We invite you to read the full text of SIA “Stiga RM” objections to the revised version of the draft Cabinet of Ministers regulations “Regulations on nature reserves” here:

“Stiga RM” objections to the Cabinet of Ministers “Regulations on nature reserves”

SIA “Stiga RM”, registration number: 40003194846 (hereinafter the Company) is a logging company that manufactures veneer sheets and wood panels. The Company is also a forest land owner. As the nature reserves included in the draft Regulations also apply to forest areas owned by the Company, the Company is not only an addressee of the provisions of the draft Regulations but is also interested in ensuring that the draft Regulations do not infringe upon its right to property guaranteed by Article 105 of the Constitution.

The Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development (hereinafter VARAM) has prepared draft Cabinet of Ministers legislation No. 23 TA 621 “Regulations on nature reserves” (hereinafter the draft Regulations). In the context of the development of the draft Regulations, VARAM and the Cabinet of Ministers are hereafter referred to as the Legislator.

The draft Regulations have been developed as amendments to Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No. 212 of 15 June 1999 “Regulations on nature reserves”. The draft Regulations propose to establish 75 new nature reserves and expand 6 existing nature reserve areas. As indicated in the annotation of the draft Regulations (hereinafter the Annotation), the draft Regulations were developed to at least partially address the infringement procedure No. 2019/2304 initiated by the European Commission against Latvia for non-compliance with the requirements of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (hereinafter the Habitats Directive).

(...)

20. By determining compensation solely for stand growth, private individuals are in principle not compensated for the actual restriction on the undisturbed use of real estate, but are only compensated for the potential future growth of the stand, or a circumstance that cannot be predicted with absolute certainty. In the event that no stand growth is detected on the real estate, the specific compensation is not due to these persons. If it is to be assumed that the references to the compensation mechanism in the Annotation and other documents for the development of the draft Regulations are correct, then it must also be assumed that a number of private individuals whose properties are restricted by the draft Regulations may receive no compensation at all for the prohibition of economic activity.

21. Furthermore, the purpose of compensation is to justify the losses incurred by a person, both in relation to restrictions on the use and development of the specific property and in relation to lost profit. Annual compensation is not proportionate if it is based on the probability of a situation occurring in the future.

22. Such a case would be disproportionate and unfair. The Annotation clearly states that the draft Regulations are being developed at all because an infringement procedure regarding non-compliance with the Habitats Directive has been initiated against Latvia. In accordance with the principle of legal certainty, errors by state authorities cannot lead to adverse consequences for private individuals who are not to blame for them.

(...)

In summary of everything stated in these objections:

1) The compensation mechanism set out in the draft Regulations is unlawful and does not comply with Article 30(1) of Regulation (EU) No. 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No. 1698/2005

2) The compensation mechanism set out in the draft Regulations is unlawful and does not comply with the framework of the law “On compensation for restrictions on economic activity in protected areas” and Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No. 197 of 18 April 2023 “Procedure for granting support for the implementation of area-related and animal-related commitments for the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development”.

3) The 75 new nature reserves and six expanded nature reserve areas defined in the draft Regulations have been determined without observing the meaning and purpose of the Natura 2000 status, using outdated or inaccurate information, thereby violating the provisions of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora.

4) The 75 new nature reserves and six expanded nature reserve areas defined in the draft Regulations have been determined without fulfilling the requirements regarding the content of the decision set out in Article 12 of the law “On Specially Protected Nature Territories”.

5) The 75 new nature reserves and six expanded nature reserve areas defined in the draft Regulations have been determined without fulfilling the obligation to justify the proportionality of the restriction of fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 105 of the Constitution.

“Stiga RM” objections to the Cabinet of Ministers “Regulations on nature reserves”