NEW DELHI, Aug 28: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Friday said courts must seek a balance between environmental protection and legitimate development requirements, stressing that ecological preservation and economic progress should not necessarily be treated as competing objectives.
Addressing the high level Commonwealth Policy Dialogue on Climate Justice at the Commonwealth Secretariat’s Marlborough House in London, Kant said climate change was increasingly challenging traditional legal frameworks and requiring courts to respond to issues affecting vulnerable communities across geographical boundaries.
The CJI is on a four day official visit to Germany and the United Kingdom.
He said the consequences of climate change now extend across continents and affect global supply chains, adding that the scale of the crisis was a reminder that established legal categories would face growing challenges.
“Our task as judges and as institutions is to ensure that the law does not become most uncertain precisely where people are most vulnerable,” Kant said.
He also highlighted the difficulties faced by developing countries that are still pursuing industrialisation while being urged to accelerate their transition towards renewable energy.
According to Kant, climate justice requires recognition of the different circumstances of countries and regions, along with a fair distribution of the responsibilities arising from the transition to cleaner energy.
He said communities dependent directly on natural resources are often among the first to experience the effects of environmental degradation and climate related disruptions.
“When a smallholder or a fisher family loses land, water or a harvest to a crisis they did little to cause, the consequences extend far beyond environmental harm,” he said, noting that such losses can threaten livelihoods, dignity and equality.
The CJI called for judicial approaches that take into account local constitutional, social and environmental conditions while also allowing courts to learn from successful practices adopted elsewhere in the Commonwealth.
He said courts should develop jurisprudence suited to their own circumstances while remaining open to ideas and solutions emerging from other jurisdictions.
Kant also spoke about the judiciary’s growing responsibility in cases where development projects and ecological concerns come into conflict.
He observed that courts are increasingly required to determine where developmental necessity ends and ecological protection begins, sometimes in the absence of detailed legislative guidance.
He said development and environmental preservation should not always be placed on opposite sides of the scales, and courts may sometimes have to find innovative solutions that allow both objectives to advance.
The CJI pointed to the expanded interpretation of the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution as an example of how courts have addressed issues where constitutional provisions do not expressly prescribe a framework for balancing competing interests.
“The role of a judge is, therefore, changing; it is no longer enough to know what the law says; we must also understand the world to which that law is being applied,” he said.
Kant further stressed the importance of technical expertise in environmental litigation. He said judicial innovation alone cannot address increasingly complex ecological disputes and courts need continuing assistance from specialists.
Citing India’s experience, he referred to the Central Empowered Committee, which was established nearly three decades ago during a long-running forest conservation case.
The committee, comprising experts in forestry, wildlife and environmental matters, was empowered to inspect sites, examine alleged violations and provide technical reports to the court.
Kant said the committee has continued to contribute to environmental adjudication and influenced the outcome of numerous forestry and conservation cases.
He also referred to the National Green Tribunal as another example of an institutional framework that combines judicial expertise with technical knowledge.
Such mechanisms, he said, demonstrate that environmental adjudication cannot be confined to judges and lawyers alone, given the increasingly scientific and complex nature of climate related disputes.
The CJI emphasised that the clean energy transition must be pursued alongside principles of fairness and shared responsibility so that efforts to address climate change do not create fresh hardships for vulnerable communities.
He said the Commonwealth could play an important role in facilitating the exchange of judicial ideas and approaches as courts across countries confront similar challenges arising from climate change.
The broader objective, Kant indicated, should be to build legal responses that protect ecological systems while ensuring that development remains inclusive and the burdens of environmental transition are distributed fairly.