Proceedings of the Second South Asia Judicial Roundtable on Environmental Justice. Irum Ahsan

socioeconomic development and decision-making processes. Ugyen Tshewang, National Environment Commission, Bhutan presented the EIA processes and procedures in his country, noting once again the country’s environmental conservation ethics. Providing a critique of EIA in Pakistan, Saima Amin Khawaja, Progressive Advocates and Legal Consultants said that the system merely provides for a definition of EIA but fails to explicitly state what the EIA is for and when it should be done. Matthew Baird then presented key principles of EIAs, noting that the primary aim of EIAs is to achieve sustainable development and create sustainable societies through public participation and decisions based on the best available information. Sanjay Upadhyay, Enviro Legal Defence Firm said that the EIA is a contentious topic in his country, despite several amendments and improvements of the regulations through the years.

      Access to environmental justice and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms are developing concepts in the field of environmental law. Providing a perspective from India, Justice Dhananjaya Chandrachud, High Court of Bombay said that alternative dispute resolution could be understood not as a substitute, but as a supplement for the courts where it is desirable. Justice Mirza Hussain Haider, Supreme Court Division of High Court of Bangladesh suggested that alternative dispute resolution be seen as “active or appropriate dispute resolution.” Discussing environmental justice and alternative dispute resolution, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah stressed that alternative dispute resolution has to be cautiously applied to environmental cases since mutual agreements between the parties cannot overshadow or marginalize the adverse effects on the environment. Harsha Fernando, ADB provided an extensive discussion on conflict management and resolution processes, offering a framework for the use of alternative dispute resolution in handling cases.

      Common capacity constraints in South Asian judiciaries is another important topic that needs a regional approach, considering the role of law, as well as that of law enforcement, for the protection of the environment. Chief Justice Md. Muzammel Hossain, Supreme Court of Bangladesh noted that despite the continuing development of environmental justice in Bangladesh, the judiciary still faces several constraints. Justice Priyasath Dep, Supreme Court of Sri Lanka said that despite his country having adequate laws and a good legal framework for the protection of the environment, including updated laws in line with international obligations, issues still remain. Noting Bhutan’s constitutional provisions and philosophy for environmental protection, Justice Sangay Khandu, High Court of Bhutan said that he could not identify any constraints facing his country currently, but cautioned that the country cannot take things for granted and be complacent because of the transboundary nature of issues. Justice Dhananjaya Chandrachud provided suggestions on how to conduct environmental adjudication and identify the doctrines of environmental law to help judges in their efforts to protect nature. Speaking about Nepal, Justice Ananda Mohan Bhattarai stressed the importance of capacity building, especially at the early stages in law schools, given the constraints faced not only by the judiciary but also by the entire justice system.

      The Draft Memorandum of Understanding for Co-operation Amongst the South Asia Judiciaries was circulated to the representative judges of the member countries, which is scheduled to be approved and adopted at the Third South Asia Judicial Roundtable on Environmental Justice to be held in Colombo, Sri Lanka in August 2014.

      During the closing remarks, Justice Tshering Wangchuk, Supreme Court of Bhutan stressed that he is a firm believer that with the growth of roughly comparable judicial institutions across the region and the world, there is much to be learned from the judicial solutions adopted by other countries. Bruce Lawrence Davis, ADB cited three key messages that emerged from the roundtable: (i) the participants were made more aware of the pressing environmental challenges that imperil sustainable growth in South Asia, (ii) the different judiciaries were able to identify key challenges that they face in resolving environmental disputes, and (iii) there was recognition of a clear need for concrete judicial cooperation on environmental adjudication in the region.