No abstract

The last decade has seen a spate of judicial activism related to both environment and human rights. Two questions pertinent to recent judicial activism a r e dealt with in this article: i) Has judicial activism contributed to environmental justice, in t h e sense of keeping in view the social implications of environmental problems and equity in access to environmental resources? Are the courts competent to deal with complex environmental problems? ii) Analysis of recent environmental cases in India reveals that there is a growing overlap between issues of human rights and those of environmental improvement and that judicial activism has contributed simultaneously to the strengthening of both the environmental and human rights movement in the country. The linkages between environmental and human rights' concerns are illustrated in this article. However, the growing dependence of the environmental movement on the judiciary to redress grievances has cast an unfair burden on it to deal with complex scientific issues. In the absence of specialised bodies to deal with environmental issues, the "generalist" courts are left with no option but to decide on crucial issues of science and technology, which may lead to disastrous results. Unless the aspect of expert knowledge is taken into account, providing justice to the environment and the people in India will remain a distant dream.

Climate change today is a reality facing every part of the world and India is no exception. Judicial institutions—courts and tribunals—have a crucial role in adjudicating on climate concerns as the society tries on the one hand to reduce emissions, build resilience against a rapidly warming world and erratic weather patterns, and adapt to the changing climate. Impacts of climate change include melting glaciers, rising sea levels, species decline and extinctions, as well as, at the individual level and social planes—increasing conflicts, violent behaviour and migration among other issues. Unfortunately, climate change is yet to figure prominently in judicial decisions. India’s environmental jurisprudence is still structured around principles such as ‘polluter pays’, ‘sustainable development’ and the ‘public trust doctrine’ which double up as ‘fictions’ and ‘myths’ and have limited applicability so far as climate change–related issues are concerned. Analysis of judicial decisions where there is discussion on climate change shows that there is lack of appreciation about the seriousness, enormity and the urgency to deal with the climate crisis by both members of the judiciary as well as lawyers. The failure to address climate change–related issues in a comprehensive manner represents a serious shortcoming in India’s judiciary which needs urgent attention.