• UGI USER
  • Apr 18, 2024
  • 25 Likes
  • 1 Comments

THE GREAT INDIAN BUSTARD AND CLIMATE ACTION VERDICT

Syllabus:

  • GS 2: Conservation, environmental pollution and degradation, environmental impact assessment.

Focus:

  • In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has expanded the scope of Articles 14 and 21 to include the right against the adverse effects of climate change.
Source: Hinduustan Times

In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India recently acknowledged the fundamental right to be free from the adverse impacts of climate change. This judgment, primarily focusing on the protection of the critically endangered Great Indian Bustard, also sets a significant precedent for inclusive climate action.

Background of the Case:

  • Recent judgment stemmed from wildlife activists’ petition to protect the critically endangered Great Indian Bustard (GIB) found in Rajasthan and Gujarat.

Protection of GIB and April 2021 SC Verdict:

April 2021 SC verdict imposed restrictions on overhead transmission lines across a 99,000 sq km area.

Proposed conversion of overhead power lines to underground to safeguard GIB.

Government’s Appeal for Modification:

  • Ministries of Environment, Power, and Renewable Energy sought SC modification, citing harm to global carbon footprint commitments.
  • Concerns raised over impact on solar/wind energy installations and technical infeasibility of underground high voltage lines.

SC Modification of April 2021 Order:

  • March 2024 SC ruling acknowledged practical challenges like technical complexity, land acquisition, and costs.
  • Emphasized climate change jurisprudence, need for renewable energy, and balancing GIB conservation with environmental preservation.

Recognition of Climate Rights

  • Right to be Free from Climate Change Impacts: The Supreme Court recognized the fundamental right to be free from adverse impacts of climate change, enhancing judicial focus on climate issues.
  • Foundation for Future Legal Frameworks: This decision paves the way for detailed future articulation and enforcement of climate rights within India’s legal system.
  • Judicial Restraint and Opportunity for Discourse: The court’s restraint in not defining the right extensively allows for future discourse, potentially leading to a more comprehensive understanding.
  • Relation to Existing Constitutional Rights: The Court connected this right to the right to equality and the right to life already enshrined in the Constitution, suggesting a broad interpretative approach.
  • Impacts Beyond the Bustard: While focused on the Great Indian Bustard, the decision has broader implications for climate litigation and policy formulation in India
Key Highlights of the Judgement:

  • The Supreme Court recognized that underground power transmission cables, suitable for 400 KV and available only in lengths of 250 meters, would necessitate multiple joints, leading to potential leaks and higher transmission losses (approximately five times greater for AC power).
  • It also noted that the Electricity Act does not currently provide for land acquisition necessary for laying underground cables, whereas overhead lines only require a right of way.
  • A nine-member expert committee was established by the Supreme Court to assess the feasibility of undergrounding power lines in designated areas.
  • The committee is expected to submit its findings by July 31, 2024.
  • The court highlighted India’s renewable energy targets, aiming for 175 GW by 2022 and 450 GW by 2030, emphasizing the national commitment to non-fossil fuel energy sources as both a strategic goal and an environmental necessity.
  • The judgment underscored the socio-economic advantages of renewable energy, particularly its role in promoting social equity through accessible and affordable clean energy, which can aid in poverty alleviation and foster inclusive growth.
  • The necessity for India to shift towards solar power was emphasized, driven by its expected contribution to 25% of global energy demand growth over the next two decades, the need for cleaner air, and the preservation of groundwater levels.
  • The court pointed out the growing recognition of the intersection between climate change and human rights, asserting the state’s obligation to mitigate climate impacts through a rights-based approach and ensure adaptive capacities for all.
  • The judgment referenced Article 48A and Article 51A(g) of the Constitution, which encourage environmental protection but are not directly enforceable, highlighting the constitutional recognition of environmental importance.
  • The court expanded the scope of fundamental rights to include the right against the adverse effects of climate change, linking it to the right to life (Article 21) and equality (Article 14), emphasizing that a stable, clean environment is essential to realizing these rights.

Just Transition Framework

  • Balancing Biodiversity and Renewable Energy: The framework offers a way to balance renewable energy development with biodiversity conservation, addressing the specific needs of endangered species like the Great Indian Bustard.
  • Equitable Climate Action: The just transition framework seeks to ensure that climate action is inclusive, considering the interests of workers, vulnerable communities, and ecosystems.
  • Non-Adversarial Approach to Climate Action: By adopting this framework, the judiciary can help prevent climate action and biodiversity protection from being viewed as conflicting goals.
  • Future Legal Precedent: Utilizing this framework could set a legal precedent for considering non-human interests in climate-related cases, promoting ecological justice.
  • Potential for Broader Application: If adopted, this approach could serve as a model for other jurisdictions dealing with similar issues of balancing development with environmental conservation.

Challenges and Government Position

  • Government’s Appeal Against Restrictions: The government challenged the court’s initial ban on overhead power lines, citing it as an impediment to achieving India’s renewable energy goals.
  • Practicality and Economic Considerations: Arguments against undergrounding power lines included high costs and logistical challenges, which the government claimed were impractical.
  • Attribution of Bustard Decline to Other Causes: The government also highlighted other factors contributing to the bustard’s decline, such as poaching and habitat destruction, suggesting a multifaceted approach to conservation.
  • Modification of the Court’s Order: The court adjusted its initial ruling by setting up an expert committee to explore feasible solutions, indicating responsiveness to practical considerations.
  • Ongoing Judicial Review: The final decision is pending, with the expert committee’s findings expected to influence the court’s conclusive judgments on the matter.

Implications for Future Climate Litigation

  • Opportunity for Judicial Leadership: The case presents an opportunity for the judiciary to lead in framing climate policy through legal decisions.
  • Shared Responsibility in Climate Action: Emphasizes the role of various stakeholders, including the state, activists, and academics, in shaping the recognition and articulation of climate rights.
  • Potential for Setting Global Precedents: The court’s decision could influence global climate litigation, especially in how judicial systems can integrate environmental considerations into legal frameworks.
  • Role of Scientific Expertise: The involvement of an expert committee underscores the importance of scientific input in judicial decisions affecting environmental and climate policies.
  • Long-term Impact on Climate Rights: This case could significantly impact the development and enforcement of climate rights, marking a critical point in the evolution of environmental law in India.
About Great Indian Bustard:

  • Found on the Indian subcontinent.
  • Scientific Name: Ardeotis nigriceps.
  • Among the heaviest flying birds.
  • Viable population of 100-150 individuals in India.
  • Mainly found in the Thar Desert of Rajasthan, with approximately 100 individuals.
  • Inhabits dry grasslands and scrublands.

Features:

  • Large bird with horizontal body and long, bare legs, resembling an ostrich.
  • Sexes are roughly the same size, with largest individuals weighing 15 kg (33 pounds).
  • Distinguished by black crown on forehead, contrasting with pale neck and head.
  • Brownish body with wings marked in black, brown, and grey.

Breeding and Lifespan:

  • Breeds mostly during monsoon season, laying single egg on open ground.
  • Lifespan: 12-15 years.

Conservation Status:

  • IUCN Red List: Critically Endangered.
  • Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972: Schedule 1.
  • CITES: Appendix 1.

Conclusion:

This Supreme Court verdict not only addresses immediate environmental concerns but also lays a foundational framework for future climate litigation and policy-making in India. It highlights the judiciary’s pivotal role in balancing ecological conservation with sustainable development, opening avenues for more informed and equitable climate action moving forward.

Source:The Hindu

Mains Practice Question:

Analyze the recent Supreme Court of India ruling regarding the conservation of the Great Indian Bustard and its implications on renewable energy projects within the context of India’s climate commitments. Discuss how the court’s decision can be seen as a step towards recognizing a fundamental right to be free from the adverse impacts of climate change.

Associated Articles:

https://universalinstitutions.com/supreme-court-inquiry-on-great-indian-bustard/

https://universalinstitutions.com/power-threat-to-the-bustard/