12. Environmental laws in South-East Europe still face challenges
Author: Sandra Zec, LLM. –
Over the past two decades, the countries of South-East Europe have built modern environmental legal frameworks. On paper, much of the region now meets or approaches European standards. In practice, the gap between the law and its enforcement remains wide, and that gap is increasingly exploited. Recent cases demonstrate that the region does not primarily need more environmental laws, but stronger institutions to apply them, greater transparency, and closer cooperation across borders, within the region and with the rest of the European Union.
Two legal tracks, one shared challenge
The region follows two distinct legal paths. On one hand, EU Member States such as Slovenia, Croatia, Bulgaria, Romania and Greece are already bound by EU environmental law. On the other hand, the Western Balkan candidate countries are aligning their legislation with the EU acquis through the accession process, 1 in particular under Chapter 27 on environment and climate change , as well as through the Green Agenda 2 for the Western Balkans endorsed in Sofia in 2020. Most have adopted framework environmental laws, updated rules on environmental impact assessment (EIA), and national strategies on waste, circular economy and emissions. However, the European Commission’s annual enlargement reports have repeatedly found that implementation of environmental legislation lags behind its adoption, and none of the Western Balkan countries is yet close to meeting EU standards in this area. Environment is widely regarded as one of the most technically complex and costly areas of accession. EU membership does not automatically close this implementation gap either.
Where the gap lies
The weaknesses are broadly similar across the region. Laws are often adopted but not implemented, environmental administrations lack capacity, and biodiversity monitoring remains incomplete. Inspectorates need more staff, training and equipment, and environmental impact assessments (EIA) are not always applied consistently. Civil society organisations have reported cases in which assessments were allegedly bypassed in order to accelerate projects. The European Commission’s annual country reports and international governance indices also identify corruption and weak rule of law as persistent concerns in parts of the region. Where permits, concessions and inspections can be influenced, weak governance becomes a direct environmental risk.
A case in point: Gospić, Croatia
In February 2025, Croatian police and the Office for the Suppression of Corruption and Organised Crime (USKOK), supported by Europol, arrested 13 people suspected of illegally importing and disposing of hazardous waste. According to Europol, the waste came mainly from Italy, Slovenia and Germany and was declared as recyclable plastic even though it was legally classified as hazardous. The alleged operation generated at least EUR 4 million in illegal profit. Croatian investigators also suspect the network of disposing of medical waste from Croatian companies.
Around 37,000 tonnes are believed to have been buried or dumped at the former PPK Velebit agricultural complex in Gospić, with additional sites identified in Varaždin and Benkovac. Dumping allegedly began in 2021, while local residents reported suspicious truck deliveries from 2022. A waste management permit linked to the suspects was revoked and subsequently reissued by the county administration in 2024. Currently, criminal proceedings are ongoing.
In August 2026, an expert report published by USKOK found elevated concentrations of heavy metals and microplastics in the soil, as well as PFAS (so-called “forever chemicals”) in groundwater downstream of the site. Public drinking water has so far tested safe, but experts have warned that the karst terrain could transport pollution rapidly towards nearby rivers, including the Lika. By September 2026, the site had still not been cleared, prompting large protests in Zagreb and grabbing the attention around the world. Official estimates of the potential cleanup cost range from EUR 2–3 million for temporary covering to EUR 100–125 million for full excavation and incineration. The Gospić case shows that this gap reaches beyond the region: waste from EU member states ended up in Croatian soil because oversight failed at every step. The Gospić case shows that this gap reaches beyond the region: waste from EU member states ended up in Croatian soil because oversight failed at every step.
Conclusion
South-East Europe does not lack environmental laws. It lacks the capacity and the will to enforce them. Years of alignment with EU standards have produced modern legislation on paper, but without well-resourced inspectorates, transparent permitting and independent courts, those laws offer little protection on the ground. Closing the gap will require more than just adopting new regulations. It will take institutions that act on warnings, authorities held accountable for their decisions, and a shared European commitment to treat environmental crime as seriously as any other serious crime. Until then, Gospić case is what environmental law in the region actually looks like.
1 More about EU acquis: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/EN/legal-content/glossary/acquis.html
2 https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/enlargement-policy/conditions-membership/chapters-acquis_en