GM Mustard Case | Justice Nagarathna Flays Failure To Make Biosafety Dossier Public, Says Right To Environmental Information Affected

Recently, Justice BV Nagarathna has upheld the right to a safe and healthy environment as a part of Article 21 by reiterating its existing jurisprudence, including in Virender Gaur vs State of Haryana, where the right to life was expanded to include the hygienic environment as an integral facet of the right to a healthy life and which puts a duty on the State to maintain ecological balance by taking concrete measures to promote, protect and improve the environment. It encapsulates a concomitant duty for the State, as understood in light of Articles 48 and 51A of the Constitution of India.” On July 23, the Supreme Court division bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Sanjay Karol delivered a split verdict on the 2022 decision of the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee granting conditional approval for the environmental release of transgenic mustard hybrid, Dhara Mustard Hybrid-11 to the Centre for Genetic Manipulation of Crop Plants. The engagement with stakeholders through participative process inspires confidence in the decision-making process and leads to more sound outcomes which are less vulnerable to legal challenges.” Environmental decision-making based on transparency, accountability and public-participation Justice Nagarathna has stated that in environmental decision-making, sufficient safeguards in the form of transparency, accountability, and public participation exist to ensure that the regulatory decisions are not based on partial and uncontested scientific evidence. She said: “The failure to publish the biosafety dossier on the website reveals a deficiency in the Guidelines for Environmental Risk Assessment for Genetically Engineered Plants, 2016.” Based on the above arguments, Justice Nagarathna concluded that there has been a violation of the right to a safe and healthy environment under Article 21 because the safeguards that were necessary to be taken before the grant of approval were not taken in the present case. She further noted: “The failure to adequately assess health and environmental impact of GM crops seriously infringes upon intergenerational equity as it potentially endangers the ability of future citizens to enjoy the highest attainable standard of health.” Precautionary principle Justice Nagarathna relied on the precautionary principle, a foundational environmental law principle.