Diyarbakir Bar Association & Ecology Association vs. Diyarbakir Governorship No. 2024/245

The case was filed against the decision of “EIA not required” about the oil exploration and extraction project of “HANCERLI-9”. According to the Turkish EIA regulation, some oil projects should get an EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment), while experts should examine others to decide whether an EIA is required. The claimants say that in Diyarbakir, Ergani, Hancerler Village 126 block 1,2,3,4 plots and 127 block 3,4 plots, the decision of “EIA not required” about the exploration and drilling project (Permit No: "AR/TPO/K/L42-c1,c3,c4) of TPAO (Turkish Petroleum) was unlawful. The claimants refer to several grounds to support their argument. First, they refer to the seismic tests. When searching for oil, a seismic test is required, in which explosions are used to understand what is underground. The claimants argue that seismic testing destroys wildlife and soil. Second, the substances used in drilling wells when searching for oil are toxic, and the debris carried to the surface contains radioactive minerals and heavy metals. Agricultural areas, as well as underground and surface waters, will be in danger. In addition, toxic liquids coming out of the ground because of the exploration activity will mix with the air, soil, underground water, and other water resources. Heavy metals in the fluids brought to the surface will also negatively affect agricultural and animal husbandry activities. Consequently, human health will also be seriously negatively affected. The claimants argue that the decision issued by the Diyarbakır Governorship not to require an EIA goes against what expert institutions have clearly stated: that there might be a threat to agricultural production and an EIA process should be carried out. The claimants also refer to several legal bases. In the project introduction file, many toxic chemicals are listed for use during the project. However, there is no explanation about how and how much of these chemicals will be used and what types of damage may occur. TPAO established a financial responsibility insurance for potential hazards, which means the abovementioned dangers are probable. Projects that threaten agriculture also threaten food security, a growing issue worldwide. The claimants further assert that houses are very close to the project area. They refer to the conditions in Annex 50, as required by Article 46/3 of the Turkish Petroleum Law Implementation Regulation, stating that the conditions have not been met. Many of the other conditions in Annex 50 have also not been met. Many special permits and planning required by Article 48/2 and Articles 6 and 9, as well as the documents required by Article 24 of the Turkish Petroleum Law, are missing. Regarding the field of activity, DSI (State Hydraulic Works) stated that the area was surrounded by drilling wells and indicated that water analyses should be conducted. In addition, DSI noted that because the area is an agricultural site, alternative regions should be explored. Claimants refer to the National Water Board of Turkey, recently established by the Presidential Decree on November 29, 2023. Considering that the areas have recently been declared an oil exploration and extraction area, water resources are being endangered, and this decree is being violated. In addition, hundreds of mining and oil projects have been launched in the Ergani and Diyarbakir area in recent months, and there is no cumulative impact assessment in the introduction file. They also assert that in the project area, there are wildlife forms that the Bern Convention of The Council of Europe protects. Finally, the claimants argue that the oil exploration and extraction activities are contrary to the global climate goals that Turkey is a party to. They state that the GHG resulting from the use of oil creates a heat-trapping effect in the atmosphere and causes climate change. Turkey, following many international agreements, especially the Paris Climate Agreement, is obliged to limit the temperature increase to 2 degrees and contribute to climate change mitigation. The only way to do this is to reduce carbon emissions or, in other words, to phase out fossil fuels. They also refer to the most recent climate adaptation strategy document of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, namely "Ecosystem-Based Adaptation Strategy to Climate Change for Anatolian Steppe Ecosystems," dated July 6, 2022. The Strategy Document, which covers agriculture, pastures and meadows, inland waters, and forests for the period 2022-2036, aims to: • Increase resilience in ecosystems that are and will be negatively affected by climate change, • Make rural population resistant to climate with an improved agricultural economy, • Increase carbon sink potential. The claimants said the activity would increase global warming by polluting water and agricultural resources and paving the way for fossil fuel use. Therefore, it conflicts with Turkish national plans. Therefore, a project that bears all the abovementioned risks can’t be exempted from an EIA, and should be annulled altogether, or, at the very least, the decision of “EIA not required” should be overruled. On April 30, 2024, the court appointed an independent expert committee to explore the field and prepare an expert opinion. The committee completed the explorations on June 26, 2024, and issued its report on August 10, 2024. The report concluded by majority vote that the "EIA not required" decision is lawful.