Dr.
RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA
NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY
Environmental Law
PROJECT- Precautionary Principle: Meaning,
Features and Legal Application in India
SUBMITTED TO – SUBMITTED BY –
Dr. Amandeep Singh Vanshita Gupta
Associate Professor Enrollment No.- 200101153
(Law) B.A. LL.B. (Hons.)
Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University 6th Semester, Section ‘B’
1|Page
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I have taken efforts in this project. However, it would not have been possible without the kind
support and help of many individuals and organizations. I would like to extend my sincere
thanks to all of them. I am highly indebted to Dr. Amandeep Singh for his guidance and
constant supervision as well as for providing necessary information regarding the project, also
for his support in completing the project.
I extend my gratitude towards the seniors of my course, who constantly helped me find the best
sources for research. Finally, I acknowledge the authorities of Dr. Madhu Limaye Library, who
provided me with the means to make this project in the form of access to online books and
resources.
This project is a result of my efforts combined with all the means and environment that has
been provided to me by Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow and its
authorities and I am thankful to them.
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that the project report of “Precautionary Principle: Meaning, Features and
Legal Application in India” submitted by me to Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law
University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh in partial fulfilment requirement for the award of the
degree of B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) is a record of bonafide project work carried out by me under the
guidance of Dr. Amandeep Singh. I further declare that the work reported in this project has
not been submitted, and will not be submitted either in part or in full, for the award of any other
degree or diploma in this institute or any other university.
Vanshita Gupta,
Enrollment No.- 200101153
6th Semester, Section ‘B’
B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
2|Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENT............................................................................................................ 2
DECLARATION ....................................................................................................................... 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................... 3
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 4
MEANING OF THE WORD PRECAUTION .......................................................................... 5
MEANING AND CONCEPT OF PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE ...................................... 6
SALIENT FEATURES OF PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE................................................ 7
PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE AND ITS LEGAL APPLICATION IN INDIA ................. 8
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................ 10
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 10
3|Page
INTRODUCTION
The quest for sustainable advancement objectives is driven by policy-based arrangement and
dynamic in light of logical information and upheld by ecological administration and law
standards.[1] Nevertheless, the 2019 UN Environmental Rule of Law: First Global Report
expresses that limits on current logical sureness and understanding mean natural matters can
bring up a more significant number of issues than answers. The favored environmental
approach embraced in individual wards depends on using the Precautionary principle. It helps
the experts and professionals immediately decide whether suitable practical measures have
been instituted to forestall natural debasement and harm human health.
The Precautionary principle is acknowledged as a central apparatus to advance a manageable
turn of events and has a significant capacity at both global and public levels. It accommodates
activity to turn away dangers of genuine or irreversible mischief to the climate or human
wellbeing without logical assurance about that mischief and offers the ‘power to take public
strategy choices covering natural security in the face of uncertainty. There is no vulnerability
in the figuring of dangers, and there is no support for the prudent standard’s work. In this
manner, logical exposure is at the center of the precautionary principle.[3]
Be that as it may, the global utilization of the Precautionary rule is an open-finished issue. A
few accept that its utilization assists settle on with bettering wellbeing and ecological choices.
Others believe that utilizing the prudent standard is uncertain because of the trouble in
accomplishing an agreement that reflects suitable reactions to oversee dangers, benefits, and
costs.[4] In general, excessive prudence will worsen eccentric and conflicting ecological
choices, contort administrative needs, smothers technological innovation, and turn around the
weight of evidence reflecting vulnerability between science-based administration and the over
or underuse of the conservative principle.[5]
In India, contamination produces complex ecological issues, including logical vulnerability and
uncertain wellbeing hazards. These contamination matters are impacted by insufficient data,
tentative proof, equivocal qualities, and public discussion. For instance, Spruijt’s investigation
recognizes how such cases contrast in the level and kind of logical vulnerability, the cultural
agitation they cause, and the use of the precautionary principle.[6]
4|Page
The examination features the discussion concerning the particulate matter that worries the
wellbeing effect of various molecule types, the entire causal systems of these wellbeing
impacts, and the idea of the openness reaction relationship for different wellbeing endpoints. It
might bring about fluctuating legal reactions. This vulnerability makes administration
challenges for administrative and adjudicatory chiefs concerning wellbeing, prosperity, and the
climate.
MEANING OF THE WORD PRECAUTION
It’s the presence of mind thought: “Be cautious.” “Best to be as careful as possible.” The
Precautionary standard isn’t all-around characterized. Notwithstanding, the Science and
Environmental Health Network brings up that, in all definitions of the precautionary principle,
we discover three components:
1. At the point when we have a sensible doubt of damage, and
2. Scientific vulnerability about circumstances and logical results, at that point
3. We must make a move to forestall hurt.
5|Page
MEANING AND CONCEPT OF
PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE
The Precautionary Principle is an instrument for improving wellbeing and ecological choices.
It intends to keep hurt from the start as opposed to oversee it after the reality. The Precautionary
Principle indicates an obligation to forestall damage when it is inside our ability to do as such,
in any event, when all the proof isn’t in. To put it plainly, “the precautionary principle is a
thought which supports making a defensive move before there is finished logical confirmation
of danger that is- an activity ought not to be deferred just because full analytical data is
inadequate.”
In straightforward terms, the Precautionary Principle passes on the sound judgment based
counsel to decide in favor of alert. The standard plans to forestall mischief to people, the
climate, and the eco-framework on the loose. Before taking a gander at a portion of the
generally utilized meanings of the Precautionary Principle, it is useful to comprehend the
specific situation and reasoning. When the effects of a particular movement, for example, an
emanation of dangerous substances, are not apparent, the overall assumption is to release the
exercises ahead until the vulnerability is settled totally. The Precautionary Principle counters
such broad assumptions. When there is a vulnerability concerning an action’s effects, the
Precautionary Principle advocates activity to foresee and deflect natural mischief. In this
manner, the Precautionary Principle favors observing, forestalling, and additionally alleviating
unsure expected dangers.
6|Page
SALIENT FEATURES OF
PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE
The Precautionary Principle addresses a change in perspective in dynamic. It takes into account
five key components that can forestall irreversible harm to individuals and nature:
1. Expectant Action: There is an obligation to make an anticipatory move to forestall hurt.
Government, business, and local gatherings, just as the overall population, share this obligation.
2. Right to Know: “The people group has an option to know total and exact data on possible
human wellbeing and ecological impacts related to the determination of items,”
administrations, tasks, or plans. The weight to supply this data lies with the defender, not with
the overall population.
3. Other Assessment: A commitment exists to analyze a full scope of options and select the
option with the most unexpected effect on human wellbeing and the climate, including the
possibility of sitting idle.
4. Full Cost Accounting: When assessing expected other options, there is an obligation to
think about all the sensibly predictable expenses, including crude materials, fabricating,
transportation, use, cleanup, inevitable removal, and wellbeing costs regardless of whether such
costs are not reflected in the underlying charge. Short and long haul advantages and time limits
ought to be thought about when deciding.
5. Participatory Decision Process: Decisions applying the Precautionary The standard should
be straightforward, participatory, and educated by the best accessible science and other
pertinent data.
7|Page
PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE AND ITS
LEGAL APPLICATION IN INDIA
The Apex Court of India’s role in perceiving the Precautionary principle as a fundamental
component of sustainable development of events and a piece of worldwide common law
advanced its subsidiary application from sacred commands to be specific Articles 21, 48A, and
51A(g).[7] In 1996, Kuldip Singh J in Vellore Citizen Government assistance Forum v Union
of India[8] proclaimed that the standard includes three conditions:
(1) State government and legal specialists should envision, forestall and assault the reasons for
environmental corruption;
(2) Where there are dangers of genuine and irreversible harm, absence of logical assurance
ought not to be utilized as an explanation behind delaying measures to forestall ecological
corruption;
(3) The ‘onus of confirmation’ is on the entertainer or designer, or industrialist to show the
activities are earth considerate. Furthermore, the particular ecological court, NGT, is a
production of a resolution; its ward, powers also, systems are understood and applied by the
language of the National Green Tribunal Act 2010.
The NGT interprets and applies the Precautionary rule as ordered by Section 20 of the National
Green Tribunal Act 2010. The NGT pronounced the prudent rule to be a vital piece of public
natural law: The relevance of the prudent rule is a legal order to the Tribunal while choosing
or, on the other hand, settling debates emerging out of generous inquiries identifying with the
climate. Hence, any infringement or even a caught infringement of this guideline would be
noteworthy by any individual before the Tribunal. Inaction in the current realities and
conditions of a given case could itself be an infringement of the prudent principle, hence
bringing it inside the ambit of the Tribunal’s purview, as characterized under the NGT Act
2010.
The NGT sees the Precautionary rule as a determinative standard that permits the adjudicators
to look at the likelihood of ecological corruption and come about mischief from a proposed
8|Page
movement. This includes very much logical information supporting safeguard and denial of
damage and an obligation to manage risks.[9] Actuate precautionary measures, activities
depend on analytic data and investigation of potential dangers to human wellbeing and climate,
but speculative, uncertain, or contested. Speculative, uncertain, or questioned logical data
makes vulnerability corresponding to holes in information and then again helpless information,
obliviousness, defective models, logical irregularity, and the difference in the idea of danger
with the low epistemic edge of proof tend towards hazard prevention.[10]
The accessibility of legitimacy audit to the NGT advances the legal use of the rule. As a
legitimacy court, the NGT turns into the paramount chief and can attempt inside and out an
investigation that includes law and the specialized assessment supporting a decision. The
Precautionary rule is conjured and followed by legal and master individuals as a regularizing
responsibility. It subsequently coordinates the judges, especially the specialized master judges,
to offer deductively based prior arrangements and strategies that react innovatively to
powerless, insufficient guidelines even without a guideline. Reception of an assortment of
systems, including investigative, partner consultation, and arrangement of particular
committees, helps utilize the Precautionary rule.
This improves dynamic investment through discourse, contention, and standards for inspiring
genuine real factors and master information to react to ecological issues. Master individuals by
on-spot site review can assess conflicting cases, positions, and reports recorded by the parties.
The partner consultative interaction is relevant to instances of more extensive consequences,
including significant issues including waterway cleaning and air pollution.[11] The particular
boards advance the experts’ responsibility to use the standards under the National Green
Tribunal Act 2010.
Along these lines, India’s Precautionary standard commands decided to use for noticing,
forestalling, and moderating expected dangers. Without a doubt, current danger factors have
gotten more perplexing, broad, and unfavorably influence general wellbeing and the climate.
The rule is utilized as an instrument inside Indian ecological administration to advance better
wellbeing and natural choices. Nonetheless, the guideline is questionable and hard to apply
because of its irregularity (regulating perspectives) and misapplication (legal norm of
evidence). In the fourth area, these issues are tended to in the Indian setting.
9|Page
CONCLUSION
Applying the precautionary principle will get simpler to set course for a general public, which
is portrayed by the practical turn of events. Reasonably using the rule implies that various
conditions are to be met. Above all else, when the guideline is utilized, its significance and
degree are to be explained. A definition is to be introduced. This will forestall disarray and
novel understandings, for example, the one given to preventive measures by the Commission
concerning the French atomic tests.
Concerning the (restrictions too) the extent of the standard, the accompanying can be said.
When the cost-effectiveness criterium is applied, it is perceived as a proportionality test as the
more genuine the potential harms could be, the more ought to be done to keep them from
coming into being. As the Precautionary guideline applies in circumstances where it isn’t sure
ahead of time how high the harms will be, the expense adequacy test can not imply that
conviction is accomplished precisely how realistic the estimates will be.
REFERENCES
[1] UN Sustainable Development Goals Report (2019) 58. Available at:
https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/The-SustainableDevelopment-Goals-Report-2019.pdf.
[2] H.S. Burnett, ‘Understanding the Precautionary Principle and its Threat to Human Welfare’
(2009) 26(2) Social Philosophy and Policy 378–410; K. Steele, ‘The Precautionary Principle:
A New Approach to Public Decision-Making?’, (2006) 5 Law, Probability and Risk 19–31.
[3] R. von Schomberg, ‘The Precautionary Principle: Its Use Within Hard and Soft Law’
(2012) 3(2) European Journal of Risk Regulation 147–156.
[4] For a detailed discussion, see European Commission Science for Environment Policy,
FUTURE BRIEF: The Precautionary Principle: Decision-Making Under Uncertainty, (2017:
Issue 18). Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/science-environment-policy.
10 | P a g e
[5]European Commission (2017) at 6–7; D.C. Peterson, ‘Precaution: Principles and Practice in
Australian Environmental and Natural Resource Management (2006) 50 The Australian
Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 469–489.
[6] P. Spruijt, A.B. Knol, A.C. Petersen and E. Lebret, ‘Expert Views on Their Role as Policy
Advisors: Pilot Study for the Cases of Electromagnetic Fields, Particulate Matter, and
Antimicrobial Resistance’ (2019) 39(5) Risk Analysis 968–974.
[7] Article 21 of the Constitution of India states: ‘no person shall be deprived of his life or
personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law’. Article 48A obligates
the state to ‘protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of
the country’.
[8] Vellore Citizen’s Welfare Forum v Union of India (1996) 5 SCC 647 at 658.
[9] For a detailed discussion, see G.N. Gill, Environmental Justice in India: The National Green
Tribunal (Routledge, UK, 2016) 121–127
[10] G.N. Gill, ‘The National Green Tribunal of India: Decision-Making, Scientific Expertise
and Uncertainty’ (2017) 29(2–3) Environmental Law and Management 82–88.
[11] K.K. Singh v National Ganga River Basin Authority Judgment 16 October 2014; Manoj
Mishra v Union of India Judgment 13 January 2015 (referred to as the Maily se Nirmal Yamuna
Revitalization Plan 2017); Vardhama Kaushik v Union of India and Sanjay Kulshrestha v
Union of India Order 7 April 2015.
11 | P a g e
