LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
print version Print this page

Summary of Lawsuits in 2011
by the Ecological Society Green Salvation
 

No. 1
Lawsuit on the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan’s failure to act and on
acknowledging the Senior State Sanitary Inspector’s statement
regarding reduction of the Sanitary Protection Zone (SPZ) to be invalid.

 
The lawsuit in the interests of Berezovka village residents (Western Kazakhstan Oblast) was filed on June 19, 2008 to the Specialized Interregional Economic Court (SIEC) of Astana City.

The lawsuit demands:

1. The government’s failure to take measures in protection of citizens’ rights and freedoms, ensuring justice and safety for the residents of Berezovka village, who have had to live within the limits of Sanitary Protection Zone, shall be recognized as inaction.
2. The Government’s failure to control activity of the Ministries and other central and local executive authorities, in regards of implementation of legislation and international agreements, shall be recognized as inaction.
3. The Government’s failure to comply with its obligations by violating the provisions of the Aarhus Convention (Articles 3.2, 3.3, 3.9, 4 and 6) and the Law “On Environmental Assessment” of 1997  (Articles 13, 14, 15.1, 16 and 36) when taking decision about reduction of the SPZ, shall be recognized as inaction.
4. The Senior State Sanitary Inspector’s statement No. 07-2 dated on January 16, 2004, as an Addendum to the Draft “The Sanitary Protection Zone of the Karachaganak Oil and Gas Condensate Field” dated on December 25, 2003, shall be recognized as invalid.
5. To require the Government to resolve the issue in accordance with the legislation, to relocate the residents of the Berezovka village to a safe and healthy location, and provide them with adequate housing taking into account their opinions.
6. To require the Government to resolve the question of compensation of material and moral damage caused to the residents of Berezovka village.

At the end of 2010, Green Salvation tried to get satisfaction of the lawsuit demands by filing of a petition and cassational appeals to the Astana City Court and a petition to the Supreme Court. In accordance with the resolution of the Supreme Court, the decision of the SIEC was cancelled and, as a result of the new case hearings, the lawsuit demands were partially satisfied. Disagreeing with the decision of the court about only partial satisfaction of the demands, the Ecological Society filed a petition to the Supreme Court. On April 21, 2011, the Supreme Court denied to consider the petition. The court decision of November 11, 2010, came into force. The Ecological Society Green Salvation undertook the following actions:

On February 9, a request was sent to the SIEC of Astana, in order to clarify the location of the writs of execution on the case. The court informed that the writs were filed to the Department of Execution of the Court Acts of the Western Kazakhstan oblast. But the akimats’ (official authorities) representatives replied that they had not received them.

In this regard, on February 25, a letter was sent to the Prosecutor’s Office in Astana city and to the chairman of the SIEC of Astana city with a request to assist in the search of the writs of execution. There was a reply saying that the writs of execution were returned to the SIEC, according to their request. During a check-up of the copies of submission of the writs of execution to the SIEC, none of them was recalled or resend. An additional writ of execution for the court costs recovery was sent, in accordance with a resolution of the Appellate Board on Civic Affairs of the Astana City Court in June, 2010.

On April 19, the Department of Execution of the Court Acts of the Western Kazakhstan oblast informed that the writs of execution were sent to the bailiff of the Burlinsky territorial division of the above mentioned department.  In May, during inquiry on whether or not the writs of execution were sent by the SIEC, it became clear that the court presented false information.

On August 11, a claim on the bailiff who failed to act is filed to the Burlinsky District Court of the West Kazakhstan Oblast.
On September 22, the claim on the bailiff’s failure to act is forwarded to the SIEC of the West Kazakhstan Oblast, because of determination of the Burlinsky District Court.
On November 14, the SIEC of the West Kazakhstan Oblast returned the claim to the ES because of the court’s lack of jurisdiction.

The court’s decision is not executed.



No. 2
Lawsuit about inaction of the state authorities which lead to formation
of an illegal dumpster in Besagash village.


The lawsuit in the interests of the residents of Besagash village is filed to the Talgar City Court, Almaty oblast on November 3, 2010.

The lawsuit demands:

1. To acknowledge the failure of the defendants, in particular:
- Akimat of Almaty oblast;
- Akimat of the Talgar region of Almaty oblast;
- Akimat of the Besagash rural district of the Talgar region of Almaty oblast;
- Emergency division of the Talgar region;
- Department of the state sanitary and epidemiological control of the Talgar region;
- Regional Department of Internal Affairs of Talgar Сity –
to execute their direct responsibilities to be inaction.

2. To require the defendants to take immediate actions within the limits of their authorities, in order to recover the favorable environmental conditions for the residents of the village, in particular: to require the owner of the land plot and boiler house, chairman of the cooperative “Luch Vostoka”, to liquidate the garbage dumpster by demolition of the former boiler house building.

On December 22, 2010, a private claim was filed to the Almaty Oblast Court in relation to the Talgar City Court refusal to accept the lawsuit.
On January 21, 2011, the claim was heard in the Almaty Oblast Court in the City of Taldykorgan. The court obliged the Talgar City Court to consider the case in the essence.
During the period from February to April, six court hearings took place.
On May 3, the court made a decision to partially satisfy the demands. The decision acknowledged the fact of inaction of the Akim (governor) of the Besagash rural district of the Talgar region. But the judge did not oblige the defendants to liquidate the illegal dumpster.
On May 23, a claim was filed to the Appellate Board on Civic Affairs of the Almaty Oblast Court demanding to satisfy all lawsuit demands and oblige the defendant to liquidate the dumpster.
On Jul 29, the Board reviewed the claim and left the court decision without alteration.
On August 15, a petition is filed to the Supreme Court.
On October 20, at the preliminary hearing of the case, the Review Board of the Supreme Court refused to satisfy the petition.
On November 11, a letter with a request to issue an objection on the decision of the Supreme Court is filed to the General’s Prosecutor’s Office.
On December 21, the General Prosecutor’s Office did not find reasons for issuing an objection.

The case is partially won. But as a result of the half-hearted decision of the court, the illegal dumpster is not liquidated and the law offenders are not punished.


  
No. 3
Lawsuit about acknowledgment of a legal act – “Rules of conducting of public hearings” –
to be contradictory to the laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan
and the international agreement – Aarhus Convention.


The lawsuit in the interests of an undetermined group of people is filed on February 2, 2011, to the Specialized Interregional Economic Court of the Astana Сity.

The lawsuit demands:

1. To acknowledge the “Rules of conducting of public hearings” adopted on May 7, 2007, by an order of the Minister of Environmental Protection of the Republic of Kazakhstan No.135-p, to be contradictory to the requirements of the Aarhus Convention, Environmental Code, and the Law “About Normative Legal Acts”, i.e. to be invalid in the full volume.

2. To require the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan to cancel the registration of the “Rules of Conducting of Public Hearings”.

On February 11, the SIEC made a decision to leave the lawsuit without a movement, because supposedly, it had been filed incorrectly. The deadline for correction of the mistakes was set as February 21. But the notification was sent by the court only on February 17, and was received by the Ecological Society on February 21.

Despite of this fact, on February 22, the SIEC made a determination to return the lawsuit to the claimants.
On March 9, based on an appeal of the Ecological Society, the Astana City Court re-set the deadline for appealing of the SIEC’s decision about returning of the lawsuit.
On April 2, the case was filed again to the SIEC of Astana, in order to speed up the process of its consideration.
On April 29, the SIEC returned the lawsuit again explaining that the paperwork had been, supposedly, filed incorrectly.
On August 15, the lawsuit is filed to the SIEC of Astana for the third time.
On September 12, the SIEC made a determination about returning of the lawsuit because the paperwork had been, supposedly, filed incorrectly.
On September 26, a private claim on the determination of the SIEC is filed to the court of the city of Astana.
On November 23, the court of the city of Astana refused to satisfy the private claim.
On December 14, a petition is sent to the Supreme Court.
On December 26, the Supreme Court left the petition without a review.
On January 18, 2012, another petition is sent to the Supreme Court.

The case remains open.



No. 4
Lawsuit about failure of the Ministry of Environmental Protection to provide environmental information –
the National Report about compliance with the Aarhus Convention and its discussion materials.

The lawsuit is filed to the SIEC of Astana city on February 15, 2011.

Demands:

1. To acknowledge the actions of the Ministry of Environmental Protection, which did not provide information to the Ecological Society Green Salvation, to be inaction, which violates the rights and lawful interests of the juridical person.

2. To require the MEP to provide the Ecological Society Green Salvation with the information, in particular:
- how was the report discussed with the public;
- where and when did “round tables” take place;
- what kind of comments were received from the public;
- how were they considered;
- when was the report sent to the Secretariat of the Convention;
- where could one get acquainted with the final version of the report?

In March-April, several court hearings took place.
On April 25, the court made a judgment by default and satisfied the demands of the Ecological Society Green Salvation.
The judgment came into force, the Ministry provided the information.

The court’s decision was executed only partially, as the state duty was not reimbursed.



No. 5
Lawsuit about failure of the Akim of Almaty City to provide information about
relocation of the people from the sanitary and protection zone of the enterprise “Tsentrbeton” Ltd.

The lawsuit in the interests of the residents of the city of Almaty is filed to the Court No.2 of Bostandykski District of Almaty City on March 1, 2011.

Demands:

1. To acknowledge the actions of the Akim of Almaty City, who did not reply in the essence to the request sent to him on December 22, 2010, to be inaction which violates the rights and lawful interests of the citizens.

2. To require the Akim of Almaty City to reply in the essence of the request, i.e. about the solution of the issue of relocation from the sanitary and protection zone of the “Tsentrbeton” Ltd.

In March-April, several court hearings took place.
On April 21, the court refused to satisfy the lawsuit demands.
On April 26, an appeal is files to the Appellate Board on Civic Affairs of the Almaty City Court.
On May 24, the appeal was not satisfied.
On August 17, a petition is sent to the Supreme Court.
On November 17, at the preliminary hearing of the case, the Review Board of the Supreme Court refused to satisfy the petition.
On December 7, a letter with a request to issue an objection on the decision of the Supreme Court is sent to the General Prosecutor’s Office.
 
The case remains open.


 
No.6
Lawsuit about inaction of the organs of public administration,
which caused formation of an illegal dump site in Panfilov village, Talgar District, Almaty Oblast.

The lawsuit in the interests of the residents of Panfilov village is filed on September 16, 2011, to the Court of the city of Talgar.

Lawsuit demands:

1. To acknowledge the failure of the defendants – Akimat of the village and other authorized state organs – to fulfill their direct responsibilities in providing environmental and sanitary and epidemiological well-being of the residents of Panfilov village to be illegal, i.e. inaction.
2. To require the defendants to take immediate actions, in order to liquidate the dump site, demolish the abandoned buildings, and bring the land sites into a proper condition, in accordance with the legislation.

On September 21, the court made a statement to leave the case without a motion.
On September 29, a reply to the statement and a letter to the chairman of the court were filed.
On October 25, the court made a determination to leave the case without a motion.
On November 2, a reply to the determination of the court is filed.
On November 7, the court made a decision to return the case.
On December 21, a private complaint is filed to the Almaty Oblast Court.

The case remains open.



No.7
Lawsuit about inaction of the Akim of the city of Almaty,
which caused discrimination of citizens residing on Bokeykhanov street, Almaty.

The lawsuit in the interests of the residents of Almaty is filed to the Court of Bostandyk Distroct of the city of Almaty on November 23, 2011.

Lawsuit demands:

1. To acknowledge the failure of the Akim of Almaty to carry out his professional responsibilities, and also his failure to comply with the national and international agreements, which has lead to discrimination by a place of residence of the citizens living on Bokeykhanov street, city of Almaty, to be inaction.
2. To acknowledge the lack of control allowed by the Akim of the city of Almaty over the authorized organs who violated the national legislation which prohibits people from living in sanitary and protection zones of enterprises, in particular, the residents of Bokaykhanov street, Almaty, to be illegal inaction.
3. Following the paragraph 1 of the Article 282 of the CPC, to require Akim of the city of Almaty to liquidate the violations of the legislation in respect of the residents of Bokeykhanov street by their resettlement from the sanitary and protection zone and providing them with adequate dwelling, in accordance with the current legislation.
 
On November 25, the court made a determination about leaving the case without any further consideration.
On December 9, the court made a determination about returning the case.
On December 28, a private complaint on determination of the Bostandyk District Court is submitted to the Almaty City Court. 

The case remains open.


Rights and legal interests of the Ecological Society “Green Salvation” are defended in court by lawyer Svetlana Philippovna Katorcha.

Translated by Sofya Tairova.

     
          



See also Green Salvation Heralds devoted to accomplishing the organization’s primary mission: defending the right of Kazakhstan’s citizens to a healthy environment.