The Supreme Court of India’s recent ruling on 5 April 2024, recognising the fundamental right to a clean environment as intertwined with the rights to life and equality under the Indian Constitution, is a landmark decision that reverberates across legal and environmental spheres. Led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, a three-judge panel delivered this pivotal judgment in a case revolving around the conservation of endangered species like the Great Indian Bustard and the Lesser Florican.

Central to this verdict was the Court’s decision to lift a ban on overhead power lines spanning 99,000 square kilometres in parts of Gujarat and Rajasthan. The ban aimed to protect these endangered birds but was deemed counterproductive to India’s transition to clean energy, particularly wind and solar power, which is crucial for global climate action and fulfilling the energy needs of Indian citizens.

Advertisement

The judgment delineates the distinction between climate mitigation and ecological conservation, stressing India’s efforts to combat climate change through various legislative acts like the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972, the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974, and others.

While previous cases like M.C. Mehta vs Kamal Nath and others have acknowledged the right to a clean environment and its connection to fundamental rights like life, health, and equality, this ruling specifically addresses the adverse effects of climate change on these rights. The Court pointed out the lack of explicit articulation regarding people’s right to be shielded from climate change impacts, attributing it to the inherent link between this right and the broader right to a clean environment. As climate change intensifies, there’s a growing imperative to delineate this as a distinct right recognised under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

A stable environment is vital for life. Under Article 21, the right to health, which is integral to life, suffers due to various climate-related factors like pollution, rising temperatures, droughts, crop failures, storms, and natural disasters, which disproportionately harm marginalised groups, violate their rights and exacerbate inequality.

Furthermore, the ruling aligns with international commitments like the Paris Agreement, viewing climate change not just as an environmental issue but also as a human rights concern touching upon health, indigenous rights, gender equality, and overall development. It calls upon states to take robust measures to mitigate climate change and safeguard citizens’ right to a healthy environment.

Despite the significance of this ruling in advancing climate rights in India, criticisms have surfaced regarding its anthropocentric focus and limited safeguards for environmental and biodiversity concerns, especially concerning renewable energy projects. Calls for more comprehensive climate legislation and stringent protection of non-human life and ecosystems have been raised in response to the judgment.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s recognition of the right to a clean environment as a fundamental right marks a crucial milestone in India’s legal landscape. It not only affirms citizens’ rights in the face of climate change challenges but also sets a precedent for future climate-related litigation and policy development, paving the way for a more sustainable and rights-centric approach to environmental governance.

The writer is an environment enthusiast and an animal welfare activist, and is the Founder of Kaloms Ideas Welfare Foundation. She is also a chartered accountant.