The protection and preservation of environment is integral to the culture and religion of most human communities; nature is seen as an essential part of the society at large. Good environment is also essential to ensure basic human rights, even the right to life, for no human right can be secured in a degraded environment. An example will highlight the importance of a green and healthy environment. Misuse of our natural resources, a key environmental issue, has direct impact on fundamental human rights such as right to food, right to water, right to air and right to life itself. It is important to draw linkages between environment and human rights to further build bridges between legislations relating to the two. This article discusses such linkages between human rights and environment protection as are relevant in the context of sustainable human development. It also studies existing human rights and the ways in which they can contribute to the present laws surrounding the protection of environment in India.
Human rights are fundamental, ethical principles that empower citizens and communities to experience freedom and dignity in their lives. They have been defined to include civil and political rights such as the right to life, liberty, and security; right to property, right to freedom of speech and expression; and the right to live without discrimination. Human rights also include socio-economic and cultural rights: the right to an adequate standard of living and decent work; right to health, right to an education; and the right to one’s own culture, language, and religion.
All these rights have an essential relationship with the environment of a human being. If we look at society from a historical perspective, the importance of protection and preservation of environment integral to the cultural and religious ethos of humanity can be ascertained. Nature was worshipped by ancient Hindus, Muslims, Parsis and members of other religions around the world in the belief that it emanated the spirit of the God. Hinduism declared in its dictum that “(t)he Earth is our mother and we are all her children”. Islamic law regards man as having inherited “all the resources of life and nature” and having certain religious duties to God in using them.
Article 48 (A) of the Indian Constitution incorporated “environmental protection and improvement as part of state policy” through the forty-second amendment. The Environment Protection Act, 1986, imposed a similar responsibility on every citizen “to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, trees, rivers and wildlife, and to have compassion for all living creatures”. Article 51A(g) under Article 21 and the right to life of the constitution have been used in diversified manner in India, including the right to survive as a species, quality of life, the right to live with dignity and the right to livelihood. They all relate to environment protection and basic human rights.
The Supreme Court has also dealt with issues relating to the environment and ecological balance in rural litigation and entitlement – the Kendra v. State of U.P .was one of its earliest cases relating to environment protection. The apex court had expanded the concept of the right to life in the Francis Coralie Mullin v. Union Territory of Delhi , where it set out a list of positive obligation on the state as part of its duty correlative to the right to life. In this case, the court showed assertiveness in adopting an expanded understanding of human rights.
The constitution bench of the Supreme Court in the Charan Lal Sahu vs. Union of India and similarly in Subash Kumar vs. State of Bihar cases had observed that the right to life guaranteed by Article 21 includes the right of enjoyment of pollution-free water and air for full enjoyment of life. The court had addressed the link between environment quality and right to life.
The court also recognized that the right to wholesome environment was an essential part of the fundamental right to life. The municipalities and a large number of other concerned government agencies could no longer rest content with unimplemented measures for abatement and the prevention of pollution. In this case they may be compelled to take positive measures to improve environment, the court had ruled.
The environment rules and regulation are enforced by the concerned administrative authorities. They act upon the direction of the court and the pollution control boards (PCBs). Different approaches, ex-post & exante, are playing an active role in improvement of environment quality in the county. To prevent environment degradation through formulation of standards, insurance of consents for the establishment and operation and closure orders to rogue industries by PCBs are other important steps being taken.
To protect and improve the natural environment including river, forest and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures, is imposed as a duty on every citizen by clause (g) of Article 51A. This and Article 48A have cumulative effect that the ‘state’ as well as the ‘citizen’ are under constitutional obligation to conserve, perceive, protect and improve the environment. In both the Articles, the words ‘protect and improve’ appear to contemplate affirmative agreement action to improve the quality of environment and not just to preserve the environment in its degraded form. There are plenty of legislations on the subject but more relevant enactments for our purpose are: The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974; The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977; The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981; The Environment (Protection) Act 1986; The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991; The National Environment Tribunal Act, 1995; The Environment Protection Rules, 1986; The National Environment Appellate Authority Act, 1997; The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
Connecting human rights and environment is a valuable sourcebook that explores the uncharted territory that lies between environmental and human rights legislation. Human beings can ensure fundamental equality and adequate conditions of life in an environment that permits a life of dignity and well-being. There is an urgent need to formulate laws keeping in mind the fact that those who pollute or destroy the natural environment are not just committing a crime against nature, but are violating human rights as well. Indeed, health has seemed to be the subject that bridges gaps between the two fields of environmental protection and human rights. The advancement of the relationship between human rights and environment would enable incorporation of human rights principles within an environmental scope, such as antidiscrimination standards, the need for social participation and the protection of vulnerable groups.
www.grandmasters.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.rcls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.itlegalsummit.com | 8 Years & Counting
www.bfls.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.maels.in | 8 Years & Counting
www.plcs.co.in | 8 Years & Counting
Copyright © 2020 Lex Witness - India's 1st Magazine on Legal & Corporate Affairs Rights of Admission Reserved
