Commissie onderneemt actie tegen Finland i.v.m. bedreigde vogelsoort (en)

The European Commission has decided to close an infringement case against Germany over protected nature sites to be part of the EU-wide Natura 2000 network. This decision follows the German authorities' latest proposal including a sufficient number of sites. At the same time, the Commission is starting legal action that could lead to a fine against Finland over its failure to fully implement a 2003 European Court of Justice judgement on the designation of protected areas under the EU Wild Birds Directive. Although Finland has designated a number of new protected areas since the judgement, it has not included an important area in the Åland archipelago, known as Nyhamn-Båtskär. This area is used as a wintering area by the Steller's Eider, a bird species which is under threat worldwide.

Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas i said: " I am pleased that Germany has now designated sufficient protection areas for the Natura 2000 network, allowing us to stop our legal action. It is vital that Member States properly implement the EU's nature protection directives, if we are to reach our goal of halting the loss of biodiversity in Europe by 2010. Over 40% of Europe's native bird species are threatened with extinction. I hope that Finland will soon comply with its obligations."

Protection of habitats in Germany

The Commission has decided to close an infringement procedure brought against Germany for failing to comply fully with a European Court of Justice judgment requiring it to propose sufficient nature sites for the Natura 2000 network, under the EU Habitats Directive[1]. The directive provides a comprehensive protection scheme for important habitat types as well as for a wide range of animal and plant species. In a case brought by the Commission, the Court ruled in September 2001[2] that Germany had not submitted an exhaustive list of nature sites (Sites of Community Importance) as it should have done by 5 June 1995. Since the Court judgement the Commission and the German authorities have worked together to identify which further habitats and species should be proposed for designation under the directive.

The Commission sent Germany a final warning in December 2005 (see IP/05/1640) as it was still not satisfied that sufficient sites had been proposed. Since then, however, Germany has proposed further designations and the Commission considers that these now allow it to close the infringement procedure.

Special protection areas for birds in Åland

The Commission is sending Finland a first written warning to comply fully with a judgment of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) from 2003[3] requiring it to designate special areas for the protection of birds under the Wild Birds Directive[4].

Finland has designated new special protection areas for birds since the ECJ ruling, but these do not include the Nyhamn-Båtskär islands in the Åland archipelago south-west of Finland. These islands are an important wintering area for Steller's Eider, which is under threat worldwide. In the meantime, the authorities have given development consent for construction on the islands of a wind farm, which could pose a potential danger to birds in the area.

The Wild Birds Directive, requires Member States to classify their most suitable territories as "special protection areas" (SPAs) for the conservation of certain specified bird species and for any regularly occurring migratory species.

Last year, Finland was condemned by the European Court of Justice[5] in a separate case for breaching the Wild Birds directive in the Åland islands. The Court ruled that Finland had not sufficiently explored alternative solutions before authorising spring hunting there.

Legal Process

Article 226 of the Treaty gives the Commission powers to take legal action against a Member State that is not respecting its obligations.

If the Commission considers that there may be an infringement of EU law that warrants the opening of an infringement procedure, it addresses a "Letter of Formal Notice" (first written warning) to the Member State concerned, requesting it to submit its observations by a specified date, usually two months.

In the light of the reply or absence of a reply from the Member State concerned, the Commission may decide to address a "Reasoned Opinion" (final written warning) to the Member State. This clearly and definitively sets out the reasons why it considers there to have been an infringement of EU law, and calls upon the Member State to comply within a specified period, usually two months.

If the Member State fails to comply with the Reasoned Opinion, the Commission may decide to bring the case before the Court of Justice. Where the Court of Justice finds that the Treaty has been infringed, the offending Member State is required to take the measures necessary to conform.

Article 228 of the Treaty gives the Commission power to act against a Member State that does not comply with a previous judgement of the European Court of Justice. The article also allows the Commission to ask the Court to impose a financial penalty on the Member State concerned.

For current statistics on infringements in general see:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/eulaw/index_en.htm#infractions

For rulings by the European Court of Justice see:

http://curia.eu.int/en/content/juris/index.htm

[1] Council Directive 92/43 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora

[2] Case C-71/99, judgement of 11 September 2001

[3] Case C-240/00, judgement of 6 March 2003

[4] Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds

[5] Case C-344/03, judgement of 15 December 2005