European Commission sends clear signal to Lithuania: Environmental damage must be restored, not just assessed in money

The European Commission has sent a clear message to Lithuania: environmental damage must be restored, not merely quantified in monetary terms. A recent assessment of the EU's Environmental Liability Directive (2004/35/EC) underscores that the primary goal is the natural restoration of affected environments, supplemented by additional or compensatory measures when necessary.

Data reveals a stark contrast between Lithuania and its Baltic neighbors. Between 2007 and 2013, Lithuania reported four environmental cases under the directive. However, from 2013 to 2022, only one case was registered, accounting for a mere 0.25% of all recorded environmental incidents. This places Lithuania among the lowest in the EU for applying the directive, significantly behind Poland (hundreds of cases), Latvia (56 cases), and Estonia (11-50 cases).

The Commission views this low application rate as an indicator of the directive's limited effectiveness in Lithuania. The issue may not be a lack of serious environmental incidents, but rather the legal path chosen after they occur. While the EU model prioritizes direct restoration of damaged natural resources, Lithuania's national practice often involves converting environmental damage into monetary sums through civil claims.

This divergence is critical. The EU directive mandates that polluters must finance the restoration of the environment they damaged. The money collected through financial claims in Lithuania, however, is not necessarily earmarked for the specific repair of the affected natural resource. This disconnect raises questions about whether the damage is truly compensated when financial payments do not directly translate into environmental recovery.