Right to Healthy Environment – Explained Pointwise

Every year during the winters, the national capital engulfs in smog & severely low air quality, which cripples the city & poses serious health challenges. The deteriorating environmental quality in several of the Indian cities is forcing the people to link the environmental rights to the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution to enforce environmental protections & to emphasize the state’s responsibility to take corrective measures.

What is Right to Healthy Environment (RHE)?

• The Right to Healthy Environment (RHE), also known as the Right to a Clean Environment, is a fundamental human right recognised globally and in India as integral to the right to life, ensuring access to pollution-free air, water, soil and ecosystems for human health and dignity.

• UN Resolution 76/300 (2022): The UN General Assembly adopted a historic resolution declaring that “the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment is a human right.” While not legally binding, it creates a powerful political and moral standard for international law.

• Elements of RHE:
  1. Clean Air: The right to breathe air free from hazardous pollutants.
  2. Safe Climate: Protection from the devastating impacts of anthropogenic climate change.
  3. Safe and Sufficient Water: Access to clean drinking water and sanitation.
  4. Healthy Food: Access to sustainably produced and nutritious food.
  5. Non-toxic Environments: Protection from hazardous substances and waste.
  6. Healthy Ecosystems & Biodiversity: Preservation of the natural world that supports human life.

• RHE is often implemented through the “greening” of existing rights for e.g. Right to Life – Interpreted to mean that a state must protect citizens from life-threatening environmental disasters.

What are the various provisions in the Constitution to ensure Right to Healthy Environment?

Important Concepts & Principles of Environmental Protection:

What are the challenges in implementing the Right to Healthy Environment?

1. Infrastructure Pressures: Major projects (highways, dams, mining) often require clearing forests or displacing ecosystems. Balancing the need to lift millions out of poverty with ecological preservation remains a constant struggle.

2. Ease of Doing Business: To attract investment, there is often pressure to “relax” Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) norms or provide faster clearances, which can lead to inadequate vetting of ecological risks.

3. Pollution Control Boards (PCBs): State and Central PCBs are frequently understaffed, lack technical expertise, and suffer from inadequate funding. This leads to poor monitoring of industrial emissions and waste discharge.

4. Water Conflicts: Since water is primarily a State subject, inter-state river disputes (e.g., Kaveri or Yamuna) often stall conservation efforts like the “Clean Ganga” mission due to a lack of federal coordination.

5. Fragmented Governance: Waste management, air quality, and forest conservation are often handled by different departments with overlapping or conflicting mandates.

6. Solid Waste: Most Indian cities struggle with “legacy waste” mountains (landfills). Current waste processing capacities are insufficient for the daily output of plastic and organic waste.

7. Marginalized Communities: Tribal populations and forest dwellers, who are often the best guardians of nature, are frequently the most vulnerable to displacement and least equipped to fight legal battles against large corporations.

8. The “Tragedy of the Commons”: In many urban areas, there is a lack of collective responsibility for public spaces, leading to widespread littering and encroachment on wetlands.

What should be the way forward?

1. Professionalizing PCBs: State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) should be staffed by environmental scientists and technical experts rather than generalist bureaucrats. They need independent funding models to ensure they can sustain long-term monitoring.

2. National Environmental Authority: Establishing a permanent, independent statutory body (similar to the Election Commission) to oversee environmental clearances and compliance could reduce the “Development vs. Environment” conflict of interest within ministries.

3. Empowering Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) & Gram Sabhas: Municipalities must be given the technical and financial capacity to manage waste and water treatment locally, rather than relying on state-level schemes. Similarly, in rural and forested areas, the Forest Rights Act must be implemented in letter and spirit, giving indigenous communities (the primary stakeholders) the legal authority to protect their local ecosystems.

4. Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (CEMS): Mandatory installation of IoT-enabled sensors in all red-category industries that stream pollution data directly to public portals in real-time.

5. Satellite Surveillance: Utilizing ISRO’s geospatial data to monitor illegal mining, deforestation, and wetland encroachment, allowing for rapid response before permanent damage occurs.

6. Green GDP: Transitioning from traditional GDP to “Green GDP” metrics that factor in the depletion of natural resources and the cost of pollution.

7. Incentivizing Circular Economy: Providing tax breaks and subsidies for industries that adopt “Zero Liquid Discharge” (ZLD) technologies or use recycled materials in production.

8. Airshed & Watershed Management: Creating regional authorities for the Indo-Gangetic plain or major river basins to coordinate pollution control strategies across multiple states, moving beyond the current fragmented approach.

Conclusion: The Right to a Healthy Environment transforms environmental protection from a matter of “policy choice” to a legal obligation. It shifts the focus from managing resources to protecting human dignity and survival in the face of the global climate crisis.