Environment Vs Development? CJI Surya Kant Says Courts Must Find A ‘Third Way’

Speaking at the Commonwealth Policy Dialogue on Climate Justice, organised by the Commonwealth of Nations and the Commonwealth Legal Education Association (CLEA) at the Commonwealth Secretariat in London, CJI Kant said environmental disputes increasingly require courts to navigate complex questions where existing legal frameworks may not provide clear answers.

CJI Kant is currently on a four-day official visit to Germany and the United Kingdom.

'Courts must search for a third way'

Addressing the challenges faced by judges in environmental cases, CJI Kant said courts are increasingly required to draw a line between developmental necessity and ecological survival.

He said development and environmental preservation “do not always have to stand on opposite sides of the scales” and that courts must sometimes find a “third way” to advance both objectives through judicial creativity.

The CJI observed that citizens increasingly approach courts when legislatures are perceived as moving slowly and governments face institutional constraints.

He noted that while several Constitutions may not expressly prescribe how competing environmental and developmental interests should be balanced, courts have evolved principles through constitutional interpretation.

Referring to India, CJI Kant said the expanded interpretation of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution has helped courts address environmental concerns.

“The role of a judge is, therefore, changing; it is no longer enough to know what the law says; we must also understand the world to which that law is being applied,” he said.

Climate change demands new legal approaches

CJI Kant said climate change is testing the boundaries of traditional legal categories, with its consequences extending across national borders and affecting global supply chains.

He noted that countries undergoing industrialisation are increasingly being asked to transition rapidly towards renewable energy, while facing criticism when they cannot move at the same pace.

He called for the development of a distinct jurisprudential vocabulary suited to the climate challenges of individual countries.

At the same time, he said courts should remain open to borrowing approaches that have worked elsewhere in the Commonwealth, while adapting them to their own constitutional, social and environmental contexts.

'Clean energy transition must be fair'

The CJI emphasised that the consequences of climate change are often first experienced by communities whose livelihoods depend directly on natural resources.

He cited small farmers and fishing communities as examples, noting that when they lose land, water or crops because of a climate crisis they did little to cause, the consequences extend beyond environmental damage to their livelihood, dignity and equality.

He said climate policy must therefore account for differing geographical circumstances and ensure a fair distribution of environmental burdens.

“The challenge, therefore, is to reconcile the urgency of the clean energy transition with the principles of fairness and shared responsibility that must underpin it,” he said.

CJI calls for greater role of experts in environmental adjudication

CJI Kant also stressed the need for courts to work closely with subject-matter experts while deciding complex environmental disputes.

He said expert bodies should not merely be called upon as witnesses at a particular stage but should remain available throughout the life of a case where technical questions require continuing assessment.

Citing India’s experience, he referred to the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), constituted nearly three decades ago in a long-running forest conservation matter.

The CEC, he said, was empowered to inspect sites, investigate violations of environmental norms and provide technical reports to the Supreme Court.

According to CJI Kant, the committee has since played a role in hundreds of forestry and environmental matters.

He also referred to the National Green Tribunal (NGT), where judicial and technical expertise are brought together for environmental adjudication.

These institutions, he said, demonstrate a broader principle that environmental adjudication cannot remain solely the province of judges and lawyers.

'Law must not become uncertain where people are most vulnerable'

CJI Kant further stressed that climate justice requires courts and institutions to recognise the disproportionate impact of environmental crises on vulnerable communities.

He said the ripple effects of climate change are now measured not merely through local weather patterns but through massive carbon emissions and disruptions to global systems.

“This, too, is a reminder that the climate crisis will test the boundaries of legal categories we have long taken for granted,” he said.

“Our task as judges and as institutions is to ensure that the law does not become most uncertain precisely where people are most vulnerable.”

The CJI's remarks come amid growing judicial engagement with questions involving climate change, environmental protection, sustainable development and the constitutional dimensions of environmental rights.