Residents of the city of Ridder in the East Kazakhstan Region have complained about environmental violations committed by one of the enterprises during preparations for the construction of a plant.
According to the agency MIK "Kazinform" citing the Supreme Court of Kazakhstan, the LLP carried out work without the mandatory environmental permit, which violates current legislation.
According to the court, on the leased territory, the company carried out welding and earthworks related to the assembly of structures and site clearance. At the same time, emissions into the environment were observed without the necessary environmental permit, which is a violation of Article 106 of the Environmental Code and Part 4 of Article 328 of the Code of Administrative Offences (CAO).
In court, the managing director of the LLP stated that the volume of welding work was minimal, and that earthworks, according to him, were not carried out at all — only site cleaning was done. Nevertheless, he did not deny the lack of an environmental permit and reported the suspension of activities at the current site, as well as plans to move the construction to another location in the city's industrial zone.
Independent environmentalists, in turn, emphasise that the obligation to obtain an environmental permit applies not only to existing but also to facilities under construction. The construction process itself, in their opinion, represents an anthropogenic impact on the environment that requires regulatory control.
According to Part 4 of Article 328 of the CAO of Kazakhstan, for such violations, medium and large businesses are subject to a fine in the amount of 200% of the cost savings obtained due to the lack of a permit. This provision is intended to prevent attempts to commence activities without complying with environmental standards.
The specialised court for administrative offences considered the case with an on-site visit and concluded that the actions of the LLP had a negative impact on the environment.
The LLP was found guilty under Part 4 of Article 328 of the CAO and was ordered to pay an administrative fine of 1.9 million tenge with a ban on activity for three months.