Kezdem nem erteni a zoldeket. Akkor most mi legyen azzal az atomhulladekkal?
Ha nem szabad tengerbe onteni vagy vashordokban elasni az eromu udvaran stb.
akkor nyilvan el kell szallitani egy biztonsagos taroloba. Erre a zoldek meg
akarjak akadalyozni az elszallitast. Megerdemelnek, hogy otthagyjak az egesz
szerelvenyt valahol egy torlasznal es csinaljanak vele a zoldek amit akarnak
(megenni ugyse tudjak). Kepzeljetek el, amint a rendorok hazamennek, a szal-
lito kontener tetejen pedig ott ugral egy zold, visitozva, hogy hurra hurra,
gyoztunk, megnyertuk a ...

Mit is?

elemes (az ertetlen)

T Kornyeszek!

> Talan erdemes elolvasni a Kornyezetvedelmi Torvenyt es a kapcsolodo
> jogszabalyokat. Ha megjobban erdekel a tema, akkor esetleg
> megkeresheted az ezzel foglalkozo szakembereket pl. a felugyelosegeknel.
> Lehet, hogy nem fognak nagyon dicsekedni, de azert a semminel tobbet
> tudnak tenni, es tesznek is.

> Zoli (ugyis, mint  [United States]])

No ez a hozzaszolas kisse naiv volt. Mivel a mult heten fejeztem be az ide
vago jogszbalyok forditasat, ugy erzem, eleg jo vagyok ebben a temaban. Az 
allamokban elo ismeroseimnel eszrevettem mar, hogy ugy velik, amint jogszabaly

van, megszunik a gond, mert hat ott a birosag. Feltetelezem, hogy amint, Zoli,

hazajossz, pillanatok alatt kigyogyulsz ebbol a betegsegbol. 

De a gond tovabbra is az, hogy en a >>>gyakorlatot<<< nem ismerem. Ezert 
kerdeztem ra par Kornyesszel ezelott. 

No de latom, hogy a tema nem erdekfeszito.

Koszonom a hozzaszolasokat.

					deak gabor

Mail*Link(r) SMTP               Haga-hirek, Liptak Belatol

NEWSRELEASE:

Today, Prince Philip, the honorary president of WWF spoke up for the
protection of the Danube environment.

Janos Vargha, president of Danube Circle has arrived in The Hague

International NGO representatives and their banner reading "Save the Blue
Danube" will arrive in The Hague on Friday.


SECOND DAY IN THE HAGUE

On the second day of the Oral Pleadings before the International Court of
Justice in the 
Hague the legal counsel and scientists of the Hungarian party dealt with the
object and purpose of 
the Original Project of the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Barrage System (GNBS), the
risks and 
damages occurring in connection with the operation of the barrage system, the
expected benefits 
from its operation and with the rules of international law permitting the
suspension and 
abandoning of the construction.
	At the beginning of the Presentation, Boldizs=E1r Nagy, Professor of the
E=F6tv=F6s Lor=E1nd 
University Budapest, demonstrated that the 1977 Treaty had two objectives, a
political and an 
economic one: the political objective was to strengthen the ties of
friendship between the two 
countries and their integration into COMECON whilst the economic objective
was the 
comprehensive utilization of the resources of the Danube. Prof. Nagy
highlighted that the planned 
barrage system needed to comply with the evolving rules of international
environmental law, both 
during its construction as well as in its operation.
	The scientific concerns arising in connection with the Original Project were
presented in 
detail by Dr. Klaus Kern consulting engineer, Karlsruhe, and  Prof. Howard
Wheater, Professor 
of Hydrology at Imperial College, London. They characterised the planned peak
power mode 
operation of the Original Project as unprecedented in Europe, and went on to
demonstrate the 
expected harm and risks. In his presentation, Prof. Wheater demonstrated the
great threat to the 
bank filtered wells of Szentendre Island which supply the drinking water of
Budapest, and he also 
demonstrated the effects on the capacity of bank filtered wells upstream of
Nagymaros. Later 
Professor Wheater and Dr. Kern showed the wide scale harm which would have
been caused by 
the planned diversion of the Danube at Dunakiliti and the consequent impacts
of the deprivation 
of free flowing water along a 30 km long section to the surface and ground
water resources of the 
Szigetk=F6z region and to the unique and diverse flora and fauna of the only
inland delta in Europe.
	Katherine Gorove, former visiting Professor of the E=F6tv=F6s Lor=E1nd
University
in Budapest 
enumerated the expected benefits of the barrage system and demonstrated that
both in the field of 
navigation and flood protection alternative solutions were and presently are
available. She 
highlighted the serious threats to the barrage system of high seismic
exposure. As to energy 
production, Prof. Gorove called the attention of the Court to the fact that
the energy to be 
produced by the barrage system would have covered only a fraction of the two
countries present 
needs and that there were numerous possibilities for its substitution by
efficient energy utilization 
or import.
	Pierre-Marie Dupuy, Professor of International Law at the University
Panth=E9on-Assis 
(Paris II), an experienced advocate before the Court, demonstrated that
Hungary acted legally 
when it suspended and subsequently abandoned the works first at Nagymaros,
then at Dunakiliti. 
He showed step by step that all the circumstances were given for the
invocation of the 
international rules of necessity precluding the charges of wrongfulness. 
	The Oral Presentation finished at 1 PM and will restart at 10 AM Wednesday
morning.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

NEWSRELEASE #3: THE FIRST DAY IN THE HAGUE:

 OPENING ARGUMENTS IN FIRST ENVIRONMENTAL CASE

Hungary presented opening arguments this morning, the first of five days of
submissions in the first 
major environmental case to come to the World Court.

Opening the case on behalf of Hungary, Ambassador Gy=F6rgy Szenasi, Agent of
the Republic of 
Hungary and Head of the International Law Department at the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, 
summarised the background to the case and indicated the structure of
Hungary's submissions over 
the next five days. He expressed the hope that "the Court would indicate ...
the principles and rules 
according to which the two countries would in future cooperate on the waters
of the Danube", 
having described the breaches of law resulting from Czechoslovakia's
unilateral diversion of the 
Danube in October 1992.

Professor Laszlo Valki, Professor of International Law at Eotvos Lorand
University in Budapest, 
outlined the history of the dispute between Hungary and Slovakia, including
the circumstances of 
Czechoslovakia's unilateral diversion in October 1992. He said " In October
1992 Czechoslovakia 
unilaterally diverted the Danube ... onto its own territory. Since that time
only 10-20% of the flow 
has been released into the natural river bed, whilst 80-90% of the water flow
runs" into Slovakia 
and the Gabcikovo plant, generating electricity.

Professor Alexandre C. Kiss from Strasbourg University summarised for the
Court the rules of 
international law which it should apply. Apart from the 1977 Treaty between
Hungary and 
Czechoslovakia relevant treaties included the 1976 Boundary Waters
Convention, the 1992 
Convention on Biological Diversity signed at the Rio Conference, and the
rules of international law 
governing the protection of the environment. Professor Kiss reminded the
Court of its Advisory 
Opinion of July 1996 concerning the legality of the use of nuclear weapons,
where it had held that 
the obligation of States not to cause damage to the environment of its
neighbours was now part of 
the corpus of  customary international law.

Professor Gabor Vida, Member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, introduced
Hungary's 
presentations on science. The Court viewed a 20 minute video which explained
and  graphically 
illustrated the damage  caused to the Danube by Czechoslovakia's unilateral
diversion. Professor 
Vida emphasised "the high quality and great quantity of drinking water
resources in the affected 
area" and explained that "the disruption of the natural dynamics of the river
 ... seriously threatens 
the exceptionally rich, unique and irreplaceable floodplain system".

Professor Roland Carbiener, Professor Emeritus of the University of
Strasbourg described for the 
Court the destructive impacts of similar dams on other rivers, in particular
the great threat to 
drinking water supplies and biodiversity. In the context of the very large
costs associated with river 
restoration on the upper Rhine he noted that impacts may only reveal
themselves over the long term, 
one or two decades after the unilateral diversion of October 1992. He called
for urgent measures to 
"reanimate the Danube pulse for the well-being of future inhabitants in
Hungary and Slovakia". 

Professor James Crawford, Professor of International Law the University of
Cambridge and 
Hungary's principal international counsel, concluded the first day's
arguments by summarising the 
differences between Hungary and Slovakia and addressing the function of the
Court. He said that 
the Court "...does have to decide whether there were serious scientific
concerns on issues affecting 
vital resources, and ... whether Hungary's concerns crossed the appropriate
threshold of 
seriousness". In the first major environmental dispute to come to the World
Court it had to show 
that it could "...deal with a complex dispute in a way which assists the
parties to cooperate as 
distinct from acting unilaterally". 

Arguments resume on Tuesday morning at 10 a.m.

I'm assuming it is ok to send this message to be screened by the modertor.  I
h
ave information about a program that searches the entire usenet and retrieves
a
rticles automatically based on keywords. It also has many other features.  I
do
n't want to offend anyone by  posting inappropriately, so I'm not identifying
h
ow or where to get it. 

Would you please tell me if this type of information is appropriate for your
ne
wsgroup.  Please email me and identify your newsgroup if it is ok.

Thank  you

Kedves Urge Laci,
Gare-ugyben valaszolok. 
Kb. negy evvel ezelott Pap Janos fideszes kepviselo interpellalt Gare 
ugyeben. Akkor, mint a szakertoje csinaltam egy interjut Simon Marton 
Peterrel, aki a KTM-ben volt fo-oszt.vez.
A mennyisegeket, befogadokepesseget most nem kerestem elo, ha erdekel, 
meg megtehetem. A lenyeg: A Garen tarolt mennyiseget a tervezett egetovel 
el lehet egetni 1-2 even belul.  Utana aki jon, annak egetnek. Jo dragan. 
SMP ur azt mondta, hogy kis hazankban erre lenne kereslet, de hogy 
FIZETOKEPRES kereslet lesz-e, az bizony kerdeses. Mi lesz akkor? -
kerdeztem. Mire o sokatmondoan hummogott: Keresnek maguknal egetnivalot. 
Fizeto felektol. 
Nyilvan kulfoldrol. 
Fidusz arrol irt, hogy ez tilos. De ezerszer megszegik a tilalmat. Azzal: 
hasznosithato holmit, ipari alapanyagot hoznak be. SMP ur ezert ellenezte a 
dolgot. Pap Jano a Dorogra valo szallitas mellett volt, en azt mondtam: kell 
egy kicsi egeto, ami szep lassan eleget ott mindent. Ha az megtortent, 
aakkor majd heti ketnapos munkaval elegeti a KORNYEK veszelyes hulladekat. 
Azt mondja erre mindenki: nem fizetodik ki. De a talajvizbe kerulo mergek 
elboronalasa mibe kerul?
Borsodbol Garera hozni nagyobb gond, mint Ausztriabol. 
Mult heten a KTM rendezett Gare-ugyben egy video-tanacskozast. Harom oran at 
lehetett kozvetlenul hallgatni az eloadasokat es visszakerdezni (US-EPA, 
sved, nemet, belga szakaertok.) Egyet emelek most ki: szallitgatni 
orszagutakon nagyon hatranyos, veszelyes.
Ha vannak kerdeseid, foleg a dioxinokhoz ertek. Jobb cimem ennel a gyorgy@
koki.hu
Udvozlettel gyorgy lajos (piros)

Hi!

Ha van kis kapacitasu (40-540) elfekvo vinyod ,es meg akarsz szabadulni
tolle akkor dobj meg egy levelel.Iranyarat,kor,tipus stb jellemzoket 
lehetoleg kozoljetek. 
					Kosz!