Green Brigades No. 17 (119), September 1-15, 1998

The main weapon of officials and technocrats are loopholes, legal tricks and ignorance widespread in Polish society provisions of applicable law and possibilities pursuing legitimate claims in an administrative way and judicial. The current code - from 1.9.98 - the code criminal also gives environmental defenders a natural strong weapon to fight against mathematics officials and technocrats in the form of chapter XXII: Crimes against the art. 181-188 of the Penal Code. These provisions had to be found in the new penal code, as Polish politicians and officials They are very impatient to be able to already to split the financial resources that By joining the European Union, Poland would receive for adjustment programs. Costs related to accession to the EU will pay society anyway, in particular Polish countryside, agriculture, mining and metallurgy etc. It was therefore declared that by 2010 we would adapt all environmental protection requirements to be binding in the EU. The whole problem is that politicians and officials accustomed to fictitious and practically unenforceable, dead recipes are not yet aware from the full legal consequences of these decisions. For example - in accordance with applicable law, practically all amphibians, including newts, frogs and toads are under species protection (and two species frogs not protected by species are subject to anyway protection during the breeding season, when amphibians intensively they migrate, entering, for example, roads and newly built ones Highways because they are looking for wet places to fold screams in water). Well, currently applicable Art. 188 of the Penal Code states: § 1 Who causes destruction in the plant or animal world in considerable sizes, subject to imprisonment from 3 months to 5 years § 2 Who contrary to the provisions in force in the covered area protection, destroys or damages plants or animals, causing material damage, shall be subject to a fine or punishes restriction of liberty up to 2 years. § 3 The penalty specified in § 2 is also subject to anyone, regardless of the place of the act destroys or damages plants or remaining animals under species protection, causing significant damage. Based on this article from April this year. we have made in Toruń, a legal action against Toruński Branch of the Agency for the Construction and Operation of Motorways (motorway A-1). Namely, the motorways built in Poland were located every 100-150 m between the highway lanes to discharge large quantities water that may accumulate on 2 bands during heavy rains. The problem is that it's medium in size a frog searching for water to deposit in the breeding season squawk (if it doesn't die under the wheels of cars, because the highway grid can only stop animals larger than a hedgehog) can easily jump in into the well, but she won't be able to use it anymore go out (as well as young frogs that in theory, they could develop from tadpoles hatched from squawking). The same applies to "sandboxes" located on both sides of the highway and intended to prevent sand deposition in concrete trenches and circles draining water from the highway. will jump in to both "land" frogs - "brown", entering the water only during the period breeding and flooding when not they will be able to leave the sandpit with concrete edges protruding 30-50 cm above the level of water accumulating in it as well "green" - that is, "water", which can jump in them during the drought, when the neighboring ones dry up with sand ditches and will also be sentenced to death, when the water dries even in the sandpit. So used on Polish highways, technical solutions are deadly trap for amphibians. In the West, it does not apply at all this type of solutions only special, porous asphalt, through which water penetrates and is drained underground drainage - due to the high price, however porous asphalt Polish investors decided to apply original native problem solution. So I recommend learn to recognize individual atlases species of frogs and toads and lead a constant observation of sandboxes and wells being built highways especially at the turn of March and April, count, photograph and submit to the district prosecutor's office reports on activities and omissions of the investor's obligations having the characteristics of art. 181 (in the protected area also Art. 187 and 188). Neither the notification nor the investigation is binding for the submitting person or association notice with no costs, allegations must however be true and we need to gather reliable evidence and make charges only against these facts, which we can prove otherwise in the event our application would be rejected by the prosecutor's
office, and if we carry out an additional press information campaign on this subject, we could be exposed to reporting by the investor to the prosecutor's office charges against us about:     false accusation of crime (Article 234 of the Penal Code);   testifying untruth or withholding the truth when giving evidence to serve as evidence in court proceedings (Article 233 of the Penal Code);   public dissemination of unauthorized messages from preparatory proceedings before they were disclosed in court proceedings - art. 241 of the Penal Code (if we were allowed during the proceedings to read the case files);   slandering a person or institution about properties or proceedings that may humiliate them in the public opinion or expose them to the loss of confidence needed for a given position, profession or type of activity (private accusation) - art. 212 1 and 2;   insult due to the form of raising or announcing the charge (art. 214 of the Penal Code). However, if we present credible evidence of an infringement of the Penal Code by the investor, the prosecutor cannot, in principle, refuse to initiate proceedings and should order the District Police Headquarters to investigate the matter in order to determine the guilty of improper construction of the applied technical solutions. The investor will have to submit to the investigator photocopies of technical documentation and environmental impact assessment of the investment positively approved by the Voivodship Department of Environmental Protection before issuing the building permit and by the Voivodship Inspector for Environmental Protection at the technical acceptance report before being allowed to use. In the Polish reality, there is a high probability that after a 3-6 month investigation, the policeman conducting them considers that the documents he has collected do not confirm the allegations, because ... the competent authorities issued an opinion that from the point of view of environmental protection the investor met all the requirements or that discontinue the case due to the negligible social harmfulness of the act (art. 1 § 2 of the Penal Code), or - that there is no evidence that there was damage in the plant or animal world to a significant extent within the meaning of art. 115 § 5 (property of significant value is property whose value at the time the offense is committed exceeds 200 times the lowest salary). After such an opinion, the prosecutor should send to our address with acknowledgment of receipt a notice of discontinuation of proceedings, together with the justification and description of the ongoing investigation. And here comes the most important moment for the whole thing, which we must not miss. Because only at this point, as a party to the case, can we get to know in the secretariat of the district prosecutor's office the full case files and make any exact notes, even copying everything word for word. I assure you that your hair may get bristled when you read, for example, an environmental impact assessment for your investment, or you may be straining your abdominal muscles from restraining laughter in a public place. You will find there a bunch of nonsense and purely rhetorical tricks, in which the special investor prof. dr. hab. MOŚZNiL appraiser is trying to prove that highways are the most ecological roads ever built on land, because they have nets preventing the entry and disappearance of wild animals under the wheels that other roads built in Poland so far do not have, or that concrete circles on 3 passing under the drainage ditches are specially designed tunnels for wild aquatic animals, or that the flyover running through the center of a village is a natural passage for animals [such as a dog, cat or cow]. Now you have to write within 7 days (the so-called "closed", i.e. if you do not write the appeal within that time, the cancellation takes legal effect) a complaint to the provincial prosecutor's office about the decision to discontinue the investigation through the district prosecutor's office. Of course, you have to write the justification of the appeal - namely that, e.g. "the collected material confirms your allegations, but in the investigation formal errors were made (such and such ...), as a result of which it is difficult to collect the materials (if you are not an expert in the field of ecology and sozology and environmental law) to find convincing evidence of guilt. " You can also extend your allegations to date, indicating which articles of the Nature Conservation Act, the Act on the Protection and Shaping of the Environment and the Construction Law and e.g. the Act on Toll Motorways have been broken by the designer, investor, contractor, author of the environmental impact assessment and the voivodship environmental protection inspector . These may be allegations of having committed offenses:     Art. 172 - obstructing actions aimed at preventing danger (...) for property of large sizes; 
Art. 231 - acting to the detriment of the public interest by failing to fulfill a duty by a public official;
    Art. 233 - suppression of truth in testimonies in court proceedings;
    Art. 239 - obstructing or frustrating criminal proceedings, helping the perpetrator to avoid criminal liability;
    Art. 271 - confirmation of untruth by an officer or expert in an issued document;
    Art. 272 and 273 - extorting false statements by misleading a public official and using a document thus obtained;
    Art. 296 - damage to property by failure to comply with the obligation of the person managing the property.

In the case of Góra Św. Anna, of course, will have to come here art. 188: Who in the area covered by protection for natural or landscape reasons or in the buffer zone of such area, contrary to the provisions, erects a new or enlarges an existing building object or conducts a business threatening the environment is subject to a fine, restriction of liberty or imprisonment for up to 2 years, as well as Art. 217: who strikes a person or otherwise violates his physical integrity (...), art. 156-160: who takes part in a fight or beating in which a person is exposed to the imminent danger of losing his life or of severe damage to health. Of course, at this moment we proceed to widely inform the press, radio and television. We can also start the process of annulment of administrative decisions taken in gross violation of applicable provisions of the Building and Environmental Protection Law. But about this at another time. HOUK!
Jerzy Czerny
"EKOTEST" Institute
/ box 13
87-102 Toruń

On the newly commissioned Lubicz-Czerniewice beltway, poorly designed motorway wells die: in spring - protected amphibians, in summer - hares, at night - mesh and cast iron covers from manholes.

In accordance with European motorway construction standards, the entire section of the Toruń bypass has been fenced with a special 22-kilometer highway grid to protect forest and field animals as well as drivers from running on the road. In our reality, the grid has also been conceived as protection against entering the highway or expressway of nearby residents and protection against unauthorized access to objects accompanying the highway, such as collectors draining water from rainfall.

Until now, the mass media only talked about the advantages of highways, apart from the need to educate the public about the principles of traffic organization on highways and the restrictions resulting from it (e.g. pedestrians enter their area). After all, it will not be possible for the motorways to function properly without public acceptance of the motorways' operating requirements and without disapproval of behaviors such as cutting, and even more so the theft of the highway grid - as behaviors threatening road safety. Because the expensive and specially imported highway grid was not installed just to show its presence on the day the expressway was put into service. Meanwhile, on many former field and forest paths, which were blocked off by a net, it was simply cut up by the local inhabitants who were there. Well, you can say that the designers forgot to design a viaduct or tunnel in this place, or decided in advance that it would be too expensive. And what about the entire sections visible from the road, where the grid has disappeared and therefore on the road you can see or feel run over bunnies under the wheels? After all, the highway grid is so characteristic and unavailable to the general public that in the West no one would even think that ... you can, for example, fence your own garden with such a grid! The question arises: will the builders of the future highway now patch and fill the missing sections of the grid on an ongoing basis, waiting for "local demand for it to be saturated" or maybe they will hire an agency to protect 22 km of public property? Otherwise - can't you refer to the builders of the Toruń beltway of the biblical words: builders who, when joining the construction of the tower will not count, will they have enough funds to finish it, will only become a laughing stock?

After all - in accordance with the Building Law and the Civil Code - maintaining the road condition required for road safety is the responsibility of the persons responsible for the construction and operation of the highway. According to the same principle, the owner of the property is responsible, where the passerby broke his leg due to icy sidewalk. However, if we think that maintaining the assumed condition is too expensive or impossible at all "in Polish reality", does this not mean that the construction of a 22 km fence was simply a waste of taxpayers' money? What to say about the credibility of the legally required assessment of

Prześlij opinię