Environmentalists oppose decriminalisation of EPA infractions, say no violation is 'simple'

Experts and activists have opposed the Union Environment Ministry's proposal to decriminalise violations of the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, saying everything should be seen through the prism of climate change.

In a consultation note issued earlier this week, the ministry proposed to amend the Environment (Protection) Act to decriminalise its existing provisions to ''weed out fear of imprisonment for simple violations''.

Amendments have been proposed to decriminalise violations of the Air Act of 1981, and the Water Act of 1974.

The ministry has sought suggestions and comments on the proposals from the public, states, Union territories, industry associations and entities concerned by July 21.

The Environment (Protection) Act (EPA) establishes the framework for studying, planning, and implementing long-term requirements of environmental safety and laying down a system of speedy and adequate response to situations threatening the environment.

Violation of the provisions of the EPA or the rules or directions issued under the Act is punishable with imprisonment up to five years or a fine up to Rs 1 lakh or both. In case of continuation of such violation, an additional fine of up to Rs 5,000 per day is levied.

The continuation of the violation beyond one year after the date of conviction is punishable with a jail term of up to seven years. Failure or contravention or non-compliance with the provisions of EPA will be dealt with a fine ranging up to Rs 5 crore. The minimum fine would be Rs 5 lakh.

However, in case of serious violations which lead to grievous injury or loss of life, they shall be covered under the provision of the Indian Penal Code.

Noted environmentalist Manoj Misra said the 2020-30 decade will decide the fate of the human species and all policy decisions impacting the environment should be seen in the context of climate change.

''We face an existential challenge and we believe the move to dilute the provisions of the EPA, Air Act and Water Act is not in favour of climate change adaptation and mitigation,'' he said.

The former Indian Forest Services officer said the move is violative of the principle of non-regression and the ''polluter pays'' principle.

The principle of non-regression provides for the strengthening of existing laws, while the 'polluter pays' principle makes the polluter responsible for the damage done to the environment. ''A jail term for violation served as a major deterrent. The amendments will replace the jail term with a penalty. A fine of Rs 5 crore is nothing when we talk of projects worth thousands of crores. People will violate the laws and get away after paying a fine,'' Misra said. He said no environmental violation can be considered ''simple'' as it immediately impacts the human body.

The environmentalist welcomed the move to raise the monetary penalty but said it should not be a fixed figure but a percentage of the profit made by the defaulting agency.

Environment activist Bhavreen Kandhari asked if the imposition of penalty has ever stopped any environmental violation. ''What should be the punishment for killing a tree?'' she posed citing the observation made by the Madras High Court recently that ''mother nature is a living entity''.

''Can you say killing a person is a simple violation and get away after paying a fine?'' ''I would like to know why shouldn't pollution cases amount to 'attempt to mass murder'? My children will live 10 years lesser than others in less polluted areas... Why should I accept that?'' Kandhari said. Environmentalist Chandra Bhushan, however, said decriminalisation of environmental laws is a practical step.

''Our current environmental laws do not have credible deterrence against non-compliance. Hardly anyone is put behind the bars and the success rate of prosecution is negligible.

''The burden of evidence is high. Even in the Bhopal Gas tragedy, no one was jailed,'' he said.

India should look at global practices that environmental laws are largely civil legislation and are based on exemplary fines. The fine must be a percentage of the profit of the polluter, said the president and CEO of the International Forum for Environment, Sustainability & Technology.

Bring in a civil adjudication process to make the implementation simple, he added.