These two separate obligations are extensively examined in a case by the Italian supreme administrative Court.65 It concerns a project related to interventions for the strengthening and development of the Orte - Falconara railway line. With Law-Decree No. 77/2021, converted into Law No. 108/2021, this project was included in the national recovery and resilience plan (Piano Nazionale di Ripresa e Resilienza - PNRR). In this case, the supreme Court rejects the appeal lodged by the applicant against the decision taken by the regional administrative court and deems as unfounded the grounds of alleged invalidity of, inter alia, the Environmental Impact Assessment - EIA (Valutazione di Impatto Ambientale - VIA) and the DNSH assessment.66 From one hand, the Council of State recalls the settled case-law and states that the EIA procedure finds its legal basis in the protection of a specific interest: the environmental protection.67 The supreme administrative Court points out that the EIA - expression of the prevention, precautionary, integration and sustainable development EU principles – is a particular, autonomous procedure aiming at considering the environmental impacts of a project, and namely the both direct and indirect significant effects produced by a project on different factors: population and human health; biodiversity; territory, soil, water, air and climate; tangible assets, cultural heritage, landscape and the interaction between these factors.68 Within the EIA, the public administration exercises a real function of political-administrative policy through the pursuing and the balancing of the different and conflicting interests both public and private69; the balancing choice in which lies the discretionary power implies the full considerations of all interests at stake and their comparison according to the rules and principles to be observed when the administration carries out its functions. Moreover, the supreme administrative Court points out that when such legal criteria (rules and principles) of the administrative activity are met, the further assessment room concerns the merits of the administrative activity and, therefore, it cannot be examined before a court.70 previous point above and the literature cited therein. 65 Council of State Division IV, judgment 5 August 2024, No. 6966. 66 The alleged violation of the DNSH relates to the protection of groundwater their prevention from pollution. 67 Council of State, judgment 5 August 2024, No. 6966, point 5.1. 68 Council of State, judgment 5 August 2024, No. 6966, point 5.1. 69 On this point, see also Council of State, Division IV, No. 1761/2022. 70 Council of State, judgment 5 August 2024, No. 6966, point 5.1. 122 FRANCESCO GASPARI
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==