Paul Csagoly
E D I T O R I A L
A funny thing happened while producing this issue of The Bulletin. After months of debate, we came up with a much-awaited new name for our magazine. We think it was a good name and it fit well with the mission of the Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe. We also made a great connection between the name and the cover story of this issue, which is the third Pan-European conference for environmental ministers held this June in Aarhus. The conference, and the Environment for Europe process of which it was part, were geared toward connecting the main players in the environmental arena and nations with each other to work out ways for mutual cooperation in protecting and rehabilitating Europe's natural environment. From NGOs to business, from Britain to Kazakhstan, the private interests of the separate groups represented at Aarhus had to be forged to create a common agenda for the future.In the following 12 pages and in the adjacent column, all dedicated to the conference at Aarhus, you will find that the main highlight of the event was the signing of the Public Participation Convention, signed by Europe's environment ministers. One of the Convention's three main pillars was the guarantee of citizen rights for free access to environmental information in an attempt to put an end to environmental secrecy and place the environmental debate into the open.
Which brings me back to the new name we found to replace "The Bulletin." We haven't used it here because it may have copyright protection. In other words, some organisation out there may have reserved the right to the word, which we wanted to use, for their private use. What a concept! Perhaps someone will soon have exclusive rights to the word "green" or maybe even "environment" itself. Then we're really in trouble. Now I do understand the limited use of copyright. But there are rumours in the wind that the copyrighting of information, or intellectual property, is increasingly becoming a very lucrative business. Doesn't this fly in the face of the dictates of the Aarhus Convention and free access to information? Some would say that this privatisation of information blatantly obstructs the goals for which the information was intended. Ministers used to have reasons for why they withheld environmental information for the "public good." Some still do. The Convention will hopefully limit this questionable privilege. In that light, privatising information under the guise of inspiring creativity and economic activity should also be questioned before our rights to words and our languages disappear before our eyes. And hopefully, you'll see the new name we came up with ... next issue.
Paul Csagoly
