CJI Surya Kant Links Environmental Justice to Future Generations
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant highlighted the Supreme Court’s evolving role in environmental justice, describing it as a “banyan tree” whose roots reflect India’s civilisational connection with nature and whose branches represent safeguards for future generations. He also discussed constitutional environmental duties, climate litigation and the need to balance development with ecological protection.
At an international conference on environment and climate dynamics in New Delhi on September 19, CJI Surya Kant spoke about the evolution of environmental protection in India and the judiciary's role in addressing ecological concerns. He connected India's long-standing cultural regard for nature with constitutional provisions dealing with environmental protection.
The Chief Justice referred to Article 48A, which places an obligation on the State to protect and improve the environment, and Article 51A(g), which establishes a fundamental duty on citizens to protect and improve the natural environment.
He described the Supreme Court's environmental jurisprudence using the banyan-tree metaphor, saying its roots were connected to India's civilisational ethos while its branches represented protection for generations yet to come.
In discussing the development of environmental law, Surya Kant referred to the Supreme Court's earlier decisions concerning sanitation and environmental protection and its subsequent development of principles such as the precautionary principle, polluter-pays principle, absolute liability and the public trust doctrine.
He also addressed the changing nature of climate litigation. According to his remarks, courts increasingly need to consider cumulative ecological damage rather than treating environmental impacts from individual projects as completely separate issues. He also pointed to the difficulty of addressing climate-related disputes that cross administrative and national boundaries.
Another theme of his address was the relationship between development and environmental protection. Rather than presenting them simply as opposing objectives, he discussed the judicial approach of examining development alongside environmental safeguards and accountability.
What's Your Reaction?
Like
0
Dislike
0
Love
0
Funny
0
Angry
0
Sad
0
Wow
0







