Environmental organisations Terra Cypria and BirdLife Cyprus have urgently demanded the immediate withdrawal of a permit for a 2 MW photovoltaic park in the community of Meladeia, Paphos, arguing the Environmental Authority’s approval is based on “serious flaws” and ignores the project’s location in three protected areas, including a habitat of exceptional natural beauty.
The groups warned the project’s approval by the Environmental Authority is fundamentally incompatible with the existing spatial plan and must be rejected by the Paphos District Administration.
In a joint letter dated 5 December 2025 to the Department of Environment and other relevant authorities, the organisations allege the Environmental Authority disregarded critical criteria stipulated under Directive 1/2024 (the licensing framework for Renewable Energy Sources, or RES).
Specifically, the groups charge that the plot falls within a Planning Regime of an Area of Exceptional Natural Beauty and contains East Mediterranean Phrygana (Habitat Type 5420), a protected natural habitat, yet these factors were not adequately examined in the final opinion.
Contradictory terms and unaddressed land concerns
The environmental bodies further expressed disappointment with the Department of Environment’s previous responses and outlined four core inconsistencies within the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and the final opinion:
- Contradictory Conditions: They questioned how specific terms of the opinion could be integrated into the approved spatial plan when they are essentially incompatible, creating regulatory conflicts.
- Neglect of Fertile Land: The groups highlighted that the opinion failed to adequately address the objection raised by the Department of Agriculture, which classified a portion of the site as fertile, productive, and cultivable agricultural land.
- Water Management Conflict: The letter noted a direct conflict between the Department of Water Development’s condition—calling for inert materials to mitigate pollution and erosion—and the Environmental Authority’s term requiring the ground to remain unsealed for rainwater absorption.
- Unprotected Wildlife Habitat: The groups queried why the opinion failed to account for the explicit condition set by the Game and Fauna Service (GFS) for the exclusion of the section containing dense natural vegetation, shrubs/trees, and dry-stone walls.
The organisations are now demanding immediate official clarification on all four points, citing their rights under the provisions of the Aarhus Convention regarding public access to environmental information.
Read more: