Corporate Environmental Responsibility
Corporate Environmental Responsibility (CER)
What is Corporate Environmental Responsibility?
Corporate Environmental Responsibility (CER) refers to the obligation of corporations to operate in an environmentally sustainable manner, minimizing pollution, conserving natural resources, and safeguarding biodiversity.
It is a facet of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) but specifically focuses on environmental impacts.
CER includes adherence to environmental laws, ethical conduct in business operations, and voluntary initiatives to promote ecological welfare.
Legal Framework and Judicial Expectations
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991
Companies Act, 2013 (Sections related to CSR now include environmental initiatives)
Courts, especially the Supreme Court of India, have emphasized that corporations must internalize environmental costs and prevent harm proactively.
Landmark Case Laws on Corporate Environmental Responsibility
1. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak Case, 1987)
Citation: AIR 1987 SC 1086
Facts:
An oleum gas leak from Shriram Food and Fertilizer Factory endangered thousands of lives.
Petitioner filed public interest litigation to address industrial hazards and corporate accountability.
Court’s Observations:
Introduced the “Absolute Liability” principle for hazardous industries.
Held corporations are liable for any harm caused by dangerous activities, irrespective of fault or negligence.
Corporations must take all precautionary measures; no defense of “Act of God” or third-party intervention.
Significance:
Landmark case making corporations strictly liable for environmental and public health damages.
Set high standards for corporate responsibility in hazardous operations.
2. Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996)
Citation: (1996) 5 SCC 647
Facts:
Pollution by tanneries in Tamil Nadu affecting groundwater and public health.
Supreme Court’s Decision:
Enunciated the “Polluter Pays Principle” as part of CER.
Directed industries to install pollution control measures and pay for environmental damage.
Emphasized corporations’ duty to prevent pollution proactively.
Significance:
Cemented the legal basis for holding corporations financially responsible for environmental harm.
Reinforced precautionary and sustainable development principles.
3. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India (Bichhri Village Case, 1996)
Citation: (1996) 3 SCC 212
Facts:
Pollution by chemical factories caused severe damage to soil and water in Bichhri village, Rajasthan.
Court’s Judgment:
Imposed liability on corporations for remediation of contaminated land.
Ordered compensation to affected villagers.
Emphasized restoration of the environment as a corporate obligation.
Significance:
Extended corporate liability beyond immediate harm to include environmental restoration.
Reinforced role of corporations as custodians of the environment.
4. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1996 onwards)
Citation: (1997) 2 SCC 267
Facts:
Writ petition on forest protection and illegal logging linked with corporate entities involved in timber trade.
Court’s Directions:
Placed restrictions on timber extraction and emphasized corporate compliance with forest conservation laws.
Directed companies involved in environmental harm to adopt sustainable practices.
Significance:
Reinforced corporate responsibility in natural resource management.
Judicial monitoring of corporate environmental compliance.
5. M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath (1997)
Citation: (1997) 1 SCC 388
Facts:
Pollution caused by a hotel on the banks of the Beas River.
Court’s Ruling:
Held corporate entities liable for environmental degradation caused by their projects.
Emphasized that economic development cannot come at the cost of environmental destruction.
Imposed strict conditions and compensations on corporate offenders.
Significance:
Demonstrated judicial commitment to balancing development with environmental protection.
Highlighted corporate accountability for environmental harm.
6. Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. Case (2013-2018) - Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board
Facts:
Sterlite Industries was accused of polluting air and water in Thoothukudi, Tamil Nadu.
Local protests and environmental impact studies indicated severe pollution and health risks.
Outcome:
Supreme Court ordered closure of the plant citing violations of environmental norms.
Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board revoked Sterlite’s license after repeated violations.
Significance:
Showed that courts and regulatory bodies can hold corporations accountable.
Reinforced that corporations must comply with environmental laws strictly or face shutdown.
Principles and Judicial Doctrines Relevant to CER
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Absolute Liability | Hazardous industries are strictly liable for harm caused. |
| Polluter Pays | Corporations must compensate for pollution and environmental damage. |
| Precautionary Principle | Corporations must prevent environmental harm even in the absence of full scientific certainty. |
| Sustainable Development | Economic activity must be balanced with environmental conservation. |
| Corporate Accountability | Corporations have legal and moral duty to comply with environmental norms. |
Summary
| Case | Key Contribution to CER |
|---|---|
| M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak) | Established Absolute Liability for hazardous industries. |
| Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum | Enunciated Polluter Pays Principle and precautionary measures. |
| Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action | Imposed environmental restoration responsibility on corporations. |
| T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad | Enforced sustainable resource management by corporates. |
| M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath | Balanced development with environmental protection in corporate projects. |
| Sterlite Industries Case | Enforcement of environmental laws through closure of polluting industries. |
Conclusion
The judiciary has played a crucial role in developing Corporate Environmental Responsibility by interpreting environmental laws in a way that makes corporations accountable for ecological protection. Through strict liability, polluter pays, and precautionary principles, courts have ensured that businesses operate responsibly, balancing economic growth with sustainability.
RELATED Blog
0 comments