Issues Within National Green Tribunal

• National Green Tribunal (NGT) Act: Establishes the framework, requiring 10-20 full-time judicial members and 10-20 expert members from reputed national institutions or government agencies involved in environmental matters.

• Current Status of NGT: Operating at half capacity with only 4 judicial and 6 expert members, raising concerns about effectiveness in fulfilling its environment protection mandate.

• Conflict of Interest Trends: Since 2016, 9 of the 13 expert members had been involved in the green clearance process under government orders, whereas only 2 of the 11 expert members appointed from 2011-2015 had similar backgrounds. This shift raises questions about impartiality and propriety in decision-making.

• Expert Member Profiles: Many current expert members hold or held positions that directly involved environmental clearances, including roles as former Indian Forest Service officers and members of Expert Appraisal Committees (EACs). Key figures include:

  • Dr. S S Garbyal: Former Principal Chief Conservator and Director General, Environment Ministry.
  • Siddhanta Das: Former Director General of Forests.
  • Several members had key roles in green clearance processes, prompting allegations of conflicts of interest in adjudicating against their previous decisions.

• Legislative Framework: The NGT's appellate jurisdiction covers decisions made under the Environment Protection Act, 1986 and the Forest Conservation Act, 1980.

• Judicial Observations: The principle of natural justice highlights concerns about former officials participating in decisions where they previously played a significant role. Legal experts express that civil society experts should comprise member selections instead of government officials.

• Selection Committee Changes: Following the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, the selection committee to appoint NGT members includes the Chief Justice of India or a nominated judge, government secretaries, and the Environment secretary as the member-secretary without a vote.

• Need for Diverse Expertise: Suggestions emphasize the necessity for a broader range of expertise in the NGT to manage sector-specific matters effectively, advocating for a full-strength tribunal with varied competencies.

• Expertise Misalignment: Concerns were raised regarding the adequacy of members’ expertise related to specific subject matter areas (e.g., pollution control vs. forestry) impacting the tribunal's functioning.

These points revolve around structural and procedural aspects of the NGT, highlighting the ongoing discussions about its efficacy and integrity in environmental governance.