The
impact of both these judgments has been that : all on-going activities must be
stopped – without prior approval of the Central Government. There would be
complete ban on felling of trees. Feeling of trees in all forests is to remain
suspended except in accordance with the working plans of the State Government,
as approved by Central Government. Where permit system is in vogue, the
Department of Forests or State Forest Corporation alone can cut trees. There
shall be complete ban on movement of cut trees and timber from the North Easter
States to other parts of the country, either by rail, road or waterways.
Workers in the wood-based industries should be paid their usual wages.
Ecologically-sensitive area is to be found out and totally excluded from
exploitation.
In
effect, all State Governments have been prohibited from using forest lands for
non-forest purposes without the prior approval of the Central Government in
accordance with the Forest Conservation Act, 1980. Through the same order the
Court has also stayed all non-forest activities that were being carried out
without the prior approval of the Central Government. Resultantly, the power to
denotify/dereserve national parks and wild life sanctuaries that vested with
the State Governments was transferred to the National Board for Wild Life
through and Amendment that came into effect from 2003. By notify of the court’s
orders even the National Board for Wild Life cannot exercise this power without
the approval of the Supreme Court.
It
may also be noted that the National Commission that is set up to review the
working of the Constitution of India in its report submitted to the Central
Government has recommended the addition of a separate article (30-D) in the
Constitution of India which would confer the stature of a fundamental right
within the Indian Constitution to the right to save drinking water, clean
environment etc.
Thus,
even a cursory study of the judgments of the Indian courts especially the
Supreme Court would reflect the consistent commitment of the courts towards the
protection of the environment. Very often the courts have had to not only lay
down the law but also closely monitor its implementation due tot the political
compulsions of the Government. The executive needs to show stronger
commitment towards implementation of environment related laws. However, its
needs to be appreciated that the efforts of the courts can only achieve
marginal success unless there is social, political and economic change in the
Government as well as of people towards adhering to a model of sustainable
development. Perhaps the solution towards protecting and utilizing nature’s
bounty in a sustainable manner lies in an introspection towards the life styles
that modern world is increasingly adopting. Concerned citizens of the world
must begin by advocating a reduction of materialistic lifestyle based on the
philosophy of the developed world, leading a life in harmony with nature,
having allow ecological footprint and adopting solutions towards equitable
growth and development in a manner that does not harm the environment.
A
recent newspaper report source to the AFP news agency quotes an article from
the Science Journal brings into sharp focus some mind boggling facts. The
report states that as of 1995 only 17% of the worlds land area remains truly
wild – with no human populations, crops road access or nighttime light
detectable by satellite. Half of the world’s surface area is used for crops or
grazing; more than half of all forests have been lost to land conversion; the
largest land mammals on several continents have been eliminated; shipping lanes
crisscross the oceans. Due to extensive damming, nearly six times as much water
is held in artificial storage world wide as is free-flowing. Subtle and not so
subtle changes brought about by man upon the environment are evident
everywhere. The report states the natural selection has been supplanted by
human selection, meaning that certain species – such as companion pets- thrive,
while others – such as river trout – have been altered specifically for human
consumption often to their detriment. And, thus, altering ecosystems has left
many species vulnerable to disturbances and less resilient. Such shrilling fact
ought to serve as a constant reminder to us to maintain our commitment to the
protection of our environment.
The
contribution of the Supreme Court of India in protecting the environment and
ecology, forest wild life, etc. has been phenomenal. Despite the limitations of
jurisdiction, the Court played a vital role in this regard. More importantly
what is needed from an environmental angle is a vision for the future. We have
got enough laws to protect the environment, but its implementation is in the
hands of administrative authorities. Good governance free from corruption is
the basic need to protect the environment. The words of Justice Frankfurter
are apt, quoting ” An onerous obligation ……. We owe to posterity…… clean air,
clean water, greenery and open space. They ought to be elevated to the
status of birth right of every citizen .”
http://highcourtchd.gov.in/judicial.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment