It is hard to believe, but the facts are convincing. July 15, 2009, the Supreme Court made a decision* that… not all of the statements of the Aarhus Convention have an obligatory status and not all of them shall be applied directly! But only a year and a half ago before the Third meeting of the Parties to the Aarhus Convention, the opinion of the Supreme Court** was the opposite. It fully matched the opinion of the General Public Prosecutor and the Ministry of Environmental Protection: the Convention has an obligatory status and has a priority over laws of Kazakhstan and shall be enforced directly!
Quite a paradoxical situation. Who to believe now? What if tomorrow the Ministry of Environmental Protection and the General Public Prosecutor change their minds?! And it is even harder to understand who of the three authorities represents an official opinion of the state. Or may be the state does not have a single opinion anymore but only has points of views of different authorities who pursue specific goals in the specific situations?
* By the decree of the Supreme Court #3-36/2009 dated on July 15, 2009, “analysis of the Article 8 of the Aarhus Convention shows that it has a status of recommendation.”
** By the decree of the Supreme Court #4Ð³Ð¿-64-08 dated on March 26, 2008, “according to the statement 3 of the Article 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, international treaties ratified by the Republic shall have priority over its laws and be directly implemented except in cases when the application of an international treaty shall require the promulgation of a law.”