The adoption of the Nature Restoration Law by the Council of the EU this week has been described as a “dark day for democracy” by the president of the Irish Natura and Hill Farmers’ Association (INHFA).
Vincent Roddy claimed that the passage of the law was a “new low” for the institutions of the EU.
The law was adopted in controversial circumstances. Its adoption came a mere two weeks after the European Parliament elections, leading to suggestions that the law had been stalled by the Council of the EU until after the elections in an effort to avoid alienating rural voters.
As well as that, the government of Austria is set to take legal action against its own environment minister after she voted in favour of the Nature Restoration Law (NRL) apparently without following proper legal procedure under the Austrian constitution.
The vote of Minister Leonore Gewessler was instrumental in allowing the Nature Restoration Law to be adopted by the council.
Without her vote, the law would not have reached the required qualified majority of 20 member states and 65% of the EU’s population.
Commenting on this controversy, Roddy said: “As someone who is married to an Austrian, I am somewhat familiar with their political system, which differs in its administration to Ireland.
“This difference stems from the fact that Austria is a federation of nine different regions and these regions have a lot of power. Contrast this to Ireland where all major decisions are made centrally, and while our county councils have some power, it is very limited in comparison to the Austrian regions.
“In Austria, similar to Ireland and other EU countries, there is a sizeable area of land designated special areas of conservation (SAC) and special protected areas (SPA). However, in Austria, the budget and management of these designations is administered by the regional government, and the expectation is that the NRL would be administered in a similar manner,” the INHFA president said.
According to Roddy, it is this arrangement in Austria that gives rise to the question over whether its environment minister had the legal authority to vote in favour of the law.
It is understood that the Austrian chancellor (prime minister) Karl Nehammer had written to the council in advance of the vote saying that his minister did not have the power to vote in favour of the Nature Restoration Law.
The chancellor apparently made this move on the basis that Minister Gewessler’s intention of voting for the law was contrary to the opinion of the regional governments in Austria, as well as the federal government.
Roddy went on to say: “Currently there are two potential court cases as a result of Monday’s actions. The first legal challenge is to the European Court of Justice, where Austria is challenging the decision by their minister to give her approval, and the second possible challenge is to the Austrian courts around the constitutionality of the minister’s decision.”
However, Roddy acknowledged that the chances of the Nature Restoration Law being rescinded are “very low”, even if the manner of its approval “does raise some concerning issues”.
“What we have seen through the development and final approval of the NRL is an ideology around the protection of nature, and while we may have issues around the detail in this law, most people will accept the need to protect and enhance nature,” he said.
“However, when an ideology, no matter how noble, trumps democracy, we are opening a dangerous door. That door was opened on Monday and that it why I say it is a dark day for democracy in Europe.
“What happened on Monday is wrong, for the people of Austria and all EU citizens. The EU was established and developed to be better than that,” Roddy added.