Decision-Making and Access To Justice in Environmental Matters (Aarhus
Convention)
17 are among the other prominent areas seriously criticized in this
period.
Turkey became a party to the Kyoto Protocol – which was adopted in 1997 and
entered into force in 2005 – on 26 August 2009. As it was not party to the
Convention during the negotiations of the Kyoto Protocol, it was not listed in
Annex-B of the Protocol. Therefore, it did not undertake any emission reduction
commitments during the first commitment period (2008–2012). This was because it
became a party to the UNFCCC – which was adopted in 1992 and entered into
force in 1994 – on 24 May 2004. It took so long to become party to the Convention
because of the debate on its status under the Convention. Indeed, as an OECD
country, it was originally listed under both Annex-I and Annex-II lists. After that,
Turkey objected to being listed under Annex-II, due to its special status. Until its
special situation was recognized under Decision 26/Conference of the Parties
(COP)-7, it chose to be out of the Convention.
In 2012, at COP-18 (Decision 2/COP.18), the second commitment period
(2013–2020) of the Protocol was adopted. As Turkey preserved its special status
and was therefore listed only under Annex-I instead of being listed under both
Annexes (see relevant decisions: Decision 1/COP-16, Decision 2/COP-17, Decision
1/COP-18, Decision 21/COP-20), it did not have any reduction commitment in the
second period, just like in the first period (Decision 1/COP-18, para. 94–96).
Lack of progress in the adoption of the acquis on environmental liability and of
the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive on the organization of
water management on a river basin basis are other problematic areas of this period
among many others.
In conclusion, even if attaining EU accession country status has accelerated the
development of TEL in various aspects, the overall alignment with and adoption of
the EU acquis was still not high during this period, and as a result, the capacity for
implementation and enforcement to ensure compliance needed to be further
strengthened. Yet, the fact that he years from 2002 to 2005 are referred to as the
‘best ever’ years of Europeanization in Turkey (Öniş, 2008), EU-Turkey relations
in general have been characterized by stagnation and marked by increasing tensions
because of the impact of the debate on the EU’s absorption capacity, the possibility
of introducing a privileged partnership with Turkey and controversy over the
Cyprus issue (Hauge et al., 2016). Therefore, the last few years – from 2005
onwards – unfortunately do not represent a period of continuous progress in the
development of environmental law, management and protection. However, the
EU-style of policy-making was still partly implemented in practice, and there were
at least some minor changes which can be traced. So it may be argued that, through
learning and persuasion processes (by EU-funded projects, programmes and policy
17
For the countries which are parties to the Convention see at: http://www.unece.org/env/pp/
aarhus/map.html.
2 The Development Process of Environmental Law in Turkey: …
17
Convention)
17 are among the other prominent areas seriously criticized in this
period.
Turkey became a party to the Kyoto Protocol – which was adopted in 1997 and
entered into force in 2005 – on 26 August 2009. As it was not party to the
Convention during the negotiations of the Kyoto Protocol, it was not listed in
Annex-B of the Protocol. Therefore, it did not undertake any emission reduction
commitments during the first commitment period (2008–2012). This was because it
became a party to the UNFCCC – which was adopted in 1992 and entered into
force in 1994 – on 24 May 2004. It took so long to become party to the Convention
because of the debate on its status under the Convention. Indeed, as an OECD
country, it was originally listed under both Annex-I and Annex-II lists. After that,
Turkey objected to being listed under Annex-II, due to its special status. Until its
special situation was recognized under Decision 26/Conference of the Parties
(COP)-7, it chose to be out of the Convention.
In 2012, at COP-18 (Decision 2/COP.18), the second commitment period
(2013–2020) of the Protocol was adopted. As Turkey preserved its special status
and was therefore listed only under Annex-I instead of being listed under both
Annexes (see relevant decisions: Decision 1/COP-16, Decision 2/COP-17, Decision
1/COP-18, Decision 21/COP-20), it did not have any reduction commitment in the
second period, just like in the first period (Decision 1/COP-18, para. 94–96).
Lack of progress in the adoption of the acquis on environmental liability and of
the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive on the organization of
water management on a river basin basis are other problematic areas of this period
among many others.
In conclusion, even if attaining EU accession country status has accelerated the
development of TEL in various aspects, the overall alignment with and adoption of
the EU acquis was still not high during this period, and as a result, the capacity for
implementation and enforcement to ensure compliance needed to be further
strengthened. Yet, the fact that he years from 2002 to 2005 are referred to as the
‘best ever’ years of Europeanization in Turkey (Öniş, 2008), EU-Turkey relations
in general have been characterized by stagnation and marked by increasing tensions
because of the impact of the debate on the EU’s absorption capacity, the possibility
of introducing a privileged partnership with Turkey and controversy over the
Cyprus issue (Hauge et al., 2016). Therefore, the last few years – from 2005
onwards – unfortunately do not represent a period of continuous progress in the
development of environmental law, management and protection. However, the
EU-style of policy-making was still partly implemented in practice, and there were
at least some minor changes which can be traced. So it may be argued that, through
learning and persuasion processes (by EU-funded projects, programmes and policy
17
For the countries which are parties to the Convention see at: http://www.unece.org/env/pp/
aarhus/map.html.
2 The Development Process of Environmental Law in Turkey: …
17