Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business Volume 10 Issue 3 Winter Winter 1990 Environmental Impact Statements in Belgium Marc Boes Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/njilb Part of the Environmental Law Commons, and the Foreign Law Commons Recommended Citation Marc Boes, Environmental Impact Statements in Belgium, 10 Nw. J. Int'l L. & Bus. 522 (1989-1990) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business by an authorized administrator of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. Environmental Impact Statements An Belgium* Marc Boes** I. JURISDICTION IN ENVIRONMENTAL MATErRS A. General Principles of Jurisdiction Until the constitutional amendments of December 24, 1970,1 Belgium was a centralized state, with legislative power vested in the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the King2, executive power vested in the King, and judicial power vested in the Courts3 . The constitutional amendments of 1970 initiated a process, not yet complete, whereby legislative and executive powers were devolved to three regions (Flanders, Wallonia, and Brussels) and to three Communi- * In the following Article, Professor Boes analyzes the statutory framework implementing the use of the environmental impact statement ("EIS'inBelgium. Authority for the EIS flows from the EEC Directive, but as yet, the national government in Belgium has erected no regulatory structure. Thus, the Article examines two of Belgium's regions which have established a regulatory system for EIS's. * Professor, Faculty of Law, Katholieke Universiteit of Leuven. Dr. Jur. (1969); Ph.D. (1969). I BELG. CoNSr., art. 59 bis (adopted Dec. 24, 1970), Belgisch Staatblad Moniteur Beige [B.S.M.B.] (Dec. 31, 1970), erratum, B.S.M.B. (Jan. 22, 1971); id. art. 107 quater (adopted Dec. 24, 1970), B.S.M.B. (Dec. 31, 1970). 2 Belgium is a British-type monarchy, and while nominally the Constitution vests executive power, BELG. CONsr.art. 29, and some legislative power, BELG.CONST. art. 26, in the King, these powers are, in fact, exercised by the government. This results from article 63 (the King is not answerable, but the Ministers are) and article 64 (no act of the King is valid unless countersigned by a Minster, who is solely responsible) of the Belgian Constitution. 3 Whilejudicial power is exercised by the Courts and Tribunals, there are jurisdictional colleges which do not belong to the judicial power. The most notable of these colleges is the Arbitration Court, which originally had jurisdiction only to annul national, regional, or community legislative acts as ultra vires.The Arbitration Court now has a limited jurisdiction to annul acts which violate articles 6 (all Belgian citizens are equal under the law) and 17 (freedom of education) of the Consti- tution. Another jurisdictional college is the Council of State, an administrative court modeled after the French Conseil d'Etat. EIS in Belgium 10:522(1990) ties (the Flemish Community, the French Community, and the German- speaking Community).4 Each region and each community has legislative power vested in a council and an executive; executive power is vested in an executive. This system of devolution has several major characteristics. Re- gions and communities have legislative power to promulgate acts that have the same force and value as national acts. Since national acts have no precedence over regional and community acts, conflicts have to be resolved by the Arbitration Court. Furthermore, regions and communi- ties have exclusive jurisdiction in matters devolved to them. The na- tional state cannot preempt those matters, and any attempt to regulate would be ultra vires and subject to annulment by the Arbitration Court. Finally, the jurisdiction of the regions and communities is limited to those matters which have been expressly attributed to them by the Spe- cial Act on the Reform of the Institutions of August 8, 1980, as amended by the Special Act of August 8, 19886. Matters not expressly attributed to the regions and communities or not expressly reserved to the national State (the so-called "residuary matters") fall under the juris- diction of the national state. B. Jurisdiction in Environmental Matters The 1980 Institutions Reform Act, as amended,7 has transferred ju- risdiction in environmental matters largely, but not totally, to the re- gions. 'Trotection of the environment,' an important concept in the Act, was defined by the Arbitration Court to cover the policy to combat air, water, and noise pollution9. Other aspects of the environment are treated in other articles and sections of the Act, in terms that qualify the jurisdiction of the regions. There are restrictions, however, on the jurisdiction of the regions. The national authority retains jurisdiction to set minimum general and 4 An excellent English commentary, edited by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, on Belgian re- form is R.SmemANE, REmORM op THE BELGIAN STATE (1987). No commentary exists, however, on the most recent modifications to the Belgian State: the Act of August 8, 1988 Amending the Special Act on the Reform of the Institutions of August 8, 1980, B.S.M.B. (Aug. 13, 1988); the Special Act of January 12, 1989, Concerning the Brussels'Institutions, B.S.M.B. (Jan 14, 1989); or the Special Act of January 16, 1989, Concerning the Fimancing of the Communities and the Regions, B.S.M.B. (Jan. 17, 1989). 5 Special Act on the Reform of Institutions of August 8, 1980, B.S.M.B. (Aug. 15, 1980) [here- inafter 1980 Institutions Reform Act]. 6 Special Act of 8 August 1988, B.S.M.B. (Aug. 13, 1988). 7 Id. 8 1980 Institutions Reform Act, supra note 5, art. 1, § 2, cl. 1. 9 Judgment 47 of February 25, 1988, Arb. Ct, Belg., B.S M.B. (Mar. 17, 1988). Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business 10:522(1990) sector standards-technical, quality, product, and emission standards. 10 The regions must respect these standards, which means that they can set more restrictive, but not less restrictive, measures. The national authority's jurisdiction is superseded by general and sector standards enacted by the European Economic Community ("EEC") under its authority in environmental matters provided in the Single European Act which entered into force on July 1, 1987.11 When such European standards exist, the national authority loses jurisdiction and the regions are bound to respect these European norms. II. ORIGIN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT IN BELGIUM Even before the Single European Act was enacted into law, the EEC used its broad powers under articles 100 and/or 235 of the EEC Treaty to legislate (most often in the form of directives) in environmental mat- ters.12 The environmental impact statement ("EIS"), however, was first introduced in the United States and then made. its way to other 13 countries. On June 27, 1985, EIS officially came to Europe when the Council of Ministers of the EEC adopted a directive on the assessment of the effect of certain public and private projects on the environment. 4 Ac- cording to the directive, member states had three years from the date of notification (July 3, 1985) to take all necessary measures to implement the directive.15 As far as Belgium was concerned, whether the EIS was performed by the regions or by the national state depended on whether the particu- lar project, from a list provided in the Directive,16 pertained to the juris- diction of the regions or of the national state. Only the national state, however, is responsible to the EEC for any delay in implementing the 10 Id. 11 3%OJ. EUR. CoMm. (No. L 169) 1-28 (1987); see also Vandermeersch, The Single European Act and the Environmental Policy of the European Eonomic Community, 12 EuR. L. REV. 407-29 (1987) [hereinafter Vandermeersch]. 12 Treaty Establishing the European Economic Community, Mar. 25, 1957, arts. 100, 235, 298 U.N.T.S. 3, 54, 91 [hereinafter EEC Treaty]. See also Vandermeereh, supra note 11, at 409-12. 13 See 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4370a (1977). See also Kiss & Lambrechts, Ler Proclduresd'Etude d'Impact en Droit Compar, REv. JUR. ENV'T 3-4, 239 (1976). 14 Council Directive 337/85/EEC 28 OJ. EuR COMM (No. L 175) 40.48 (1985) [hereinafter EEC Directive]. 15 Id. art. 12. 16 Id. art. 4. Article 4 was implemented into the law of Belgium's Walloon Region in the Wal- loon Regional Act of II September 1985, Annex I, B.S.M.B. Qan. 24, 1986) [hereinafter Walloon Regional Act]. See infra notes 22-24 and accompanying text. EIS in Belgium 10:522(1990) directive, regardless of whether the state or the regions had jurisdiction for implementation.17 I. JURISDICTION TO IMPLEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACr STATEMENTS IN BELGIUM: EXISTING AcTs AND REGULATIONS A. The Question of Jurisdiction In principle, the question of who has jusrisdiction for the EIS de- pends on which entity-the state or the region-has jurisdiction to li- cense a project which the directive stipulates must have an EIS.18 Thus, one should look at the projects requiring an EIS to determine which au- thority has jurisdiction in these matters. While the subject matter of most projects belongs under the jurisdiction of the regions, two areas fall under the jurisdiction of the state: nuclear power stations and other nu- clear reactors, 19 and construction of long-distance railway lines and air- ports with runways longer than 2,100 meters20 . For projects licensed by regional authorities (e.g., building permits), the Arbitration Court has decided that the region may not use its powers in such a way as to interfere with matters under the jurisdiction of the national state.21 It is not yet clear, however, what kind of restraint the regions must exercise in this respect.