WU Ang*

 

Abstract: As an innovation in the environmental governance system that breaks the traditional hierarchical structure, environmental protection supervision has not only played a significant role in protecting tangible environmental rights but also expanded the basic scope of the right to environmental information — part of procedural environmental rights. In the supervision of environmental protection, the objects of the right to environmental information and the subjects of the obligation to provide environmental information have been both expanded, with the focus shifting from government information to Party information and from administrative organs to Party organs. This vividly demonstrates the Communist Party of China’s concrete efforts to protect human rights in the field of the endeavor to build an ecological civilization. At present, the realization of the right to environmental information in environmental protection supervision still faces problems such as insufficient standards and norms, disordered practice and operation, and lack of liability guarantee. In this context, based on renewing relevant subjects’ cognition of the right to know in environmental protection supervision, we should further improve and specify the rule for disclosing information about environmental protection supervision, rationally distribute the obligations for information disclosure in environmental protection supervision, and clarify the accountability rules for violating relevant requirements for information disclosure, so as to promote the overall development of the environmental protection supervision system while guaranteeing the realization of the right to environmental information.

 

Keywords: right to environmental information · environmental protection supervision · public participation · information disclosure

 

In 1998, the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe adopted the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters in the Danish city of Aarhus (hereinafter referred to as the Aarhus Convention). Although regional in scope, the significance of the Aarhus Convention is global. It is by far the most impressive elaboration of Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration.¹ The procedural environmental rights centered on the right to environmental information, the right to participate in environmental decision-making, and the right to access environmental justice are clarified for the first time in the Aarhus Convention.² Since then, the right to environmental information, as a core part of procedural environmental rights, has gradually been prioritized in the environmental protection of different countries. In China, the institutional framework for the realization of the right to environmental information has taken shape and meaningful explorations have been carried out in practice. As one of the important institutional innovations in environmental protection in China in recent years, environmental protection supervision has made unique contributions to the realization of the right to environmental information. This paper analyzes how environmental protection supervision enriches the theory and practice of the right to environmental information and provides suggestions for further improving the realization of the right to environmental information in environmental protection supervision.

 

 

The right to information is a significant procedural right in the system of the basic rights of citizens. Its essence is that citizens have the right to obtain information related to their interests in state and social affairs. The right to information plays a fundamental role in the pedigree of civil rights. The operation and realization of many civil rights are closely related to the right to information. Therefore, it is regarded as the prerequisite for the realization of other civil rights.³ In terms of environmental protection, the right to environmental information is the right of citizens to obtain relevant information like the environment of the country, national environmental management, and environmental conditions.⁴ The right to environmental information is the embodiment of the right to information as a basic right in the field of environmental protection and the result of the interweaving of the right to the environment and the right to information.⁵ In current theoretical research, the right to environmental information is often placed under the right to the environment as a core component.⁶ Although the connotation of the right to the environment is not determined, the basic scope of the right to environmental information is comparatively clear.

 

 

The object of the right to environmental information is environmental information. The Aarhus Convention adopts the following exemplified definitions of environmental information: the state of elements of the environment, such as air and atmosphere, water, soil, landscape, and natural sites, biological diversity, and its components; factors, such as substances, energy, noise and radiation, and activities or measures, including administrative measures, environmental agreements, policies, and legislation, affecting or likely to affect previously mentioned elements of the environment; and the state of human health and safety, conditions of human life, cultural sites and built structures, inasmuch as they are or may be affected by the state of the elements of the environment or, through these elements, by the factors, activities or measures referred to previously.⁷ It can be found that almost all information related to environmental protection can be classified into the category of environmental information. The comprehensive provisions in the Aarhus Convention also reserve sufficient space for the expansion of the contents of environmental information in practice.

 

Despite the rich contents of environmental information in theory, the information that could be truly accessed by the public in practice should be judged according to the laws and policies of the specific country. Taking China as an example, the environmental information supported by laws mainly includes two categories, namely environmental information that should be disclosed by the government and companies. Environmental information that should be disclosed by the government refers to the information produced by administrative organs during the exercise of environmental administrative functions. According to Article 54 of the Environmental Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China, environmental information that should be disclosed by governments mainly includes information on the quality of the environmental, environmental monitoring, environmental administrative permits, environmental administrative punishments, and so on. Apart from the environmental information disclosed by the governments, the object of citizens’ right to environmental information includes relevant environmental information held by companies.⁸ Environmental information that should be disclosed by companies refers to information related to the environment created by companies during their production and operation activities. Based on Measures for the Administration of the Law-based Disclosure of Environmental Information by Enterprises, which went into effect in February 2022, environmental information that should be disclosed by companies mainly includes information on environmental management, discharge of pollutants, carbon emissions, ecological and environmental emergency response mechanisms, environmental violations, and so on. On the whole, there is no obvious difference in scope between the types of environmental information in the legislation of China and the environmental information listed in the Aarhus Convention.

 

 

It is generally believed that the subject of the right to environmental information is the public. The public in the Aarhus Convention includes natural persons, legal persons, and organizations. Such a definition is adopted in the legislation in China. It is stipulated in the Environmental Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China that citizens, legal persons, and other organizations shall have the right to obtain environmental information.Regarding the subjects of the obligation to the right to environmental information, it is pointed out in the Aarhus Convention that governments should make environmental information available to the public while it is clarified in Article 53 of the Environmental Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China that “the competent environmental protection administrations of the people’s governments at various levels and other departments with environmental supervision responsibilities shall disclose environmental information pursuant to the law.” It can be said that the right to environmental information requires administrative organs to disclose environmental information and administrative organs should bear adverse legal consequences if they fail to fulfill the obligation.⁹ Besides, enterprises, which directly influence the environment, are also the subjects of obligation to the right to environmental information. In China, the obligation of enterprises to disclose environmental information is stipulated in the Environmental Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China and Measures for the Administration of the Law-based Disclosure of Environmental Information by Enterprises. The legislative experience of other countries also reflects the obligation of governments and enterprises to disclose environmental information. In the United States for example, the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) requires local governments to disclose information on chemical production facilities and emissions to residents;¹⁰ the Sewage Overflow Community Right-to-Know Act requires sewage treatment plants to report discharges of raw sewage, and the Genetically Engineered Food Right to Know Act would mandate labels that disclose when food contains genetically engineered material or is produced with genetically engineered material.¹¹ According to the United Kingdom’s Environmental Information Regulations (EIRs), enterprises shall not deny the right to environmental information of the public on the grounds of trade secrets unless there are exemptions stipulated by law and the key environmental information in the operations of enterprises should be disclosed to the public.¹²

 

To sum up, the subject of the right to environmental information is the public, and governments and enterprises have the obligation to disclose environmental information, and the object of the right to environmental information is the information held by governments and enterprises. The basic scope of the right to environmental information not only has a clear legal basis but also relatively few theoretical disputes. In this structure, the right to environmental information fully embodies the spiritual essence to balance governments and enterprises, aiming to ensure the law-based government administration and the pursuit of economic interests by enterprises within reasonable limits.¹³

 

 

The central supervision of ecological and environmental protection (hereinafter referred to as “central environmental protection supervision”) started in 2015 is an important institutional innovation in the field of environmental protection in China. So far, two rounds of central environmental protection supervision have been completed in China. Winning kudos from the people, affirmation from the CPC Central Committee, and support from the local government, it has solved problems and achieved the intended results.¹⁴ In view of the significant role of central environmental protection supervision, all provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government) have established provincial-level supervision of ecological and environmental protection mechanisms (hereinafter referred to as “provincial environmental protection supervision”). The central environmental protection supervision and provincial environmental protection supervision constitute a complete environmental protection system. Great importance has been attached to public participation while requirements for information disclosure have been clarified in environmental protection supervision to ensure the effectiveness of its implementation.¹⁵

 

First of all, it should be clarified that information disclosure should not cover all work in environmental protection supervision. Taking the central environmental protection supervision as an example, the links involving information disclosure are introduced in this paper. Based on the Regulations on Central Supervision of Ecological and Environmental Protection (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations on Central Environmental Protection Supervision) and the supervision practices, the forms of central environmental protection supervision include routine supervision, special supervision, and follow-up supervision. No matter what form it takes, a complete procedure of central environmental protection supervision should cover such links as preparation, stationing, report, feedback, handover, rectification, and filing. The emphasis of the work of these links varies. Preparation is early work to learn the object to be supervised, determine the team, and formulate a work plan. Stationing is the period for the team to accept complaints and reports from the public during supervision, which is taken as an important means of finding problems.¹⁶ Report, feedback, handover, and rectification are promoted after stationing. The major tasks include the rectification of the object of supervision and the holding of those involved accountable. As the final link, filing is carried out to sort out and store relevant materials. According to Article 29 of the Regulations on Central Environmental Protection Supervision¹⁷ and the connection between the work of specific links and the items that should be disclosed in Article 29, it can be seen that most links of environmental protection supervision involve information disclosure. Since provincial-level environmental protection supervision and central environmental protection supervision are highly similar in terms of workflow and contents, the above-mentioned link distinctions are also applicable to provincial-level environmental protection supervision.

 

The path of information disclosure in environmental protection supervision can be roughly summarized from the workflow of environmental protection supervision demonstrated above. To be specific, the specific subject should actively disclose part information in part work links in light of the actual situation of the supervision based on relevant regulations. Furthermore, the path of information disclosure in environmental protection supervision can be analyzed as follows.

 

First, the grounds for disclosure show duality. The grounds for information disclosure in environmental protection supervision are relatively complex, covering both the work regulations in environmental protection supervision and relevant laws and regulations related to environmental information disclosure. Both the Regulations on Central Environmental Protection Supervision and the work regulations of provincial environmental protection supervision require the disclosure of such information as the specific work arrangements, the rectification while under supervision, relevant prominent problems and cases, the rectification plan, the implementation of the rectification plan, and the accountability to the public. It is fair to say that relevant work regulations of environmental protection supervision are the most direct and main ground for information disclosure in environmental protection supervision. However, this does not mean that relevant work regulations are the only source of grounds for information disclosure in environmental protection supervision. Relevant laws and regulations on environmental information disclosure could also be used as the grounds for the disclosure of some information on environmental protection supervision. This is because, although environmental protection supervision is an activity within the Party, many specific tasks still need to be undertaken by administrative organs. Some of the environmental governance activities carried out by administrative organs in accordance with relevant requirements of environmental protection supervision are acts to perform administrative functions. Environmental information generated during the process should be disclosed in accordance with laws and regulations such as the Environmental Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Regulations on the Disclosure of Government Information.

 

Second, channels for passive disclosure are not provided because most of the disclosure is active. After development of more than a decade, the government environmental information disclosure system has been initially established in China. Although the current institutional arrangements have not yet solved such problems as the fragmentation of information disclosure subjects and the poor quality of information disclosed, the information disclosure framework composed of active disclosure and disclosure upon application should be recognized.¹⁸ In contrast, information disclosure in environmental protection supervision is mainly active disclosure. The work regulations of both central and provincial environmental protection supervision only require active disclosure of relevant information yet fail to provide the public with a channel to apply for information disclosure. Theoretically, the public can obtain some environmental protection supervision information through government information disclosure, yet most of the information in environmental protection inspections could hardly be covered by the government environmental information disclosure system.

 

Third, it is mainly partial disclosure rather than the disclosure of all relevant information. Although the categories of information to be disclosed have been listed in work regulations of the central and provincial environmental protection supervision, no requirement has been set on the details, ways, and terms of information disclosure. In practice, there is no uniform standard for the degree of information disclosure in environmental protection supervision, which means that information disclosure in environmental protection supervision is optional. The public could not know what information is not disclosed and there is no channel to learn about it.

 

To sum up, the path of information disclosure in environmental protection supervision is different from that of government environmental information disclosure in the traditional sense. The reason for the difference lies in that the bases for the disclosure of environmental protection supervision information are not only relevant laws, administrative regulations, and departmental rules, but also internal Party regulations centered on work regulations of environmental protection supervision. Meanwhile, the nature of environmental protection supervision is not the administrative supervision targeting enterprises in general but the supervision of local Party committees and governments, State Council departments, and some state-owned enterprises directly under the central government. Through environmental protection supervision, the environmental protection supervision model in China has changed from the previous way of “supervising enterprises” to the way of “supervision on enterprise” via “supervision on governments.”¹⁹ The change in the nature of work will inevitably bring about changes in the path and contents of information disclosure, which in turn will have an impact on the theoretical scope of the right to environmental information.

 

 

There are two ways to realize the right to environmental information in the traditional institutional structure: one is the active disclosure of environmental information by administrative organs and enterprises in accordance with laws and regulations and the other is the disclosure of environmental information by administrative organs upon public application. In other words, the realization of the right to environmental information of the public mainly depends on the disclosure of environmental information by the government and enterprises.²⁰ However, as it is mentioned previously, the realization of the right to environmental information in environmental protection supervision is different from the traditional way. Behind the change of path is the expansion and enrichment of the scope of the traditional right to environmental information in environmental protection supervision.

 

 

For the convenience of discussion, the information on environmental protection supervision is divided into direct environmental information and indirect environmental information in the paper. Both of them are the objects of the right to environmental information in environmental protection supervision. Direct environmental information refers to information directly related to the resolution of environmental problems and the improvement of environmental quality generated during environmental protection supervision, which could help the public intuitively understand the changes in environmental conditions. For example, the information generated during the link of rectification in environmental protection supervision is direct environmental information.Because the main work is the rectification of problems, the information disclosed directly points to the resolution of environmental problems. Indirect environmental information refers to information that does not directly reflect the resolution of environmental problems during environmental protection supervision but is closely related to the resolution of environmental problems and has an important impact on the improvement of environmental quality, such as personnel arrangements, work plans, and accountability in environmental protection supervision. Although it does not directly reflect the situation of the environment, the public can learn about the progress and dynamics of environmental protection supervision through the information which is a necessary prerequisite for in-depth and effective participation in environmental protection supervision. In general, direct environmental information in environmental protection supervision is mainly generated in the rectification process, while indirect environmental information is mainly generated during such links as preparation, report, handover, and so on.

 

The key basis for distinguishing direct and indirect information in environmental protection supervision is the rules for public access to the two types of information. As far as direct environmental information is concerned, it is mainly generated during the implementation of specific rectification tasks undertaken by relevant administrative organs. Since the resolution of specific environmental problems is within the responsibilities of administrative organs as a process of performing their duties, it means that direct environmental information should be actively or passively disclosed in accordance with the Environmental Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Regulations on the Disclosure of Government Information. For indirect environmental information, it is not generated by the administrative organs in the process of performing their duties but in the process of environmental protection supervision as an inner-Party activity. The steps from preparation to handover are activities within the Party rather than government actions, so such information does not need to be disclosed according to the Environmental Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Regulations on the Disclosure of Government Information. For this reason, it is stipulated in the Regulations on Central Environmental Protection Supervision and provincial regulations on environmental protection supervision that indirect environmental information should be disclosed.

 

To sum up, two types of environmental information are generated during the environmental protection supervision of different work links. Although they are different in contents and bases of disclosure, they should be disclosed to the public as objects of the right to information in environmental protection supervision. To be specific, the objects of the right to environmental information during environmental protection supervision are no longer limited to environmental information generated during the duty performance of administrative organs in content and information on environmental administrative permits, environmental administrative punishments, environmental quality, and environmental monitoring, and so on, in types. In environmental protection supervision, the boundary of the objects of the right to environmental information is expanded. The information generated in the innovation of the practice of environmental protection supervision and work information related to environmental protection is included in the scope of the objects of the right to environmental information. 

 

 

The expansion of the objects of the right to information in environmental protection supervision means corresponding changes in the subjects of the obligation to provide environmental information. In a word, the subjects of the obligation to provide environmental information in environmental protection supervision has been expanded from administrative organs to specific work organs of the Party. In the traditional structure of the right to environmental information, it mostly applies to the administrative organs, and the core subjects of the obligation to provide environmental information are administrative organs responsible for ecological and environmental protection.²¹ However, in environmental protection supervision, much environmental information is no longer generated and commanded by administrative organs. Some work organs of the Party have become the subject of information due to their participation in environmental protection affairs. Such expansion of the subjects is not only a solution with Chinese characteristics contributed by environmental protection supervision to the realization of the right to environmental information but also a vivid demonstration of the great practice of the CPC in respecting and protecting human rights.

 

In today’s world, the environment has been increasingly pushed onto the stage of democratic politics. In Western countries, “green parties” with the guideline of “protecting the environment and promoting peace” have gradually become an important force in the political arena.²² In some countries or regions, green parties have moved from the fringes of the political arena towards the center, becoming key balancers that traditional mainstream parties must rely on.²³ However, to meet the needs of electoral politics, green parties are increasingly showing the image of regular electoral parties, making it doubtful whether the green propositions they put forward can be implemented.²⁴ In China, as the ruling party, the CPC has always represented the fundamental interests of all the Chinese people and is committed to truly protecting such basic human rights of the Chinese people as the rights to subsistence and development.²⁵ After the 18th CPC National Congress, in particular, the overall leadership of the CPC over state and social affairs became more prominent. Many environmental policy documents have been issued jointly by the Party and the government, and so this has become a major institutional norm in the endeavor to build an ecological civilization.²⁶ In this context, it is in line with the reality of environmental governance in China to expand the subjects of obligation to provide environmental information to specific work organs of the Party. The expansion is the concrete practice of the CPC’s commitment to environmental protection and a vivid demonstration of the leadership of the CPC in environmental governance.

 

Whether it is in the central environmental protection supervision or provincial environmental protection supervision, there are three core organizations: the leading group of environmental protection supervision, the supervision office of environmental protection, and the environmental protection supervision group. Considering relevant regulations on environmental protection supervision and the supervision practice, the subjects of obligation to provide environmental information have been expanded to include the supervision office of environmental protection as the specific work organ. Although the organ for information disclosure is not specified in the Regulations on Central Environmental Protection Supervision and provincial regulations on environmental protection supervision, it should be the supervision office of environmental protection. Among the above-mentioned three subjects, the leading group of environmental protection supervision is in charge of the decision-making and doesn’t undertake specific supervision tasks. Although environmental protection supervision groups undertake supervision takes, they are not standing work organs but temporarily formed groups according to the supervision work arrangement. Comparatively, the supervision office of environmental protection is not only a standing working organ but also participates in each round and batch of environmental protection supervision activities, playing the roles of organizer, coordinator, and supervisor. Taking the central environmental protection supervision as an example, it is stipulated in Article 9 of the Regulations on Central Environmental Protection Supervision: The responsibilities of the central supervision office of ecological and environmental protection include: “(2) formulating laws and regulations, planning and plans, and implementation plans of the central ecological and environmental protection supervision, and organizing the implementation; (3) coordinating the central ecological and environmental protection supervision groups; (4) reviewing and summarizing supervision reports and submitting them for approval, handing over the supervision findings, and checking and auditing rectifications made after supervision...” It can be seen that the office of environmental protection supervision plays a pivotal role in the organization of supervision activities. To perform the duties of “organization, coordination, adjusting and supervision,” it is necessary for the office of environmental protection supervision to have access to comprehensive and specific information of environmental protection supervision work. For example, a staff member of the office of supervision said during our investigation that all information on supervision cases is gathered for selecting, compiling, and releasing typical cases of environmental protection supervision. In general, the office of environmental protection supervision should be the de facto subject of obligation to information disclosure in both the central environmental protection supervision and provincial environmental protection supervision. Nevertheless, it does not mean that all information needs to be disclosed directly by the office of environmental protection supervision. Taking the central environmental protection supervision as an example, the Central Supervision Office of Ecological and Environmental Protection can disclose the supervision rectification plans and implementation situation of provinces on the website of the Ministry of Ecology and Environment while the information of specific case can be handed over to the provinces (autonomous regions, municipalities directly under the Central Government) for disclosure.

 

Finally, it needs to be clarified that the expansion of the subjects of obligation to information disclosure to the work organs of the Party doesn’t cover all. As mentioned previously, local governments that are supervised are also obliged to disclose part of the information in environmental protection supervision. In addition, state-owned enterprises directly under the central government that are supervised also have to undertake part of the obligation to information disclosure. However, although enterprises other than specific state-owned enterprises directly under the central government are directly responsible for environmental problems, they do not undertake the information disclosure obligation of environmental protection supervision, which is determined by the characteristics of environmental protection supervision to “supervise administrative organs.”

 

 

Although the scope of the right to environmental information in environmental protection supervision has been expanded, which is conducive to the protection of substantive environmental rights, there are still many problems in the protection of the right to information in environmental protection supervision due to the limitations in the actual operation of the environmental protection supervision system. To ensure better protection of the right to information in environmental protection supervision, this part briefly analyzes the existing problems in the protection of the right to information in environmental protection supervision and provides targeted suggestions. It should be noted that although several state-owned enterprises directly under the central government have been identified as targets of environmental protection inspections, the information disclosure of state-owned enterprises directly under central government supervision is not included in this analysis due to the small number of such enterprises and limited samples.

 

 

The analysis of the protection of the right to information in environmental protection supervision should be based on the information disclosure practice of environmental protection supervision. To this end, this part discusses the situation of information disclosure in environmental protection supervision from multiple angles. In terms of the object, provincial environmental protection supervision is taken as the main analysis object here. This is because the central environmental protection supervision has reached a relatively high level of information disclosure due to its strict requirements. Although the articles on information disclosure in the Regulations on Central Environmental Protection Supervision are very simple, a path of information disclosure characterized by concise information + detailed information has been constructed. With the website of the Ministry of Ecology and Environment as a comprehensive platform and the websites of the departments (bureaus) of ecology and environment of the provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government) under supervision as the extension, the contents covered in Article 29 of the Regulations on Central Environmental Protection Supervision have been fully disclosed. In contrast, there are many problems with the information disclosure of the provincial environmental protection supervision. Through retrieval, induction, and analysis, this paper summarizes the following problems in the protection of the right to information in environmental protection supervision.

 

 

As the direct guideline of environmental protection supervision, the regulations on environmental protection supervision are the core normative foundations of information disclosure. Whether the regulations are perfect or not will directly affect the level of information disclosure. In terms of the introduction of related regulations, it is found through retrieval and investigation that 31 provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government), except Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan, have issued provincial environmental protection supervision work regulations or implementation measures (hereinafter collectively referred to as “work regulations”). Among them, the work regulations of Shanghai, Liaoning, Heilongjiang, Henan, Guangxi, and Guangdong are still in the trial implementation stage. The work regulations of Sichuan are still soliciting opinions. It should be noted that not all the above-mentioned work regulations that have been issued can be obtained through public channels. After several rounds of retrieval, it is found that the text of the work regulations of Tianjin, Shanghai, Heilongjiang, Hebei, Henan, Hubei, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Guangxi, and Guangdong could not be accessed through public channels, accounting for one-third of all provincial-level administrative organs. In some provinces, the work regulations are not publicly released even in the provincial Party and government organs. Judging from the texts of work regulations of provincial environmental protection supervision that can be accessed through public channels, the articles on information disclosure are highly similar to those in the Regulations on Central Environmental Protection Supervision. For example, the articles on information disclosure in the Measures of Beijing Municipality on Implementation of Regulations on Central Supervision of Ecological and Environmental Protection, the Implementation Measures of Chongqing Municipality on Ecological and Environmental Protection Supervision, the Implementation Measures of Yunnan Province on Ecological and Environmental Protection Supervision, and the Measures of Jilin Province on Ecological and Environmental Protection Supervision, are almost the same to Article 29 of the Regulations on Central Supervision of Ecological and Environmental Protection.²⁷

 

In general, one-third of provincial administrative organs haven’t disclosed the work regulations for provincial environmental protection supervision in their region. Among the work regulations on provincial environmental protection supervision published, a minority of them do not require information disclosure while most of the rest are highly similar to the Regulations on Central Environmental Protection Supervision, with almost no change. There is no specific regulation on the ways, levels, and duration of information disclosure or supporting measures.

 

 

As far as the methods of disclosure are concerned, the main channel for information disclosure in provincial environmental protection supervision is the official website of departments (bureaus) of ecology and environment or governments. Some provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government) set up special columns of provincial environmental protection supervision on the official websites of the governments, like Ningxia Hui autonomous region; more places have set up special columns of provincial environmental protection supervision on the official websites of the departments (bureaus) of ecological and environment such as Tianjin, Shanghai, Heilongjiang, Guizhou, Henan, Xinjiang, Anhui, Hubei, Jiangsu, and Shaanxi. In addition to the above two methods, some provinces (autonomous regions) choose to make announcements on the official websites of the prefecture-level municipal governments under supervision or the websites of the bureaus of ecology and environment, such as Jilin, Inner Mongolia, Shandong, Gansu, Hunan, 

Sichuan, and Guangdong. In general, there is no uniform approach in the way of information disclosure for provincial environmental protection supervision.

 

As far as the content of disclosure is concerned, the provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government) are far from meeting the requirements of the work regulations on information disclosure. It was discovered after browsing through the official websites of the departments (bureaus) of ecology and environment and governments of provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government) one by one that although some provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government) disclose information on the dynamics of supervision, rectification while under supervision, rectification plans, and implementation of rectification to a certain degree, such fragmented disclosure could hardly fully present the core information of provincial environmental protection supervision. There are also some provinces (autonomous regions, municipalities directly under the central government) that seldom disclose any information related to provincial environmental protection supervision. The work of environmental protection supervision could only be learned in sporadic reports and there is no public channel to access important information of the process, required rectification, and problems of environmental protection supervision. Focusing on the disclosure of information, 19 provinces (autonomous regions, municipalities directly under the central government) that provide access to texts of the regulations on supervision are chosen as examples to demonstrate the general situation of the information disclosure of provincial environmental protection supervision at present.

 

 

The table briefly presents the information disclosure of provincial environmental protection supervision in some provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government). It can be seen from the above table that among the 19 provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government), only Shandong Province has disclosed the work information of provincial environmental protection supervision in accordance with the requirements of the regulation on supervision and the rest of the provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government) have failed to disclose information as required. It was found in the analysis that even Shandong province with relatively comprehensive information disclosure has major problems in the completeness of the content and the availability of information. In short, there is a big gap between the information disclosure of provincial environmental protection supervision in many provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government) and the requirements stipulated in the corresponding work regulations.

 

 

At present, there are two obvious problems in the accountability system for the information disclosure of environmental protection supervision. The first is the absence of the subject of accountability for information disclosure and a clear distinction between the contents disclosed by provincial and municipal organs. The second is the absence of accountability for failing to disclose information. Although it is stipulated in the Measures for the Accountability of Party and Government Leaders for Damage to the Ecological Environment (for Trial Implementation) that “where information of environmental pollution and ecological damage (disasters) incidents is not reported, announced or disclosed as required, the leading persons of relevant government departments should be held accountable,” it could not be used as a requirement for disclosure of supervision information because the scope of information is different from that of the environmental protection supervision. Moreover, information disclosure is not included in the accountability measures issued by local governments against leading cadres of the Party and government who fail to perform their duties in accordance with the requirements of central and provincial environmental protection supervision. For example, although the situations of holding leading cadres and staff accountable are stipulated in detail in the Measures of Liaoning Province on the Accountability in Rectification of Problems Found in Environmental Protection Supervision (for Trial Implementation), failing to disclose information is not included in the situations listed there in. Furthermore, judging from the cases of accountability published so far, there has not been any case of accountability for insufficient information disclosure in central and provincial environmental protection supervision.

 

 

Based on the above analysis, it can be concluded that the current information disclosure of environmental protection supervision is not yet standardized and the realization of the right to information in environmental protection supervision is still facing many obstacles. To enable the public to obtain relevant information on environmental protection supervision in a timely and accurate manner, concrete suggestions are proposed as follows.

 

 

To improve information disclosure in environmental protection supervision, a correct understanding of the information disclosure of environmental protection supervision should be established by related subjects first. Such kind of renewing of cognition is not only necessary for relevant staff but also valuable for the public.

 

To be specific, the staff of environmental protection supervision should realize that the nature of environmental protection supervision as activities within the Party does not block the possibility of the disclosure of indirect environmental information. To strengthen the Party and improve the Party’s ability to govern and lead, the CPC has increased transparency in Party affairs in recent years. In 2017, the Regulations of the Communist Party of China on Open Party Affairs (For Trial Implementation) (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations on Open Party Affairs) were issued, marking the institutionalization and standardization of open Party affairs.²⁸ The information of the Party that should be disclosed to the public is stipulated in Article 8 of the Regulations on Open Party Affairs.²⁹ From the perspective of institutional purpose, actual effect, and scope of influence, environmental protection supervision belongs to Party affairs involving the production and livelihood of the people, so the disclosure of related work information of environmental protection supervision is in line with the spirit of building a transparent Party and is theoretically legitimate and necessary. The purpose of establishing the environmental protection supervision system is to solve the environmental problems around the people and protect their right to enjoy a better living environment. Therefore, the public should be present in the field of environmental protection supervision and play an active role. This means that the public should not take a wait-and-see attitude toward environmental protection supervision but actively play the roles of participants and supervisors and firmly safeguard their environmental rights. The necessary prerequisite for effective participation in environmental protection supervision activities is to obtain and know important information about environmental protection supervision. Therefore, the public also needs to renew the cognition of information disclosure of environmental protection supervision and actively pay attention to, understand, obtain, and use relevant information in environmental protection supervision.

 

 

On the one hand, work regulations of provincial environmental protection supervision should avoid mechanical follow-up of the Regulations on Central Environmental Protection Supervision. Provinces (autonomous regions, municipalities directly under the central government) should issue regulations of supervision based on local conditions and make useful exploration on the part of information disclosure. At present, almost all provinces (autonomous regions, municipalities directly under the central government) have carried out provincial environmental protection supervision and some twice. Unique work experience has been accumulated in many places in the process. For example, during the investigation in Zhejiang province, the interviewed staff of a certain city introduced to the research group the dynamic tracking mechanism for rectification cases of environmental protection supervision. Rectification cases are classified according to the specific circumstances and the rectification tasks are assigned to specific responsible units with designated contacts. Different colors are used to mark the progress of the rectification to directly show the dynamic status, which is disclosed on the website of the government in due course. The staff interviewed said that the local government is exploring the introduction of a work method with the standardization of rectification of supervised cases, which is planned to cover comparatively detailed regulations on information disclosure. The author suggests that all provinces (autonomous regions, municipalities directly under the central government) can issue work plans with distinctive characteristics and in line with their local needs to avoid copycatting the Regulations on Central Environmental Protection Supervision.

 

On the other hand, as mentioned above, the current regulations on information disclosure in the central and provincial environmental protection supervision work regulations are too rough and not operable. For example, although it is stipulated that the dynamics of the supervision should be disclosed, the content of supervision dynamics, whether all links before and after stationing belong to supervision dynamics, and which information in supervision dynamics should be disclosed is not clear. So far, there is still no clear basis, which has also led to the fact that no dynamics of supervision were disclosed after the publishing of the announcement of stationing and the way of complaints and reports in many places. To solve such problems, it is necessary to specify relevant regulations on information disclosure based on the existing regulations of environmental protection supervision. First of all, it is necessary to clarify the scope of supervision information that should be disclosed. At the current stage, information that is directly related to the solution of ecological and environmental problems and that is most concerned to the public should be disclosed, like the arrangement of supervision work, the rectification while under supervision, and the implementation of rectification plans. Secondly, clear and standardized information disclosure channels should be established. A diversified information disclosure channel system should be constructed with the websites of the Ministry of Ecology and Environment and the departments (bureaus) of ecology and environment as the core and supplemented by websites, official media, official WeChat accounts, and Weibo of local governments. Regardless of the specific design of channels for information disclosure, it should be ensured at least for the public to inquire about the information of central and provincial environmental protection supervision on the websites of the departments (bureaus) of ecology and environment of provinces (autonomous regions, municipality directly under central government). Third, the standard and format for information disclosure of environmental protection supervision should be unified. The minimum contents and scientific format of the information disclosure of environmental protection supervision should be set to ensure that key information such as problem rectification and accountability can be truly displayed and eliminate the phenomenon of complete non-disclosure or disclosure of merely fragmentary information in practice. Finally, the channels for the public to apply for information disclosure of environmental protection supervision should be opened. When the public fails to find the required information through public channels, it should be allowed to apply to the office of environmental protection supervision for it. In particular, when the complaint is answered as “not true”, the public should be allowed to know the specific reasons.

 

 

For unclear accountability in information disclosure of environmental protection supervision, the subjects of the obligation to provide environmental protection supervision information should be clarified in the follow-up work. It should be stipulated in the work regulations of central and provincial environmental protection supervision that the offices of environmental protection supervision are the subjects of the obligation to provide information. In addition, the pertinence and relevance of information on environmental protection supervision could be used as a standard to require other subjects to disclose information. For example, it can be stipulated that provincial offices of environmental protection supervision are obligated to provide information on the unified arrangement of environmental protection supervision, the typical cases in the province, and the accountability situation in provincial environmental protection supervision; while the cities supervised are obligated to provide information on rectification while under supervision, the major contents of the supervision report, the rectification plan, and the implementation of the rectification plan. Such division of obligations will not only avoid overlapping of the information disclosed but also meet the common sense of the public to make targeted applications for information. Regarding the accountability for the insufficient information disclosure of environmental protection supervision, the traditional accountability mechanism based on the Environmental Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China and the Regulations on the Disclosure of Government Information is no longer fully applicable due to the factual distinction between direct and indirect environmental information, which provides appropriate space for the application of Party regulations represented by the Accountability Regulations of the Communist Party of China and the Measures for the Accountability of Party and Government Leaders for Damage to the Ecological Environment (for Trial Implementation). Compared with laws, although Party regulations cannot be authorized externally, they can act as self-restraint.³⁰ The responsibility set in Party regulations is institutional constraints on the behavior of Party members. The concrete demonstration of political responsibility can effectively promote Party organizations and Party members to abide by Party regulations.³¹ Therefore, content on accountability for information disclosure could be gradually added to Party regulations related to environmental protection supervision in the next step. Meanwhile, information disclosure should be taken as an important criterion for assessing the work of environmental protection supervision to provide a guarantee for information disclosure.

 

 

As an innovative mechanism for environmental governance, the effects of environmental protection supervision have been recognized by all walks of life. Although there are problems in the practice of environmental protection supervision, it has a broad space for development. Based on the investigation, there is an urgent need for improvement in such links as the identification of problems, rectification, and accountability. In this context, it is the starting point for the logic of the research of the paper to start from information disclosure for improving the right to information in environmental protection supervision and promoting the standard, scientific, and normalized development of the environmental protection supervision system. Of course, the research of the paper on the right to information in environmental protection supervision is not perfect and the suggestions also need to be tested in practice. In the follow-up research, the author will continue to explore this based on more sufficient actual research, and so contribute more to the improvement of the environmental protection supervision system.

 

(Translated by HU Liang)

 

* WU Ang ( 吴昂 ), Lecturer and Post-Doctoral Research Fellow at the Law School of Renmin University of China. The article is an initial progress of the “Research on Improving the Central Supervision System of Ecological and Environmental Protection” (Project No. 21ZDA088), a National Social Science Foundation Major Project of the Research on the Interpretation of the Spirit of the Fifth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee.

 

1. Elisa Morgera, “An Update on the Aarhus Convention and Its Continued Global Relevance,” Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law 2 (2005): 138.

 

2. Wang Xiaogang, “On Changes of Research Approaches to Environmental Rights — Book Review of New Development of Environmental Rights Theory,” Journal of China University of Geosciences (Social Science Edition) 5 (2019): 62.

 

3. Zhou Youyong and Zhu Zheng, “The Protection of Citizens’ Right to Know in the Modernization of Risk Governance,” Journal of Comparative Law 3 (2020): 103.

 

4. Lv Zhongmei, “Environmental Right of Citizens Revisited”, Chinese Journal of Law 6 (2000): 136.

 

5. Dinah Shelton, “Human Rights, Environmental Rights, and the Right to Environment,” Stanford Journal of International Law 1 (1991): 104.

 

6. Lv Zhongmei and Zhang Zhongmin, “Thoughts on the Path to Improve the Environmental Public Participation System,” Environmental Protection 23 (2013).

 

7. Zhong Weihong and Weng Hanguang, “Citizen’s Right to Obtain Information in Environmental Matters of the Aarhus Convention and its Enlightenment: And on the Legislation and Practice of Citizen’s Right to Obtain Information in Environmental Matters of China,” Pacific Journal 8 (2006).

 

8. Uzuazo Etemire, “Public Access to Environmental Information Held by Private Companies,” 14 Environmental Law Review 1 (2022): 7-8.

 

9. Lv Zhongmei, “Environmental Right of Citizens Revisited”, Chinese Journal of Law 6 (2000): 136.

 

10. Danielle M. Purifoy, “EPCRA: A Retrospective on the Environmental Right-to-Know Act,” 13 Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law and Ethics 2 (2013): 377-378.

 

11. Shannon M. Roesler, “The Nature of the Environmental Right to Know,” 39 Ecology Law Quarterly 4 (2012): 991.

 

12. Madeeha Dean, “An Environmental FOIA: Balancing Trade Secrecy with the Public’s Right to Know,” 109 California Law Review 6 (2021): 2425-2427.

 

13. Li Zhiping, “Reconsidering the Substance and Status of Citizens’ Environmental Rights,” Journal of Sun Yatsen University (Social Science Edition) 1 (2004).

 

14. Li Ganjie, “Winning Kudos from the People, Affirmation from the CPC Central Committee, and Support from Local Governments, the Central Environmental Protection Supervision Has Solved problems and Achieved the Expected Results,” people.cn., accessed February 23, 2022.

 

15. According to Article 4 of the Regulations on Central Supervision of Ecological and Environmental Protection, “Central supervision of ecological and environmental protection should uphold and strengthen overall Party leadership and raise political awareness; take a problem-oriented approach and enforce accountability with the courage to tackle the toughest problems; work in accordance with laws and regulation and stay serious, standard, objective and unbiased; adhere to the mass line and information disclosure and highlight overall effect; and work in a down-to-earth, realistic and pragmatic manner and oppose formalism and bureaucratism.”

 

16. Zhu Xiao and Qiu Taotao, “Regional Environmental Protection Inspection,” Governance Studies 1 (2022).

 

17. According to Article 29 of the Regulations on Central Supervision of Ecological and Environmental Protection, “Information disclosure should be strengthened. The specific work arrangements, the rectification while supervision, relevant prominent problems and cases, the main contents of the supervision report, the rectification plan, the implementation of the rectification plan, and the accountability should be disclosed to the public in accordance with relevant requirements to respond to the concerns of the public and accept scrutiny from the people.”

 

18. Meng Hongzhi and Zhang Yunhao, “Reform and Trend of Government Information Disclosure System in the Era of Big Data,” Legal Forum 4 (2021).

 

19. Li Lingyu, “Four Focuses on the Modernization of Ecological and Environmental Governance — Interview with Zhu Xiao, Professor of the Law School and Deputy Dean of the School of Environment & Natural Resources , Renmin University of China,” China Environment News, December 6, 2021.

 

20. Yan Houfu, “Between Disclosure and Non-disclosure: Conflicts and Balance between the Right to Environmental Information and Government Authority to Manage the Environmental Information,” Journal of Shanghai University (Social Science Edition) 2 (2017).

 

21. Zhang Zhen, “The Claim Function of Right to Environmental: From Theory to Practice,” Contemporary Law Review 4 (2015).

 

22. Shi Yucheng, “Citizens’ Right to Know the Fact of Environmental Cases and its Protection,” Journal of Gansu Political Science and Law Institute 2 (2004): 56.

 

23. Xuan Chuanshu and Yu Ming, “The Green Parties Performance in the European Parliament Elections and Its Causes,” Issues of Contemporary World Socialism 4 (2019): 143.

 

24. Ye Kairu, “The Rise of European Environmental Politics and Its Limitations,” Beijing Cultural Review 6 (2020): 109-110.

 

25. Qin Tianbao, “On China’s Concept of the Environmental Rights in the New Era,” Law and Social Development 3 (2022): 7-9.

 

26. Chen Haisong, “Political Party, the State and the Society in the Environmental Rule of Law in China,” Chinese Journal of Law 3 (2018): 6.

 

27. For example, according to Article 38 of the Implementation Measures of Chongqing Municipality on Ecological and Environmental Protection Supervision: “Information disclosure in the rectification during the environmental protection supervision should be enhanced. The specific work arrangements, the rectification while under supervision, relevant prominent problems and cases, the main contents of the supervision report, the rectification plan, the implementation of the rectification plan, and the accountability should be disclosed to the public in accordance with relevant requirements to respond to the concerns of the public and accept scrutiny from the people.”

 

28. Shi Xinzhou, “Intra-Party Rule of Law and Inner-Party Democracy: Analysis on the Duel Value of Party Affairs Openness,” Legal Forum 4 (2019): 99.

 

29. Article 8 of the Regulations of the Communist Party of China on Open Party Affairs (For Trial Implementation): “Party organizations should reasonably determine the scope of openness according to the degree of connection between the Party affairs and Party members and the people: (1) Party affairs concerning leadership of economic and social development and involving the production and livelihood of the people shall be publicly disclosed; (2) Party affairs involving major issues concerning Party building or the obligations and rights of Party members and that require the general understanding of and compliance and implementation by all Party members shall be disclosed to the entire Party; (3) Party affairs of each region, department and unit shall be disclosed within the respective region, department and unit; (4) Party affairs involving the vital interests of particular Party organizations, Party members and people shall be disclosed to such particular Party organizations, Party members and the people.”

 

30. Wu Xiaochuan, “On the Role of ‘Statute of Party’ for Limitation and Normalization on Power,” Journal of the Party School of the Central Committee of the C.P.C. 6 (2016): 21.

 

31. Zhuang Deshui, “Analysis on the Applicability of the Responsibility Provisions in the Party,” Theoretical Exploration 4 (2021): 24.