Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Indian Constitution, adopted in 1950, initially lacked explicit provisions for environmental protection, reflecting the prevailing developmental priorities of the time. However, with growing awareness of environmental issues in the 1970s, spurred by the Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment (1972), India began incorporating environmental concerns into its legal and policy framework. The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 was a watershed moment, introducing specific provisions dedicated to environmental protection and improvement. This answer will critically examine these constitutional provisions, analyzing their scope, limitations, and the role of judicial activism in shaping environmental jurisprudence in India.
Constitutional Provisions for Environmental Protection
The Indian Constitution provides for environmental protection through a combination of Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs) and Fundamental Rights. While DPSPs are not enforceable by courts, they serve as guidelines for the state in formulating policies. Fundamental Rights, on the other hand, are legally enforceable.
1. Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs)
- Article 48A: This article, inserted by the 42nd Amendment Act, directs the State to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the country’s forests and wildlife. It emphasizes the state’s duty to protect and improve the environment, but its non-justiciable nature limits its direct enforceability.
- Article 51A(g): This article, also inserted by the 42nd Amendment, makes it a fundamental duty of every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment, including forests, lakes, rivers, and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures. While a fundamental duty, its enforcement relies on citizen participation and awareness.
2. Fundamental Rights
- Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty): Judicial interpretation has significantly expanded the scope of Article 21 to include the right to a healthy and pollution-free environment. Landmark cases like M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1988) established that the right to life encompasses the right to a dignified environment.
- Article 14 (Equality before the Law): This article has been invoked in environmental cases to challenge discriminatory environmental policies or practices. For example, challenging siting of polluting industries in disadvantaged communities.
- Article 19(1)(g) (Freedom of Trade, Profession, Occupation): This right can be restricted in the interest of protecting the environment, as demonstrated in cases involving restrictions on mining or quarrying activities. The principle of ‘sustainable development’ is often invoked to balance economic activities with environmental protection.
3. Other Relevant Provisions
- Entry 6 of List III (Concurrent List): This entry empowers both the Union and State governments to legislate on matters related to forests and wildlife, allowing for a collaborative approach to environmental governance.
- Sixth Schedule of the Constitution: Provisions relating to the administration of Scheduled Areas, often involving traditional resource management practices, indirectly contribute to environmental conservation.
Judicial Activism and Environmental Protection
The Indian judiciary has played a pivotal role in interpreting and enforcing environmental provisions. The concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL), pioneered in the 1980s, has been instrumental in bringing environmental issues to the forefront.
| Case | Year | Key Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Ganga Pollution) | 1985 | Ordered closure of polluting industries along the Ganga River. |
| M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Taj Mahal) | 1996 | Directed measures to protect the Taj Mahal from air pollution. |
| Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India | 1996 | Established the ‘Polluter Pays’ principle and the ‘Precautionary Principle’ in Indian environmental law. |
The ‘Polluter Pays’ principle holds that those who pollute the environment should bear the costs of remediation. The ‘Precautionary Principle’ emphasizes taking preventive measures even in the absence of complete scientific certainty regarding environmental harm.
Limitations and Challenges
Despite the constitutional provisions and judicial activism, several challenges remain:
- Enforcement Issues: Weak enforcement mechanisms and bureaucratic delays hinder the effective implementation of environmental laws.
- Conflict between Development and Environment: Balancing economic development with environmental protection remains a significant challenge, often leading to compromises on environmental standards.
- Lack of Public Awareness: Limited public awareness and participation in environmental governance impede effective environmental protection.
- Inter-departmental Coordination: Lack of coordination between different government departments responsible for environmental management creates inefficiencies.
Conclusion
The Indian Constitution provides a reasonably robust framework for environmental protection, evolving significantly since its inception. However, the effectiveness of these provisions is contingent upon strong enforcement, increased public awareness, and a genuine commitment to sustainable development. While judicial activism has played a crucial role in shaping environmental jurisprudence, a more proactive and holistic approach involving all stakeholders is necessary to address the complex environmental challenges facing India. Strengthening environmental impact assessment processes, promoting green technologies, and fostering a culture of environmental responsibility are essential steps towards achieving a truly sustainable future.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.