Climate Change Laws of the World will soon be upgraded to be AI powered, see full announcement
Turkey flag
Turkey

Yeşil Artvin Derneği and others v. Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye, Ministry of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change and Energy Market Regulatory Authority

Jurisdiction: 11th Administrative Court of Ankara


Side A: Yeşil Artvin Derneği and other environmental NGOs (Ngo)


Side B: Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye, Ministry of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change and Energy Market Regulatory Authority (Government)


Core objectives: Asking for the cancellation of the tacit rejection of the Presidency on the request to annul the license of the power plant in Çanakkale, Turkey.


Summary
The applicants, as sixteen environmental NGOs, before filing the case at hand, made an application before the Presidency of the Republic of Turkey, requesting the annulment of the licenses of thirty-seven active coal thermal power plants in Turkey. The basis for this application is the scientific reports stating that the pandemics such as the recent coronavirus pandemic is a result of global climate change. Accordingly, it is alleged that the coalmines and thermal power plants play a leading role for climate change and therefore, their activities must be terminated. The Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye didn’t respond to this application in sixty days, which is deemed as a tacit rejection under Administrative Judicial Procedure Act. In the case at hand, the applicants requested the annulment of the tacit rejection of the Presidency. 

Presidency of Republic of Türkiye stated in its defence, the authority to annul the licence for the power plants belongs to the Ministry of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change and Energy Market Regulatory Authority. Energy Market Regulatory Authority, in its defence, referred that the relevant authority for environmental assessments is the Ministry of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change. Finally, the Ministry alleged that there is no scientific proof on the relationship between climate change, pandemics and coal power plants. 

The Court rejected the case depending on (1) that the allegations made by the claimants does not constitute a legal ground for the annulment of the licence of the powerplant and (2) the claimants haven’t initiated any legal procedures against the production licence, environmental assessment report and the documents on environmental permitting and licence. The Court also stated that the licence which has been granted in accordance with the legal regulations cannot be annulled upon abstract grounds and therefore the tacit rejection by the Presidency cannot be deemed illegal. 

The case has been brought before the Regional Administrative Courts by the Claimants for appeal.

Full case documents will be added as they become available.
from the Grantham Research Institute
from the Grantham Research Institute
Publication banner
Climate Change Laws of the World uses cookies to make the site simpler. Find out more about cookies >>