A szerb és a magyar jog harmonizációja az Európai Unió ... · Компјутерска обрада текста Владимир Ватић, ГРАФИТ, Петроварадин

САДРЖАЈ – TABLE OF CONTENTS

I

УНИВЕРЗИТЕТ У НОВОМ САДУ

ПРАВНИ ФАКУЛТЕТ У НОВОМ САДУ SZEGEDI TUDOMÁNYEGYETEM

ÁLLAM- ÉS JOGTUDOMÁNYI KAR

Хармонизација српског и мађарског права са правом Европске уније

A szerb és a magyar jog harmonizációja az Európai Unió jogával

Harmonisation of Serbian and Hungarian Law with the European Union Law

ТЕМАТСКИ ЗБОРНИК TEMATIKUS TANULMÁNYKÖTET

THEMATIC COLLECTION OF PAPERS

КЊИГА III III. KÖTET

VOLUME III Правни факултет у Новом Саду, Центар за издавачку делатност,

Нови Сад, 2015 Újvidéki Jogtudományi Kar, Kiadói Központ, Újvidék, 2015 Faculty of Law Novi Sad, Publishing Center, Novi Sad 2015.

IV

IV

201620162016.

IV.


II


ПРАВНИ ФАКУЛТЕТ ЦЕНТАР ЗА ИЗДАВАЧКУ ДЕЛАТНОСТ

Трг Доситеја Обрадовића 1 21000 Нови Сад www.pf.uns.ac.rs

ХАРМОНИЗАЦИЈА СРПСКОГ И МАЂАРСКОГ ПРАВА СА ПРАВОМ ЕВРОПСКЕ УНИЈЕ

Главни и одговорни уредник Проф. др Ранко Кеча

Уредништво: Проф. др Татјана Бугарски

Проф. др Бранислав Ристивојевић Проф. др Драгиша Дракић Проф. др Слободан Орловић

За издавача: Проф. др Ранко Кеча, декан Правног факултета у Новом Саду

Проф. др Љубомир Стајић, управник Центра за издавачку делатност Мр Радмила Дабановић, главни и одговорни уредник монографских издања

Рецензенти:

Prof. Dr. József Hajdú Проф. др Драган Милков Prof. Dr. Elemér Balogh Проф. др Ранко Кеча

Doc. Dr. Klára Gellén Проф. др Зоран Арсић Doc. Dr. Péter Mezei Проф. др Иштван Фејеш

Технички уредници: Идејно решење корица

Др Атила Дудаш, доцент Милан Левнајић Лука Батуран, асистент

Ратко Радошевић, асистент Компјутерска обрада текста Горан Хајзлер

Штампа Тираж

„Футура“ Петроварадин 200 примерака

ISBN 978-86-7774-153-2

Објављивање ове публикације одобрио је Издавачки савет Центра за издавачку делатност Правног факултета у Новом Саду на седници одржаној 4. марта 2015. године.

Copyright © Правни факултет – Нови Сад, 2015.

Главни и одговорни уредникПроф. др Љубомир Стајић

Уредништво:Проф. др Татјана Бугарски

Проф. др Бранислав РистивојевићПроф. др Драгиша Дракић

Проф. др Слободан Орловић

За издавача:Проф. др Љубомир Стајић, декан Правног факултета у Новом Саду

Проф. др Љубомир Стајић, управник Центра за издавачку делатностМр Радмила Дабановић, главни и одговорни уредник монографских издања

Рецензенти: Prof. Dr. József Hajdú Проф. др Драган Милков Prof. Dr. Elemér Balogh Проф. др Ранко Кеча Doc. Dr. Klára Gellén Проф. др Зоран Арсић Doc. Dr. Péter Mezei Доц. др Атила Дудаш

Технички уредници: Идејно решење корица Лука Батуран, асистент Милан Левнајић Ратко Радошевић, асистент Компјутерска обрада текста Владимир Ватић, ГРАФИТ, Петроварадин

Штампа Тираж „Футура”, Петроварадин 200 примерака

ISBN 978-86-7774-178-5

Објављивање ове публикације одобрио је Издавачки савет Центра за издавачку делатностПравног факултета у Новом Саду на седници одржаној 9. марта 2016. године.



II


ПРАВНИ ФАКУЛТЕТ ЦЕНТАР ЗА ИЗДАВАЧКУ ДЕЛАТНОСТ

Трг Доситеја Обрадовића 1 21000 Нови Сад www.pf.uns.ac.rs

ХАРМОНИЗАЦИЈА СРПСКОГ И МАЂАРСКОГ ПРАВА СА ПРАВОМ ЕВРОПСКЕ УНИЈЕ

Главни и одговорни уредник Проф. др Ранко Кеча

Уредништво: Проф. др Татјана Бугарски

Проф. др Бранислав Ристивојевић Проф. др Драгиша Дракић Проф. др Слободан Орловић

За издавача: Проф. др Ранко Кеча, декан Правног факултета у Новом Саду

Проф. др Љубомир Стајић, управник Центра за издавачку делатност Мр Радмила Дабановић, главни и одговорни уредник монографских издања

Рецензенти:

Prof. Dr. József Hajdú Проф. др Драган Милков Prof. Dr. Elemér Balogh Проф. др Ранко Кеча

Doc. Dr. Klára Gellén Проф. др Зоран Арсић Doc. Dr. Péter Mezei Проф. др Иштван Фејеш

Технички уредници: Идејно решење корица

Др Атила Дудаш, доцент Милан Левнајић Лука Батуран, асистент

Ратко Радошевић, асистент Компјутерска обрада текста Горан Хајзлер

Штампа Тираж

„Футура“ Петроварадин 200 примерака

ISBN 978-86-7774-153-2

Објављивање ове публикације одобрио је Издавачки савет Центра за издавачку делатност Правног факултета у Новом Саду на седници одржаној 4. марта 2015. године.


САДРЖАЈ

Др Родољуб М. Етински, редовни професорПраво приступа информацијама у области животне средине и његова импле-ментација у право ЕУ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Зоран В. Арсић, редов ни про фе сорУпис акци ја у пра ву Репу бли ке Срби је . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Дра ган Л. Мил ков, редов ни про фе сорПоводом новог Закона о општем управном поступку . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Пре драг П. Јова но вић, редов ни про фе сорЗаштита младих на раду и у вези са радом у међународном, европском и праву Србије . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Душан ка Ј. Ђур ђев, редов ни про фе сорПојам „изванредне околности” према уредби 261/2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Ран ко И. Кеча, редов ни про фе сорО пред ме ту дока зи ва ња у срп ском пар нич ном поступ ку . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Гор да на Б. Кова чек Ста нић, редов ни про фе сорПоро дич но прав на зашти та дете та од наси ља у поро ди ци у срп ском и европ ском пра ву . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Дани ца Д. Попов, редов ни про фе сорПре ста нак хипо те ке . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Љубо мир С. Ста јић, редов ни про фе сор; Ненад П. Ради во је вић, аси стентНеки про бле ми импле мен та ци је Зако на о при ват ном обез бе ђе њу . . . . . . .

Др Маја Д. Ста ни ву ко вић, редов ни про фе сорКон форм ни обра чун кама те у међу на род ној инве сти ци о ној арби тра жи . .

Др Душан Ж. Нико лић, редов ни про фе сорОднос људских права и грађанских приватних права у Европи . . . . . . . . .

Др Бер на дет И. Бор даш, редов ни про фе сорДвојно држављанство у контексту права Европске уније . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Иштван И. Фејеш, редов ни про фе сорНеки аспек ти зако ни то сти дока зи ва ња у кри вич ном поступ ку . . . . . . . . .

1

31

47

65

79

93

119

137

153

171

193

211

231

Хармонизација спрског и мађарског права са правом Европске уније

Др Сенад Р. Јаша ре вић, редов ни про фе сорНове тенденције у области заштите личних података на раду у међуна-родном и европском праву . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Сне жа на С. Бркић, редов ни про фе сорИзбор и трансформација упрошћених кривичнопроцесних форми . . . . .

Др Сања В. Ђајић, редов ни про фе сорРаз вој инсти ту та про тив ме ра у прак си међу на род них судо ва и арби тра жа .

Др Јожеф J. Хајду, редовни професорСоцијална заштита радника миграната у праву Европске уније са посеб-ним освртом на социјалну помоћ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Маг дол на И. Сич, ван ред ни про фе сорНејединство непокретности и хипотека на објектима у изградњи у српском и мађарском праву . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Татја на Д. Бугар ски, ван ред ни про фе сорТужилачка сарадња у борби против прекограничног криминалитета . . .

Др Дра ги ша С. Дра кић, ван ред ни про фе сор„Мождана” смрт – кривичноправни, етички и медицинско-биолошки аспекти . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Бра ни слав Р. Ристи во је вић, ван ред ни про фе сорПравна природа заједничког злочиначког подухвата у Римском Статуту .

Др Сло бо дан П. Орло вић, ван ред ни про фе сорОснове уставноправног положаја локалне самоуправе у Србији и Мађарској .

Др Бојан Л. Пај тић, ван ред ни про фе сорДопуштеност уговора између брачних другова у српском и мађарском праву . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Гор да на М. Дра кић, ван ред ни про фе сорРад на доно ше њу гра ђан ског зако ни ка у међу рат ној југо сло вен ској држа ви .

Др Зоран Ј. Лон чар, ван ред ни про фе сорЕвроп ски прав ни стан дар ди и управ ни посту пак у Срби ји . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Јеле на Ђ. Видић Трни нић, ван ред ни про фе сорФорме завештања у српском и мађарском праву . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Др Тамаш Р. Антал, ванредни професорИзвршни органи у мађарским градовима у првим декадама двадесетог века .

Др Кити Ч. Бакош-Ковач, адјунктЗакључење уговора на интернет сајтовима друштвених мрежа са освртом на Ф-трговину . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Габријела Ш. Месарош, студент докторских студијаТипови социјалних давања за бригу о породици у прекограничном кон-тексту ЕУ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Адриен И. Лукач, студент докторских студијаЗаштита личних података у Мађарској у светлу друштвених мрежа и за-пошљавања . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

263

283

297

321

357

371

391

409

421

439

449

461

479

509

519

531

543

IV

TARTALOMJEGYZÉK

Rodoljub M. Etinski, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárA környezetre vonatkozó információhoz való hozzáférési jog és annak imple-mentációja az Európai Unió jogába . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Zoran V. Arsić, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárRészvényjegyzés a Szerb Köztársaság jogában . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dragan L. Milkov, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárAz új általános közigazgatási eljárásról szóló törvényről . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Predrag P. Jovanović, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárA fiatalkorúak munkahelyi és munkával kapcsolatos védelme a nemzetközi, európai és szerb jogban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dušanka J. Đurđev, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárA „rendkívüli esemény” fogalma a 2004/261. sz. Rendelet értelmében . . . . . .

Ranko I. Keča, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárA bizonyítás tárgyáról a szerb perrendtartásban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Gordana B. Kovaček Stanić, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárA gyermek családjogi védelme a családon belüli erőszaktól a szerb és az európai jogban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Danica D. Popov, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárA jelzálog megszűnése . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ljubomir S. Stajić, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanár, Nenad P. Radivojević, tanársegédA személy- és vagyonvédelemről szóló törvény alkalmazása során észlelt egyes problémákról . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Maja D. Stanivuković, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárAz egyenlő értékű (konform) kamatláb alkalmazása a nemzetközi befektetés- -védelmi választott bírósági eljárásban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dušan Ž. Nikolić, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárAz emberi és polgári magánjogok kapcsolata Európában . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Bordás I. Bernadett, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárA kettős állampolgárság intézménye az Európai Unió jogának kontextusában .

Fejős I. István, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárA bizonyítás törvényességének egyes aspektusairól a büntető eljárásban . . . .

1

31

47

65

79

93

119

137

153

171

193

211

231

Хармонизација спрског и мађарског права са правом Европске уније

Senad R. Jašarević, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárA munkаvállalással kapcsolatos személyi adatvédelmet érintő új irányzatok a nemzetközi és európai jogban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Snežana S. Brkić, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárAz egyszerűsített büntető eljárások alkalmazása és átalakulása . . . . . . . . . . . .

Sanja V. Đajić, Ph.D., egyetemi rendes tanárAz ellenintézkedések intézményének fejlődése a nemzetközi bíróságok és a választott bíróságok gyakorlatában . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hajdú J. József, Ph.D., egyetemi tanárA migráns személyek szociális védelme az EU-ban, különös tekintettel a szo-ciális segélyezésre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Szűcs I. Magdolna, Ph.D., egyetemi rendkívüli tanárA föld és az épület szétváló tulajdonjoga és az építési jelzáloghitel a szerb és a magyar jogban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tatjana D. Bugarski, Ph.D., egyetemi rendkívüli tanárÜgyészségi együttműködés a határon átívelő bűnözés elleni harcban . . . . . . .

Dragiša D. Drakić, Ph.D., egyetemi rendkívüli tanár„Agy” halál – büntetőjogi, etikai és orvosi-biológiai szempontok . . . . . . . . . . .

Branislav D. Ristivojević, Ph.D., egyetemi rendkívüli tanárA bűnszövetkezet jogi természete a Római Statútumban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Slobodan P. Orlović, Ph.D., egyetemi rendkívüli tanárA helyi önkormányzatok alkotmányjogi helyzete Szerbiában és Magyarországon .

Bojan L. Pajtić, Ph.D., egyetemi rendkívüli tanárA házastársak közötti szerződések érvényessége a szerb és a magyar jogban .

Gordana M. Drakić, Ph.D., egyetemi rendkívüli tanárPolgári jogi kodifikációs folyamatok a két világháború közötti jugoszláv államban .

Zoran J. Lončar, Ph.D., egyetemi rendkívüli tanárAz európai jogi mércék és a szerbiai közigazgatási eljárás . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Jelena Đ. Vidić Trninić, Ph.D., egyetemi rendkívüli tanárA végrendelet alakszerűsége a szerb és a magyar jogban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Antal Tamás Róbert, Ph.D., egyetemi docensVégrehajtó szervek a magyar városokban a 20. század első évtizedeiben . . . . .

Dr. Bakos-Kovács Cs. Kitti, PhD., egyetemi adjunktusA közösségi portálokon történő szerződéskötés, különös tekintettel a Facebook--kereskedelemre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mészáros S. Gabriella, Ph.D. hallgatóA családi ellátások típusai az Európai Unió szabályozásának kontextusában .

Lukács I. Adrienn, PhD hallgatóMunkaerő felvétel és adatvédelem Magyarországon: a közösségi oldalak és a felvételi eljárás kapcsán felmerülő kihívások . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

263

283

297

321

357

371

391

409

421

439

449

461

479

509

519

531

543

VI

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Rodoljub M. Etinski, Ph.D., Full ProfessorThe Right of Access to Environmental Information and Its Implementation in EU Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Zoran V. Arsić, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sor Subscrip tion of Sha res in Law of Repu blic of Ser bia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dra gan L. Mil kov, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sor On the new Law on Gene ral Admi ni stra ti ve Pro ce du re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pre drag P. Jova no vić, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sor The Pro tec tion of Young Peo ple at Work and Work rela ted Mat ters in the Inter na ti o nal, Euro pean Law and the Law of Ser bia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dušan ka J. Đur đev, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sor Extra or di nary Cir cum stan ces in Regu la tion 261/2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dr. Ran ko I. Keča, orden tlic her Pro fes sorZum Bewe is ge gen stand im ser bischen Zivil pro zess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Gor da na B. Kova ček Sta nić, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sor Family Law Pro tec tion of the Child from Dome stic Vio len ce in Ser bian and Euro pean Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dani ca D. Popov, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sorTer mi na tion of Mort ga ge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Lju bo mir S. Sta jić, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sor; Nenad P. Radi vo je vić, Assi stant Some Pro blems of Imple men ta tion of the Law on Pri va te Secu rity . . . . . . . . .

Maja D. Sta ni vu ko vić, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sor Com po und Inte rest in Inter na ti o nal Invest ment Arbi tra tion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dušan Ž. Niko lić, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sor Rela ti on ship bet we en Human Rights and Civil Pri va te Rights in Euro pe . . . .

Ber na det I. Bor daš, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sor Dual Nati o na lity in the Con text of EU Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ištvan I. Feješ, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sorSome Aspects of Lega lity of Evi den ce in Cri mi nal Pro ce e dings . . . . . . . . . . .

1

31

47

65

79

93

119

137

153

171

193

211

231

Senad R. Jaša re vić, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sorNew Ten den ci es in the Field of Per so nal Data at Work in Inter na ti o nal and Euro pean Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Sne ža na S. Brkić, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sor The Selec tion and Tran sfor ma tion of Sim pli fied Cri mi nal Pro ce du re Forms .

Sanja V. Đajić, Ph.D., Full Pro fes sor Deve lop ment of Coun ter me a su res in the Case-Law of Inter na ti o nal Courts and Arbi tral Tri bu nals: Rai sing the Bar too high? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

József J. Hajdú, Ph.D., Full ProfessorSocial Protection for Migrants in the European Union, with Special Regards to Social Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mag dol na I. Sič, Ph.D., Asso ci a te Pro fes sor Sepa ra te Owner ship of Land and Buil ding (Disu nity of Immo va bles) and Mort ga ges on the Buil dings under Con struc tion in Ser bian and Hun ga rian Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tatja na D. Bugar ski, Ph.D., Asso ci a te Pro fes sor Pro se cu to rial Coo pe ra tion in the Fight aga inst Cross-Bor der Cri me . . . . . . . .

Dra gi ša S. Dra kić, Ph.D., Asso ci a te Pro fes sor “Brain” Death – Cri mi nal, Ethi cal, Medi cal and Bio lo gi cal Aspects . . . . . . . .

Bra ni slav R. Risti vo je vić, Ph.D., Asso ci a te Pro fes sor Legal Natu re of Joint Cri mi nal Enter pri se in Rome Sta tu te . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Slo bo dan P. Orlo vić, Ph.D., Asso ci a te Pro fes sorBasis of Con sti tu ti o nal Posi tion of Local Self-Govern ment in Ser bia and Hun gary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Bojan L. Paj tić, Ph.D., Asso ci a te Pro fes sor Per mis si bi lity of Con tracts bet we en Spo u ses in Ser bian and Hun ga rian Law .

Gor da na M. Dra kić, Ph.D., Asso ci a te Pro fes sor Work on the Adop tion of the Civil Code of Inter war Yugo slav Sta te . . . . . . . .

Zoran J. Lon čar, Ph.D., Asso ci a te Pro fes sor Euro pean Stan dards and Admi ni stra ti ve Pro ce du res in Ser bia . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Jelena Đ. Vidić Trni nić, Ph.D., Asso ci a te Pro fes sor The Forms of Will in the Ser bian and Hun ga rian Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Antal R. Tamás, Ph.D., Associate ProfessorExecutive Organs in Hungarian Cities in the First Decades of the 20th Century .

Kitti Cs. Bakos-Kovács, Ph.D., Assistant ProfessorConclusion of contracts on social network sites with regard to F-commerce . .

Gabriella S. Mészáros, Ph.D. StudentThe Typology of Family Benefits in EU Cross-Border Context . . . . . . . . . . . .

Adrienn I. Lukács, Ph.D. StudentPre-employment and Data Protection in Hungary: the Main Issues Regarding Social Networking Sites and Hiring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

263

283

297

321

357

371

391

409

421

439

449

461

479

509

519

531

543

Хармонизација спрског и мађарског права са правом Европске унијеVIII

ПРЕДГОВОР

Четврта књига тематског зборника са међународног пројекта Хармони-за ција српског и мађарског (домаћег) права са правом Европске уније и преко-гра нична сарадња (Правни факултет Универзитета у Новом Саду и Правни факултет Универзитета у Сегедину) нови је допринос решавању теоријских и практичних проблема на путу европских интеграција. Приближавање прав-них норми како националних правних система међусобно, тако и њихово при-ближавање комунитарном праву (acquis communautaire) Европске уније, јасан је интерес Србије и Мађарске.

И ова књига садржи научне радове који обрађују – из теоријскоправног, со циолошкоправног, историјскоправног, правноекономског, безбедносно прав-ног угла – актуелна питања у вези са проблемом стварања и примене права. Уједно, дају се предлози за будуће решавање уочених правних проблема.

Књигом се употпуњује досадашња међусобна сарадња два правна фа-кул тета и подстичу заједничка настојања ка бољитку у области научног истра-живања и образовног рада.

Главни и одговорни уредник

проф. др Љубомир Стајић

IX

ELŐSZÓ

Az Újvidéki Egyetem Jogtudományi Kara és a Szegedi Tudományegyetem Állam- és Jogtudományi Kara között megvalósuló A szerb és a magyar (belső) jog harmonizációja az Európai Unió jogával és a határon átívelő együttműködés elneve-zésű nemzetközi kutatási projekt keretében megjelenő negyedik tanulmánykötet újabb hozzájárulás az európai integrációs folyamatok kapcsán felmerülő elméleti és gyakorlati jogi problémák megoldásához. A nemzeti jogrendek egymáshoz való közelítése, valamint az Európai Unió közösségi jogával (acquis communautaire) való harmonizáció, nyilvánvaló érdeke Szerbiának és Magyarországnak is.

E tanulmánykötetben szereplő tudományos munkák csakúgy, mint az előző kötetekben lévők, jogelméleti, jogszociológiai, jogtörténeti, gazdasági jogi és rendészeti jogi szempontból vizsgálják a jogalkotással és jogalkalmazással kapcso-latos időszerű kérdéseket, illetve megoldásokat kínálnak a feltárt jogi problémákra.

A tanulmánykötet fokozza a két Kar közötti eddigi sikeres együttműködést és hozzájárul közös törekvéseinkhez a tudományos és oktatói tevékenység szín-vonalának fejlesztésében.

Fő- és felelős szerkesztő

Prof. Dr. Ljubomir Stajić

XI

XIII

PREFACE

The fourth volume of the thematic Collection of papers, as a result of the international project Harmonisation of Serbian and Hungarian (domestic) law with the European Union Law and Cross-Border Cooperation (Faculty of Law of the University of Novi Sad and Faculty of Law of the University of Szeged) represents a new contribution for solving theoretical and practical problems on the path of European integrations. The approximation of legal norms of two national legal to each other and their approximation to acquis communautaire of the European Union are clear interests of Serbia and Hungary.

This Volume also comprises of scientific papers which deal – from theoretical, sociological, historical, economic, legal and security perspectives – with current issues in relation to problem of creation and implementation of law. At the same time, the proposals are given for the future resolving of perceived legal problems.

The Volume complements previous mutual cooperation of two law faculties and incites joined efforts towards prosperity in the fields of scientific research and education.

Editor in Chief

Prof. Ljubomir Stajić, Ph.D.

Оригинални научни рад 001.102:502/504]:001.61EU

Rodoljub M. Etinski, Ph.D., Full ProfessorUniversity of Novi SadFaculty of Law Novi [email protected]

The Right of Access to Environmental Information and Its Implementation in EU Law

Abstract: The Right of Access to Environmental Information, laid down in Articles 4 and 5 of the Aarhus Convention, is complex and includes the right to environmental information and the right to information in the case of emergency. The Article 5 of the Aarhus Convention imposes several obligations to the parties to facilitate and simplify enjoyment of the right to environmental information. The Aarhus Convention is implemented in EU law by a few regulations and directives. Regulations secure effects of the Aarhus Convention at the level of EU institutions and directives at national levels. The implementation was used for extension of some obligations and for making more precise some provisions of the Aarhus Convention. However, there are some disparities between the provisions of the Aarhus Convention and implementing EU acts.

Keywords: the Aarhus Convention, the right to information, implementation, EU law

1. IntroductionThe Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-mak-

ing and Access to Justice in Environmental Matter, done at Aarhus on 25 June 1998, (hereinafter: the Aarhus Convention or the Convention) entered into force on 30 October 2001.1 The Ministerial Conference “Environment for Europe”, which was

1 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2161, p. 447. The Convention was opened for signature by Member States of the UN Economic Commission for Europe, as well as States having consultative status with the UN Economic Commission for Europe, by regional economic integra-tion organizations consisting of Member States of the UN Economic Commission for Europe and with competence over matters governed by the Convention. At the 29th September 2016 there were 47 parties, including the EU. https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no= XXVII-13&chapter=27&clang=_en Text of the Convention is available at http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/documents/cep43e.pdf

1

2

Rodoljub M. Etinski, Ph.D., The Right of Access to Environmental Information... (стр. 1–30)

held in Sofia in October 1995, initiated the preparation of the Convention.2 The Sec-retariat of the UNECE prepared the Draft Elements.3 The Working Group, composed of representatives of Member States of the UNECE, as well as of representatives of the EU, of some UN agencies and of NGO-s prepared the text of the Convention.4

The Convention guarantees the rights of access to information, public par-ticipation in decision-making, and access to justice in environmental matters. Article 1 of the Convention defines the objective of the Convention and states that the parties to the Convention contribute, by the mentioned rights, to protection of “the right of every person of present and future generations to live in an environ-ment adequate to his or her health and well-being”.5

Access to information is elaborated on in Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention. Public participation in decision-making is exposed in Articles 6, 7 and 8. Access to justice is presented in Article 9. These main provisions of the Convention are interconnected and overlapping. Article 6 (2) specifies the right to information in the context of public participation in decision-making. Article 9 (1) provides legal protection to the right to environmental information.

Article 2 of the Convention defines key terms and Article 3 contains gener-al provisions. Rest of Articles is dedicated to: the meeting of the parties (Article 10), the right of a party to vote (Article 11), the Secretariat (Article 12), annexes and amendments to the Convention (Articles 13 and 14), review of compliance (Article 15) and settlement of disputes (Article 16). Final provisions on signature, depositary, ratification, acceptance, approval and accession, entry into force, withdrawal and authentic texts are in Articles 17-22.6

The second Meeting of the Parties, held in Almaty on 25-27 May 2005, adopted the amendment to the Convention inserting Article 6 bis and Annex I bis on public participation in decisions on deliberate release into the environment and placing on the market of genetically modified organisms. Text is available at http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/documents/2005/pp/ece/ece.mp.pp.2005.2.add.2.e.pdf

For the time being, the amendment has not entered into force. An extraordinary Meeting of the Parties, held in Kiev on 21 May 2003 accepted Protocol on Pollutant Realise and Transfer Registers. Text is available at http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/prtr/Protocol%20texts/PRTR_Protocol_e.pdf

The Protocol entered into force on 8 October 2009.2 Working Group for the preparation of a draft convention on access to environmental

information and public participation in environmental decision-making, Report of the first session, CEP/AC.3/2, 9 July 1996, para 6.

3 Ibid., para 9.4 See about relevant international development, which preceded the Aarhus Convention in

Michael Mason, Information Disclosure and Environmental Rights: The Aarhus Convention, Global Environmental Politics, 3/2010, 11, 12

5 The academic discussion on a fundamental right to an adequate environment has started in the 1970s, but did not resulted in clearly defined right. Progress has been made in respect of re-lated procedural rights. See Ludwig Krämer, EC Environmental Law, sixth ed., London, 2007, 148

6 See further about the Convention in B. Tubić, Polje priemene Arhuske konvencije, Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta u Novom Sadu, 2/2011, 383-393


3

The position and effect of international treaties in internal legal orders are governed primarily by the internal constitutional provisions. Constitutions of many parties to the Aarhus Convention allow direct effect of international treaties. However, the most of the provisions of the Convention are not capable, due to their inappropriate legal qualities, to produce direct effect and ask for further legal building in the process of implementation. In Lesoochranárske zoskupenie VLK the European Court of Justice found that Article 9 does not produce direct effect, since it does not contain clear and precise obligation capable directly to govern legal position of an individual7 and requires implementing act.8 Some provisions of the Aarhus Convention, such as Articles 4 (1), 5 (2), 5 (5) and 9, oblige the parties to secure certain effects of the Convention within the framework of their national legislation. Obviously, these provisions require implementation. Leaving possibility to a party to achieve one of the two alternative results, the other pro-visions, like those in Article 9 (1, 2 and 3), imply also necessity of implementation. Two provisions in Articles 5 (3) and 5 (9) oblige the parties to make progress in achieving required results, what also might imply implementing provisions.

The issue of implementation of the Aarhus Convention is governed by Article 3 (1) of the Convention.9 The Article imposes two obligations. The parties are obliged to take the necessary legislative, regulatory and other measures to establish and maintain a clear, transparent and consistent framework to implement the provisions of this Convention. They are obliged, also, to take measures to achieve compatibil-ity between the provisions implementing the information, public participation and access-to-justice provisions in this Convention. The second obligation requires the parties to consider and treat the stated rights as mutually interconnected.

Implementation does not mean pure transposition of provisions of the Conven-tion to the EU or national legal system. Article 3 (1) requires the implementation to achieve qualities of clearness, transparency and consistency of the legal framework. Purpose of implementation is creation of an internal legal framework which will enable full effectiveness of the Convention. An implementation guide is published.10

That does not mean that the provisions of the Convention are deprived of any direct effect, but scope and kind of direct effect depends on national usage. In many

7 Case C-240/09, Lesoochranárske zoskupenie VLK v. Ministerstvo životného prostredia Slovenskej republiky, Judgment of 8. 3. 2011, para 45.

8 Ibid.9 Article 3(1) reads: “Each Party shall take the necessary legislative, regulatory and other

measures, including measures to achieve compatibility between the provisions implementing the information, public participation and access-to-justice provisions in this Convention, as well as proper enforcement measures, to establish and maintain a clear, transparent and consistent framework to implement the provisions of this Convention.”

10 The Aarhus Convention: An Implementation Guide, prepared by Jonas Ebbesson, Helmut Gaugitsch, Jerzy Jendroska, Fioana Marshal, Stephen Stec, second edition. United Nations, New York and Geneva, 2014

4


parties, probably in all, internal judges will try to interpret internal provisions in accordance with the Convention.

It is worth to note that the right to information and the right to legal remedies have been recognized as the general human rights. It means that some relevant provisions had already existed in internal legal systems in time of acceptance of the Aarhus Convention. Article 3 (6) of the Aarhus Convention states that the Con-vention does not require any derogation from existing rights of access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters. Paragraph 5 of the same Article allows the parties to establish higher standards of those rights than they are determined by the Convention.

Combined legal techniques have been used for implementation of the Aarhus Convention. Some provisions of the Convention have been literally transposed in internal law by an implementing act. Text of other provisions has been transposed, but its effect have been extended or made more precise by new added text. New text has been created in implementing acts for concrete determination of certain matters, to satisfy other requirements of the provisions of the Convention or to achieve the purpose of the Convention.

Parties to the Aarhus Convention are not fully autonomous in implementation of the Convention. Having been authorized by Article 15 of the Convention to es-tablish optional arrangements of a non-confrontational, non-judicial and consultative nature for reviewing compliance with the provisions of this Convention, which will be accessible to the public and which may include the option of considering com-munications from members of the public on matters related to the Convention, the first Meeting of the Parties, held in Lucca, on 21-23 October 2002, established the Compliance Committee and empowered it to consider communications of members of the public concerning the Party’s compliance with the Convention and to express its findings.11 A member of the public, who considers that his or her rights, recog-nized by the Convention, have been violated by a failure of a party to comply with provisions of the Convention, is entitled to send communication to the Compliance Committee. The Compliance Committee addressed the issues of implementation and found many failures of the parties in many cases.12

11 The Compliance Committee summarized its practice in Case Law of the Aarhus Conven-tion. See Case Law of the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee (2004-2011) second ed. A. Andrusevych, T. Alge, C. Konrad (eds), RACSE, Lviv, 2011

12 The Case Law of the Aarhus Convention refers to the following cases where the Compli-ance Committee found failures in implementation of the Convention: Kazakhstan ACCC/C/2004/1; ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2005/2/Add.1, 11 March 2005, para. 23; Kazakhstan ACCC/C/2004/6; ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2006/4/Add.1, 28 July 2006, para. 24; Belgium ACCC/2005/11; ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2006/4/Add.2, 28 July 2006, paras. 41-43; Kazakhstan ACCC/C/2004/1; ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2005/2/Add.1, 11 March 2005, para. 27; Kazakhstan ACCC/C/2004/2; ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2005/2/Add.2, 14 March 2005, para. 28; Ukraine ACCC/C/2004/3 and ACCC/S/2004/1; ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2005/2/Add.3, 14 March 2005, paras 34, 40; Turkmenistan ACCC/C/2004/5; ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2005/2/Add.5, 14 March


5

2. Implementation of the Aarhus Convention in the EU Legal System

The Aarhus Convention is opened for regional economic integration organi-zations. Articles 17 and 19 of the Aarhus Convention have opened the Convention for Member States of the UN Economic Commission for Europe, States having consultative status with the UN Economic Commission for Europe and regional economic integration organizations, constituted by sovereign States members of the UN Economic Commission for Europe, to which their Member States have trans-ferred competences over matters governed by the Convention. Other Member States to the UN may accede to the Convention upon approval of the Meeting of the parties. If Member States to a regional economic integration organization and the regional economic integration organization are simultaneously parties to the Convention, they have, in accordance to Article 19 (4) of the Convention to decide on their respective responsibilities for the performance of their obligations under the Con-vention, but the organization and their Member States are not entitled to exercise concurrently rights under the Convention. The regional economic integration organization is invited, by expressing the consent to be bound by the Convention, to declare the extant of its competences with respect to the matters governed by the Convention. All Member States to the EU are parties to the Convention.13

Upon Article 4 (2 e) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, environment is a shared competence between the EU and Member States. Title XX of Part III of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU is dedicated to environment.

The European Community signed the Aarhus Convention on 25 June 1998. By the Council Decision 2005/370/EC of 17 February 2005, the Community ap-proved the Convention, which entered into force relating to the Community in the same year. The mentioned Council Decision noted that the Community had “al-ready adopted a comprehensive set of legislation which is evolving and contributes to the achievement of the objective of the Convention, not only by its own insti-tutions, but also by public authorities in its Member States.” Council Directive of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment,14 and Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the freedom of access to information on the environment15 were adopted before the

2005, paras 22,27; European Community ACCC/C/2006/17, ECE/MP.PP/2008/5/Add.10, 2 May 2008, paras. 35,36, 58, 59; France ACCC/C/2007/22, ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2009/4/Add.1, 8 February 2011, para. 31; United Kingdom ACCC/C/2008/33, ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2010/6/Add.3, December 2010, para. 140; Moldova ACCC/C/2008/30; ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2009/6/Add.3, 8 February 2011, para.38; Armenia ACCC/C/2009/43, ECE/MP.PP/2011/11/Add.1, April 2011, paras.53- 56, 68.

13 https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-13& chapter=27&lang=en

14 Official Journal of the EU, L 175/40, 5. 7. 1985. 15 Official Journal of the EU, L 158/56, 23.6.1990.

6


Aarhus Convention and they might had been among sources of inspiration of people who prepared the Draft Elements for the Convention.

By the occasion of approval of the Convention, the European Community submitted declaration to the Depositary explaining, inter alia, that the European Community had already adopted legislation covering matters governed by the Convention, that the European Community was responsible for the performance of those obligations, resulting from the Convention, which were covered by Com-munity law in force and that the exercise of Community competence was, by its nature, subject to continuous development.16 In such way the EU satisfied it obli-gation under Article 19 (5) of the Convention to declare the extant of its compe-tences with respect to the matters regulated by the Convention.

The EU has fulfilled its obligation to implement provisions of the Aarhus Convention by adopting or amending a few regulations and directives. The main EU instrument, concerning the Aarhus Convention, is titled: “Regulation (EC) No 1367/2006 of the European Parliament and the Council of 6 September 2006 on the application of the provisions of the Aarhus Convention on Access to Infor-mation, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environ-mental Matters to Community institutions and bodies”17 (Hereinafter: the Aarhus Regulation). The Aarhus Regulation is the main implementing instrument, which secures effects of the Aarhus Convention in respect to institutions and bodies of the European Union.

In respect of the access to environmental information the Aarhus Regulation refers to, supplements and amends Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the Europe-an Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to the European Parliament, Council and Commission Documents18 (hereinafter: the Regulation on the Access to Documents). The Regulation on the Access to Documents is of a general nature since it provides access to all documents, not only those containing environmental information. It was adopted after the EC signed the Aarhus Convention, but before the Convention entered into force for the EC. It might be presumed that the legislative institutions had in mind the Aarhus Con-vention, when prepared the Regulation, but that their intent was not to implement relevant provisions of the Aarhus Convention by the Regulation. Due to this fact, the Regulation is supplemented and amended by the Aarhus Regulation. Regulation (EC) No. 166/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 January 2006 concerning the establishment of a European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register and amending Council Directive 91/689/EEC and 96/61/EC19 (hereinafter:

16 https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-13& chapter=27&lang=en

17 Official Journal of the EU, L 264/13, 25. 9. 200618 Official Journal of the EU, L 145/43, 31. 5. 200119 Official Journal of the EC, L 33/1. 4. 2. 2006.


7

the Regulation on a European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register) implements also certain obligations established by the Aarhus Convention.

The EU adopted a few directives to harmonize national legislation imple-menting the Aarhus Convention. Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on public access to environmental infor-mation and repealing Council Directive 90/313/EEC20 (hereinafter: the Directive on the public access to environmental information) prevents disparities between the laws in Member States concerning the access to environmental information. Directive 2003/35/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 providing for public participation in respect of drawing up of certain plans and programmes relating to the environment and amending with regard to public participation and access to justice Council Directives 85/337/EEC and 96/61/EC21 (hereinafter: the Directive on the public participation and access to justice) was adopted to contribute to the implementation of the provisions of the Aarhus Con-vention on the public participation in decision-making and on the access to justice. The Directive on public participation and access to justice supplements and amends the Council Directive of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment22 (hereinafter: the Directive on the assessment) and Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September 1996 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control.23 (hereinafter: the Directive concerning integrated pollution prevention).

Some other directives contain provisions of relevance for the Aarhus Con-vention. Article 14 of Directive 2000/60 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing framework for the Community action in the field of water policy24 is dedicated to public information and consultation. Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment25 is certainly important for the effects of the Aarhus Convention. Also, Directive 2012/18/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances, amending and subsequently repealing Council Directive 96/82/EC.26 (hereinafter: the Seveso III Directive)

The EU implementing acts, regulations and directives, provide effects of the Aarhus Convention on two levels: on the level of the EU institutions and on the

20 Official Journal of the EU, L 41/26, 14. 2. 2003. 21 Official Journal of the EU, L 156/18, 25. 6. 200322 Official Journal of the EU, L 175/40, 5. 7. 198523 Official Journal of the EU, L 257, 10. 10. 199624 Official Journal of the EU, L 327/1, 22. 12. 200025 Official Journal of the EU, L 197/30, 21. 07. 200126 Official Journal of the EU, L 197/1, 24. O7. 2012

8


national levels. Regulations are final and complete acts which produce direct effects. Directives require national implementing acts and they do not produce direct effects, but exceptionally under certain conditions. It means that Member States have to take national legislative measures for implementation of the Directive on the public access to environmental information, the Directive on the public participation and access to justice and others. By implementation of these provisions, Member States should have taken into account the provisions of the Convention itself.

Implementation of the Aarhus Convention includes some discretion powers in concretization of general provisions, in choosing of possible results or in choos-ing means of achieving results.27 The discretion powers are enlarged by Article 3 (5) of the Aarhus Convention which enables the parties to establish higher stand-ards than they are defined by the Convention. Also, implementation of EU direc-tives leaves certain discretion powers in choosing means of achieving the results. It means that responsibility for appropriate implementation of the Convention is shared between the EU and Member States, if the EU uses directives for the im-plementation. Each side is responsible for its implementing acts.28

3. Analysis of Articles 4 and 5 of the Aarhus ConventionInformation play important role in efforts to secure a better environment. It is

assertion of the EU Commission of general significance.29 The EU Report on envi-ronment shows how shortages of relevant information make serious problem for cre-ation of environmental policies and achieving environmental aims.30 Articles 4 and 5 of the Aarhus Convention satisfy, however, need of an individual to be informed about the environment, factors affecting the environment and related public governance and they strengthen the capacity of the public to participate in the public governance.31

27 Michael Mason, Information Disclosure and Environmental Rights: The Aarhus Convention, Global Environmental Politics, 3/2010, 21

28 A communication was submitted to the Compliance Committee, which asserted, inter alia, the EU failed to satisfy requirements of Article 3 (1) of the Aarhus Convention regarding the implementation of the Convention. Having been submitted late in the proceedings and having not been substantiated by the communicant, the Compliance Committee decided not to consider the submission. See Findings and recommendations with regard to communication ACCC/C/2012/68 concerning compliance by the European Union and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Adopted by the Compliance Committee on 24 September 2013, paras 64, 76

29 EU Shared Environmental Information System, Implementation Outlook, Commission Staff Working Document, SWD(2013) 18 final, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/archives/seis/pdf/seis_implementation_en.pdf

30 EEA, 2015, The European environment — state and outlook 2015: synthesis report, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen. http://www.eea.europa.eu/soer

31 See about the right to environmental information in international and EU environmental law in general in Alexandre Kiss, Dina Shelton, International Environmental Law, third ed, New York, 2004, 668-673


9

The legal content of Articles 4 and 5 is complex and includes, at least, two different rights: a) the right to environmental information; and b) the right to in-formation in the case of emergency. Under “the right” I understand here an enti-tlement of members of the public, protected by the law.

The right to environmental information is guaranteed by provisions of Ar-ticle 4 (1) and 9 (1) of the Convention. Article 4 (1) states: Each Party shall ensure that …. public authorities, in response to a request for environmental information, make such information available to the public… Article 9 (1) reads: Each Party shall … ensure that any person who considers that his or her request for information under article 4 has been ignored, wrongfully refused, … has access to a review procedure before a court of law or another independent and impartial body estab-lished by law. Except Articles 1 and 3 (6, 8) other text of the Convention hesitates to use a term rights in respect to information, public participation and justice. In spite of that, the quoted provisions show clearly that there is the right to environ-mental information. There is an entitlement of members of the public to request environmental information, there is a corresponding obligation of public author-ities and parties are obliged to provide the entitlement by legal protection.

The situation is not so simple in respect to the right to information in the case of emergency. Article 5 (1,c) of the Convention reads: Each party shall ensure that: … In the event of any imminent threat to human health or the environment, whether caused by human activities or due to natural causes, all information which could enable the public to take measures to prevent or mitigate harm aris-ing from the threat and is held by a public authority is disseminated immediately and without delay to members of the public who may be affected. But, Article 9 does not oblige the parties to provide the legal protection in respect to Article 5 (1, c), as it was done in respect to Article 4. However, it does not mean that the right to information in the case of emergency is not protected by the law. An Im-plementation Guide of the Aarhus Convention refers to the case Guerra v. Italy, where the European Court of Human Rights found that a failure of a State to extend information on the risk, by which affected population was exposed, violates Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.32 In the case Öneryıldız v. Turkey33, the European Court of Human Rights confirmed the public’s right to information in the case of emergency. N. Colacino refers to the judgment of the International Court of Justice in the 1949 Corfu Channel case, where the Court confirmed the existence of „duty to warn“.34 Really, general principle of humanity

32 Guerra v. Italy, Application no. 14967/89, ECHR, Judgment of 19 February 1998, para 60. 33 Öneryıldız v. Turkey; Application no.48939/99, ECHR, Judgment of 30 November 2004, para 90. 34 Nicola Colacino, Exploring the legal nature of the State’s obligation to provide information

to the public in the case of an imminent threat to the environment: More than the B-side of the individual right to access? In International Environmental Law: Contemporary Concerns and Challenges in 2014, ed. V. Sancin and M. Kovič Dine, Ljubljana, 2014, 182

10


obliges States to inform the public on existing risk. Having this in mind, it can be argued that the European Convention of Human Rights and principle of human-ity impose an obligation to States as it is formulated by Article 5 (1, c), as far as it relates to human life, privacy or other goods protected by the European Con-vention on Human Rights and by the principle of humanity.

However, the right to information in the case of emergency serves the purpose quite different than the right to environmental information. Opposite to the right to environmental information, which should enable the public to an informed participation in environmental governance, the right to information in the case of emergency should enable members of the public to take measures to prevent or mitigate harm.35 Natural consequence of different purposes is reflected in a mode of operation of the two rights. The right to environmental information is function-ing upon request of members of the public, or, we shall see later, at least, upon their initiative. The right to information in the case of emergency should operate on initiative of public authorities. In the case of emergency, a party is obliged to inform the public and to endeavor to inform each individual in the potentially affected group. To secure full effect of that right, the parties should establish a mechanism that will enable such mode of delivering information. It will be shown that the Seveso III Directive may play a role of such mechanism.

The relationships between members of the public and public authorities, as established by Article 5 of the Convention, are not exhausted by the two rights. Provisions of Article 5 (2, 3, 5, 7, and 9) oblige the parties to make available to the public some exactly determined environmental information and information on the environmental information in electronic or published forms, by various means such as telecommunication networks or publishing and dissemination. These obligations serve to facilitate enjoyment of the right to environmental infor-mation by simplification of procedure. If information is easy accessible at internet portal, members of the public have not to address a request for that information to public authority, but they can obtain information without formal procedure. Or, if they are not aware that information is displayed at internet portal and submit the request, the addressed public authority will inform them that requested infor-mation is available at the internet portal.

In the Draft Elements, prepared by the Secretariat of the UNECE, Article 4 of the Convention appeared as Article 3, under the same title: “Access to environ-mental information”. Article 5 of the Convention, under the title “Collection and dissemination of environmental information,” appeared in the Draft Elements as Article 4, under title “Duties with respect of environmental information.”36 Ob-

35 See about distinct nature of the right to obtain some information in the case of emergency in N. Colacino, op. cit. 181-184.

36 UNECE, Committee on Environmental Policy, Draft elements for the Convention on Ac-cess to Environmental Information and Public Participation in Environmental Decision-Making, CEP/AC.3./R.1, 11 April 1996, 5-8.


11

viously, intent of the Secretariat was that Article 3 elaborates on the right to en-vironmental information and Article 4 formulates corresponding obligations of parties. Structures of the two Articles of the Draft Elements have been preserved in the final text of the Convention. Article 3 of the Draft Elements determined the right to environmental information, limits of the right and some elements of pro-cedure of access to information. Article 4 of the Draft Elements defined relevant duties of the parties. The right to information in the case of emergency was not envisaged by the Draft Elements. At the first session of the Working Group, some delegations proposed that the Convention should address also emergencies as well as the transport of dangerous goods.37 New provision, which has been inserted in Article 3 of the Draft Elements at fourth session of the Working Group, obliged the parties to provide information immediately and without delay, where the dis-closure of the information requested would be likely to result in preventing or mitigating an imminent threat to human health or the environment.38 The issue was determined as a variant of the right to environmental information; it means that request was necessary. At the seventh session of the Working Group, the provision was reformulated and got content and place in the structure in Article 4, which stayed unchanged in the Convention, except that Article 4 of the Draft Elements became Article 5 of the Convention.

As it was already stated, the right to environmental information is guaranteed by Article 4 (1) of the Convention. The provision establishes the relationship be-tween members of the public and public authorities, whose content is entitlement of members of the public to request environmental information and obligation of pubic authorities to make such information available to applicants. Article 4 (3 and 4) define limits of the right. They determine reasons for refusing the request. Some procedural issues are governed by Article 4 (1, 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8). They relate to nondisclosure of interest for information, form of information, time-limits for providing information, redirection of a request, explanation of refusal of request and charges.

Article 5 determines obligations of parties to the Convention concerning environmental information. The basic obligation concerning collection and pos-sessing of environmental information is defined by provisions of Article 5 (1, a, b), which oblige parties to establish mandatory system of the flow of information to public authorities about proposed or existing activities which may significant-ly affect the environment and that to secure that public authorities possess and

37 Working Group for the preparation of a draft convention on access to environmental information and public participation in environmental decision-making, Report of the first session, CEP/AC.3/2, 9 July 1996, para 10.

38 Working Group for the preparation of a draft convention on access to environmental information and public participation in environmental decision-making, Report of the fourth session, CEP/AC.3/8, 21 Mart 1997, 5

12


updated environmental information, which is relevant for their functioning. Par-agraphs 2, 3, 5, 7, and 9 of Article 5 established, as mentioned above, certain obligations of the parties to make available to the public exactly determined en-vironmental information by publishing, dissemination, by establishing registers or gradually in electronic form via telecommunication networks.

Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention are closely related to Article 2 of the Convention, since it defines, inter alia, environmental information, public author-ities and the public. Environmental information comprehends information related to three areas: a) the state of elements of environment, such as air, atmosphere, water, soil etc; b) factors, such as substances, energies, noise, activities, legal measures and others affecting or likely to affect elements of environment and cost-benefit analyses; c) the state of human health, conditions of human life and cultural sites, as far as they are or may be affected by the state of the elements of the environment or, through these elements, by the factors, activities or measures referred to under (b) above. It is a broad definition, whose borders are established by Article 5 (1, a), according to which public authorities have to possess and update environmental information which is relevant to their functions. Accordingly, the public is entitled to obtain environmental information, possessed by the public authorities, and they should possess environmental information which is relevant to their functions.

Article 2 (4 and 5) makes distinction between the public and the concerned public. Opposite to the public, the concerned public is the public affected or like-ly to be affected or has an interest in decision-making. Holders of the entitlements, established, by Articles 4 and 5 are members of the public.

Judicial and legislative authorities are excluded from the notion “public author-ities.” Public authorities include government at all levels, natural or legal persons performing administrative functions under national law or having public respon-sibilities or functions, or providing public services in relation to the environment, under control of government or bodies, performing administrative functions. Public authorities include, also, institutions of regional economic integrations.

4. Implementation of the Right to Environmental Information in EU Law

4.1.1. Environmental information

Definitions of environmental information in the Aarhus Regulation and the Directive on the public access to environmental information are the same by their structures with the definition in the Convention, but enrich and make more precise39 that definition by adding some new examples. It was said above that definition in

39 Maria Lee, Carolyn Abbot, The Usual Suspects, Public Participation under the Aarhus Convention, The Modern Law Review, 2003, 93


13

the Convention consists of three components and that the first two components – elements of the environment and factors affecting them – are explained by an open list of examples. So Article 2 (1 b) of Aarhus Convention determines the factors affecting or likely to affect the elements of the environment, numbering substances, energy, noise and radiation. Article 2 (1 d II) of the Aarhus Regulation and Article and Article 2 (1 b) of the Directive added to the numbered factors also waste, in-cluding radioactive waste, emissions, discharges and other releases. The two EU instruments enrich also the definition by reports on implementation on environ-mental legislation (Article 2 (1 d IV) of the Aarhus Regulation and Article 2 (1 d) of the Directive). The last, third component of the definition in Article 2 (3 c) of the Aarhus Convention, which relates to the state of human health and safety, conditions of human life, cultural sites and built structures, which are or may be affected by the state of the elements of the environment, is extended by Article 2 (3 d VI) of the Aarhus Regulation and Article 2 (1 f) of the Directive on the public access to envi-ronmental information, also, by adding the contamination of the food chain.

4.1.2. Obligation to collect and possess environmental information

Articles 4 (1) and 5 (1) of the Aarhus Regulation have transposed provision of Article 5 (1 a) of the Convention concerning obligation of public authorities to posses environmental information. Article 4 (1) of the Aarhus Regulation requires Union institutions and bodies to organize the environmental information, which is relevant to their functioning and which is held by them, with a view to its active and systematic dissemination to the public. In line with Articles 4 (1) and 5 (1) of the Aarhus Regulation, Articles 7 and 8 of the Directive oblige Member States to take necessary measures to ensure that public authorities organize the environ-mental information which is relevant to their functioning. The implementing acts do not determine what information is relevant to their functioning.

Article 5 (1 b) of the Aarhus Convention on the mandatory system of flow information to public authorities has not be transposed into the Aarhus Regulation. However, it should have in mind that the obligation, established by the mentioned provision overlaps, at leas partially by the obligation established by Article 5 (9) of the Convention, which was implemented by the Regulation on a European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register.

The Directive on the public access to environmental information also did not transpose the provision on the mandatory system of the flow of information to public authorities.

The Compliance Committee has recognized that distribution of powers be-tween the EU and Members States is of relevance for fulfillment of obligations under the Convention.40 Under presumption that issuing permissions for activities,

40 ECE/MP.PP/2008/5/Add.10, p. 9, para 44

14


which may affect environment, is a national competence, it is understandable that the EU is not obliged to establish mandatory system of informing EU institutions about proposed activities of such sort. However, it is strange that the Directive on the public access to environmental information did not transpose that obligation. The explanation might be that mandatory system on flow of information to public authorities about activities dangerous to the environment had been already estab-lished by Articles 5 and 6 of the Council Directive of 27 June 1985 on the assess-ment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (85/337/EEC).41 According to Article 5 of the Directive 85/337/EEC Member States are obliged to take measures to ensure that undertakers (developers of projects) supply required information.

4.1.3. National reports on the state of the environment

Article 4 (4) of the Aarhus Regulation, transposes Article 5 (4) of the Aarhus Convention and obliges the Commission to ensure regularly, in intervals not ex-ciding four years, publishing a report on the state of the environment, including information on the quality of, and pressures on, the environment.42 The same has been done by Article 7 (3) of the Directive on the public access to environmental information in respect to Member States, which are obliged to ensure regularly publishing national and where appropriate regional or local reports on the state of the environment in intervals not exceeding four years and that the reports include information on the quality of, and pressures on, the environment. The both in-struments transplanted the obligation, but without further concretization in respect of qualities or pressures or other elements of the reports.

4.1.4. Dissemination of information on legislation and policy documents, international treaties and other significant documents

on environmental issues

Article 5 (5) of the Aarhus Convention obliges each party to take measures within the framework of its legislation to disseminate, inter alia: a) legislation and policy documents, like documents on strategies, policies, programmes and action plans relating to the environment, as well as progress reports on their implementa-tion, prepared at various levels of government; b) international treaties on environ-mental issues; and other important international documents on environmental issues.

Article 12 (2) of the Regulation on the Access to Documents requires par-ticularly that legislative documents are directly accessible. According to Article

41 Official Journal of the EC, L 175/40. 5. 7. 1985.42 EEA, 2015, The European environment — state and outlook 2015: synthesis report, Eu-

ropean Environment Agency, Copenhagen. Synthesis and full text is available at http://www.eea.europa.eu/soer.


15

12 (3), where possible, other documents, particularly documents relating to the development of policy or strategy, should be made directly accessible. Article 13 of the Regulation on the Access to Documents regulates publishing of documents in the Official Journal and requires, inter alia, publishing of regulations, directives, decisions, as well as Commission proposals, common positions and international agreements of the EU.

Article 4 (2) of the Aarhus Regulation extends significantly list of documents which should be publicly accessible. Beside international agreements and EU legislation on the environment, covered by Article 13 of the Regulation on the Access to Documents, Article 4 (2 a) of the Aarhus Regulation adds policies, plans and programmes relating to the environment. Article 4 (2 b) of the Aarhus Reg-ulation includes progress reports on the implementation of items under Article 4 (2 a), where they exist in electronic form. Steps in proceedings for violations of EU law from the stage of the reasoned opinion (para. 2 c), reports on the state of the environment (para. 2 d), data or summaries of data derived from the monitoring of activities affecting, or likely to affect, the environment (para 2 e), authorizations with a significant impact on the environment and environmental agreements or information on the place where such information can be requested or accessed (para 2 f) and environmental impact studies and risk assessments concerning environmental elements are also included by Article 4 (2).

Article 7 (2) of the Directive on the public access to environmental informa-tion refers to the same sorts of documents which are numbered in Article 4 (2) of the Aarhus Regulation. Beside, Article 7 (2) adds to EU legislation also national, regional or local legislation. The implementing acts went beyond scope of infor-mation, required by Article 5 (5) of the Convention, providing broader information, derived from monitoring activities or related to environmental impact studies and risk assessments.

4.1.5. Obligation of operators to inform the public of the environmental impact and characteristics

of their activities or products

Article 5 (6) of the Convention obliges the parties to encourage operators, whose activities make a significant impact on the environment, to inform the public regularly on the environmental impact of their activities or products, using eco-labeling, eco-auditing or other means. One of the aims of dissemination of information is that consumers are sufficiently informed about environmental characteristics of products so that they can make informed environmental choic-es and the parties to the Convention are obliged by Article 5 (8) of the Convention to develop mechanism to reach that aim.

16


There is an opinion in literature that these two paragraphs are created in non-mandatory and aspirational fashion.43 However, the two paragraphs brought the obligations of different sorts. Paragraph 6 imposes an obligation “of means” and Paragraph 8 creates an obligation “of results”. The parties have fulfilled the obligation to encourage, when they took some measures to encourage operators. It is not necessary that operators accept to inform public regularly on environ-mental effects of their activities and products. But, the obligation under Paragraph 8 requires the parties to develop mechanism which will enabling consumers to be sufficiently informed about environmental characteristics of products so that they can make informed environmental choices.

The two obligations have not been implemented by the considered EU im-plementing acts. It does not mean that there is no any obligation of operators to inform on environmental effects of their activities or that the public is not informed at all on environmental characteristics of products. The Saveso III Directive obliged operators to inform about hazardous activities. Beside, obligation, estab-lished by Article 5 (6) of the Convention overlaps partially with obligation estab-lished by Article 5 (9) of the Convention. The EU consumer law secures that consumers are supplied by information of relevance for environment.44

4.1.6. Information on facts and analyses of facts which are important for major environmental policy proposals

Article 5 (7 a) of the Convention requires each party to publish information on the facts and analyses which it considers relevant and important in preparing major environmental policy proposals. This obligation is closely interconnected with Article 5 (3, c) of the Convention, which requires each party to make acces-sible in electronic database, as appropriate, policies, plans and programmes on or relating to the environment. It might be presumed that policies, plans and pro-grammes contain information on facts and analyses which the public authorities considered relevant and important in preparing these documents. It was said above that Article 4 (2 a) of the Aarhus Regulation and Article 7 (2, b) of the Directive on the public access to environmental information require that databases and registers include texts of policies, plans and programmes relating to the environ-ment. Beside, Article 4 (2, g) of the Aarhus Regulation and Article 7 (2, g) of the Directive on the public access to environmental information ask that databases and registers include environmental impact studies and risk assessment concern-ing environmental elements. They are certainly relevant for preparing environ-mental policies. However, neither of the considered EU implementing acts did not transpose literary Article 5 (7 a) of the Convention in EU legal system.

43 M. Mason, op. cit, 2444 The Aarhus Convention: An Implementation Guide, 35


17

4.1.7. Information on dealings with the public in matters of the Aarhus Convention

Article 5 (7b) of the Convention obliges the parties to publish, or make ac-cessible otherwise, all available explanatory material on their dealings with the public in matters falling with the scope of the Convention. At the EU level this obligation has been implemented by Article 17 (1) of the Regulation on the Access to Documents, according to which each institution is obliged to publish annually a report for the preceding year including the number of cases in which the insti-tution refused to grant access to documents, the reasons of such refusals and the number of sensitive documents not recorded in the register.

4. 1.8. Information on performance of public functions relating to the environ-ment

Article 5 (7c) of the Convention requires the parties to provide in appropriate form information on the exercise of public functions or delivering of public ser-vices relating to the environment by government at all levels. Article 4 (2 b, c and f) of the Aarhus Regulation contains provisions which implements, at least par-tially, Article 5 (7c) of the Convention. The paragraphs refer to progress reports on the implementation of international treaties and EU legislation, to steps taken in proceedings for infringements of EU law, and to authorizations with significant impact on the environment. Similar provisions are inserted in Article 7 (2, c and f) of the Directive on the public access to environmental information, which refer to progress reports on the implementation of international treaties, EU, national, regional and local legislation, and to authorization with a significant impact on the environment.

4.1.9. System of pollution inventories or registers

Article 5 (9) of the Aarhus Convention imposes an obligation to each party progressively to establish, taking into account international process where appro-priate, a coherent, nationwide system of pollution inventories or registers on a structured, computerized and publicly accessible database, complied through standardized reporting. The provision states further that the system may comprise inputs, releases and transfer of certain substances and products to environmental media and to on-site and offsite treatment and disposal sites. This matter has been developed further by the Protocol on Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers, adopted at Kiev in 2003.45 The EU acceded to the Protocol on 21 February 2006.46

45 Elisa Morgera, An Update on the Aarhus Convention and Its Continued Global Relevance, RECIEL, 2/2005, 138, at 143 – 144

46 https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-13-a&chapter=27&lang=en Until Jun 2016, two Member States did not ratify the Protocol.

18


The Protocol was implemented by the Regulation on a European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register. Three annexes are attached to the Regulation: Annex I on activities, Annex II on pollutants and Annex III on format for the reporting of release and transfer data by Member States to the Commission. An operator of a facility, who undertakes one or more activities, covered by Annex I, is obliged, by Article 5 of the Protocol, to report the amounts annually to national competent authority and Member States are obliged by Article 7 of the Protocol to send data to the Commission by electronic transfer. According to Article 10 the Commission, assisted by the European Environmental Agency, makes the European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register publicly accessible by the Internet.

4.1.10. Limits of the right to environmental information – reasons for refusal of request

Article 4 (3, 4) of the Aarhus Convention determines eight reasons for deni-al of access to environmental information. Three reasons, stated in Article 4 (3, a, b, c), are of procedural nature. The addressed public authority does not hold requested information. The request is manifest unreasonable or too general. The request concerns material in the process of completion or concerns internal com-munication of public authorities. The last, third reason has to be foreseen by na-tional law or customary practice as an exception and public interest served by disclosure has to be taken into account. Generally, exceptions from human rights have to be determined by the law, written or unwritten in common law countries. The meaning of “customary practice” is not quite clear. The remaining five reasons of denial, stated in Article 4 (4) of the Convention, are justified by possible adversely effects of disclosure. If national law prescribes confidentiality of the proceedings of public authorities and if the disclosure would negatively affect that confidenti-ality, the request may be refused. Harmful effects to international relations, na-tional defence or public security justify the refusal of request. Detrimental effects to course of justice, the right of a person to fair trial or the ability of a public au-thority to conduct an enquiry of criminal or disciplinary nature are also the reason for refusal of the request. If the law protects confidentiality of commercial and industrial information, in order to protect a legitimate economic interest, adverse-ly effects of the request to such confidentiality justify its refusal, except the request for information concerning emissions relevant for the protection of environment. Harmful effect to intellectual property rights is a ground for the refusal. If national law provides for confidentiality of personal data/or fi