Top Banner
Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008
31

Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Dec 26, 2015

Download

Documents

Amie Ward
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges

in IndiaJustice Anil Kumar

India

November 26, 2008

Page 2: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

India Situation

• No policy on Natural Resource Damage (NRD)

• No legislation to enforce Responsible Parties (RPs) to conduct clean up

action or pay/reimburse trustees (MoEF/ DoEs) for cleaning up NRD

Page 3: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• Limited Regulatory Agency actions imposing bank guarantee (BG)

and in some cases even pollution cost to restore environmental damage; assessment arbitrary

Page 4: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• One Indian state (Andhra Pradesh) created Environmental Fund with forfeited BG for remedial actions/reversal of damage to NR

• Needs policy and legal support and scientific procedure for assessing

amount of compensation for BG

Page 5: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Judicial Actions

• Supreme Court (SC) in several judgements recognized the importance

of principle of international laws such as “Polluter Pay”, “Precautionary Principles” and “Absolute Liability”

• SC declared them as law of the land in

view of Article 47,48A of the Constitution and the EPA of 1986

Page 6: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Case Study I

• In Bichhri (Rajasthan), industry produced toxic oleum and H acid

• Highly toxic effluents and sludge damaged the land (unfit for cultivation) and water (unsuitable for irrigation)

Page 7: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• Local administration directed closure but large quantity of toxic sludge still remained accumulated in the area

• NGO filed a writ for remedial action

Page 8: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• Court held that industry engaged in hazardous activity has liability to compensate all affected by accidents and also liable to pay cost of remedying damage caused to NR and health

Page 9: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• Court directed MoEF to assess amount required for removal of sludge lying in the area (transportation, treatment and storage in accordance with the Haz Waste Rules,1989) and the responsible industry to pay this amount

Page 10: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• Court further directed that local community can file suit in civil court on loss suffered by villagers

• Finally, Court ordered the industry to pay USD 1,000 by way of cost to the petitioner who fought this litigation over six years with his own resources

Page 11: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Case Study II

Sriram Oleum Gas Leak on Strict Liability:

• Writ Petition seeking court direction for closure of Sriram industry (SI) as hazardous to community

• Court allowed SI to continue with certain conditions ;only dispute related to its relocation to another place where no danger to health and safety of people

Page 12: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd

• While writ petition was pending, there was oleum gas leak

• NGO filed application for compensation to affected people

Page 13: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• SI contested the compensation claim arguing it was not included in the Writ or the Writ was not amended; but court rejected this contention

• The Court applied the expanded concept of Absolute Liability wherein no defense is available to the violator to escape liability.

Page 14: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• Court observed that enterprise engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous industry posing threat to the health/safety of workers & surrounding community owes a non delegable duty to ensure that no harm is caused and has absolute liability to compensate those who were affected

Page 15: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• Court also held that amount of compensation should be directly correlated with degree of damage & capacity of enterprise and it must have deterrent effect

Page 16: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• Court further directed that the NGO should take up the cases of those who were affected and file actions on their behalf in appropriate court for claiming compensation from SI

Page 17: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Case III

Pollution by Tannery in Tamil Nadu:

• Writ petition that tanneries/other industries discharging untreated toxic effluents into agriculture field, open land and waterways and finally into the river which is main source of water supply to Vellore city

Page 18: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• The effluents contaminated ground water and destroyed physico -chemical properties of soil

• NGO survey found 350 of 467 wells used for drinking/irrigation are polluted and about 59 villages were affected

Page 19: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• Court observed that despite state PCB effort, most tanneries were operating without any treatment facility

• Court therefore, directed National Environmental Engineering Research Institute to submit feasibility report for Common Effluent Treatment Plants

Page 20: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• Court also directed the Central Govt to constitute a Authority under EPA with power to invoke Precautionary Principle and Polluter Pay Principles

Page 21: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• This Authority should determine compensation to be recovered from the polluters as cost of reversing the damaged environment and direct closure of non paying industries

Page 22: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• MoEF constituted Loss of Ecology (Prevention and Payment of Compensation) Authority headed by a retired Judge

• This Authority after detailed study awarded a compensation of USD 5.5 ml to 29,193 families as pollution damage

Page 23: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Case Study IV

• Case involved encroachment of forest land and attempt to change the course of river to facilitate the construction of a motel

by a company

Page 24: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• Court took notice of a news item and proceeded to quash the approval of the govt to lease forest land for motel construction

• Court directed the govt to take over the entire area and restore it to its original state

Page 25: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• The Company was directed to remove the construction made on the river bed, to pay compensation by way of cost of restoration of the environment and ecology and to ensure that the river is not polluted by effluents from the motel

Page 26: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• Court used Public Trust Doctrine as part of the law of the land that provides a framework to courts in deciding cases related to environment where a major community resource has been diverted for purpose and use other than those for common enjoyment and benefit.

Page 27: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Case Study V

• Writ petition: Diversion of forest land for non forestry purpose

• Centrally Empowered Committee (CEC- constituted by the MoEF under EPA pursuant to Court Order to monitor forestry related matter)

Page 28: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• CEC recommended that while approving diversion of forest land for non forestry purpose Under Forest Conservation Act:

-realize from user agency fund for

compensatory afforestation /reforestation and net present value (NPV) of forest land diverted for non forest purpose

Page 29: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

-create Compensatory Afforestation Fund (CAF) for depositing all money

-establish CAF Mgt and Planning Authority for Mgt of this fund

Page 30: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

• Court accepted the recommendations of CEC and directed MoEF to :

-create a Special Purpose Vehicle to develop a plan and restore ecological balance through reforestation; and

Page 31: Natural Resource Damage: Experience and Challenges in India Justice Anil Kumar India November 26, 2008.

Contd.

- constitute an Expert Committee to develop a methodology to calculate the NPV based on economic principles (replacing the World Bank developed methodology that adopts USD 12,000-18,000 per ha as NPV)