Justice BV Nagarathna, speaking at the valedictory session of the International Conference on ‘The Future of Environment and Climate Dynamics’ organised by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in New Delhi, called for a deeper rethinking of humanity’s relationship with nature, stressing that environmental law must move beyond a framework centred exclusively on human interests.
Justice Nagarathna said the environmental crisis was rooted in humanity’s changed understanding of its relationship with the natural world. Drawing from Indian traditions, Justice Nagarathna said human beings have historically been viewed as being within, rather than above, the natural order. Referring to the concept of Panchamahabhutas, she said the five elements of nature, earth, air, fire, sky and water, offered lessons in human conduct.
“
“Human beings are said to be composed of five elements of nature, or Panchamahabhutas, which in turn teach us essential lessons in humanity. Earth teaches us patience and tolerance; air teaches us mobility and liberty; fire teaches us warmth and courage; sky teaches us equality and broad-mindedness; water teaches us purity and cleanliness. Nature is neither an inert matter nor an object external to our existence. It is our teacher, sustainer and kin. This is a profound corrective to the modern tendency to reduce nature to property, commodity and resource. Humanity has forgotten that it is constituted by the very world which it claims dominion.”
She further identified five principles that have come to provide the vocabulary of environmental governance and jurisprudence: sustainable development, the polluter pays principle, the precautionary principle, the public trust doctrine and the intergenerational doctrine.
She stressed that environmental adjudication cannot be confined to addressing harm that has already occurred, particularly when courts are confronted with emerging ecological risks and scientific uncertainty. She added that environmental adjudication therefore requires courts to look beyond the immediate dispute and account for the interests of future generations. Justice Nagarathna also highlighted what she described as the significant contribution of the Supreme Court to environmental jurisprudence, particularly its movement towards an ecocentric approach. She said:
“
“While adjudicating environmental disputes, courts are not concerned merely with the determination of completed wrongs and the redress of injuries already occasioned. They are equally required to confront and respond to risks that are unfolding in real time, often under conditions of scientific uncertainty and with the potential for irreversible ecological consequences. Environmental adjudication is an exercise in foresight, requiring courts to govern the present with an alert consciousness of the future. In fact, the Supreme Court of India is now pushing for a shift from an anthropocentric approach to an ecocentric approach in matters of environment. This entails recognising that human interests do not, by virtue of being human, enjoy automatic precedence over the interests of the non-human world.”
According to Justice Nagarathna, this approach also recognises obligations towards non-human life that exist independently of its utility to human beings. She also linked environmental protection with the principle of substantive equality, emphasising that environmental harm does not affect all sections of society equally. She highlighted that the impact of environmental decisions can vary across regions, jurisdictions, communities and generations, making it necessary for environmental governance to account for these differing social consequences rather than focusing solely on overall or aggregate outcomes.
She noted that environmental governance frequently requires reconciliation between competing interests, including development and conservation and present needs and future interests. Such questions, she said, arise at the intersection of science, economics, technology, ethics and politics.
Justice Nagarathna further emphasised that environmental challenges transcend national and territorial boundaries, as climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution, land degradation and water security are interconnected issues that require coordinated action across jurisdictions. She stressed the need for greater international cooperation, including the sharing of knowledge and resources and equitable responsibility-sharing among nations, to address these challenges effectively.
Referring to the international dimension of environmental protection, she said environmental governance increasingly required national action to be viewed alongside international responsibility, particularly in addressing climate change and other transboundary environmental consequences.
Towards the conclusion of her address, Justice Nagarathna returned to the five elements of nature, describing them as five commitments that environmental leadership demands, the steadiness of earth, the adaptability of water, the urgency of fire, the openness of air and the breadth of space. “The environmental challenges of our time require all five,” she said.