Public Interest
Litigations
 Shatoosh
Petition - Supreme Court
Turtle
Petition - Central Empowered Committee
Bhoramdeo
Petition - Central Empowered Committee
Kaziranga
Petition - Central Empowered Committee
Sariska
Road Petition - Rajasthan High Court
Corbett
Road Petition - Supreme Court
Shahtoosh
Petition - Supreme Court
Shahtoosh is the
fabric woven from the fur of the Tibetan antelope, which
in one of the most endangered animals on the planet.
The antelopes are poached illegally in China, and their
extremely valuable fur is smuggled into India, usually
in barter trade for tiger parts, where it is woven into
shawls and other high fashion items.
This trade is taking place even though
the antelope is listed in Schedule I of the Wild Life
(Protection) Act, which gives it maximum protection
under Indian law. The Convention for International
Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora (CITES)
also lists the antelope in Appendix I, which gives the
affords the species near total prohibition in international
trade.
WPSI initially filed a Public Interest
Petition in the Jammu and Kashmir High Court in April
1998, requesting the State Government to ban the manufacture
and sale of shahtoosh shawls and to abide by national
and international laws and conventions.
On 1 May 2000, the High Court ordered
the State Government to “enforce the law against
those who are carrying on business and trade in contravention
of Section 43 of the State Wildlife Act and provisions
of CITES”. However the order fell short of a complete
ban, so WPSI appealed the order on 30 May 2003. While
the appeal was still in court, the State Government
amended its Wildlife Act in August 2002 and placed the
Tibetan antelope in Schedule I, banning trade in shahtoosh,
including the manufacture of shawls.
However a subsequent Jammu and Kashmir
Division Bench order on 10 February 2003 reversed many
of the advances made in the battle to save the Tibetan
antelope. It said that the trade in shahtoosh should
not be banned because of the “human aspects”
involved, even though it also noted that the animal
was protected under the law.
WPSI then filed a Special Leave Petition
in the Supreme Court of India against the Division Bench
order. On 1 August 2003, the Supreme Court issued notice
to all the respondents, asking them to reply to the
Special Leave Petition.
The Respondents include the Chief Wildlife
Warden of Jammu and Kashmir, and the Union of India
through the Ministry of Environment and Forests.
Top
Turtle
Petition - Central Empowered Committee
Every year, tens of thousands of Olive
Ridley sea turtles congregate on the beaches of Orissa
and lay eggs in a unique and spectacular mass-nesting
phenomenon known as arribada. Unfortunately, thousands
of breeding adult turtles die by drowning after being
trapped in fishing trawler nets.
The Orissa High Court has been hearing
a WPSI petition on the protection of these rare marine
animals, and other conservation matters, since 1998.
The issue was heavily politicised by an influential
lobby of mechanised fishing boat owners who fish at
unsustainable levels along the Orissa coast. Using data
provided by WPSI, a private citizen filed a petition
in 2002 before the Central Empowered Committee
(CEC)
The CEC has shown a keen interest in
this matter. In March 2003, it issued a set of Interim
Directions, asking the Orissa State government to implement
various turtle conservation measures. The Orissa government
replied to these Interim Directions by claiming that
they had all been complied with.
Using data provided by WPSI, the petitioner
was able to prove that directions had been implemented
half-heartedly and that turtle protection measures were
still not adequate.
The CEC is still hearing the case.
Top
Bhoramdeo
Petition - Central Empowered Committee
Massive tree cutting to make way for
the construction of a dam and a canal inside Chhattisgarh's
Bhoramdeo Wildlife Sanctuary was reported in March 2003.
This is of special concern because the Sanctuary adjoins
the buffer zone of Madhya Pradesh's world famous Kanha
Tiger Reserve.
After a field visit by a WPSI field
officer, who collected photographic evidence and confirmed
the scale of encroachment and deforestation, WPSI filed
a petition before the Central Empowered
Committee (CEC). The petition gave details of the
tree felling activity, together with the dimensions
of the canal and embankment that were constructed in
the Sanctuary. It also described another incident of
encroachment in the same forest, and linked both to
a lack of enforcement by government bodies.
The CEC took serious note of the deforestation
and issued notices to the various respondents in the
case. It asked them to explain why conservation laws
had been repeatedly violated inside the Sanctuary. In
reply, the Forest Department agreed with most of the
points WPSI raised, only disputing sections of the petition
that accused them of willful negligence.
The CEC is still hearing the case.
Top
Kaziranga
Petition - Central Empowered Committee
Kaziranga National Park, in the State
of Assam, is one of the world’s most biodiversity-rich
areas. It is included in UNESCO’s list of Natural
Heritage Sites and is one of the most spectacular and
unique ecosystems on the planet. Its numerous grasslands,
woodlands and water bodies are home to five endangered
species of mega fauna - Indian one horned rhinoceros,
Asian elephant, swamp deer, Asian wild buffalo and tiger.
Situated on the flood plains of the
Brahmaputra River, the park has suffered considerable
loss of land due to riverbank erosion on its northern
boundary. In an attempt to offset this land loss, the
Assam State government created six ‘Additions’
to the National Park in 1994-1995, which provide vital
habitats for Kaziranga’s mega herbivores, as well
as corridors that animals can use as escape routes to
higher ground during the Brahmaputra’s annual
flooding.
Illegal graziers and settlers however
encroached heavily upon these areas so, in June 2003,
WPSI filed a petition before the Central
Empowered Committee (CEC). The Petition asked the
CEC to issue orders that the illegal encroachments should
be removed from all six Additions. The petition provided
a mass of data for each Addition, including the dates
of notification, ecological importance, and precisely
what kind of human interference it was suffering.
In reply, the Forest Department stated
that they were doing their best to win back the land
from the encroachers through litigation in the state
High Court.
The CEC is still hearing the case.
Top
Sariska
Road Petition - Rajasthan High Court
WPSI filed a Public Interest Litigation
(PIL) in the Jaipur bench of the Rajasthan High Court
in 2002, requesting closure of a section of State Highway
No. 13 that runs through the Sariska Tiger Reserve in
Rajasthan. This followed construction of a bypass skirting
the reserve that was built in 1998 because large numbers
of wild animals were being killed in road accidents
on Highway 13. Despite the opening of the bypass, the
highway has not been shut down and animals are continuing
to be killed.
The case continues to be heard.
Top
Corbett
Road Petition - Supreme Court
Corbett Tiger Reserve, consisting of
Corbett National Park and Sonanadi Wildlife Sanctuary,
is one of India’s most famous tiger reserves.
In 2001, WPSI intervened in the Navin Raheja vs. Union
of India case that was being heard in the Supreme Court,
regarding the proposed construction of a road through
Corbett National Park in the State of Uttaranchal. This
road would involve felling a huge number of trees, so
WPSI suggested an alternative route that would partly
use an existing road, skirting the Tiger Reserve.
At a hearing in February 2003, the
Indian Board for Wildlife unanimously stated that the
sanctity of the Park needed to be protected and agreed
that the road should skirt the Park and pass through
reserve forests in the neighbouring state of Uttar Pradesh
(UP). This would involve the Uttaranchal Government
paying UP for compensatory aforestation. Uttaranchal
agreed to this proposal and the two states are working
out a strategy to construct the road in such a way that
it serves public need with minimum damage to Corbett
Tiger Reserve. However, this is a contentious issue,
since Uttar Pradesh is reluctant to hand over administrative
control of any of its land to Uttaranchal.
Top
|
