Professional Documents
Culture Documents
on
LEGAL STRUCTURES AND
NATIONAL & INTERNATIONAL
FRAMEWORK FOR
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
INTRODUCTION:
The concept of 'Sustainable Development' is not a new concept. The doctrine had come to be
known as early as in 1972 in the Stockholm declaration. It had been stated in the declaration
that: " Man has the fundamental right to freedom, equality and adequate conditions of life, in
an environment of a quality that permits a life of dignity and well being and he bears a
solemn responsibility to protect and improve the environment for present and future
generation "
But the concept was given a definite shape in a report by world commission on environment,
which was known as ' our common future'. The commission, which was chaired by the then
Norway Prime Minister, Ms. G.H. Brundtland defined 'Sustainable Development' as: "
Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the
future generations to meet their own needs".The report was popularly known as 'Brundtland
report' the concept had been further discussed under agenda 21 of UN conference on
environment and development held in June 1992 at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Sustainable development is development which meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It is aimed at
promoting wellbeing of citizens now and in the future. It requires creating a sustainable and
resource efficient economy founded on a fair and just society, respecting the three core pillars
of sustainability: the environmental, the economic, and the social.
The original concept of sustainable development was elaborated upon through a series of
groundbreaking documents and legal instruments agreed at the 1992 Earth Summit held in
Brazil (also known as the United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development
or UNCED), which was a major success in raising public awareness on the need to integrate
environment and development. In the preparatory process for the Rio Summit in 1992, there
were a number of proposals for institutional reform to address the challenges of sustainable
development. Also, UNCED saw the adoption of a number of crucial agreements and those
agreements were signed at the Earth Summit, which are as follows:
Agenda 21;
World Heritage Convention (1972) which refers to natural and cultural heritage
being preserved for the benefit of mankind.
Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer (1985) and Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (1987) (Montreal Protocol)
which requires precautionary measures to be adopted to prevent ozone depleting
their domestic laws. In this regard, the introductions of national laws that give effect to treaty
obligation are critical to translating those international principles into action on the ground.
Each of the eight goals has targets and indicators used to measure progress. Due to its
overarching nature, the concept of sustainable development underpins each of the MDGs.
In UN General Assembly Resolution, which adopted the outcomes of the 2002 World
Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), the General Assembly agreed to adopt
sustainable development as a key element of the overarching framework for United Nations
activities, in particular for achieving the internationally agreed development goals, including
those contained in the United Nations Millennium Declaration, and to give overall political
direction to the implementation of Agenda 21 and its review.
This Resolution demonstrates that the General Assembly considered the application of
sustainable development principles to be a crucial consideration to be taken into account in
the UNs work, and as an essential prerequisite for achieving the MDGs. It is, furthermore,
intuitive that for development to be effective, it must have a long term vision addressing
economic, social and environmental considerations. In other words, all development should
fall under the rubric of sustainable development.
C. Rio+20 Summit:
The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development - or Rio+20 - took place in Rio
de Janeiro, Brazil on 20-22 June 2012. It resulted in a focused political outcome document
which contains clear and practical measures for implementing sustainable development.
financing.
development. The Rio +20 Conference also galvanized the attention of thousands
of representatives of the UN system and major groups. It resulted in over
Also, The Rio +20 affirmed the essential role of the rule of law in development. In the
Outcome Document, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in September 2012,
participating states acknowledge that democracy, good governance and the rule of law, at
the national and international levels, as well as an enabling environment, are essential for
sustainable development, including sustained and inclusive economic growth, social
development, environmental protection and the eradication of poverty and hunger. The
participants also acknowledged the need for strong and effective legal and regulatory
frameworks, especially to ensure sustainable development through extractive industries, and
to expand development to the poor and vulnerable.
The two themes of the Conference were: (1) a green economy in the context of sustainable
development and poverty eradication; and (2) the institutional framework for sustainable
development (IFSD).
Trade discrimination;
Technology gaps;
Poverty eradication;
4. The polluter pays principle: It says, those who generate pollution and waste should bear
the cost of containment, avoidance or abatement;
However, one characteristic these diverse organizations share is that their non-profit
status means they are not hindered by short-term financial objectives. Accordingly, they
are able to devote themselves to issues which occur across longer time horizons i.e. long
term objectives, such as climate change, malaria prevention or a global ban on landmines.
Public surveys reveal that NGOs often enjoy a high degree of public trust, which can
make them a useful - but not always sufficient - proxy for the concerns of society and
stakeholders and other interest groups.
The trouble with sustainable development of this sort is that, although its easy to picture,
it is hard to bring about. We may have a good idea of what wont work, but were less
certain of what will. Addressing poverty as an economic problem involves work such as
loaning money to people to start small businesses, or seeking to improve human capital
through helping children attend school. The rationale is that small improvements can be
compounding and ultimately self-sustaining: businesses expand; profits are reinvested;
educated children get better jobs. It is the sort of reasoning that NGOs can play as roles
in order to improve micro-economic condition from the very root of itself.
NGOs as a external agents are trying to bring change, they are inevitably going to be
imperfectly informed about this context. There are limits to what they can do and they are
often hampered by powerful local actors and state policies. Under these circumstances, it
is possible that the optimal approach in a hypothetical world of omnipotent NGOs wont
be the best approach in the real world where NGOs are constrained by others factors.
They also play a vital role in the shaping and implementation of participatory democracy.
Their credibility lies in the responsible and constructive role they play in society. Formal
and informal organizations, as well as grass-roots movements, should be recognized as
partners in the implementation of Agenda 21. The nature of the independent role played
by non-governmental organizations within a society calls for real participation; therefore,
independence is a major attribute of non-governmental organizations and is the
precondition of real participation.
Judiciary in India, more precisely, the Supreme Court and the High Courts has played an
important role in preserving the doctrine of ' Sustainable Development '. Parliament has
enacted various laws to deal with the problems of environmental degradation. In such a
situation, the superior courts have played a pivotal role in interpreting those laws to suit the
doctrine of ' Sustainable Development'.
It is worthwhile to mention here that principle 10 of Rio declaration, 1992 states that:
"Environmental issues are best handled with participation of all concerned citizens, at the
relevant level. At the national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to
information concerning the environment that is held by public authorities, including
information on hazardous materials and activities. States shall facilitate and encourage
public awareness and participation by making information widely available. Effective access
to judicial and administrative proceedings, including redress and remedy, shall be provided."
1) Vellore Citizen Welfare Forum vs. Union of India was the first case on which the apex
court had applied the doctrine of ' Sustainable Development' in which the dispute arose over
some tanneries in the state of Tamil Nadu. These tanneries were discharging effluents in the
river Palar, which was the main source of drinking water in the state .The Hon'ble Supreme
Court held that: "We have no hesitation in holding that the precautionary principle and
polluter pays principle are part of the environmental law of India". The court also held that:
"Remediation of the damaged environment is part of the process of 'Sustainable
Development' and as such polluter is liable to pay the cost to the individual sufferers as well
as the cost of reversing the damaged ecology."
But before Vellore Citizen's case, the Supreme Court has in many cases tried to keep the
balance between ecology and development. In Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra
1
Dehradun vs. State of Uttar Pradesh , which was also known as Doon valley case, dispute
arose over mining in the hilly areas. The Supreme Court after much investigation, ordered the
stopping of mining work and held that: "This would undoubtedly cause hardship to them, but
it is a price that has to be paid for protecting and safeguarding the right of the people to live
in healthy environment with minimal disturbance of ecological balance and without
avoidable hazard to them and to their cattle, homes and agricultural land and undue
affection of air, water and environment."
1
However in 1991, in the Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra vs. State of U.P. the
Supreme Court firstly allowed a mine to operate until the expiry of lease as exceptional case
on condition that land taken on lease would be subjected to a forestation by the developer.
But as soon as the notice was brought before the court that they have breached the condition
and mining was done in most unscientific way, the Supreme Court directed the lessee to pay
a compensation of three lacs to the fund of the monitoring committee. This has been directed
on the principle of 'polluter pays'.
Likewise, various forests have also been protected. In a landmark case Tarun Bhagat Singh
3
vs. Union of India , the petitioner through a PIL brought to the notice of the Supreme Court
that the state government of Rajasthan though empowered to make rules to protect
environment, failed to do so and in contrary allowed mining work to continue within the
forest area. Consequently, the Supreme Court issued directions that no mining work or
operation could be continued within the protected area.
But it would be unwise to hold that the courts always favour environment without giving any
significance to the development aspect when dispute arises between environment and
development.
In M. C. Mehta vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court issued directions towards the closing
of mechanical stone crushing activities in and around Delhi, which was declared by WHO as
the third most polluted city in the world. However it realized the importance of stone
crushing and issued directions for allotment of sites in the new 'crushing zone' set up at
village Pali in the state of Haryana.
2
3
In order to achieve the objectives of accessible, quick and speedy justice, these
Environment Courts' should be established and constituted by the Union
Government in each State.
The proposed Environment Court should consist of a Chairperson and at least two
other members.
Global law is necessary to solve the environmental cases and 12 law of principle is
helpful for the better judiciary process.
Thus it is quite obvious that the courts give equal importance to both ecology and
development while dealing with the cases of environmental degradation. Environment and
development are two sides of the same coin. Any one of these cannot be sacrificed for the
other. On contrary, both are equally important for our better future. Thus the responsibility
lies on the Supreme Court and the various High Courts to deal with these cases with caution
of high degree. Then only, we will achieve our goal i.e. to secure a pollution free developed
country for our next generation.
information and awareness of the relationship between law and sustainability, lawyers can
further sustainable development by helping craft legally sound frameworks for the private
and public sectors to implement the steps that will undoubtedly be a product of Rio 20.
And on talking about the role of courts, they function as an arm of government that is critical
in the separation of powers doctrine, and they play a crucial role in giving effect to legislative
and executive intentions and pronouncements. Judicial power enables sovereign states to
decide controversies between itself and its subjects and between the subjects between
themselves.
Judiciary balances the interests of society with economic development, environmental
sustainability, and the competing interests of persons and entities.