Syllabus
GS Paper 2 – Structure, organization and functioning of the Executive and the Judiciary.
GS Paper 3 – Conservation, environmental pollution and degradation, environmental impact assessment.
Applications where to apply?
When asked about
– Fundamental Rights
– Article 21
– Climate Justice
-Climate change
Context
Supreme Court has expanded the scope of Articles 14 and 21 to include the “right against the adverse effects of climate change”.
Source
The Indian Express | Editorial dated 11th April 2024
What is a citizen’s ‘right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change’, underlined by Supreme Court?
The Supreme Court has, from time to time, expanded the fundamental rights chapter to include various facets of a dignified existence. However, this is the first time that it has included the “right against the adverse effects of climate change ”.
Constitutional Provisions Related to Environment
- Article 48A of the Constitution provides that the State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country.
- Clause (g) of Article 51A stipulates that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures.
- Expansion of Article 14 and 21:
- Article 21 recognises the right to life and personal liberty while Article 14 indicates that all persons shall have equality before law and the equal protection of laws.
- These Articles have been identified as important sources of the right to a clean environment and the right against the adverse effects of climate change.
Various Cases pertaining to Environment
- MC Mehta v. Kamal Nath, 1996: any disturbance of basic environmental elements namely air, water and soil which are necessary for life would be hazardous to life and can’t be polluted.
- Virendra Gaur vs State Haryana (1995): The Supreme Court emphasized that Article 21 protects the right to life, extending it to sanitation for the enjoyment of life with dignity.
- Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board vs C Kenchappa (2006) Supreme Court took note of the adverse effects of rising sea levels and rising global temperatures.
- Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Ltd. (3) v. Bombay Environmental Action Group (2006): Supreme Court recognised that climate change posed a “major threat” to the environment.
The present case before the Supreme Court
The case pertained to a writ petition filed by retired government official and conservationist M K Ranjitsinh concerning the protection of the Great Indian Bustard (GIB) and the Lesser Florican, both critically endangered species.
The petition sought various measures for the conservation and recovery of the GIB, including the
- Framing and implementation of an emergency response plan
- Directions for installation of bird diverters
- An embargo on the sanction of new projects and renewal of leases of existing projects
- Dismantling power lines, wind turbines, and solar panels in and around critical habitats.
Contention of the Ministries and Modification of the 2021 Order
- The Ministry of Power, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, and Ministry of New and Renewable Energy sought a modification of the April 2021 which imposed restrictions on the setting up of overhead transmission lines in a territory of about 99,000 sq km in the GIB habitat in Rajasthan and Gujarat.
- They argued that the order had adverse implications for India’s power sector and cited India’s commitments to transition to non-fossil fuel energy sources under the Paris climate treaty.
- The Supreme Court modified its earlier order regarding undergrounding power lines, directing experts to assess the feasibility based on factors such as terrain and population density.
However, the court also made several other observations on climate change, and on litigation in other jurisdictions.
Observations of the Supreme Court
- The apex court emphasized the intersection of climate change and human rights, highlighting the imperative for states to address climate impacts through a rights-based approach.
- It recognized India’s obligations to prevent climate change and its adverse effects, referencing Article 21 (right to life) and environment-related aspects of the Directive Principles of State Policy.
- The court reaffirmed Article 21 as encompassing not only the right to existence but also rights essential for a dignified life, including the right to a clean environment.
- Despite the absence of specific legislation on climate change, the court affirmed the existence of a “right against adverse effects of climate change” for Indians.
Significance of the Supreme Court Ruling on the Right against Climate Change
- Affirmation of India’s Climate Justice Commitments:
- The SC ruling reaffirms India’s obligations under international agreements like the Paris Agreement , emphasizing the pursuit of environmental and climate justice.
- Integration of Climate Change into Public Discourse:
- By acknowledging the right against climate change as a fundamental right, the ruling elevates the issue to public and political discourse, urging legislative action from Parliament.
- Expansion of Environmental Jurisprudence:
- Recognition of this right opens avenues within constitutional courts for citizens to address climate change issues through litigation, thus broadening the scope of environmental jurisprudence.
- Establishment of Legal Precedent:
- Amidst the absence of comprehensive legislation targeting climate change, the judiciary’s acknowledgment of Indian rights against climate change sets a significant legal precedent, marking a progressive step.
- Acknowledgment of Vulnerability:
- The SC ruling acknowledges the vulnerability of Indians to climate change, aligning with findings from various studies, including those by the IPCC , thus emphasizing the urgency of addressing climate-related challenges.
Conclusion
In essence, the Supreme Court’s pronouncement amplifies the recognition of individuals’ entitlement to a dignified existence, inclusive of safeguarding against the perils of climate change. By affirming the nexus between environmental preservation and constitutional rights, the judgment underscores the imperative for concerted efforts towards sustainable development and climate resilience, echoing India’s commitments on the global stage.
Related Topics
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution is a fundamental right that guarantees protection of life and personal liberty.
Wording: “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.”
Applies To: Everyone in India, both citizens and foreigners.
Broader Scope: The Supreme Court of India has interpreted Article 21 to include various aspects of a dignified life, such as:
List of rights that Article 21:
- Right to privacy
- Right to go abroad
- Right to shelter
- Right against solitary confinement
- Right to social justice and economic empowerment
- Right against handcuffing
- Right against custodial death
- Right against delayed execution
- Doctors’ assistance
- Right against public hanging
- Protection of cultural heritage
- Right to pollution-free water and air
- Right of every child to a full development
- Right to health and medical aid
- Right to education
- Protection of under-trial
References
Indian Express-right-against-adverse-effects-of-climate-change
Related PYQ
Climate Change’ is a global problem. How will India be affected by climate change? How Himalayan and coastal states of India will be affected by climate change? [UPSC Civil Services Exam – Mains 2017]
Practice Question
Discuss the recent Supreme Court judgment emphasizing the right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change, and its implications for environmental jurisprudence in India? [150 words]