This document discusses environmental rule of law and the role of environmental institutions in Bangladesh. It outlines the legal background of environmental protection acts and ordinances. It describes a survey that found factories are causing ecological imbalance by discharging pollutants. A 1986 notification required industries to control pollution within 3 years and for new industries to adopt controls. However, petitioner argued pollution continued uncontrolled. The duties of lawyers and pioneering environmental jurisprudence of Indian lawyer Mahesh Chandra Mehta are also discussed. Relevant court cases that established principles like the right to a clean environment are cited.

1. Environmental Rule of Law: Role
of Environmental Institutions
Preeti Kana Sikder
Assistant Professor
Department of Law & Justice
Jahangirnagar University

2. Industrial
Pollution

3. BELA v
Bangladesh
22 BLD (HCD) 2002

4. List of
respondents
Ministry of Industries
Ministry of Environment and
Forests
Department of Environment,
Director General

5. Background
Factories Act, 1965
Factories Rules, 1979
East Pakistan Water Pollution Control
Ordinance, 1970
Bangladesh Environment Pollution Control
Ordinance, 1977

6. Survey by
Department of
environment,
Pollution
control
 Ecological imbalance is being caused continuously
due to discharge of various industrial wastes into air
and water bodies
 The intensity of pollution caused by the factories
and industrial units depend on:
 Type
 Location
 Raw Materials
 Chemical Effects
 Production process and
 Discharge of gaseous, liquid and solid pollutants

7. Notification
from Ministry
of Industries
on 5/6/1986
2.a) The ministry of industries will ensure that the
industries having no environmental pollution
control/protection system will adopt measures to
control pollution over a period of next three years
b) While sanctioning a new industrial unit, the
ministry of industries will ensure that necessary
environmental pollution control/protection
measures are adopted by it.
The department of environment Pollution control
would render necessary co-operation to the
ministry of industries in implementing above
decisions

8. Grievance of
Petitioner
No evidence found as to any effective
measure or legal action taken against any of
the factories/industries to curb their
continuing discharge of the effluent and
wastages into air and water bodies
Rather industrial pollution is being
continued unabated, uncontrolled and
indiscriminately, not only by those
industries identified in the notification but
also by new factories that sprung up since
then

9. Grievance of
Petitioner
Thereby the respondents failed in
performing their statutory duties
and obligations cast upon them by
the provision of the ordinance

10. Prayer for appropriate
relief relating to the
matter of control of
pollution from industries

11. Locus standi
Paragraph 10-12

12. Importance of public
interest litigation
Paragraphs 9-12

13. Submission
of Petitioner
Environmental Management in
Bangladesh Chemical industries
corporation (BCIC) provided a reply on
11/7/94
Newspaper clippings showing
deteriorating environmental pollution
New list prepared by department of
environment containing 1176 industries
as pollutants

14. Dutiesoflawyers?
Mahesh Chandra Mehta has won precedent-setting suits-
• Against industries that generate hazardous waste;
• Banned intensive shrimp farming and other damaging
activities along India’s 7,000 kilometer coast.
• Introducing lead-free gasoline to India and reducing the
industrial pollution fouling the Ganges and eroding the Taj
Mahal.

15. Mahesh Chandra Mehta
 A courtroom was set aside every Friday just for
Mehta’s cases.
 He has almost single-handedly obtained about
40 landmark judgments and numerous orders
from the Supreme Court against polluters, a
record that may be unrivaled by any other
environmental lawyer in the world.

16. PioneerofEnvironmental
Jurisprudence
M.C. Mehta’s public interest environmental
litigation cases have formed the foundation for
the development of environmental
jurisprudence in India, and indeed, South Asia
today.
The constitutional right to life extends to the
right to a clean and healthy environment.
Courts are empowered to grant financial
compensation as a remedy for the infringement
of the right to life.
Polluters should be held absolutely liable to
compensate for harm caused by their
hazardous activities.

17. PioneerofEnvironmental
Jurisprudence
Public resources that are sensitive, fragile or of
high ecological value should be maintained and
preserved for the public.
Similarly, the government has a responsibility to
prevent environmental degradation. Even if
scientific uncertainty exists, the implementation
of preventative measures should not be delayed
wherever there is the possibility of serious or
irreversible damage.
Green benches should be established in Indian
High Courts dealing specifically with
environmental cases.

18. Relevantcases
Mc Mehta v Union of India, AIR, 1987
(Paragraph 34)
MC Mehta v Union of India and ors,
AIR 1988 SC 1037 (Paragraph 36)
Koolwal v state of rajsthan, 1988
(Paragraph 35)
AIR 1988 SC 1115 (paragraph 37)
Lakshmipathy v State of Karnataka
(para 38)

19. Sources used
for this lecture
Banglapedia, Factories Act, 1965
http://en.banglapedia.org/index.php?titl
e=Factories_Act_1965
Dr. Mohiuddin Farooque, v Bangladesh
and Ors, 22 BLD (HCD) 2002