Polish law does not adequately protect forests, finds EU court

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled that Poland’s forestry law does not comply with the country’s obligations under an EU directive to protect natural habitats and that there should be a possibility for forest management plans to be legally challenged. The case against Poland was brought by the European Commission.

Figures from Poland’s national-conservative ruling party have condemned the ruling, calling it “interference” in the country’s right to manage its own forests and suggesting that it was made in the interests of “foreign organisations”.

The inability of environmental NGOs to challenge forest management plans became apparent amid the government’s 2016 decision to increase logging in Białowieża, Europe’s last primaeval forest, which could not be stopped in Polish courts. The logging was only halted after the intervention of the CJEU in 2018.

The European Commission argued that Poland’s forestry law, as amended under the current Law and Justice (PiS) government, is incompatible with the EU Birds and Habitats Directives. The commission also accused Poland of not allowing the public to challenge forest management plans in court.

In a ruling issued today, the CJEU concluded Poland’s forestry law “is irreconcilable with the obligation imposed on Member States to establish strict protection for animal and bird species, as well as to take measures for the protection of natural habitats and species habitats”.

The ruling was welcomed by Bartosz Kwiatkowski, a lawyer at Frank Bold, an NGO specialising in environmental law, and one of the co-authors of the complaint written with WWF Polska that inspired the European Commission to lodge a case against Poland.

“In practice, this [law] meant that animals and trees in Polish forests were left almost unprotected,” he said, quoted by news service Gazeta.pl. “The court made it clear today that there is no place for such provisions in Polish law, and that the most valuable species and their habitats must be protected.”

As regards the commission’s second complaint, the CJEU found that, because forest management plans “significantly affect the land”, this “creates the need to be able to request a court to examine the[ir] legality”.

“Poland now needs to change the legislation in this area as soon as possible and allow environmental organisations to challenge the minister’s decisions approving forest management plans,” said Kwiatkowski.

“This should not be difficult,” he added. “There has been a bill in [parliament] for a year, which only needs to be passed to bring Polish law in line with international standards.”

However, a leading figure from Poland’s ruling party, Beata Szydło – who was prime minister when the logging of Białowieża was authorised and now serves as an MEP – condemned the CJEU’s decision, which she portrayed as part of an attempt to gain influence over Polish government decisions.

“Foreign organisations have been demanding influence over Polish forests at the European Commission – and the CJEU has just granted them this right,” she tweeted. “It is worth emphasising – this is not about ‘defending nature’. This is about giving foreign organisations the right to block Polish decisions.”

Another PiS MEP, Zbigniew Kuźmiuk, told Polskie Radio that “forest management is the exclusive competence of EU member states”. He described the CJEU’s rulings on Polish forests as “deep interference”.

Main image credit: Greenpeace Polska/Flickr (under CC BY-ND 2.0)

Alicja Ptak

Alicja Ptak is senior editor at Notes from Poland and a multimedia journalist. She previously worked for Reuters.