THE true success of democratic system mostly depends on the en-mass participation of people in the governance of the state mechanism. It is often opined that the legal system of a nation reflects its capability of administering natural justice. In the democratic governance the responsibility of formulating legislation is largely vested with the legislature. Though abidance of law is compulsory for all and no one may take plea that ignorance of law as a excuse the people play a very insignificant role in adopting a new law. It is a well known fact that the law makers are elected representatives of the people and the trust of the people has been transmitted with the authority to exercise their law making power. In practice, laws are made in a way devoid of public participation.

For better protection and conservation of the environment and eco-system in Bangladesh. Environment Conservation Act. 1995 was enacted. But it has failed to workout for its in-built inadequacy. After approval of the draft bill of Environment Conservation Act. 1995 by the Cabinet, BELA organized a debate on the said Bill. Some suggestions such as definition of environment was narrower than that of the Environment Pollution Control Ordinance. 1977; although the Bill aims to provide for the conservation. development and pollution control of environment, the text of the whole law speaks contrary and virtually Bill turns out to be more pollution oriented: the Bill lacks in necessary direction for the conservation and development of resources and biodiversity; it does not provide for the prosecution procedure that would be determined by bye-laws; no court has been specifically debarred from taking cognizance. The effectiveness of the Bill largely depends on the rules and by-laws that are to be made in future which might eventually give rise to great uncertainty away the foreign investors. Besides, unskilled and unplanned drafting has affected the merits of the Bill, the experts opined. The law, on the contrary, is virtually based in two sections, i.e., one on providing power and the other providing junctions to the Director General the uncertainty of Environment Quality standards gives the DG the arbitrary power. These suggestions derived from the debate held in 1994 were sent to the.Ministry of Environment and Forest, but not considered at the time of enactment. But after 4 years all those suggestions have come as proposal for amendment of Environment Conservation Act, 1995. The recent view of

Department of Environment (DoE) to consider those suggestions inspired BELA once again to organize another public debate on a recent draft of DoE on Environment Court Act, 1999 for conservation of our environment.

Number and Nature

According to the draft bill primarily eight environment courts shall be established, six in divisional head quarters and two in Dhaka. It was noted in the discussion that prior to the establishment of such a court, a survey needs to be undertaken as to the total number of environmental litigation pending before the existing courts to legitimize the sustainability of such a new Judicial institution. If. the survey suggests that a large number of environmental litigation are pending then only it would be justified to have a number of environment courts. The discussants in the debate opined that the existing judges could be entrusted with additional responsibility to adjudge environmental cases.

The participants said that in addition to courts of divisional head quarters, courts may be es-tablisned in every district so that people can file a suit where cause of action arises. At the same time some mobile courts may be operated for redressing public injury immediately. The traditional way of mitigating environment problems through public Interest litigation under writ Jurisdiction may also be applied where necessary.

Establishment of Environmental Court

Under the bill. Government will appoint a judge in Environment Court from the additional district judges with the permission of the Supreme Court. In the previous draft bill, there was a provision to appoint a technical person with the additional district judge from the Department of Environment. All the discussants were against the Inclusion of a technical person in the environment court.

Power and Jurisdiction of Environment Court

All cases about conservation of environment, it's further development. control and combat of environmental pollution shall be filed and dissolved in these courts. The discussants observed that if there is any provision in any other laws to take any action about environmental matters or indicate any specific courts for filing

vironinent Court as well.

Who can file suit

Any aggrieved person whose environmental right has been infringed can directly file a suit

in the Environment Court. In the previous draft Bill, it has been stated that no person can file a suit without the permission of the Director General of DoE.

Activities to expedite the trial

No case filed in the Environment Court shall be adjourned for hearing more than 3 times. Every suit shaft be dis-.sqlved within a period of 6 umonths from the date of filing a suit. Some suggests that it is necessary to insert some provisions to take immediate action according to the damage and to ensure equitable justice. The time frame may also be ex tended.

Interim order

Any person may prefer an appeal to the High Court within 30 days from the date of pronouncement of the judgement. Provided that no such appeal shall be filed against any interim order. Discussants also welcomed these provisions because most of the time appeal against such order causes delay to realise the judgement.

Provisions for Damages

There was no provisions for ,. providing damages' in the foi -mer draft bill. Now there is a provision for damages to be determined depending on the facts and circumstances of each case and fine and imprisonment to be increased from 1 lacks to 10

lacks and 5 years to 10 years respectively. Discussants emphasized on implementation of the law rather enhancement of the punishment.

Existing laws

There is a number of laws, which have bearing on environment directly and indirectly. If there is any contradiction among the provisions of these laws about the same mat-.ter. it should be cleared and immediate amendment would be necessary for appropriates remedy.

Some important actions like public hearing of every project under Environment Impact Assessment and for renewal of EIA projects under Environ-

ment Management Plan in every year should be compulsory. Like other countries, our DoE should act as watch-dog for conservation of environment. Above all mass awareness is necessary for promotion of efforts aiming to conservation of environment.

Some Observations

With aft the theoretical and practical restraints on the common people's part, justice nowadays has become a myth for the mass people. The complexity of the structure of the court, the procedural loopholes creating scope of exploitation of a party, the virtual obscurity of court obscurity of court procedures, the unidentifiable delay of court procedure and the total denial by the state to provide le-8al aids to the poor are some of je factors which have put Justice in a position to be treated as a commodity. This is against the fundamental right of the people guaranteed by the Constitution. These letters of the Constitution looses its justification when the people are debarred from access to the door of justice even if due to practical restraints, this is only one of the aspects of the topic of this thesis which strongly reveals the picture as to why we should go lor an immediate court reform. Another aspect may be drawn from the changing situations of socio-economic state of the country. The same court procedures designed to meet the needs of 19th century can not be expected to play effective role in meeting the demands of 20th century.

Surprisingly we find in section 3 and 4 of the draft bill on Environment Court Act, 1999 respectively that this environment court will be recognized as criminal court and this court will enjoy all powers and jurisdiction. like criminal court according to the Code of Criminal Procedure. 1898. Notwithstanding anything contained in this act. Environment Court will follow the Code of Criminal Procedure. 1898 (Act V of 1898) for its proceedings. It would be wise to open both the existing courts and Environment Court for general public to get justice about environmental matters, so that they can choose their own way for enforcing their constitutional right -— right to life — which is the central of aft rights, and play an important role to protect our environment for its conservation, further development control and combat environmental pollution which is necessary for sustainable development and for the existence of our future generation.

The writer is a staff lawyer of Bangladesh Environmental lawyers Association (BELA).