Unisha Aryal and Preiya Shah/ kathmandu/ Environment can be described as the aggregate of all living and non-living components, as well as their impact on human life. Animals, trees, forests, fisheries, and birds, for example, are all living or biotic components. Water, soil, sunshine, rocks, and air are examples of non-living or abiotic elements.In simple sense, the term ‘environment’ literally means “nature,” which includes the natural ecosystem as well as all of its non-human attributes, traits, and processes.Hence, an individual’s, object’s, element’s, or system’s environment contains all of the other entities by which it is surrounded. Individuals, objects, elements, and processes rarely occur in isolation in reality; instead, they communicate with their surroundings to varying degrees.

As we all know from last one month there have been a huge pollution especially air because of the forest fires. Nepal’s weather situation was very hilarious and terrible as there was not clear sky and living beings were having major health problems like burning of eyes, breathing problems, etc. Air pollution has reached dangerous levels, causing millions of students around the world to sit at home.The Himalayan country of 30 million people is sandwiched between China and India, two of the world’s most polluting nations.Air pollution is a persistent problem in Kathmandu, Nepal’s rapidly expanding capital city, and a further embarrassment for the administration, which is battling the coronavirus pandemic.

People have also been advised to remain indoors to stop building and garbage burning, according to the authorities.Experts claim the heavy smog has been caused by raging wildfires in many areas of the world mixed with stagnant atmospheric conditions.A year after the government first enforced restrictions in the region, citizens are fearful of another wave of Covid-19, and another health issue linked to respiratory illnesses caused by toxins in the air has surfaced.Despite the fact that the majority of people in our world breathe air that is dangerously polluted, we lack the willpower to behave responsibly to address the problem. The visibility in the Kathmandu valley has significantly deteriorated. Snow-capped mountains shone brilliantly in the winter a year ago, and we could easily see the mountains and valleys.This season, though, the smoke was so thick that we couldn’t see through it. The cloud has been ingrained in our surroundings, obstructing our vision and diminishing our visibility.

There are various kinds of environmental problem that arises time and again within the territory of Nepal. And, it is very pathetic to know that there is not even a single environmental court or tribunal in Nepal. Environmental Courts and Tribunals (ECTs) are also commonly regarded as a viable means of achieving this critical aim.Citizens has right to get environmental justice parallel with others. Constitution of Nepal 2072, Article 30 has mentioned the right regarding clean environment. Government must establish environmental courts and tribunals for the control of the destruction of the natural resources within the country which are directly hampering the health of the citizens. The international recognition of human and environmental rights’ interdependence has had a significant impact on environmental law in general and ECT growth in particular. The dangers to the environment and human being due to environmental pollution is global and international in character. It is no doubt that the developing countries like Nepal also needs an Environmental Court.

Constitutions aren’t the only thing that foreign legal instruments have an effect on. State (and even subnational) ECT policy is increasingly being drafted in response to international environmental law.Civil society is also a significant political force behind the establishment of ECTs. The public has a vested interest in how environmental, health, and land use decisions are taken, as well as whether or not such critical decisions are equitable, successful, and executed, as those whose lives, livelihoods, and lifestyles are at stake.The public’s desire for environmental justice that is “just, fast, and inexpensive” is forcing policymakers, decision-makers, and other stakeholders to review conflict-resolution institutions to see how they can meet those three legitimate demands.

Green courts or environmental courts and tribunals adjudicates in the environmental disputes and it addresses environmental and closely related socio-economic issues that require significant specialized knowledge. It requires trained judges and lawyers in the field of environmental science and other technical filed. National laws determine the type of claims that an environmental court and tribunal is authorized to hear and dictate the eligibility criteria for access to the decision-making bodies. A study by the Access Initiative has identifies over 350 environmental courts and tribunals in forty-one countries and on every continent, including 117 created in the Philippines in 2008. It might take the forms of judicial branch of government or body that is not part of the judicial branch but have the authority to issue binding decisions in environmental disputes. There are many environmental courts in different nations, for example: The Land and Environment Court in the state of New South Wales, Australia, Brazil’s state and federal environmental courts, similarly in India , the national Green Tribunal Act of 2010 authorized the development of institutional capacity for domestic environmental governance, including the implementation of a national green tribunal that is staffed by judicial and expert members for issuing rulings on environmental controversies, etc. Additionally, efforts to build a green court are advanced in Kenya and in several Asian countries as well.

ECTs can now be present on any populated continent, in both large and small countries, under democratic and nondemocratic governments, and in both rich developed and poor least developed countries.There are numerous advantages of environmental courts and tribunals mentioned below:

1. There would be specialized experts who will make better decisions for the favorable environment.
2. It shows governmental concern for the environment and biodiversity, and offers a public outlet that is clearly recognizable.
3. There will be greater efficiency with quick decisions.
4. It may introduce laws that give people, environmental NGOs, and public interest litigants more standing (PIL). (China, like other countries, has recently passed laws extending the standing of environmental NGOs and public interest litigators in their ECs.)
5. The government’s contribution to the environment and biodiversity is put into action.
6. It can deal with various laws in a more coordinated manner, particularly if the ECT has civil, criminal, and administrative jurisdiction.
7. The public’s confidence in the government and the justice system will be boosted, making citizens more likely to voice their complaints to the system.

As they are the major advantages which will make the country more developed in the environmental sector and people will be healthy. When the environment can be incorporated into all aspects of legal decision-making, environmental matters can get side tracked down a specialist route; non-specialized but high-quality judges can add fresh viewpoints and insights; and it’s not straightforward to make straight boundaries between environmental and non-environmental situations.There is no consensus about whether the ECT should be a judicial or administrative tribunal; both will function effectively. There is still no consensus about whether it can be implemented at the trial (first-instance) level, the appeal (second-instance) level, or at all levels of the system.

Least successful in terms of specialization benefits but is the simplest, fastest, and easiest to implement. Merely designating an already seated general court or judge as an “EC” to manage environmental cases on top of his or her usual docket; this minimalist model has been chosen by the Philippines, Hawaii, and a few other jurisdictions.Judges and policy makers who are competent and experienced in environmental law or their environmental career are critical to the rule of law and good environmental jurisprudence, and continued professional preparation and growth is an important best practice.

Although many ECT proponents argue for a fully autonomous, widely recognizable, and wide-ranging ECT as a first move, it could be more practical for others to begin with a more modest approach.If there is difficult to forecast potential caseloads, money is insufficient, there is strong resistance (for example, from the current judiciary or business community), or there is little political will but a major leader in favor of the ECT, this strategy makes sense.Environmental rule of law combines important environmental needs with key principles of the rule of law, laying the groundwork for environmental governance reform. It places a premium on environmental protection by linking it to fundamental rights and responsibilities.

It establishes a basis for environmental rights and commitments by expressly reflecting basic fundamental principles and ethical standards of behavior. Environmental governance can be authoritarian, that is, discretionary, contingent, and volatile, without environmental rule of law and the regulation of legal rights and obligations.ECT is the “right” approach for improving environmental justice, the rule of law, economic growth, community integrity, and “just, fast, and cheap” environmental dispute resolution, as well as improving environmental justice, the rule of law, sustainable development, community credibility, and “just, quick, and cheap” environmental dispute resolution.

Countries have created robust environmental agencies, negotiated multilateral agreements and undertaken new initiatives at the local, limit greenhouse, emissions, conserve biodiversity and wildlife and manage natural resources. Lack of environmental management has led to the continued loss of biodiversity, reduction in natural resources, climate degradation and the worldwide proliferation of waste.

Conservation of environment leads to the leads to the overall development of the state. The International Network for Environmental Compliance and Enforcement (INECE) is a global network working with environmental compliance and enforcement officials around the world to respond to this compliance gap. In a number of remarkable ways, the judiciary specifically “green courts” also known as environmental courts help to empower a concerned authority to participate in the process of achieving environmental justice. Hereby, judiciary plays a vital role in enforcing environmental law in promoting sustainable development.

Sustainable development and environmental conservation depend upon good governance, good governance depends upon the rule of law depends upon effective compliance and enforcement. A judiciary well informed of the rapidly expanding boundaries of environmental law and law in the field of sustainable development, and sensitive to their role and responsibilities in promoting the rule of law in regard to environmentally friendly development, would play a critical role in the vindication of the public interest in a healthy and secure environment through interpretation and enhancement of environmental law.

Courts have a powerful transformative effect on society. Scott Fulton and Justice Antonio Benjamin, prominent environmental judges from separate continents and cultures, have jointly commented that, “what judges treat as important, a society comes to judge as important.” The success of global environmental governance depends on more than an environmentally trained and motivated judiciary.

As stated in the UN Environment Program (UNEP) GEO-4 Report, the environmental issues (brought about by climate change) transcend borders. Issues relating to environment is a global problem. Protecting the global environment is largely beyond the capacity of individual countries. Only concerted and coordinated international action will be sufficient. Therefore, the world needs a more coherent system of international environmental governance.