Skip to main content

UN experts to Govt of India: Environmental exemptions to industry unwarranted

Counterview Desk

Several top United Nations (UN) experts* have taken strong exception to the Government of India’s draft Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2020, stating that it seeks to violate several UN provisions on rights to life, health, food, water and sanitation, housing, culture and a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment.
Also objecting to “exempting” several polluting sectors such as chemical manufacturing, petroleum products, building, construction and area development, inland waterways and expansion or widening of national highways, in a strongly-worded communication to the Union ministry of environment, forests and climate change, they quote approvingly quote a Supreme Court judgement delivered in a case filed by top Gujarat environmentalist Rohit Prajapati.
Especially referring to the draft's provision of post-facto environmental clearance for projects, the UN communication refers to the judgement as saying that “environment compliance must not be seen as an obstacle to development but as a measure towards achieving sustainable development and inter-generational equity.”
The apex court had underlined, it adds, “Environment law cannot countenance the notion of an ex post-facto clearance. This would be contrary to both the precautionary principle as well as the need for sustainable development.”

Text:

We would like to bring to the attention of your Excellency's Government information we have received concerning the draft Environment Impact Assessment Notification, 2020, issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, which, if adopted, will supersede the Environment Impact Assessment notification dated September 14, 2006 and its subsequent amendments.
In this regard, we express our concern regarding some provisions and their impact on the effectiveness and transparency of the environmental regulatory framework in India, which is essential to avoid undertaking or authorizing actions with environmental impacts that interfere with the full enjoyment of all relevant rights, including the rights to life, health, food, water and sanitation, housing, culture and a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment.
The draft notification includes under Clauses 14 (2) and 26 an exemption of several large industries and projects from public consultation -- as part of the environment impact assessment process -- such as chemical manufacturing and petroleum products; building, construction and area development; inland waterways and expansion or widening of national highways.
These exemptions are unwarranted given the substantial environmental and human rights negative impacts that can arise from projects in these areas. This is of great concern, as shown by the recent gas toxic leak in Andhra Pradesh at a chemical plant on May 12, that caused the death of 12 people and illness of over 1,000.
According to Clause 5 (7), the draft notification does not require the publication of information or the holding of public consultation for projects labeled by the Central Government as “involving strategic considerations'. Regretably, the draft notification does not provide clarification regarding the criteria for categorizing projects ‘strategic' by the Central Government and could therefore be open to excessively broad interpretation, reducing the ability of the public to raise concerns about potential impact on humans and the environment.
Another substantial concern relates to the proposal to allow post-facto clearance of projects that have been commenced without obtaining the required environmental clearances or environmental permissions (Clauses 22 and 23). This practice contradicts basic principles related to the environmental rule of law.
As the Supreme Court of India recently noted, “Given the social and environmental impacts of an industrial activity, environment compliance must not be seen as an obstacle to development but as a measure towards achieving sustainable development and inter-generational equity” (Alembic Pharmaceuticals Ltd v Rohit Prajapati and Others, Supreme Court of India, Civil Appeal No. 1526 of 2016, Decision dated April 1, 2020, p 36).
In light of the purpose of environmental impact assessment, the Court concluded that “environment law cannot countenance the notion of an ex post-facto clearance. This would be contrary to both the precautionary principle as well as the need for sustainable development” (p 23).
Furthermore, under Clause 20 (4), the draft notification extends projects' compliance reporting timeframe from six months to one year, including in critical sectors such as mining. The draft notification also reduces the period for the public to comment from 30 days to 20 days under the clearance process and requires that the public hearing process be completed in 40 days, compared to 45 days under the current notification.
Often project proposals that incur environmental impact are of a complex nature, requiring in-depth analysis and consultation among various sectors of society, who could be affected. These proposed changes would make it more difficult for the public including those who may be directly impacted to excercise their rights to effective, equal and meaningful participation in environmental decision-making processes.
Rohit Prajapati
As articulated in the Framework Principles on Human Rights and the Environment published in 2018, “The assessment procedure itself must comply with human rights obligations, including by providing public information about the assessment and making the assessment and the final decision publicly available (framework principle 7), facilitating public participation by those who may be affected by the proposed action (framework principle 9), and providing for effective legal remedies (framework principle 10).”
Current best practices in environmental impact assessment include an evaluation of actual and potential impacts on human rights, and require proponents to take steps to avoid any potentially adverse effects on human rights resulting from their proposed projects or activities. 
As noted in the Framework Principles on Human Rights and the Environment, the assessment of environmental impacts should also examine the possible esfects of the environmental impacts of proposed projects and policies on the enjoyment of all relevant rights” (Principle 8).
Article 25(a) of the The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which India has ratified, guarantees the right of everyone to take part in the conduct of public affairs of their country, including participation in decision-making related to the environment. The Covenant also recognizes, in its article 19(2), the right of all persons to seek, receive and impart information, which includes information on environmental matters.
On environmental impact assessment, Supreme Court had said: The law cannot countenance the notion of an ex post-facto clearance
Furthermore, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in its General Comment no. 15 (2002) stated that, before any action that interferes with individual's right to water is carried out by the State party, or by any other third party, the relevant authorities must provide an opportunity for “genuine consultation with those affected”.
Additionally, access to information and public participation safeguards are reflected in the Declaration of the UN Conference on the Human Environment (Stockholm, 1972), the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (Rio de Janeiro, 1992), the Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. 
These international instruments include requirements for environmental impact assessments to be carried out prior to the approval or implementation of any projects or activities that could cause substantial adverse effects.
We would like to highlight that ensuring that environmental decisions take into account the views of those who are affected by them increases public support, promotes sustainable development and helps to protect the enjoyment of rights that depend on a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment.
Assessments of the environmental and human rights impacts of proposed projects and policies must include a careful examination of the impacts on those in most vulnerable situation, such as persons living in poverty, members of indigenous peoples and other local communities, older persons, persons with disabilities, ethnic, racial or other minorities, women, migrants, displaced persons and those living in rural or remote areas.
Moreover, under international human rights standards on the right to participate in environemental matters, effective public participation must be open to all members of the public who may be affected and must occur early in the decision-making process. 
In addition, all relevant information about assessments, proposals and the decision-making process must be made available to the affected public in an objective, understandable, timely and effective manner. In monitoring and reporting on environmental issues, detailed information should be provided on the threats to, and status of, those in most vulnerable situation.
We would like to note that the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples further affirms the right to the conservation and protection of indigenous peoples' environment and of the productive capacity of their lands, territories or resources (Article 29). 
It also confirms the right to free and informed consent prior the approval of any project assecting their lands (Article 32.2), which is particularly important for to indigenous peoples living in forests and relying on fragile ecosystems for their subsistence. 
Regarding the draft and adoption process of the Environment Impact Assessment notification 2020, the Declaration requests that States consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them (Article 19).
Furthermore, under the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (the UN Guiding Principles), the State has a duty to protect against actual and potential negative impact caused by business operations on human rights and the environment. This requires taking appropriate steps to prevent, investigate, punish and redress such abuse through effective policies, legislation, regulations and adjudication (Guiding principle 1).
In this context, we would like to remind your Excellency's Government about its formal commitment to effectively and coherently implement the UN Guiding Principles through the release, in December 2018, of a zero draft of the national action plan on business and human rights in which the Government articulates its action to fulfil its commitment under the “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Pillars framework of the UN Guiding Principles.
We would also like to remind that, under the UN Guiding Principles, businesses have an independent responsibility to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address their impacts on human rights and the environment, including through effective human rights due diligence and environmental impact assessment processes, in order to “identify and assess any actual or potential adverse human rights impacts with which they may be involved either through their own activities or as a result of their business relationships”.
Essential elements of human rights and environmental impact assessment processes include the “meaningful consultation with potentially affected groups and other relevant stakeholders”, the integration of the findings from their impact assessments across relevant internal functions and processes, and taking appropriate action (see Guiding Principles 17--19).
Lastly, we would like to recall the National Guidelines on Responsible Business Conduct, issued by the Government in March 2019, which are in line with the UN Guiding Principles. Principle 6 of the Guidelines provides that all businesses “should respect and make efforts to protect and restore the environment”.
This principle “emphasizes that environmental issues are interconnected at the local, regional and global levels, which makes it imperative for businesses to address issues like pollution, biodiversity conservation, sustainable use of natural resources and climate change (mitigation, adaptation and resilience) in a just, comprehensive and systematic manner.”
As it is our responsibility, under the mandates provided to us by the Human Rights Council, to seek to clarify all cases brought to our attention, we would be grateful for the observations of your Excellency's Government on the following matters:
  • Please provide any additional information and/or any comment(s) you may have on the issues raised.
  • How do the provisions of the draft notification correspond with India's obligations under international law? 
This communication, as a comment on pending or recently adopted legislation, regulations or policies, and any response received from your Excellency's Government will be made public via the communications reporting website within 48 hours. They will also subsequently be made available in the usual report to be presented to the Human Rights Council.
While awaiting a reply, we urge that all necessary interim measures be taken to halt the alleged violations and prevent their re-occurrence and in the event that the investigations support or suggest the allegations to be correct, to ensure the accountability of any person(s) responsible for the alleged violations.
--
*Signatories:
  • David R Boyd Special Rapporteur on the issue of human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment
  • Anita Ramasastry Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises 
  • Michael Fakhri Special Rapporteur on the right to food 
  • José Francisco Cali Tzay Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples 
  • Olivier De Schutter Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights 
  • Léo Heller Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation

Comments

TRENDING

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Our Representative Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

World Bank proved right, Narmada is already a destructive project: Medha Patkar

By Rajiv Shah  Narmada Bachao Andolan leader Medha Patkar has said that the World Bank’s independent review mission, which brought out the Morse Commission report , has been proved right: The Sardar Sarovar dam has not only failed to live up to the loud promises made for irrigating large arid areas of Saurashtra and Kutch in Gujarat, those who were displaced and resettled in Gujarat are getting increasingly restive as many of them are unable to get the promised water for irrigation and some for drinking water too. While 50,000 families have been resettled in three states and 20,000 have received land rights as land or cash, the authorities have not calculated what should be done with 15,000 families, whose houses are acquired for Sardar Sarovar but following changing backwater levels of the Sardar Sarovar dam, they are denied rehabilitation, Patkar tells Counterview in an interview (part1*): *** Q: What is the latest position in your view as far as the Sardar Sarovar dam is concerned?

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Industries dumping effluents into Narmada, destroying Adivasis' organic farms: Medha

By Rajiv Shah  Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) leader Medha Patkar believes that it is not just rehabilitation issues which nag the Sardar Sarovar dam affected people, especially Adivasis who have lived along the Narmada river for centuries.  The river water is now facing excessive sand mining, on one hand, and effluent discharge in Narmada and its tributaries, on the other, making people increasingly restive, Patkar tells Counterview in an interview (part 2*): *** Q: Apart from rehabilitation, which other issues, in your view, are affecting people living next to the Narmada river today? A: Since in 2019, when they filled up the dam to the full reservoir level, 138 metres, we notice, the river is going down and down and down... Q: Is it because of the climate change? A: Partly, but the main reason is illegal, unbound, unwanted sand mining. Just as Yamuna got finished, Narmada is following the same pattern. We won the case against illegal mining. There are also a number of judgments, like

Vadodara violence: Fine Arts Faculty alumni raise fingers at Varsity's political appointee

Hasmukh Vaghela with PM Counterview Desk  In a statement, alumni of the Faculty of Fine Arts (FoFA), Maharaja Sayajirao University (MSU), Baroda, Gujarat, referring to the “violence” by right-wing groups for displaying “objectionable” paintings that “hurt religious sentiments” at the one of India’s top fine arts institute May 5, have taken strong exception to “the assault and rustication” of one of the students, and lack of action taken against those who “violated” the institution and committed the act. Floated as an online petition seeking wider support, the FoFA alumni, in their statement, addressed to the vice chancellor, MSU, said, there should be “thorough” investigation in the whole incident and “immediate action” should be taken against syndicate member Hasmukh Vaghela, MSU, who sparked the assault, and “other co-conspirators” for breaching “university code of conduct and unlawful activities committed in broad daylight”. While the alumni statement doesn't say so, Vaghela

Polygamy in India "down" in 45 yrs: Muslims' from 5.7 to 2.55%, Hindus' 5.8 to 1.77%, "common" in SCs, STs

By Rajiv Shah Amidst All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) justifying polygamy, saying it “meets social and moral needs and the provision for it stems from concern and sympathy for women”, facts suggest the the practice is down from 5.7 per cent of Muslim families in 1961 to 2.55 per cent in 2006.

Ukraine: Why Gandhi's thinking offers serious alternative to today's 'violent' civilization

By Prem Singh*  Splintered lies the ethics, In varying degrees Which both have bent The Pandavas less, the Kauravas more Oh, when will this bloodletting end …? – 'Andha Yug', Dharamveer Bharati. The Russia-Ukraine war shows no signs of ending. However, there continue to be constant statements, discussions, and write ups from leaders, diplomats, experts, officials, scholars and ordinary citizens on various aspects related to the war. Whatever the significance of this whole exercise in the discussion of the causes, implications, effects, consequences etc. of war, it has been if little help in exerting any positive influence. It seems that modern violent civilization doesn't appear to have many options, not only by politicians and diplomats, but also by various experts and scholars who have taken their stand on the war. It can also be said that that they do not perceive modern civilization as violent. The UN general secretary says that the Russia-Ukraine war is an absurdity, a

UK leader cites Indian farmers' struggle one of top global fights against neoliberal order

Counterview Desk  Jeremy Corbyn, member of the UK Parliament, former leader of the UK Labour Party and founder of the  Peace and Justice Project , in his  inaugural speech to the  Progressive International’s  Summit at the End of the World on May 12, 2022, has said, what is happening across globe suggests that "image of apocalypse -- bombs and raids, oil spills and wildfires, disease and contagion -- is a reality for people across the planet." In an adaptation of his speech, distributed by  Globetrotter , Corbyn, however, said, there are fresh examples action, too -- by Indian farmers forcing Prime Minister Narendra Modi to withdraw three neo-liberal laws;  by workers, communities and activists against the top giant multinational Amazon's "greed and exploitation"; and by Latin American people's struggle to say "no more to the domination by imperialism, the destruction of their communities and the abuse of their environments." Stating that this is n

This Maoist justified US, western Europe's anti-Soviet stance, even Bhindranwale

By Harsh Thakor*  A glaring example of the extent to which those seeking to identify themselves as revolutionaries can go in making odd compromises with those normally considered as “class enemies” in Marxist jargon is late Kondapalli Seetharamiah. Few know that this Maoist organiser two decades ago was so enamoured by the Chinese three worlds theory that he called for a united front with the United States and other western countries against what he considered Soviet social imperialism! This wasn’t the only “compromise” Seetharamiah made during his career as a revolutionary. On Punjab he took a most eclectical stand of supporting Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale, thus soft-pedalling the terrorist Khalistani movement. Among his other opportunist alliances, about which few are aware of, include support to the Akalis in Punjab, on one hand, and the NTR Telugu Desam regime in Andhra Pradesh, on the other – all part of his anti-Congress thrust. Also known as KS, this Maoist started his career as

Custodial death of Muslim youth: Govt of India told to ratify UN convention on torture

Counterview Desk  Kirity Roy, secretary, Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM), and national convenor, Programme Against Custodial Torture & Impunity (PACTI), Hooghly, West Bengal, in a representation to the chairman, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), has drawn to the custodial death of a Muslim youth following his torture in police custody after registering a "false case" based on manufactured records. Seeking "proper investigation" the whole incident, Roy in his plea insists, the incident legitimizes his organisations' long-standing demand "for immediate ratification of the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment." Text : Here I want to draw your kind attention to one incident of custodial torture by the Deganga police personnel and the subsequent custodial death of one Muslim man from the Other Backward Class community in Dum Dum Central Correctional Home. The name o