नेपाल सरकार कानून, नीति, नियम तर्जुमा गर्न अब्बल देखिए पनि तिनको कार्यान्वयन गराउन भने असफल भएको देखिन्छ।

जिवेश झा

नेपालको संविधानले वातावरण संरक्षण र प्रवर्द्धन सम्बन्धी विशिष्ट मौलिक हकहरूको प्रत्याभूति गरेको छ। संवैधानिक व्यवस्थाले राज्यसंयन्त्र र व्यक्तिलाई समेत वातावरणको संरक्षण र संवर्द्धनमा भूमिका खेल्न प्रेरित गरेको भए पनि वेलाबखत काठमाडौं विश्वका प्रदूषित शहरमध्ये अब्बल स्थानमा आउँछ। यो भनेको संविधान र प्रचलित कानूनको उचित कार्यान्वयन नहुनु हो।

५ जूनमा विश्व वातावरण दिवस मनाइरहँदा वातावरण प्रदूषण बढेर काठमाडौं अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय स्तरमै कुख्यात हुनुका कारणबारे गम्भीर चिन्तन गर्नुपर्ने देखिन्छ।

संवैधानिक व्यवस्था

नेपालको संविधानको धारा ३० मा ‘प्रत्येक नागरिकलाई स्वच्छ र सफा वातावरणमा बस्ने पाउने हक हुनेछ’ भन्ने उल्लेख छ। धारा ३५ (४) मा ‘प्रत्येक नागरिकलाई स्वच्छ खानेपानी तथा सरसफाइमा पहुँचको हक हुनेछ’ भन्ने उल्लेख छ।

खाद्य सम्प्रभुताको हक धारा ३६ ले सिर्जना गरेको छ भने कृषि वा वातावरण संरक्षणमा सुधार ल्याउन भूमिसुधार सम्बन्धी कानून तर्जुमा गर्ने राज्यको अधिकारलाई धारा २५ ले सुनिश्चित गरेको देखिन्छ। गुणस्तरीय खाद्य पदार्थ र सेवाहरूमा उपभोक्ताको हकलाई धारा ४४ ले स्थापित गरेको छ।

उच्च तथा सर्वोच्च अदालतलाई वातावरणको संरक्षण र संवर्द्धनका लागि कुनै निर्देशन वा आदेश गर्न अधिकार दिइएको छ। वातावरण संरक्षण सम्बन्धी हकको उल्लंघन भएमा उचित कानूनी उपचारका लागि अदालत पुग्ने मार्ग पनि प्रशस्त गरेको पाइन्छ।

वातावरण सम्बन्धी यस्ता प्रावधानले अन्ततः नेपालको हरित गणतन्त्र (ग्रीन डेमेक्रेसी)लाई टेवा पुर्‍याउँछ।

‘पब्लिक ट्रस्ट डक्ट्रिन’ अनुसार प्राकृतिक सम्पदाको प्रभावकारी व्यवस्थापन गर्ने जिम्मेवारी राज्यको हुन्छ र प्राकृतिक सम्पदाको अनुचित प्रयोगबाट वातावरणमा पर्ने जोखिम न्यूनीकरण गर्न निरोधात्मक र पूर्व सावधानीको उपाय अपनाउन पनि राज्यको विशेष जिम्मेवारी हुन्छ।

‘प्यारेन्स प्याट्रिया’ सिद्धान्तले पनि वातावरण संरक्षण गर्ने दायित्व राज्यसत्ताको हुने भनेको छ। र, नेपालको संवैधानिक व्यवस्थाले पनि यी स्थापित सिद्धान्त आत्मसात् गरेको पाइन्छ।

कानूनी प्रावधान

राज्यका संयन्त्रहरूले बाध्यकारी संवैधानिक प्रावधान र अदालतको आदेश अवज्ञा गरेकै कारण आज नेपालको वातावरण प्रदूषित भइरहेको छ।

वातावरण संरक्षण ऐन, २०७६ ले वातावरण अध्ययन प्रतिवेदन विना विकास निर्माणसँग सम्बन्धित प्रस्ताव ‘पास’ हुने परिकल्पना गरेको छैन। उक्त ऐनको दफा ३ अनुसार प्रस्तावकले विकास निर्माण सम्बन्धमा वातावरणीय अध्ययन प्रतिवेदन सरकार समक्ष पेश गर्नुपर्ने परिकल्पना गरेको छ।

राष्ट्रिय प्राथमिकता प्राप्त विकास आयोजना, राष्ट्रिय गौरवका योजना, एकभन्दा बढी प्रदेशमा निर्माण कार्य गर्नुपर्ने आयोजना लगायत विषयसँग सम्बन्धित विकास निर्माणको हकमा वातावरण अध्ययन प्रतिवेदन वातावरण मन्त्रालयमा पेश गर्नुपर्ने भनिएको छ।

यस्तै, प्रदेश सरकारको अधिकार क्षेत्रभित्र पर्ने विषयसँग सम्बन्धित विकास निर्माण सम्बन्धी कार्य वा आयोजना सम्बन्धी प्रस्तावको हकमा सम्बन्धित प्रदेश कानूनले तोके बमोजिमको निकाय समक्ष प्रतिवेदन पेश गर्नुपर्ने व्यवस्था छ।

स्थानीय निकायको अधिकार क्षेत्रभित्र पर्ने विकास निर्माण सम्बन्धी कार्य वा आयोजना सम्बन्धी प्रस्तावको हकमा पनि संक्षिप्त वातावरणीय प्रतिवेदन वा प्रारम्भिक वातावरणीय परीक्षण प्रतिवेदन भए सम्बन्धित स्थानीय निकायमा पेश गर्नुपर्ने व्यवस्था छ।

दफा १० ले वातावरणीय प्रतिकूल प्रभाव न्यूनीकरणका लागि आयोजना निर्माणका क्रममा, आयोजना सम्पन्न भएपछि वा आयोजना कार्यान्वयनका क्रममा केकस्ता उपाय अवलम्बन गरिने हो भन्ने सम्बन्धमा समेत प्रस्तावकले वातावरणीय व्यवस्थापन योजनामा उल्लेख गर्नुपर्ने व्यवस्था गरेको छ।

वातावरणीय अध्ययन प्रतिवेदन स्वीकृत नगराई विकास निर्माण वा आयोजना कार्यान्वयन गराएको पाइएमा सो निर्माण कार्यमा सरकारले रोक लगाउन सक्ने व्यवस्था दफा १३ ले गरेको छ।

दफा १५ ले प्रदूषण नियन्त्रणका लागि सवारीसाधन, होटल लगायत अन्य स्थानका लागि मापदण्ड नेपाल सरकारले निर्धारण गर्न सक्ने प्रावधान तोकेको छ। दफा १८ ले वातावरण संरक्षण तथा प्रदूषण नियन्त्रण सम्बन्धी जाँच वा परीक्षण गर्न नेपाल सरकार वा प्रदेश सरकारलाई अधिकार प्रदान गरेको छ।

वातावरणीय अध्ययन प्रतिवेदनको पालना भए/नभएको सम्बन्धमा अनुगमन तथा निरीक्षण गर्ने जिम्मेवारी वातावरण निरीक्षकलाई हुने परिकल्पना दफा २१ ले गरेको छ। दफा ३५ ले वातावरणीय प्रभाव मूल्याङ्कन प्रतिवेदन स्वीकृत नगराई वा स्वीकृत प्रतिवेदन विपरीत हुने गरी कुनै प्रस्ताव कार्यान्वयन गरेमा ५० लाखसम्म जरिवाना हुने व्यवस्था गरेको छ। संक्षिप्त वातावरणीय अध्ययन प्रतिवेदन स्वीकृत नगराई वा स्वीकृत प्रतिवेदन विपरीत कार्य भएको पाइएमा पाँच लाख रुपैयाँसम्म जरिवाना हुने व्यवस्था छ।

यस्तै, प्रारम्भिक वातावरणीय प्रतिवेदन स्वीकृत नगराएमा वा सो विपरीत हुने किसिमले विकास निर्माण कार्य अगाडि बढाइएमा १० लाख रुपैयाँसम्म जरिवाना हुने व्यवस्था छ।

स्थानीय सरकार सञ्चालन ऐन, २०७४ को दफा ११ ले प्रत्येक स्थानीय तहलाई सरसफाइ सम्बन्धी मापदण्डको कार्यान्वयन र सो सम्बन्धमा नीतिनियम बनाउन र कार्यान्वयन गर्न/गराउन अधिकार प्रदान गरेको छ। आधारभूत स्वास्थ्य, सरसफाइ, स्वच्छ खानेपानी, सरसफाइ सचेतनाको अभिवृद्धि लगायत फोहरमैला सङ्कलन, पुनरुपयोग, प्रशोधन, विसर्जन र सोको सेवा शुल्क निर्धारण र नियमनका लागि पनि स्थानीय निकायलाई नै जिम्मेवारी प्रदान गरेको छ।

यही ऐनले जैविक विविधताको संरक्षण, वातावरण संरक्षण र स्थानीय स्तरमा वातावरणीय जोखिम न्यूनीकरणका लागि समेत आवश्यक कदम चाल्न स्थानीय निकायकाई नै जिम्मेवारी तोकेको छ।

सरसर्ती हेर्दा वातावरण सम्बन्धी नेपालको कानून प्रगतिशील नै देखिन्छ।

न्यायिक दृष्टिकोण

सर्वोच्च अदालतले विभिन्न समयमा विभिन्न मुद्दामा वातावरण संरक्षणका लागि सरकारलाई निर्देशन दिंदै आएको पाइन्छ। उदाहरणका लागि ‘अमरनाथ झा विरुद्ध नेपाल सरकार समेत’ (२०७३, निर्णय नं. १०७४३) लाई लिन सकिन्छ।

उक्त मुद्दामा आनन्दमोहन भट्टराई र सुष्मलता माथेमाको संयुक्त इजलासले विधिको शासन भएको मुलुकमा जनताले सुरक्षित वातावरणमा सम्मानपूर्वक बाँच्न पाउनुपर्ने नैसर्गिक र अहस्तान्तरणीय अधिकार हुने भनी व्याख्या गरेको छ।

‘वातावरण, जलवायु परिवर्तन र मानव अधिकार सम्बन्धी कानूनको बढ्दो दायरा र चासोलाई अदालतले अवश्य पनि गम्भीरतापूर्वक हेर्छ र हेरिनुपर्छ। स्वस्थ र सुरक्षित वातावरणमा बस्न पाउने जनताको हकको हर तरहबाट सम्मान गरिनुपर्छ’ भन्ने समेत बेहोरा उल्लेख गरी प्रस्तुत मुद्दामा नजीर प्रतिपादन भएको देखिन्छ।

‘अधिवक्ता नारायणप्रसाद देवकोटा विरुद्ध नेपाल सरकार समेत’ (२०६६, निर्णय नं. ८५२१)मा सर्वोच्च अदालतले योजनाकार एवं सरकारले योजना बनाउँदा आर्थिक विकास र औद्योगिक विकास तथा वातावरण संरक्षणलाई ‘ब्यालेन्स’ गर्न सक्नुपर्छ, आजको २१औं शताब्दीको विश्व स्वच्छ वातावरणको आवश्यकता र महत्त्वबारे सचेत हुनुपर्छ र वातावरण विनाश गरेर आर्थिक विकास स्वीकार्य हुन सक्दैन भन्ने नजीर स्थापना गरेको छ।

सर्वोच्च अदालतले उक्त मुद्दामा पब्लिक ट्रस्ट डक्ट्रिन अन्तर्गत नेपालको प्राकृतिक स्रोतमा नेपाल सरकार ‘ट्रस्टी’ सम्म मात्र हुने र नेपालको प्राकृतिक स्रोतको कुनै कानूनी आधार बेगर छाडा रूपले केवल नाम मात्रको राजस्व बुझाएको भरमा मात्र वातावरणमा प्रतिकूल प्रभाव पार्ने गरी कार्य गर्न दिन नहुने भनी सरकारका नाममा आदेश गरेको पाइन्छ।

उक्त मुद्दामा ‘वातावरण प्रदूषण वास्तवमा राज्यको खराब सामाजिक आर्थिक नीतिको कारण नै हुने हो। यदि यस पुनीत कार्यमा कार्यपालिकाले आफ्नो संवैधानिक कर्तव्य पालना गर्न ढिलाइ गर्छ वा पछि पर्छ भने नागरिकको मौलिक हकको अभिभावक अदालत चूप लागेर बस्नु हुँदैन। वातावरण जोगाउन सर्वोच्च अदालतले पाएको संवैधानिक आदेश पूरा र पालना गर्नुपर्ने’ सिद्धान्त प्रतिपादन गरेको देखिन्छ।

यसरी हेर्दा सर्वोच्च अदालतले मातहतका अदालतलाई वातावरणीय न्यायको प्रत्याभूति जनतालाई दिलाउन आवश्यक पहल गर्न/गराउनका लागि दिशानिर्देश गरेको देखिन्छ। नेपालको संवैधानिक व्यवस्था, प्रचलित कानून र अदालतका आदेशलाई समष्टिगत रूपमा हेर्दा वातावरण संरक्षणका लागि राज्यको नीतिनियम बलियो भए पनि कार्यान्वयन भने फितलो भएकोमा दुई मत छैन।

नेपाल गम्भीर हुनैपर्छ

नेपाल सरकार कानून, नीति, नियम तर्जुमा गर्न अब्बल देखिए पनि तिनको कार्यान्वयन गराउन भने असफल भएको देखिन्छ। संविधानको धारा ३० ले प्रत्येक नागरिकलाई स्वच्छ वातावरणको हक हुने भने पनि जनता प्रदूषित वातावरणमा सास फेर्न बाध्य छन्। यस्तो परिस्थिति उत्पन्न हुनु नै गलत हो। संविधान र प्रचलित कानूनको घोर उल्लंघन हो।

‘प्लास्टिकजन्य प्रदूषण निर्मूल पारौं, वातावरणमैत्री विकल्पको उपयोग गरौं’ भन्ने यस वर्षको विश्व वातावरण दिवसको नारातर्फ हामी कति गम्भीर छौं? सन् २०२३ मा प्लास्टिक प्रदूषण नियन्त्रणमा गम्भीर भई वातावरणीय कानूनको पूर्ण पालना गर्दै नेपालको वातावरण स्वच्छ बनाई सुन्दर र सफा मुलुक निर्माण गर्नुपर्छ। अन्यथा विश्व वातावरण दिवस मनाउनुको कुनै अर्थ छैन।

(लेखक संवैधानिक कानूनका अध्येता हुन्। हाल धनुषा जिल्ला अदालतमा शाखा अधिकृत पदमा कार्यरत छन्।)

सोमबार, २२ जेठ, २०८०, ०९:१४:०० मा प्रकाशित
https://www.himalkhabar.com/news/136196

Environmental protection is not only a constitutional goal but also a cultural heritage of Nepal

Our legal as well as cultural practices endeavor to regulate the conduct of mankind to preserve nature. We need to realize that all our sacred texts, laws, judgments, conventions and cultural practices show the proximity of mankind with nature.

Jivesh Jha - 5 June, 2023

@NepalLiveToday

• Read Time 5 min.

---

Einstein has rightly said, “The environment is everything that isn’t me.” Environment is a polycentric and multifaceted problem affecting human life. We, the human beings, are nature’s best promise. But, we have turned into nature’s worst enemy by adopting all unsustainable development practices.

Undoubtedly, progress and pollution go together. There can be no end to progress in terms of industrialization, commercialization and globalization, and consequently, no escape from pollution. Still, we cannot turn a deaf ear to the environmental protection measures, as it’s our responsibility to ensure that our development practices meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

The problem of environmental pollution is not a noble concept. It is as old as the emergence of people on the planet. Atharva Veda says that a pollution-free clean environment keeps all people, birds and animals living happily. In Veda, air, water, earth, sky, sun and trees are considered as deities.

In Rigveda, it’s been said that fresh air works as the panacea of all diseases. It directs one not to do any act that lessens or degrades the quality of oxygen. These concepts are recognized by laws, conventions and science of today. Take an example of the Rio Declaration of 1992. Principles 4 and 25 of Rio Declaration say that peace, development and environment are interdependent and indivisible.

Environment protection: A religious affair 

Environmental pollution was controlled rigidly in ancient times. It was not only an affair limited to an individual but the society as a whole accepted its duty to protect the environment, held by the Supreme Court of India in the case of TN Godaverman Thrimulpad v Union of India (2002).

In Amarnath Jha v Government of Nepal and Others, the Supreme Court of Nepal held that every person shall have an inherent right to live in a pollution-free environment to lead a dignified life [2073BS, Decision Number 10743].

Kautilya’s Arthashastra said it was the Dharma of each individual in society to protect nature. Similarly, the Yajna or sacrificial fire is apparently done to worship one or other deity and it ultimately purifies the air. The Samaveda highlights the importance of the Yajna as it helps in keeping away the mosquitoes and other insects. In Padma Purana and Karma Purana, it is mentioned that the trees, like Peepal, Bel, Neem etc are the abode of the God and they are not to be cut.

In Buddhism, the principle of Simplicity preaches for sustainability and the Principle of Ahimsa (Non-violence) preaches for the love for flora and fauna. King Ashoka wanted the non-violence to be the cultural heritage of the people. The Holy Koran declares that everything is created from water. Allah is considered to be the owner of the land and mankind is the trustee, whereas other living creatures are considered to be the beneficiaries.   

Nepal is the land of rites and rituals. The belief and cultural practices followed here show a deep concern for the protection and preservation of the environment.   

Socio-cultural legacy

Nepal is a multi-religious country where people belonging to every sect and faith live with co-existence. Our cultural legacy shows that we have never been cruel towards the environment. In fact, environmental protection is the cultural heritage of Nepal.

Every religious, cultural work we make, symbolizes environmental protection. See, Chhath festival. It’s the festival demanding cleanliness of waters. The devotees offer prayers to the Sun god by standing in the waters.

In Baisakh, the first month of the year in Nepal’s Bikram Sambat calendar, people in Terai-Madhesh celebrate Jur Shital festival which also promotes protection of trees and soil. The festival begins with elders sprinkling cool water on the heads of their relatives. The family members spread water on the plants and trees. In addition to this, there is a culture of playing the traditional game Kado-Mati (mud-soil) which is similar to mud bath. These cultural practices symbolize conservation of soil, trees, and water.

Our holy texts, laws and court judgments too show that the country has been serious towards environmentalism. We should develop a conscious approach and strike a balance between environmental protection and development, held by the Supreme Court of Nepal in the landmark case of Advocate Narayan Prasad Devkota v Government of Nepal and Others (2066 BS, Decision Number 8521). The apex court in this case held that bad socio-economic policy of the country is to be blamed for environmental degradation.

Constitutional goals

The Constitution of Nepal guarantees the right to clean environment as a fundamental right [Article 30].  The constitution declares various rights associated with the protection of the environment. Specific provisions associated with the environment are; the right to live in a clean environment, right to clean water and hygiene; right to food sovereignty; the right of state to carry out land reforms on agriculture and environment; and right of consumers to have quality foodstuffs and services.

The Constitution obliges the state to control and prevent any act or omission polluting or likely to pollute the environment. The Supreme Court and High Courts (under Article 133 and 144, respectively) can issue required direction, order or writs for this purpose.

The Constitution confers power to the Centre, provinces as well as local governments to adopt and enact policies for protecting the natural environment. The Directive Principles provided in part-IV of the constitution, calls upon the local/ provincial governments to adopt policies for the protection and promotion of the environment [Article 51].

The Environment Protection Act, 2019 has been enacted by the government to implement Article 30 of the Constitution. The Act aims to protect and improve the environment and to mitigate the pollution; to enforce the right to clean environment; to grant compensation to victims of environmental pollution; and to implement EIA, Environmental Study and Environment Examination reports.   The Act has set heavy fines for non-compliance of law and government policies. Section 35 of the Act envisages that there could be a fine of up to five million at the instance of non-compliance of EIA by a proponent. Similarly, defiance of Initial Environmental Examination would lead to a fine of up to one million.

Way forward

On June 5, World Environment Day (WED), with the theme of “Beat Plastic Pollution,” we should evaluate if we have succeeded—or even tried—to acknowledge our cultural heritages, messages of the holy texts and green laws that were passed to preserve and advance the environment.

As a rule of state, environmental pollution is a business of shame in the environment. Environmental pollution also symbolizes that our mechanisms are not operating as per the mandate of law. Eventually, pollution rapes rule of law. Kathmandu’s deteriorating air quality and Nepal’s failure to upkeep sustainable development practices would certainly question our capability to deal with environmental menaces.   

This year’s event, which is being hosted by Cote d’lvoire in collaboration with the Netherlands, comes with the added duty of leading a worldwide movement against plastic waste.

Our legal as well as cultural practices endeavor to regulate the conduct of mankind in such a manner which is conducive to nature and not adverse to nature.  It’s high time for us to realize that all our sacred texts, laws, judgments, conventions and cultural practices show the proximity of mankind with nature. It’s time to implement our green laws, to acknowledge the messages of our cultural practices and to revive our heritage of environmental protection.  

#WorldEnvironmentDay

https://www.nepallivetoday.com/2023/06/05/environmental-protection-is-not-only-a-constitutional-goal-but-also-a-cultural-heritage-of-nepal/

Act now to strengthen green democracy

Jivesh Jha

2023/05/265 mins read

Those green laws are not mere cosmetic arrangements but like lampposts showing vivid paths

The Environment Protection Act, 2019 is a comprehensive piece of legislation, enacted primarily to give effect to Article 30 of the Constitution that guarantees the citizens’ right to fresh air and clean environment.

Introduced to consolidate environment laws, this Act assures victims of pollution a reasonable amount of compensation from the polluter. The main legislative intentions are to ensure the right to a clean and green environment, maintain balance between environment and development, and protect communities from adverse environmental impacts and climate change. While celebrating World Environment Day (WED) on June 5 with the theme of “Beat Plastic Pollution,” we need to analyze whether we have succeeded or even tried enforcing the green laws meant for protecting the environment. This year’s WED has put on Cote d’ivoire, the host of the event in partnership with the Netherlands,  one more responsibility: To lead a global drive against plastic pollution. In 2018, India hosted the WED with the theme of “Beat Plastic Pollution.” It’s high time for India to realize that their fight against plastic pollution was not robust and their failure made the United Nations Environment Program carry the same slogan in 2023 as well.

The 1972 Stockholm Conference on Human Environment laid the foundation for the Environment Day celebration the world over, and has been held yearly on June 5 since 1973. The first WED was held in the USA with the theme of “Only one Earth” in 1974. The 1972 Stockholm Declaration, adopted at the end of WED events held at Stockholm from June 5 to 16 with the participation of 114 states, set the milestone by adopting 26 principles that emphasize pollution control and nature conservation. In 1987, the idea of rotating the center of environmental activities under different themes by selecting different host countries began.

A Green Charter

The Constitution of Nepal has stipulated the right to a clean environment as a fundamental right.  The charter has specific provisions associated with the environment like the right to live in a clean environment, right to clean water and hygiene; right to food sovereignty; the right of the state to effect land reforms on agriculture and environment; and the right of consumers to have quality foodstuffs and services.

The law obliges the state to control or prevent any act or omission polluting or likely to pollute the environment. The Supreme Court and High Courts (under Article 133 and 144, respectively) can issue required directives, orders or writs for this purpose.

The charter has conferred powers to all tiers of government in this regard. In reference to the charter, the government of Nepal, under schedule-V, entry 27 (Environment management, national parks, wildlife reserves, wetlands, national forest policies, carbon services) and provincial governments, under schedule-VI, entry 19 (Use of forests and waters and management of environment within the state) and both governments under schedule-VII, entries 12 (Ayurvedic medicine, veterinary, Amchi and other professions), 18 (Tourism, water supply and sanitation) & 23 (Utilization of forests, mountains, forest conservation areas and waters stretching in inter-state form) have to  work on issues of ecology, sanitation, clean and healthy water, wildlife conservation and afforestation.

The Directive Principles provided in part-IV of the charter call upon the local/provincial governments to adopt policies for the protection of the environment (Article 51). In partnership with the private sector, NGOs, communities, religious and cultural groups, the government can take  measures for environmental conservation.

 

A climate-friendly polity

The Environment Protection Act, 2019, meant to  implement Article 30 of the charter, aims to protect and improve the environment and to mitigate pollution; to enforce the right to a clean environment; to grant compensation to victims of pollution; and to implement EIA, Environmental Study and Environment Examination reports. It imposes on the state duties like setting standards to reduce and regulate emissions, hazardous waste, vehicular pollution, industrial pollution and pollution from  hotels, restaurants and equipment. Unlike the Act of 1997, the 2019 Act has outlined measures for dealing with climate change and controlling the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs).

The center has exclusive jurisdiction over identification of areas emitting GHGs, determination of their national reference level, specification of open or green areas, identification of polluted areas, prevention of development activities therein and participation in carbon trading with foreign countries.

Moreover, the Act specifies various roles and functions for provincial governments. Provinces have to develop plans and policies for environmental protection at their levels. Section 3(2)(c) of the Act allows local governments to oversee  related environmental study reports, including EIA. Central and provincial governments can also set up laboratories to test or analyze samples of pollution under Section 18.

 

Gray area, green judgements

The Act has envisaged heavy fines for non-compliance of laws and government policies. Section 35 of the Act stipulates imposing a fine of up to five million rupees at the instance of non-compliance of EIA.

Also, defiance of Initial Environmental Examination would lead to a fine of up to one million rupees. A vast discretionary power is given to law enforcing officials. Minimum fine is not fixed leaving vast discretion, so the provision requires correction. The imposition of a minimal fine in violation of this law may help defeat the spirit of law itself. Also, the Act has no provision of reward for those making  exemplary contributions to environment conservation and protection.

The Local Government Operation Act, 2017 has given local units the power to enact laws, policies and other measures for the protection and promotion of green democracy. Section 11(2)(i) has given local bodies  the power to adopt and enact measures to curb pollution and to ensure clean water and fresh air. Over the years, the Supreme Court has issued judgments on environmental issues. Decades ago, in Surya Dhungel v Godavari Marbles Pvt Ltd (1995) case, it observed that environmental pollution and degradation would be a threat to living beings, so a healthy environment is a requisite for better human life and livelihood. In Pro Public v HMG Nepal (2006, Decision Number 758) the court  sought immediate steps for decreasing the adverse impact of pollution from brick kilns located around densely populated areas, schools, cultural and touristic zones.

Summing up, our green laws are like lampposts and not mere cosmetic arrangements. Nepal deserves to have a truly green democracy. As an ancient country of environment-friendly people, Nepal cannot survive with unsustainable development practices. Environmentalist Keith Hawkins has rightly said: Pollution control is done in a moral, not a technological world. The Himalayan republic has enacted a number of green laws for promoting green democracy. It’s high time to make a pledge for a robust fight against pollution in all forms.

The author is a Judicial Officer at Dhanusha District Court, Janakpur

jhajivesh@gmail.com

 https://theannapurnaexpress.com/news/act-now-to-strengthen-green-democracy-42935

#constitution#green democracy