Context

Recently, the Supreme Court of India historically stated that people have a right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change recognised by Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution.

Articles 14 and 21: Supreme Court Recognizes Right Against Climate Change Part of Equality and Right to Life

• The Supreme Court passed its judgment in a case titled M K Ranjitsinh & Ors versus Union of India & Ors regarding the protection of two critically endangered bird species on the IUCN Red List – the great Indian bustard (GIB) and the lesser florican. 
  • Both are scheduled species listed under Part III of Schedule I of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.

Right Against Climate Change: Background & Evolution of the Judgment

• Petition: The judgment came on a long pending petition by wildlife activist MK Ranjitsinh and others to protect the Great Indian Bustard (GIB) (Ardeotis nigriceps).
• Earlier Judgment: In April 2021, the Court placed restrictions on the setting up of overhead transmission lines. 
  • Setting of Expert Committee: A committee was appointed to evaluate the laying of underground high-voltage lines on a case-to-case basis. 
  • On Powerlines: All low-voltage power lines were directed to be laid underground in the “priority” and “potential” habitats of GIB in the future. 
    • For existing power lines, bird diverters were to be installed that were pending for the conversion of overhead power lines into underground power lines.
• The Union Government’s Position: Since the major solar and wind energy-producing installations of India are in Rajasthan and Gujarat area, the Centre claimed the court’s directions will harm India’s global commitments to reduce the carbon footprint by increasing dependence on renewable energy sources.
• Supreme Court’s Action: The court recalled an earlier order requiring the undergrounding of overhead transmission lines across an area of over 80,000 sq. km. in the two states.
• Recent Judgment: In April 2024, the Court placed its reliance on several reports by the Wildlife Institute of India, identifying 13,663 square km as the “priority area”; 80,680 square km as “potential areas”; and 6,654 square km as “additional important areas” for the GIB.
  • Formation of an Expert Committee: The bench formed an expert committee comprising independent experts, members of the National Board of Wildlife, representatives of power companies, and former and serving bureaucrats drawn from departments of environment and forests and ministry of new and renewable energy (MNRE).
  • Aim: The Committee is formed to suggest ways to balance two objectives – the conservation of the bird and India’s sustainable development goals. 
    • The committee’s first report is expected by July 31.

Implications of the Judgment for Environmental Jurisprudence

• Strengthening Environmental & Climate Justice: The judgment puts the focus on strengthening environmental and climate justice by highlighting the multiple impacts of climate change on a range of communities.
• Expansion of Article 14 & Article 21: These have been expanded by the apex court to include a right to clean environment. 
  • The judgment not only looks to curb environmental pollution, but also proactively outlines environmental and climate justice issues, keeping our international commitments in mind.
• Establishment of Legal Precedent: As per experts, the judgment will set an important legal precedent, and will influence the broader public discourse on environmental matters, and has the potential to shape future government policies.

Need for Right To Be Free From Adverse Effects Of Climate Change

• Rising Vulnerabilities: 

  • Evidence for the vulnerability of Indians to climate change is threatening day by day. 
    • Floods have become more frequent and intense.
    • Rainfall patterns are changing.
    • Heatwaves pose serious health risks
      • Several studies, including IPCC reports, have warned that global warming will put an increasing number of Indians at risk in the coming years.

• Severe Impact on Communities & Culture: 

  • Indigenous communities such as tribals in Andaman and Nicobar Islands depend on nature and the relationship that indigenous communities have with nature may be tied to their culture or religion. 
    • The destruction of lands and forests or their displacement from their homes may result in a permanent loss of their unique culture. 
    • In these ways too, climate change may impact the constitutional guarantee of the right to equality (Article 14).

• Risk of Deepening of Inequality: 

  • If climate change and environmental degradation lead to acute food and water shortages in a particular area, poorer communities will suffer more than richer.
  • The inability of underserved communities to adapt to climate change or cope with its effects violates the right to life (Article 21) as well as the right to equality (Article 14).

• No Priority: 

  • Yet, the toll taken by receding glaciers, landslides, sea-level rise, poor air and the loss of green lungs is rarely an issue for the country’s political class even in an election year.
    • Ecology has, by and large, remained the concern only of academics, civil society groups and activists. 

• Lack of Executive Action: 

  • Governments have not always given proper respect to SC rulings that underline the links between ecology and human dignity. 
    • Delhi’s continuing air pollution is a classic example of the hiatus between jurisprudence and policy. 

• A Question & Threat to Development: 

  • Environmental issues like air and water quality receive attention only when they become an emergency. But with such a scenario, the issue of climate change would become grave. 
    • These events raise questions on the country’s developmental actions which haven’t always been sensitive to ecological concerns.

• Lack of Legal Framework: 

• • Overall, India’s legal framework lacks a single comprehensive climate change law.
    • While dwelling on India’s international commitments to mitigate the impact of greenhouse gas emissions, the apex court also noted that despite many regulations and policies to address the adverse effects of climate change, there was no single legislation relating to climate change and attendant concerns.
      • However, the absence of such legislation, did not mean that Indians do not have a “right against adverse effects of climate change”.

Climate Change & Human Rights in India

• Right to Health: 

  • Article 21 and Article 14 are important sources of the right to a clean environment and the right against the adverse effects of climate change. 
    • Without a clean environment, which is stable and non impacted by the impacts of climate change, the right to life is not fully realized. 
      • Article 21 recognises the right to life and personal liberty and the right to health is its important part.
      • Article 14 indicates that all persons shall have equality before law and the equal protection of laws.

• Article 48A: 

  • It states that the State shall endeavor to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country. It was added by the 42nd Amendment, 1976 and places an obligation on the State to protect the environment and wildlife.

• Article 51-A (g): 

  • It states that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures.

• Right to be free from the Adverse Effects of Climate Change: 

  • The right to health is impacted due to various factors such as air pollution, shifts in vector-borne diseases, rising temperatures, droughts, shortages in food supplies due to crop failure, storms, and flooding. 
  • Hence, a right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change is desirable.

• Judicial Intervention: 

• • M C Mehta v Union of India (1987): The Supreme Court treated the right to live in a pollution-free environment as a part of the Right to Life. 
  • Since then, several SC verdicts have underlined that people have a right to breathe unpolluted air, drink clean water and live a healthy life. 

Way Forward

• Urgent Shift on Solar Energy: India urgently needs to shift to solar power as India is likely to account for 25% of global energy demand growth over the next two decades, necessitating a move towards solar for enhanced energy security and self-sufficiency while mitigating environmental impacts. 
• A Call to Action: The Supreme Court said that states are compelled to take effective measures to mitigate climate change.
  • The intersection of climate change and human rights has been put into sharp focus in recent years, underscoring the imperative for states to address climate impacts by providing the rights.
• Interpretation of Rights: The Supreme Court opined that constitutional rights such as the right to life and equality before the law are interpreted to include the right to a clean environment and protection against the adverse effects of climate change. 
  • Even while lacking a comprehensive climate change law, India encompasses various measures aimed at mitigating environmental degradation and addressing climate change concerns. 

Conclusion

Recognition by the Supreme Court of India of the right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change within the purview of constitutional fundamental rights paves the way for legal accountability of actions that undermine meeting climate targets. This case significantly influences jurisprudence on climate governance in India.