That nature permit became Destroyed by the court in June, Because it was not prepared with the required care. It was not investigated whether the calculated nitrogen rights that Schiphol had (partly obtained by buying farmers) had perhaps had been necessary for the recovery of nature reserves.
Schiphol and the State Secretary appeal against the decision. But because Schiphol now has no permit, but wants legal certainty, Schiphol hopes to temporarily regain the permit from the highest administrative court.
Fear of limiting flights
To be allowed to implement flights, a nature permit is essential. Schiphol is afraid of enforcement, lawsuits and economic damage as long as the destruction of the permit is maintained.
For example, environmental clubs could submit enforcement requests to the court because Schiphol is now flying illegally. Schiphol fears that the number of flights will then be reduced, even before the appeal serves. “That the tree is already being cut, while the procedure for the logging permit is still ongoing,” explains a spokesperson.
Back to the situation of Before the Polderbaan?
Schiphol also fears increasing noise nuisance and the loss of noise preference track use. This is because without a nature permit possible to return to the situation before 2003, when the polder lane was constructed. Schiphol does have enough nitrogen rights for that situation.
The maximum number of flights that Schiphol is allowed to handle is on November 1 Already from 483,000 to 478,000 flights. If it is up to environmental clubs, much more will be rid of. Environmental organization Mobilisation for the Environment (MOB) insists on nature’s interests, the increasing noise nuisance and believes that it can all be much less.
Previously rejected enforcement request
There are currently no enforcement requests from the courts. Mob has already submitted a request for enforcement, but that was rejected by the judge. The environmental club indicates that there are currently no concrete plans to submit a request again, “but don’t exclude it.”
Whether the court agrees with Schiphol that it is of ‘urgent interest’ that the annulment of permit must be temporarily suspended, must be apparent. The ruling is on 4 September.