1. Idea floated by Supreme Court which directed the government to appoint a Regulator with offices in States under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 for appraising projects, enforcing environmental conditions for approvals and imposing penalties on polluters. 2. Rejected the Centre’s contention that the government alone was the Regulator.
3. Problem with current mechanism: Presence of the MoEF Secretary in both the appraisal and approval processes leads to a perception of conflict of interest. The current EIA and CRZ clearances rely predominantly on the data provided by the project proponent.
1. Idea floated by Supreme Court which directed the government to appoint a Regulator with offices in States under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 for appraising projects, enforcing environmental conditions for approvals and imposing penalties on polluters.
ReplyDelete2. Rejected the Centre’s contention that the government alone was the Regulator.
3. Problem with current mechanism:
Presence of the MoEF Secretary in both the appraisal and approval processes leads to a perception of conflict of interest. The current EIA and CRZ clearances rely predominantly on the data provided by the project proponent.