9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (7) TMI 263 - SC - CustomsChallenge import of toxic wastes from industrialized countries to India - Writ Petition - Ministry of Environment and Forests permitting import of toxic wastes under the cover of recycling - Held that - Interim directions given with regard to the handling of hazardous wastes and ship breaking in the various orders passed in the writ petition from time to time and, in particular, the orders dated 13th October, 1997 and 14th October, 2003 to issue a notification to ban the import of such identified hazardous substances - The Central Government is also directed to ban import of all hazardous/toxic wastes which had been identified and declared to be so under the BASEL Convention, aimed and protecting marine biology and countries having coast-lines alongside seas and oceans and its different protocols - The Central Government is also directed to bring the Hazardous Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules, 1989, in line with the BASEL Convention and Articles 21, 47 and 48A of the Constitution - that without adequate protection to the workers and public the aforesaid Rules are violative of the Fundamental Rights of the citizens and are therefore unconstitutional is however rejected in view of what has been discussed.
Issues Involved:
1. Ban on imports of hazardous/toxic wastes. 2. Amendment of rules in conformity with the BASEL Convention and Articles 21, 47, and 48A of the Constitution. 3. Constitutionality of the Hazardous Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules, 1989. Detailed Analysis: 1. Ban on Imports of Hazardous/Toxic Wastes: The writ petition was filed to challenge the import of toxic wastes from industrialized countries to India, arguing that such imports made India a dumping ground for hazardous wastes, violating Articles 14, 21, and 47 of the Constitution. The petitioner highlighted the BASEL Convention, which India signed, and argued that India should have amended its laws to align with the Convention. The Court initially asked all State Governments and Pollution Control Boards to submit affidavits on the implementation of the Hazardous Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules, 1989. A High-Powered Committee was appointed to examine 14 specific issues related to hazardous waste management. The Court directed that the import of banned hazardous wastes should be strictly prohibited and that any hazardous waste imported should be handled according to the rules and regulations. 2. Amendment of Rules in Conformity with the BASEL Convention and Articles 21, 47, and 48A of the Constitution: The petitioner argued that India should align its hazardous waste management laws with the BASEL Convention. The Court noted that the BASEL Convention prohibits the import of hazardous wastes without the consent of the importing country and mandates environmentally sound management of such wastes. The Court directed the Central Government to issue notifications banning the import of hazardous substances identified by the BASEL Convention and to ensure compliance with the Convention's provisions. The Court also emphasized the need for amendments to the Hazardous Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules, 1989, to bring them in line with the BASEL Convention and the constitutional provisions. 3. Constitutionality of the Hazardous Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules, 1989: The petitioner contended that the Hazardous Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules, 1989, were unconstitutional as they did not provide adequate protection to workers and the public. The Court, however, observed that the Rules were in aid of Articles 21, 39(e), 47, and 48A of the Constitution and not in derogation of them. The Court directed strict compliance with the Rules, particularly in the matter of destruction of hazardous waste oil by incineration. The Court rejected the prayer to declare the Rules unconstitutional, emphasizing that they were essential for protecting the environment and public health. Additional Observations: The Court also addressed the issue of ship-breaking and the MARPOL Convention, which mandates the discharge of sludge oil for recycling. The Court directed that waste oil should be recycled under strict supervision and that the authorities should ensure compliance with the BASEL and MARPOL Conventions before allowing ships to enter Indian waters. The Court reiterated the importance of the polluter-pays principle and the precautionary principle in dealing with environmental pollution. Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of by reasserting the interim directions regarding the handling of hazardous wastes and ship-breaking. The Central Government was directed to ban the import of hazardous/toxic wastes identified under the BASEL Convention and to amend the Hazardous Wastes (Management & Handling) Rules, 1989, to align with the Convention and constitutional provisions. The Court rejected the declaration that the Rules were unconstitutional, emphasizing their role in protecting the environment and public health.
|
