The State could face "substantial fines" if it fails to comply with two environmental judgments by the European Court of Justice, the European Commission said yesterday.
The first case involves a 2001 court decision that the Republic must complete an overdue list of its most endangered species and natural habitats. Due in 1995, the department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government has yet to complete it.
The second stems from a failure by the Departments of Environment and Agriculture and Food to obey a 2002 court ruling to sufficiently implement steps reclaiming Irish uplands vegetation damaged by sheep. Such vegetation prevents erosion and landslides.
"I am hopeful that the Irish authorities will now step up efforts to finalise their network of important nature sites and show that the problem of sheep over-grazing has been fully addressed," EU Commissioner for the Environment Stavros Dimas said in a statement.
The commission could ask the court to impose fines if the State fails to meet the terms by mid-December, according to a commission spokeswoman.
"We try to give them every chance to comply," said Ruth Deasy, head of press for the European Commission Representation in Dublin. "But the process seems to be stalled."
In January, the court fined France more than €57 million for every six-month period it remained in violation of a 1991 judgment regarding fisheries and markets. That was in addition to a €20 million fine France had already paid.
The court could fine the Republic as much as €20,000 per day until the violations are remedied, or a lump sum in millions of euro, according to a spokeswoman for the Environment Commissioner in Brussels.
"My department has arranged immediate discussions with the commission's officials to discuss Ireland's programme for completion of the designation process," Minister for the Environment Dick Roche said in a statement yesterday. "A management plan has been adopted" to address sheep overstocking in Mayo, he said.
The commission also decided on Thursday to close another case against the State regarding a 2003 ruling by the court on the absence of pollution-reduction programmes for 14 shellfish waters.