States not using funds allotted by Centre for afforestation: Justice BV Nagarathna

Supreme Court judge Justice BV Nagarathna on Saturday bemoaned that funds supplied by the Centre to States for compensatory afforestation were not being utilised by State governments.

The judge highlighted that out of the total ₹57,325 crores of compensatory afforestation funds received and transferred to States, nearly ₹38,698 crores remained unutilised.

"This indicates that the government is receiving such huge amounts due to diversion of forests. It is possible that many of them may be a result of diversion of pristine evergreen forests which need utmost protection in the present context of climate change. This huge amount of money collected makes me feel as if laws in place to conserve forests are reduced to mere procedures instead of promoting development! I hope this is not true," Justice Nagarathna said.

Hence, she stressed that such afforestation laws must be enforced in line with constitutional duties.

Justice Nagarathna was speaking at the fourth GL Sanghi Memorial Lecture at the Maharashtra National Law University in Nagpur on the topic 'Environmental Justice and Climate Change'.

Senior Advocate GL Sanghi was the father of former Delhi High Court judge and Uttarakhand High Court Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi.

In her address, Justice Nagarathan underscored that it is among the fundamental duties of Indian citizens to be compassionate about all living creatures.

She added that the judiciary must be alive to the legal questions bought about by climate change and must live up to the challenge by creative interpretation of laws.

"The language in Article 48A and 51A(g) suggest that citizens have an extra fundamental duty to have compassion for living creatures. We have to understand this requirement through the constitutional schema enshrined in the Preamble to our Constitution. Climate change brings with it several new legal questions and the Court must be alive to such new challenges through creative interpretation of existing laws. Environmental justice should not be seen in isolation. Rather, it must be seen as part of a broader framework of justice," she said.

Law alone is not enough to protect the environment and deal with climate change, she reminded.

"It begins at the level of the individual as well. We must be mindful of how our actions affect others and our surrounding. It is only when our thoughts are pure that our actions cause minimal suffering to others. That is the essence of the fundamental duty enshrined in Article 51A(g) of the Constitution."

Towards these ends, environmental justice should be a part of the broader framework of justice and ecological concerns and human rights must be dealt with together.

Such a framework rejects the ‘othering’ of nature.

"This process of ‘othering’ is very evident in the use of terms like ‘natural’ disasters. In my opinion, there is nothing ‘natural’ about a disaster. Disasters occur because we have designed our living spaces without regard to their interaction with the environment ... Despite humans to blame, we term such disasters as ‘natural’ disasters and shift the blame on nature, thereby ‘othering’ it," she said in context of floods in urban areas due to encroachment of water bodies.