581public Interest Litigation Ppt

7/23/2019 581public Interest Litigation Ppt

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/581public-interest-litigation-ppt 1/20

Presentation for the Inaugural Sessionof the Study Tour on Comparative Aspects of Public Interest Litigation inIndia & China, October !"#$, #%Organier' LAS()*, +olata, India-.nder the Auspices of the /anishInstitute for 0uman 1ights2 China

Programme3



• Any public"spirited person can 5le a Public InterestLitigation case -PIL3 on behalf of a group of persons,

6hose rights or entitlements are a7ected

•It is not necessary that the person fling a case shouldhave a direct interest or involvement in the matter olitigation

• A person in 8umbai can 5le a Public Interest Litigationfor malnutrition deaths in Orissa or protection ofenvironment in Tamil 9adu

•Public Interest Litigation is not de5ned in any statute or

act: It has been interpreted by ;udges to consider ande<amine the intent o public at large



•public in;ury and public 6rong caused by actsor omissions of various state agencies or other

constituted public authorities

•su7icient cause for enforcement fundamentaland constitutional rights of disadvantaged and

poor people

• violation of rights transcending limits ofprivate concern, vested interest and ulteriorindividual motif



• Agencies, departments and constituted bodies of stateand central governments and not private parties andnon-governmental organizations/institutions

• A =Private party> can be included in a PIL as a=1espondent>, after maing the concerned stateauthority a party

• As in the case of a private factory in /elhi, causingpollution, people living in its vicinity or any other personcan 5le a PIL against the ?overnment of India, the StatePollution *oard, maing the private factory a respondent



•Introduction of the @/ue Process2 clause toe<pand fundamental nights in India

•The subservient and deferential role of theSupreme Court of India during the)mergency period in the late 4%s

•Interference of the )<ecutive in ;udicial

appointments

•Post emergency radical interpretations of Articles $# and ##! of the Constitution of

India 6herein 5ling of PILs got legitimiedfor e7ective assertion of constitutionall



Salient Beatures

• Access and Standing

•Procedural rules rela<ed

• Appointment of citiens as investigators fact5nders

•9on adversarial approach

•9o 5nancial burden on petitioners



Boon

Citizens have an inexpensive legal remedy topublic issues concerning human rights ,

consumer and environmental protection Bane

Increase in fling o rivolous cases with an intentto strike deals with the victims o stay orders

People fling PIs which are based on privateinterests disguised as public interests



PIs can be fled in a !igh Court or in the "upremeCourt, depending on the #$ature o Case%

Proceedings are conducted in the same manner asin other normal litigations

&udges may constitute in'uiry commissions toinvestigate claims made in a PI

(ven a letter or a report deemed to have depictedreal)lie issues can be used to initiate a PI



•PIL signifes a paradigm o legal justicewhich locates the content o inormal justicewithin the ormal justice deliverysystem…..Non Anglo-a!on jurisdiction

induces courts to transcend the traditional judicial unction o adjudication and provideremedies or social wrongs

•"he systemic impact o pu#lic interestlitigation is not necessarily or directlyrelated to its success in court.....thelitigation process may also have palpa#leimpacts on pu#lic discourse and policy

•



Interim *easures

+ew (xamples

Closing down a plant causing extensive airpollution and reopening it subect to extensiveterms and conditions

Imposing strict deadlines on hotels operatinglate in the night



-ural itigation . (ntitlement /endravs0 "tate o 10P "toppage o mining operations which

were leading to environmental damage

2ellore Citizens3 4elare +orum vs01nion o India 5anneries discharging toxic wastes in

Palar river were endangering the health othe residents and these were asked toshut down



MC Mehta’s PIL(1985) for unleaded petrol won reliefonly in 21 !e"ause of the in#ol#e$ent of a $i%htypri#ate se"tor "o$pany&'till 2 out of I*C refineries

produ"e leaded fuel&''Pu!li" #i%ilan"e is the need ofthe hour

+ull i$pa"ts of ,ud%$ents on "ru"ial issues of noise

pollution li-e the use of fire."ra"-ers and loud.spea-ersare yet to !e reali/ed due to la"- of awareness andsensiti/ation



6 PI pointed out that 5a *ahal was acing athreat rom pollution caused by the actories

situated nearby causing erosion o theexterior white marble

"upreme Court banned the use o coke and

coal in the surrounding industries

5he pollution in the area was substantiallyreduced resulting in environmental

conservation



Strategic Areas of PILs2 Impact

0uman 1ights of the vulnerable

)conomic , social and cultural

rights

Police accountability

8ultifarious issues relating toenvironmentaldegradationre;uvenation



•over-e!tensive reliance on court-appointed commissions oen%uiry....allegations o #ias and partial

&evidence gathering

•Pro#lems arising out o alleged&du#iousness'( &preerence' and &unair

dealings' o judges( legal practitioners andpara-legal court unctionaries

•the pro#lem o #ac)logs and delayscaused #y lac) o inrastructure and human

resources remains a serious concern and



Allegation s have #een raised on

grounds o*

•+ourts e!ceeding their institutionalcapacity, reversing constitutional priorities,

usurping #oth legislative and administrativeunctions, violating the rule o law, ridingroughshod over traditional rights andsuccum#ing to machinations o power and

politiciation o constitutional adjudication,

•hile PIL has #een partly

institutionalied( it remains dependent on



Pro#lems phantom inter-meddlers

+reate

•evidentiary pro#lems

•"he re%uency o PIL cases in the upreme+ourt and the /igh +ourts increased asclaimants and their lawyers learned how to

ta)e advantage o the more li#eral procedures

•+ourts saw that pu#lic interest litigants andtheir lawyers were 0dressing up1 privatedisputes in the name o PIL



• $ustice Pasayat o the 2elhi /igh+ourt( in the case o Asho) 3umarPandey v. tate o .4.( descri#ed as0#usy#odies( meddlesomeinterlopers( wayarers or o5cious

interveners who approach the courtwith e!traneous motivation or orglare o pu#licity1

•"he contention that PILs wea)enpolicy ormulation andimplementation in the legislative and

e!ecutive #ranches is typically0 1



Challenges Ahead

•Striing a balance bet6eenallo6ing @legitimate2 PILs anddiscouraging the @frivolous2 ones

•)stablished PIL scholars lieSurya /eva has recommendedpreventive measures liebuilding in @economicdisincentives2 and con5ningPILs primarily to cases 6here

access to ;ustice is undermined

581public Interest Litigation Ppt

Documents

Transcript of 581public Interest Litigation Ppt