary, and the elimination of bureaucracy in ensuring access to environmental information.” - Ilya Trombitsky, Association of River Keepers Eco-TIRAS, Chisinau
Poland: “Poland's major issues with the full implementation of Aarhus Convention persist over years, in particular with regard to meaningful public participation and effective access to justice in relation to EIA procedure and some types of permits, as well as plans and programmes. Given the recent ACCC findings, we hope that these issues have a chance to be rectified in the following years.” - Ewa Dąbrowska, lawyer, ClientEarth
United Kingdom: “The UK's Report masks a period of significant decline in compliance with the Aarhus Convention. It highlights positive elements but omits new legislation imposing harsh sentences for peaceful environmental protest and measures that make it harder to challenge major infrastructure projects in court. It fails to clarify that the UK remains in breach of the Convention's access to justice provisions due to the high costs of legal action.” - Carol Day and Katie de Kauwe, speaking to Environment Link
Ukraine: “Ukraine demonstrates a mix of progress and setbacks in implementing environmental democracy. Access to information had been limited due to the start of full-scale war against Ukraine, yet new tools such as the „Ecosystema” database and updated EIA and SEA registers have significantly improved transparency. The new waste management law lacks provisions for public participation in waste licensing and waste permitting, while the recently adopted IPPC law includes detailed provisions on public involvement.” - Olya Melen-Zabramna, lawyer, Environment-People-Law, Lviv
(3) The shadow reports on environmental democracy, prepared by the non-governmental organizations.
https://unece.org/environmental-policy/public-participation/2025-reporting-cycle/organisations
(4) Seventh Session of the Parties to the Aarhus Convention
https://unece.org/environmental-policy/events/Aarhus_Convention_MoP8
(5) Each country that is a signatory of the Aarhus Convention is obliged to prepare every four years a report on the state of legislation and also the practical implementation of environmental rights. The reports are available here.
(6) In a case when a certain state violates the principles of environmental democracy set out in the Aarhus Convention, citizens or NGOs can submit a complaint to the Compliance Committee. All cases are available here.
(7) Background on the Plastics Convention negotiations
https://arnika.org/en/news/disappointed-not-surprised-un-s-plastics-treaty-postponed-for-now
