This article is written by rahul , 4th sem student at university. Teerthankar mahaveer university moradabad
Introduction
Public participation and citizen suit provisions have become integral components of environmental law worldwide. In India, the Right to Information Act, 2005, the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, and the Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006, are a few examples of legislation that provide for public participation and citizen suits in environmental matters. These provisions allow individuals and groups to participate in decision-making processes, challenge violations of environmental laws, and hold polluters accountable. This essay will examine the history and goals of public participation and citizen suit provisions in Indian environmental law, their current use, and their potential future impact on environmental protection.
History and Goals of Public Participation and Citizen Suit Provisions
The need for public participation in environmental decision-making processes was recognized in India with the enactment of the National Green Tribunal Act in 2010, which explicitly provides that “any person aggrieved by an environmental decision or action may approach the Tribunal”. Prior to this, public participation in environmental decision-making processes was limited. However, after the Bhopal Gas Tragedy in 1984, the public’s demand for greater participation in decision-making and accountability mechanisms led to the inclusion of public hearings in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process under the Environmental Protection Act 1986. A citizen got the right to file a complaint under section 19 of the environment protection Act.
The Environment Protection Act of 1986 established citizen suit provisions in lower courts for the first time. A citizen may prosecute a polluter under Section 19 of the Act by filing a complaint with a Judicial Magistrate Court. It is possible after giving the State Pollution Control Board 60 days’ notice of intent to file a case. Previously, only the government could bring a case. Later, similar provisions were included in Section 43 of the Air Act of 1981 and Section 49 of the Water Act of 1974.
The goals of public participation in environmental decision-making are to promote transparency, accountability, and inclusivity in decision making, and to ensure that everyone has an opportunity to participate in matters involving their environment. Public participation enables the sharing of diverse knowledge and perspectives, ultimately fostering better decisions and governance. Apart from public participation in environmental decision-making, citizen suit provisions allow individuals and citizen groups to initiate legal proceedings against violators of environmental laws.
There are three type of citizens suits.
- A private citizen may file a lawsuit against a citizen corporation or government body for violating the environment provisions.
- A private citizen may sue a government entity for failing to perform a non-discretionary duty.
- The common law tort of public nuisance is analogous to this third type of citizen suit.
The goals of citizen suit provisions are to enhance the effectiveness of environmental regulatory authorities, promote enforcement of environmental laws, and deter future violations of environmental norms. Citizen suits allow individuals to take a more proactive role in enforcing environmental regulations, holding polluters accountable, and seeking justice for environmental harm.
Current Use of Public Participation and Citizen Suit Provisions
Public participation and citizen suit provisions are utilized in various environmental law proceedings across India. One of the most significant tools for public participation is public hearings in the EIA process. Public hearings allow communities to be informed of upcoming environmental projects, provide feedback on related concerns, and engage in decision-making processes. Additionally, the EIA process allows for public access to information with respect to proposed projects, helping to facilitate informed decision-making.
Apart from the EIA process, the Right to Information Act, 2005 is an essential tool for public participation in environmental decision-making processes. The Act permits the public to access information regarding government activities, including environmental decisions. In 2011, the Central Information Commission’s landmark decision in the case of Mr. Subhash Chandra Agrawal Vs. Central Pollution Control Board mandated that environmental data – lab reports owned by the Central Pollution Control Board – would have essential public interest and be made public through the right to information system.
The National Green Tribunal (NGT) set up under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, serves as a specialized forum for environmental adjudication. The NGT has the power to provide significant relief, including the suspension of projects that pose an environmental threat or require environmental clearance, and even criminal prosecutions. The NGT has jurisdiction over matters relating to water, air, land, and noise pollution, among other environmental issues.
Citizen suit provisions are widely used to enforce environmental laws and protect the environment. The Indian judiciary has been instrumental in upholding such citizen actions, particularly in pollution-related cases. The landmark Supreme Court decision in M.C. Mehta vs Union of India (1986) mandated the closure of hazardous and polluting industries in and around Delhi, which aimed to control air pollution in the capital. Similarly, in the Olefiant case, residents of Delhi filed a case before NGT against a chemical factory, resulting in the imposition of a penalty of Rs. 25 crores for polluting the Yamuna River.
Public participation is important in environmental decision-making. It is recognized in international environmental law through instruments like the Rio Declaration and the Aarhus Convention. Public participation has three components: the right to participate in decision-making processes, access to information, and access to justice. It has several benefits, including enhancing democratic legitimacy, managing social conflict, and producing more accurate results. Public participation is especially important in environmental assessment, where it has positively impacted review panels. Public concerns and ideas are discussed in panel deliberations and recommendations, indirectly influencing federal decision-making.
Potential Future Impact of Public Participation and Citizen Suit Provisions
Public participation and citizen suit provisions will continue to play a critical role in environmental protection efforts in India. The potential future impact of these provisions lies in expanding access to information, increasing participation in decision-making processes, and making enforcement mechanisms more effective, particularly for environmental regulatory authorities.
The establishment of digital platforms, such as environmental clearance portal e-co, aims to streamline and increase transparency in the EIA procedure, promoting the participation of various stakeholders during the decision-making process. Digital infrastructure has the potential to improve data collection, accelerate data analysis, and provide real-time information to the public, encouraging the participation of more people in decision-making processes.
Apart from the use of digital platforms, the National Green Tribunal is also expanding to integrate more environmental matters, such as biodiversity and deforestation. The Court has expanded the jurisdiction of the NGT beyond pollution matters, indicating that the Court will continue to subsume matters concerning ecological degradation and harm to biodiversity. With this expansion, the NGT will become an even more significant instrument for nature conservation and enforcement of environmental laws.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) AND CITIZEN SUIT PROVISIONS
The primary distinction between a PIL and a citizen suit provision is that a PIL is a much broader concept than a citizen suit provision. A citizen suit provision is also governed by the respective acts and is not a matter of right, whereas moving to the High Court or the Supreme Court is not barred.
The Supreme Court and High Courts under writ jurisdiction allow public interest litigation (PIL) or social action litigation (SAL) at the instance of public-spirited citizens for the enforcement of constitutional and other legal rights of any person or groups of persons who are unable to approach the court for relief due to their disadvantageous position. Any public-spirited citizen or non-governmental organisation (NGOs) may petition the Supreme Court under Article 32 or the High Courts under Article 226 to prevent environmental pollution.
The Environment (Protection) Act of 1986 established citizen suit provisions in lower courts for the first time. A citizen may prosecute a polluter under Section 19 of the Act by filing a complaint with a Judicial Magistrate Court. It is possible after giving the State Pollution Control Board 60 days’ notice of intent to file a case. Previously, only the government could bring a case. Later, similar provisions were included in Section 43 of the Air Act of 1981 and Section 49 of the Water Act of 1974.
Citizen suit provision under the Environment Protection Act, 1986 – Until the enactment of the Environment Act, the power to prosecute under Indian environmental laws belonged exclusively to the government. The citizens‟ suit provision in the Environment Act expands the concept of locus standi in environmental prosecutions.
Similar provisions allowing citizens participation in the enforcement of pollution laws are now found in Sec of the Air Act(as amended in 1987) and Sec of the Water Act(as amended in 1988). Sec. 19 of the Environment Act provides that any person, in addition to authorized government officials, may file a complaint with a court alleging an offence under the Act. However, the person must have given notice of not less than 60 days of the alleged offence and the intent to file a complaint with the government official authorized to make such complaints. The citizens‟ suit provision appears to give the public significant powers to enforce the Environment Act. However, some critics are of the view that during the 60 days’ notice period required for the government to decide whether to proceed against the alleged
In conclusion,
Public participation and citizen suit provisions serve as important regulatory mechanisms in Indian environmental law. Providing access to information, expanding participation, and making enforcement mechanisms more effective can improve decision-making processes and address the challenges facing the environment. Advancements in digital infrastructure and the expansion of NGT’s jurisdiction reinforce the need for effective regulation and enforcement, ensuring that the public can be actively involved in decisions about their environment.
0 Comments