Eu Commission is sends 1st warning to Bulgaria over failure to protect wild birds

Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said: "The network of Special Protection Areas is the key to safeguarding the future of migratory and vulnerable bird species. It is imperative that Member States fulfill their obligations to protect them."

Special protection areas

Under the Wild Birds Directive,[1"> Member States are obliged to designate all the most suitable sites as Special Protection Areas (SPAs) for the conservation of wild bird species. The designation of SPAs must be based on objective, verifiable scientific criteria. To assess whether Member States have complied with their obligation to classify SPAs, the Commission uses the best available ornithological information. Where the necessary scientific information is lacking, national inventories of Important Bird Areas (IBAs), compiled by the non-governmental organisation Birdlife International, are used. While not legally binding, the IBA inventory is based on internationally recognised scientific criteria. The Court of Justice has already acknowledged its scientific value, and in cases where no equivalent scientific evidence is available, the IBA inventory is a valid basis of reference in assessing whether Member States have classified a sufficient number and size of territories as SPAs.

First warning over bird protection laws

The Commission is sending Bulgaria a first written warning for failing to designate the most suitable areas, in both number and size, as Special Protection Areas according to the provisions of the Wild Birds Directive. Although Bulgaria has designated 114 IBAs as SPAs, 6 of these are significantly smaller than the corresponding IBAs.

The Commission is thus taking legal action against Bulgaria for its shortcomings in designating for protection the most suitable areas on its territory.

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 within 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" (second and 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, normally two months.

If the Member State fails to comply with the Reasoned Opinion, the Commission may decide to bring the case before the European 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 rulings by the European Court of Justice see:
http://curia.eu.int/en/content/juris/index.htm