Ar hidraulinio uolienų ardymo draudimas išsklaidytųjų angliavandenilių tyrimui ir (ar) naudojimui neprieštarauja konstitucijoje įtvirtintam principui, jog valstybė reguliuoja ūkinę veiklą taip, kad ji tarnautų bendrai tautos gerovei?
Drumstas, Aurimas |
2020 m. liepos 7 d. įsigaliojo Lietuvos Respublikos žemės gelmių įstatymo redakcija, kurioje buvo uždraustas hidraulinio uolienų ardymo taikymas tiriant ir (arba) naudojant išsklaidytųjų angliavandenilių išteklius. Atsižvelgiant į tai, kad šiuo draudimu yra galimai ribojamas valstybės energetinis saugumas, energijos prieinamumas bei materialinė gerovė, šis ūkinės veiklos reguliavimas kelia abejonių dėl jo atitikties Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucijos 46 str. 3 d. įtvirtintam principui, kuris numato, kad valstybė reguliuoja ūkinę veiklą taip, kad ji tarnautų bendrai tautos gerovei. Šiame darbe koncentruojamasi į visapusišką šio principo reikšmės ir skalūnų išteklių teisinio reguliavimo pagrįstumo tyrimą. Tyrimo tikslas – ne tik išanalizuoti minėtas aplinkybes, bet ir įvertinti jų tarpusavio koreliaciją ir atsakyti ar Hidraulinio ardymo draudimas tiriant ir (arba) naudojant išsklaidytuosius angliavandenilius neprieštarauja Konstituciniam principui, jog valstybė reguliuoja ūkinę veiklą taip, kad ji tarnautų bendrai tautos gerovei. Pirmoji darbo dalis skirta ūkinės veiklos reguliavimo ir bendrosios tautos gerovės principo esminių aspektų atskleidimui. Taikant tarpdisciplininį tyrimą, atskleidžiama ūkinės veiklos reguliavimo esmė, būdai, tikslas ir sąlygos, taipogi, bendrosios tautos gerovės lingvistinė reikšmė bei istorinė genezė. Antrojoje dalyje tiriama dabartinio hidraulinio uolienų ardymo ir išsklaidytųjų angliavandenilių teisinio reguliavimo genezė. Šis tyrimas buvo atliktas analizuojant Europos Sąjungos bei Lietuvos strateginius tikslus, lyginant Jungtinių Amerikos Valstijų ir įvairių Europos Sąjungos valstybių skalūnų gavybos istorinę raidą bei atliekant socialinės ir teisinės aplinkos analizę. Taip pat hidraulinio ardymo teisinis reguliavimas atskleistas išnagrinėjus: (i) hidraulinio ardymo teisinio reguliavimo nuo 2020 m. liepos 7 d. aspektus; (ii) Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucinio Teismo nutarimą dėl hidraulinio ardymo; (iii) įstatymų leidėjo valia priimant draudimą naudoti hidraulinį ardymą išsklaidytųjų angliavandenilių gavybai ir; (iv) hidraulinio ardymo teisinio reguliavimo iki 2020 m. liepos 7 d. aspektus. Trečiojoje dalyje trumpai apibendrinami ir analizuojami pirmųjų dviejų skyrių pagrindiniai argumentai suponuojantys, jog Hidraulinio ardymo draudimas išsklaidytųjų angliavandenilių gavybai prieštarauja Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucijos 46 str. 3 d. įtvirtintam principui ir šių argumentų kontrargumentai bei atliktos analizės pagrindu suformuojamas atsakymas į šį klausimą.
In 7 July 2020 the amendments of the Law on the Underground of the Republic of Lithuania came into force, which explicitly prohibited the application of hydraulic fracturing in exploring and (or) using of dispersed hydrocarbon resources. Taking into consideration the fact that this regulation may restrict the state's energy security, energy availability and material well-being of the nation, hence this regulation of economic activity raises doubts regarding its compliance with Article 46 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania. Article 46 part 3 establishes the Constitutional principle which states that: “the State shall regulate economic activity so that it serves the general welfare of the nation”. Thus, the master thesis is focused on a comprehensive study on the meaning and significance of aforementioned principle and the legal regulation of shale resources exploration and exploitation. Nevertheless, the purpose of the study is not only to analyse the abovementioned objectives, but also to assess their inner correlation and answer whether the prohibition of hydraulic fracturing in the exploration and (or) usage of dispersed hydrocarbons is not contrary to the Constitutional principle that the State shall regulate economic activity so that it serves the general welfare of the nation. The first part of the work is devoted to the disclosure of the essential aspects of the regulation of economic activities and the principle of the general welfare of the nation. The application of interdisciplinary research reveals the essence, methods, purpose and conditions of economic activity regulation, as well as the linguistic significance and historical genesis of the general welfare of the nation. In the first part of this work these aspects were studied and analysed: (i) the type of Lithuanian economic model and the directly emerging principle of freedom of economic activity. Subsequently, the circumstances of when this principle can be restricted, and the methods of the restriction were evaluated; (ii) in order to extensively define the properties of state regulation of economic activities, the conditions laid down by the Constitutional Court were disclosed under which the regulation of economic activity is not in conflict with the principle that the state regulates economic activity so that it serves the general welfare of the nation; (iii) since the principle of general welfare of the nation has not been explained or disclosed in detail, thus, a linguistic analysis of this principle has been performed. The results of the analysis provided the concept of the principle of general welfare of the nation, semantics of each word of this principle and its correlation with the principle of common interest; (i) the historical context of the principle of general welfare of the nation was analysed in order to discover the genesis of this term. It was concluded that this term developed together with the Lithuanian nation's desire for freedom and prosperity through Constitutions of interwar Republic of Lithuania. This evolution was influenced by the Constitution of Republic of Weimar, and its “Social state” model; (ii) eventually, based on the legal jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of Republic of Lithuania, the objective of the general welfare of the nation as an aim of economic activity regulation was revealed since the objective of general welfare of the nation simultaneously provides the direction, scope and boundaries of economic activity regulation. In the second part, after analysing the concept of Lithuanian economic regulation and revealing the principle of general welfare of the nation in detail and with regards to the question posed in the topic - a comprehensive and thorough research was conducted towards the long-term energy strategies of European Union and Lithuania. Subsequently, the application of shale resources and the use of hydraulic fracturing in United States of America and European Union from the start of “shale revolution” to present day was examined and compared. Lastly, the legal regulation of shale resources and hydraulic fracturing in European Union and Lithuania was researched. In the second part of the master thesis, these issues were thoroughly explored: (i) the general notions regarding energy sector development in European Union and the national Lithuanian long-term energy strategies and objectives together with the potential of natural gas and shale resources. (ii) after disclosing the present-day and future energy goals, the analysis was focused on the development and general usage of shale resources and hydraulic fracturing in the United States of America and European Union. It was concluded and rationalised how the differences between the success of shale resources in United States of America and the failure in European Union emerged. (iii) Only after revealing the general practice of hydraulic fracturing application in United States of America and European Union a research was conducted regarding the genesis of current hydraulic fracturing and shale resources legal regulation in Republic of Lithuania. The legal regulation of hydraulic fracturing in Republic of Lithuania was evaluated by describing and examining: (i) legal regulation of hydraulic fracturing until 7 July 2020; (ii) ruling of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania on hydraulic fracturing; (iii) circumstances together with the process of the adoption of current legal regulation and the intents of the legislator and; (iv) legal regulation of hydraulic fracturing from 7 July 2020. Thus the third part is dedicated to analysis of the main arguments and counter-arguments for and against the prohibition of hydraulic fracturing usage for dispersed hydrocarbons exploration and (or) usage. Only after systemic evaluation of all the main findings, it was possible to compare the arguments and counter-arguments and to determine whether the prohibition of hydraulic fracturing application to explore and (or) use the dispersed hydrocarbons is compliant with the Constitutional principle that the State shall regulate economic activity so that it serves the general welfare of the nation after conducting the elaborate research of aforementioned issues.