Press release
Ombudsman opens inquiry after EU trashes wolf protections
07 November 2024
Ombudsman opens inquiry after EU trashes wolf protections
EU Ombudsman Emily O’Reilly has opened an investigation into the European Commission’s downgrading of the wolf’s protection status.
This comes as the 50 Parties to the Bern Convention prepare to convene in December to set this proposal in stone.
The news follows a request lodged by environmental law non-profit ClientEarth in February, which raised a number of issues with how the Commission had reached its decision – including a lack of scientific grounding, a problematic consultation process, no access to documents, and doubts over the motivations of the downgrade.
ClientEarth lawyer Ilze Tralmaka said: “From start to finish, this proposal and the procedure surrounding it has been problematic – there are clear democratic issues with how it went ahead and we are pleased to see the Ombudsman engage with our complaint.
“It’s also a bizarre decision: it sends the message that when ambitious nature policies and laws actually succeed, the Commission will scrap them at the first sign of pushback.”
The Ombudsman, in her initial questions to the Commission, asks for information on:
“why the Commission departed from the Better Regulation Guidelines on stakeholder consultation when it carried out this targeted data collection?”
and
“on what scientific evidence it based its statement on the danger posed by the wolf population […]?”
ClientEarth wildlife and habitats expert Marta Klimkiewicz said: “Wolves are not an inconvenience to ecosystems – they are fundamental to them working as they must. Nature urgently needs intelligent lawmaking – and protected must mean protected.”
ClientEarth says there has been a notable uptick in possible instances of EU maladministration that then require follow-up by oversight bodies. Since September, following flags by ClientEarth and others, the Ombudsman has also opened or concluded investigations into:
- The ‘emergency’ scrapping of environmental provisions in the CAP
- The EU’s illegal delays to bans on harmful chemicals
Tralmaka said: “Nature is the cornerstone of the climate fight, the fight for human rights, and ultimately, the fight for our survival. Downgrading its protection at this moment in time is the ultimate act of irresponsibility.”
The EU’s Working Party on International Environmental Issues (WPEI) is meeting on Monday in the wake of COP16, and is set to discuss wolf protection.
ENDS
Notes to editors
Background on the downgrade of protection
The downgrade moves wolves from ‘Strictly Protected’ to ‘Protected’ status – allowing them to be hunted if they are perceived to pose risks to livestock, public health or safety. This is in spite of ample flexibility in EU nature laws and instead weakens foundational nature protections, without scientific justification.
The process of tabling this change has been largely led by President von der Leyen. In September 2023, the public were given only 18 days to express their views on the potential revision of the wolf’s protection status.
300+ organisations issued a joint statement to reject the downgrading proposal.
68% of rural inhabitants in Europe are supportive of maintaining the strict protection status of wolves and other large carnivores.
Past proposals to downgrade the wolf’s protection under the Bern Convention were rejected in 2006, 2018, and 2022 due to insufficient scientific evidence, which remains the case today. The European Commission’s 2023 assessment confirms that the wolf population’s status does not warrant a change.
The Bern Convention, binding on 50 countries (including all EU Member States), mandates protection of species unless scientific evidence proves they are secure. At present, this evidence is still lacking.
Read ClientEarth’s initial reaction to the move to roll back wolf protection: Wolf protection rollback a 'sombre omen' for wildlife protection in Europe – lawyers | ClientEarth
Waterbear has just released a documentary, “The Wolf Within”, on the relationship between wolves and humans in Europe.
What did ClientEarth’s complaint to the Ombudsman say?
ClientEarth’s lawyers claim (inter alia) that:
- The proposal was prepared in breach of the Commission’s own rules for better law-making, in particular without sound scientific evidence and proper consultation
- The manner in which the public consultation was carried out constitutes maladministration:
The complaint states: “The announcement of the collection of data on “challenges related to the return of wolves” via an e-mail address active for a mere 18-day period violates the Commission’s own rules regarding Better Regulation. The Better Regulation Guidelines indicate that all stakeholders should have a reasonable period for informed and effective contributions.”
- Subsequent access to documents requests were mishandled, a major transparency and administration issue
- There is a risk that the duty of impartiality, enshrined in the EU Treaties, was not adhered to
The European Ombudsman does not have enforcement powers, but it can propose solutions and make official recommendations.
ENDS
Notes to editors:
Background on the downgrade of protection
The downgrade moves wolves from ‘Strictly Protected’ to ‘Protected’ status – allowing them to be hunted if they are perceived to pose risks to livestock, public health or safety. This is in spite of ample flexibility in EU nature laws and instead weakens foundational nature protections, without scientific justification.
The process of tabling this change has been largely led by President von der Leyen. In September 2023, the public were given only 18 days to express their views on the potential revision of the wolf’s protection status.
300+ organisations issued a joint statement to reject the downgrading proposal.
68% of rural inhabitants in Europe are supportive of maintaining the strict protection status of wolves and other large carnivores.
Past proposals to downgrade the wolf’s protection under the Bern Convention were rejected in 2006, 2018, and 2022 due to insufficient scientific evidence, which remains the case today. The European Commission’s 2023 assessment confirms that the wolf population’s status does not warrant a change.
The Bern Convention, binding on 50 countries (including all EU Member States), mandates protection of species unless scientific evidence proves they are secure. At present, this evidence is still lacking.
Read ClientEarth’s initial reaction to the move to roll back wolf protection: Wolf protection rollback a 'sombre omen' for wildlife protection in Europe – lawyers | ClientEarth
Waterbear has just released a documentary, “The Wolf Within”, on the relationship between wolves and humans in Europe.
What did ClientEarth’s complaint to the Ombudsman say?
ClientEarth’s lawyers claim (inter alia) that:
- The proposal was prepared in breach of the Commission’s own rules for better law-making, in particular without sound scientific evidence and proper consultation
- The manner in which the public consultation was carried out constitutes maladministration:
The complaint states: “The announcement of the collection of data on “challenges related to the return of wolves” via an e-mail address active for a mere 18-day period violates the Commission’s own rules regarding Better Regulation. The Better Regulation Guidelines indicate that all stakeholders should have a reasonable period for informed and effective contributions.”
- Subsequent access to documents requests were mishandled, a major transparency and administration issue
- There is a risk that the duty of impartiality, enshrined in the EU Treaties, was not adhered to
The European Ombudsman does not have enforcement powers, but it can propose solutions and make official recommendations.
About ClientEarth
ClientEarth is a non-profit organisation that uses the law to create systemic change that protects the Earth for – and with – its inhabitants. We are tackling climate change, protecting nature and stopping pollution, with partners and citizens around the globe. We hold industry and governments to account, and defend everyone’s right to a healthy world. From our offices in Europe, Asia and the USA we shape, implement and enforce the law, to build a future for our planet in which people and nature can thrive together.