Judges call for environmental protection, condemn attack on environmentalists

On the occasion of World Environment Day, recently retired Supreme Court Justice Abhay S Oka and sitting Supreme Court Justice Sanjay Karol called out the attacks on activists and the Judiciary for trying to protect the environment.Speaking at the inaugural ceremony for the Climate Change Conference organised by the Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF) and the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), Justice Karol drew attention to the annual problem of seasonal air pollution in Delhi and the stink from the pollution in the river Yamuna. Justice Karol also called for cooperation between industry, the judiciary, the government and the people to protect the environment.'I see that there is no conflict between activism in the Indian judiciary and economic growth, or the development of the economy or otherwise in India. There is no doubt that all of us have to work together to achieve the constitutional goal that is set out in the preamble,' said Justice Karol.Justice Oka, who was also honoured at the event for his contribution to the development of environmental law in India, praised the activists who fight for the environment, despite the opposition they face.'What I find from my long experience—20 years as a lawyer and nearly 22 years as a judge of three constitutional courts—is that very few citizens show enthusiasm and courage to take up environmental issues. It is not easy to address environmental concerns, as those who raise these issues rarely get active societal support,' said Justice Oka.advertisement'Often, people seriously addressing environmental issues are branded anti-development, accused of obstructing so-called developmental activities. That is the greatest tragedy of our society.Those fighting for the environment are fighting for social and economic justice guaranteed under the Constitution. Their ultimate aim is upholding the rights under Article 21. However, those advocating for environmental causes rarely receive societal support. When society doesn't support them, how can we expect public authorities or the government to support them?' said Oka further.Justice Oka also said that there is no conflict between development and protection of the environment.'Someday, we should debate the concept of development itself. Do we necessarily mean construction of huge buildings, roads, and flyovers, or should development mean providing basic amenities to the poor and needy? That is a separate debate altogether,' said Oka.Justice Karol also called for 'grassroots solutions' to environmental issues.advertisement
"If you were to see our report card in the last 75 years, or since the 1980s, what is it really we have done? Have we done enough to protect the environment, or not? My view is this: a lot needs to be done, at all levels. And I would borrow an expression that the solution to the problem now is grassroots solutions to an international problem. So, grassroots solutions for global challenges. The way forward, according to me, is that we as individuals have to take up the causes pertaining to the environment,' said Justice Karol.Delhi High Court Justice Jasmeet Singh also spoke about the need to maintain a balance between development and environmental protection, particularly in light of the economic impact. "Limited attention is given to environmental care because of the economic challenges it poses. Transitioning to sustainable practices is frequently seen as costly or disruptive, especially in a developing economy like India. There is significant dependence on fossil fuels. This creates a sense of conflict between environmental responsibility and economic growth. But I believe that challenge can be transformed into an opportunity, an instrument of meaningful change," said Justice Singh.Senior advocate Lalit Bhasin, President of SILF and Chairman of the CII National Committee on Legal Services, also said that 'Sustainability is no longer an optional agenda; it is a core element of national and business competitiveness.'Meanwhile, at a separate event to mark World Environment Day at the National Green Tribunal (NGT), Chairman NGT Justice Prakash Shrivastava called for 'collective action' to protect the environment. Highlighting the urgent need to curb plastic pollution, Justice Shrivastava said that 'The National Green Tribunal stands as a sentinel for environmental protection, but our efforts alone are insufficient without the active participation of every citizen.' Must Watch

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Scroll.in

10 minutes ago

• Scroll.in

Pakistan nominates Trump for Nobel Peace Prize, cites ‘pivotal' role during conflict with India

Pakistan announced on Saturday that it has nominated United States President Donald Trump for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize 'in recognition of his decisive diplomatic intervention and pivotal leadership' during the recent conflict with India. 'The Government of Pakistan also acknowledges and greatly admires President Trump's sincere offers to help resolve the longstanding dispute of Jammu and Kashmir between India and Pakistan – an issue that lies at the heart of regional instability,' Islamabad stated in a social media post. It also described Trump as a 'genuine peacemaker'. The winner of the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize is expected to be announced in October 2026. Pakistan to recommend US President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize 2026: Pakistan statement — Sidhant Sibal (@sidhant) June 21, 2025 Pakistan's announcement came days after Trump claimed that he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize for multiple global peace efforts, The Hindu reported. 'I should have gotten it four or five times,' the US president was quoted as saying by AP. 'They won't give me a Nobel Peace Prize because they only give it to liberals.' In a social media post on Saturday, Trump reiterated that he would never receive a Nobel Peace Prize, 'no matter what I do'. He also repeated his claim that he had helped 'stop the war' between India and Pakistan. New Delhi has rejected Trump's assertions. On Wednesday, New Delhi stated that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had told the US president that India will never accept mediation to resolve tensions with Pakistan. Trump was also told that New Delhi had agreed to the ceasefire only on Islamabad's request, said India's Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri. Hours after the statement, Trump hosted Pakistan's Chief of Army Staff, Field Marshal Asim Munir, at the White House. Speaking afterwards, Trump thanked both Munir and Modi for their roles in 'ending the war', and noted ongoing trade discussions with both countries, The Hindu reported. The tensions between New Delhi and Islamabad escalated on May 7 when the Indian military carried out strikes – codenamed Operation Sindoor – on what it claimed were terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. The strikes were in response to the terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam, which killed 26 persons on April 22. The Pakistan Army retaliated to Indian strikes by repeatedly shelling Indian villages along the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir. At least 22 Indian civilians and eight defence personnel were killed. On May 10, India and Pakistan reached an 'understanding' to halt firing following a four-day conflict. New Delhi's announcement on the decision to stop military action had come minutes after Trump claimed on social media that India and Pakistan had agreed to the ceasefire. However, India has said that the decision to stop firing was taken bilaterally and that there was no intervention by the US. The winner of the Nobel Peace Prize is selected by the Norwegian Nobel Committee. The five-member panel is appointed by the Norwegian Parliament. According to the Nobel Prize website, a nomination for the Peace Prize is valid if submitted by qualified individuals such as government officials, judges, professors, former laureates or members of recognised peace organisations. This includes 'members of national Assemblies and national governments of sovereign states as well as current heads of state'. Self-nominations are not accepted.

News18

15 minutes ago

• News18

News18 Afternoon Digest: Bihar Govt Raises Social Security Pension To Rs 1100 & Other Top Stories

Last Updated: We are also covering: : FATF Flags Ballistic Missile Development By Pakistan, Who Was Saeed Izadi, Iranian Commander Behind Hamas' Oct 7 Attack, and other top stories. In today's afternoon digest, News18 brings you the latest updates on the Bihar government's announcement regarding the increase in the pension from Rs 400 to Rs 1100 under the Social Security Pension Scheme, and other top stories. Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar on Saturday announced that state government has increased the pension from Rs 400 to Rs 1100 under the Social Security Pension Scheme. The decision is taken in view of the Assembly elections in Bihar, set to take place by the end of 2025. Read More Not So 'Nobel'? Why Pakistan's Push For Trump Reeks Of A Strategic Gamble | Exclusive In a diplomatic move, Pakistan has formally nominated US President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize. Official sources within Pakistan's government have confirmed that the nomination stems from their belief that Trump played a pivotal role in defusing the tensions during the India-Pakistan crisis of May 2025. Read More A new report by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has called out Pakistan for violating international norms by engaging in ballistic missile development, citing a shipment that was seized by Indian customs officials in 2020. Read More It seems as if Gukesh Dommaraju has stiff competition brewing for his throne, and it is none other than his Indian compatriot R Praggnanandhaa, who is aiming to dethrone the reigning World Champion. Read More First Published: June 21, 2025, 14:43 IST

First Post

29 minutes ago

• First Post

Victory for Trump in US Supreme Court, his tariffs allowed to stay amid legal challenges over trade powers

The US Supreme Court refused to fast-track lawsuits challenging Trump's tariffs, allowing them to remain in effect for now. The court said that it will wait for the appeal court's order read more US President Donald Trump delivered remarks on tariffs, in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington. A federal appeals court reinstated the most sweeping of President Donald Trump's tariffs. File image/Reuters The US Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a major legal victory after it refused to put a challenge to his sweeping reciprocal tariffs on the fast track. On Friday, the Supreme Court justices rejected a scheduling request from two family-owned businesses seeking to invalidate many of Trump's import taxes . The rejection means that the Trump administration would have the normal 30 days to file a response to the case. The Tuesday court filing stated that the companies involved in the case were seeking a quick response from the Trump administration, a request which has now been rejected by the country's apex court. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD According to Bloomberg, the two family-owned businesses wanted the court to take the unusual step of considering the case without waiting for a federal appeals court to rule on the matter. Meanwhile, the Trump administration argued that the Supreme Court should let the normal appellate process play out. Trump's tariff went to the Supreme Court for the first time It is pertinent to note that this is the first time the challenge to Trump's reciprocal tariffs came to the US Supreme Court. As of now, the legal cases over tariffs are limited to district and federal courts. Meanwhile, a federal district judge agreed with educational toy makers Learning Resources Inc. and Hand2Mind Inc., the two companies involved in the Supreme Court case, that the POTUS lacked the authority under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act to issue sweeping reciprocal tariffs. In a separate case, a federal appeals court ruled that the tariffs could stay in effect at least until that panel hears arguments on July 31. Both courts are dealing with Trump's April 2 'Liberation Day' tariffs, which combine a universal baseline levy of 10 per cent with potentially higher rates for various trading partners. It is pertinent to note that each of these suits also concerns at least some of Trump's separate import taxes over fentanyl trafficking. The case that went to the Supreme Court is titled 'Learning Resources v. Trump'.