The Recognition Of The Right To A Sustainable Environment As A Third-Generation Human Right

Author: LawSphereX

Category: Constitutional & Human Rights

Published: 2026-08-23T21:27:34.118221+00:00

Updated: 2026-08-26T17:05:28.695+00:00

THE RECOGNITION OF THE RIGHT TO A SUSTAINABLE

ENVIRONMENT AS A THIRD-GENERATION HUMAN

RIGHT

Aditi Indrani, Advocate, HC Of Delhi Introduction Human rights are those absolute fundamental rights to which a human being is innately entitled to. These rights are considered as universal and egalitarian and hence are applicable to everyone. As per Section 2(1) (d) of Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, human rights means “the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed by the Constitution or embodied in the International Covenants and enforceable by courts in India”. 1 Thus, the recognized inherent dignity and of the absolute as well as equal rights of all human beings is the core basis of freedom, justice and peace. As per the constitutions of various countries, the right to safe healthy, and ecologically balanced environment as an independent human right.

The first Secretary General of the International Institute for Human Rights (IIHR) divided human rights into three generations in the year 1977. The first generation of human rights deals with traditional civil and political rights such right to freedom of speech, the right to freedom of religion, etc. , which assumes a duty of non-interference on part of the government towards its citizens. On the other hand, the second generation of human right are the rights which require affirmative government action for their recognition. They are also known as collective rights as they relate to the well-being of whole societies. The Human Rights of Third Generation (Collective Rights)- Individuals are also members of such units, groups or communities as a family, religious community, social club, trade union, professional association, and racial group, people, nation and the State.

It is not strange, therefore, that international law not only recognizes absolute rights of individuals, but also identify certain collective rights exercised together by individuals who are grouped into larger communities, including nations. The third generation of human rights refers to the fraternity or brotherhood. This category of rights is totally based on the sense of harmony, which is

1 Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

necessary for the realization of the main concerns of the international community such as peace, development and environment. The exercise of collective rights is a prerequisite to the exercise of other rights, political or economic or both. Research Question(S) • What is the basic idea behind the emergence of third generation human rights? • How have the Indian courts explained different concepts of third generation human rights through various case laws? • What are the various principles followed by the Indian judiciary system while dealing with environmental law cases? • How can we recognize the right to environment under the concept of third generation of human rights? Jurisprudence of right WN Hohfled in Fundamental Legal Conceptions2 postulated two matrixes, deontic matrix and potestatic matrix.

Deontic matrix is about duty and its allied concepts while potestatic matrix is about power and its allied concepts. As per Deontic matrix, claim-right and duty are correlatives. If one person has a right, then the other person necessarily has a duty. In the case of environmental law, the right to environment is a right in rem. According to Hohfled, it is “right liberty” instead of “right” since the person who has the right to do something is at liberty. In layman’s term, you are actually having the liberty to environment since you cannot do whatever you want to do with the environment; you can act only in a particular way in which you’re permitted. If someone stops you from usage of the environment in the permitted way then the person will commit an act of breach of such claim-right.

Claim-right is a means of protecting interest and it is the duty of the state to secure your liberty until and unless it is void and illegal. That means, right necessitates the intervention by state.

2 WN Hohfled, Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning: and other legal essays

(Hardpress publishing, 2012).

Third generation human right The third-generation human right is different from the other two generations in the sense that its recognition is based not only upon affirmative and negative duties of the state, but also upon the conduct of an individual. This generation includes right to development, right to selfdetermination, right to a healthy environment, right to natural resources, right to intergenerational equity, etc. The right to a healthy environment requires a healthy human habitation, which requires the responsibility of the state to: i Abstain from interfering with the enjoyment of the right to a healthy environment ii Prevent third parties from obstructing in any way with the enjoyment of the right to a healthy environment, and iii Implement the required measures to attain the full realization of the right to a healthy environment.

The third generation of human rights has been expressed in the 1972 Stockholm Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, the 1986 Declaration on the Rights to Development, and the 1992 Rio Declaration of Environment and Development. They are also known as group rights or solidarity rights. The Rio declaration had proposed three different concepts of environmental rights: • Environmental rights as a distinct human right; • Environmental rights as included within previously established human rights; and • Environmental rights as rights of the environment in and of itself, regardless of its effect on people. This is basically the eco-centric approach which requires humans to enforce such rights. The Brundtland Commission report3 of the year 1987 first spoke about the significance of environment as human rights.

The annex 1 of the report suggested legal principles for environmental protection and sustainable development, and laid down the principles, rights,

3 G Brundtland, “Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future”

(United Nations General Assembly document A/42/427, 1987).

and responsibilities. The right to self-determination is covered under article 1 of the ICCPR and ICESCR. Additionally, the Article states that “the peoples have the right to freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligation arising out of international economic co-operation, based on the principle of mutual benefit and international law”. 4 It also states that under no condition people can be robbed of their own means of existence. Article 1. 3 vests responsibility on the States to encourage the realization of the right of self-determination and to act in conformity with the provision of the UN Charter.

However, in India, this provision in not applicable to the sovereign independent states because the Indian Government while ratifying the ICCPR and ICESCR made a specific reservation that the “right of self-determination” will be applicable solely to peoples under foreign authority. The Government justified its move by stating that if they make it applicable to everyone then it will encourage secessionist inclinations and will be disadvantageous to the unity and integrity of a nation. Human Rights and the Environment Article 51 A of Indian constitution enlists ten fundamental duties and the same was added to bring the Constitution of India in line (or the idea of) with Article 29(1) of Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHRC). This gives two outsets of environmental human rights in the present human rights system i. e.

, the right to have a healthy and adequate environment is in itself considered as a human right (this is also provided under Article 24 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights as well as Article 11 of the San Salvador Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights). And the second is related to the basic idea that the environmental human rights can be originated from other kind of human rights for instance the right to life, the right to health, the right to property etc. The beginning of various environment related issues like climate change as well as global warming which have generated potential conflict between different kinds of human rights. Human rights eventually need a working ecosystem as well as a healthy environment, but the granting of several rights to persons may cause harm to these.

Such as the conflict between right to decide number of offspring and the common need for a healthy environment, as noted in the tragedy of the commons. Environmental rights basically revolve mainly around the 4 Karel Vasak, “Human Rights: A Thirty Year Struggle: the sustained efforts to give force of law to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, UNESCO Courier 30:11, Paris: UNESCO, November 1977.

concept and idea of a right to a liveable environment both for the present generations as well as the future generations. Mainly, Indian Constitution makes two-fold provisions. On one side it gives directive to state for protection and improvement of environment. And on the other side, the citizens owe a constitutional duty to protect and improve natural environment. Also, there are lot of provisions in the Indian Constitutions to protect the environment. Environmental justice It is a movement that grew from the recognition of uneven environmental burdens on certain communities. The primary aim revolves around ensuring a healthy environment for anyone regardless of race, nationality, income, gender, or age. This movement prioritizes on how a healthy environment is a necessary element for a healthy life.

A disproportionate number of polluting industries, power plants, and waste disposal areas were located near low-income or minority communities. This functioned as a main catalyst to the movement. The movement further embraces two purposes: • To ensure that rights and responsibilities with respect to the utilization of environmental resources are distributed with greater fairness among communities. • To reduce an overall amount of environmental damage by a pragmatic approach or alternative. The focal point under Article 145 of the Indian Constitution deals with equal enjoyment of rights and freedom. It states that the state may take steps to protect or advance individuals or groups that have been disadvantaged by unfair discrimination, with the aim of promoting the achievement of equality.

This ensures a sort of protection for the underprivileged and the poor who otherwise will not be able to participate equally in the social and economic life of the country if they do not have the access to basic needs of survival like health care, housing, food and education. Thus, to achieve the same objective, the Government is trying to take transparent and reasonable measures and in order to make sure that the government takes proper measures, the individuals have the right to information.

5 The Constitution of India, Article 14.

Sustainable development It was first discussed in the 1972 Stockholm declaration as a concept. The World Commission on Environment’s report titled as “Our common future” shaped the idea and gave clarity to the notion of sustainable development. It defined it as “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs”. It was later on elaborated in the Agenda 21 as a result of UN Conference on Environment and Development during the Earth Summit in 1993. The Apex Court of India has extensively relied upon numerous international principles like the principle of inter-generational equity and intra-generational equity, polluters’ pay principle, and precautionary principle while striking a balance between Right to Development and the Right to Environment. The first principle, i. e.

, inter-generational equity principle has been recognized in the case of State of Himanchal Pradesh v Ganesh Wood Products6 and MC Mehta v Union of India7 (Taj Trapezium case) wherein the Court shut down the forest-based industries while holding that the principle is essential to the conservation of forest resources and sustainable development. In the case of Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v Union of India8, the Court ruled that the principle of inter-generational equity would be violated if there was a substantial harm caused to the environment caused by the concerned industry. Similarly, in the case of Vellore Citizen Welfare Forum v Union of India9, the court held that the precautionary principle and polluters’ pay principle are an integral part of the environmental law, and that precautionary principle includes the following: i.

“Environmental measures by the state government and the local authority must anticipate, prevent and attack the causes of environmental degradation. ” ii. “Where there are threats of serious and irreversible damage, lack of scientific certainty ought not to use as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation” iii. “The onus of proof is on the actor or the developer to prove that his action is environmentally benign”

6 AIR 1996 SC 149.

7 AIR 1997 SC 734.

8 (1996) 5 SCC 281.

9 AIR 1996 SC 2715.

Justice Kuldip additionally laid down that these principles can even be enforced by applying the doctrine of harmonious construction which states that those customary international law which are not in conflict with the domestic law will be deemed to be a part of the domestic laws of the country. In 1987, the Apex Court in the case of Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra, Dehradun v State of Uttar Pradesh10 ordered the discontinuing of mining work since it was illegal and unauthorized, and had caused ecological imbalance and environmental disturbance. The court stressed on the fact that these are permanent assets and are not to be exhausted in one generation, rather it should be saved for the future generation. The Court basically stressed upon the importance of sustainable development and how it is important for us to think for the future generation as well.

The same year, the Court in the case of MC Mehta v Union of India11 had opined that “Life, public health, and ecology has priority over unemployment and loss of revenue problem”. Subsequently, in the case of ND Jayal v Union of India12, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the concept of “adherence to sustainable development is sine qua non for the maintenance of symbiotic balance between the right to development and development” is an integral part of life under Article 21. Role of judiciary Judiciary has a vital role which has been bestowed constitutionally in protecting Human rights of individuals. This function is thus allocated to the superior judiciary i. e. , the Supreme Court as well as High Courts. In terms of issues relating to protection of human rights, the Apex Court plays a prominent role.

Hence it is expected that the judiciary must adopt a creative as well as purposive approach in order to interpret Fundamental Rights as well as Directive Principles of State Policy in our Constitution with an aim to advance Human Rights jurisprudence. The key contributors in the advancement of Human Rights Jurisprudence by the Indian Judiciary are: substantive expansion of the concept of Human Rights under Article 21 and the procedural innovation of Public Interest Litigation (PIL). The Supreme Court has improved and widened the ambit of Article 2113 of the Constitution i. e. , Right to life and liberty by

10 (1987) Supp SCC 487.

11 (1987) 4 SCC 176, 482.

12 MANU/SC/0649/2003.

13 The Constitution of India.

interpreting the same to the Right to safe environment and right to health. Our constitution is providing fundamental rights under part III which is required for the development of an individual to which an individual is inherently entitled to by virtue of being a human being. And right to environment is among them without which realisation an individual’s potential and development is impossible. For environmental protection, Article 14,

19 and 21 have been interpreted.14 Article 21 advocates that no person shall be deprived of his

life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. This provision gets liberal interpretation with time after the judgement of Supreme Court in the case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India15 Article 21 guarantees fundamental right to life, right to environment, right to free of danger of disease and infection is inherent in it. The courts are moving towards by recognizing right to healthy environment up the hierarchy of human rights as a fundamental right. In India various judgements are given between 1996 and 2000 act in response to health concerns caused due to industrial pollution in Delhi. There was a case of Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India16 where court interpreted the right to life guaranteed by Article 21 to comprise the right to a wholesome environment.

Also, In the case of Subhash Kumar V State of Bihar17 the court said that the “right to life guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution consists of the right of enjoyment of pollution – free water and air for full enjoyment of life”. When jurisprudence and legislation are put together which includes the particular regulatory benchmarks, then the right to have a clean environment emerged as new form of human right in India. It has implications for NHRC also in terms of a widened scope which consists of the need to protect individuals and society as a whole from pollution. In India, the link between the environment and human rights has been mostly understood through judicial interpretations of constitutional provisions. For instance, in 1985 in the case of Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra vs.

State of Uttar Pradesh18, the Supreme Court gave order for the closure of certain limestone quarries and the same is followed by land reclamation, soil conservation as well as afforestation in those areas. Also, it was said that closure would lead to losses to owners and employees, and it was a necessity for “protecting

14 ‘Article 21 of Indian Constitution- a mandate to pollution free environment’

accessed on 08th September, 2024.

15 1978 AIR 597.

16 1988 AIR 107.

17 1991 AIR 420.

18 1985 AIR 652.

and safeguarding the right of the people to live in healthy environment with minimal disturbance of ecological balance and without avoidable hazard to them and to their cattle, homes and agricultural land and undue affectation of air, water and environment. ”19 In order to resolve the issue of degradation of environment, the doctrine of sustainable development came into picture which clarifies that there must be a reasonable balance between development and ecology. Thus, environmental degradation is not justified on the stake of national interest. 20 Article 51-A says that it is the duty of each citizen of India to protect the natural environment which comprises of water bodies, forests, wildlife etc and to have compassion for living creatures. By showing deep concern for the healthy environment in order to lead a healthy life, the Supreme Court said that Art.

21 which deal with right to life is categorized as a fundamental right in Indian constitution. Enjoyment of life and its attainment includes the right to life with human dignity which in turn covers the protection and prevention of environment, ecological balance free from pollution of air and water, sanitation. In the absence of these abovementioned rights, the same right to life cannot be enjoyed. And thus, Environmental, ecological, air as well as water pollution etc should be considered as a violation of Art 21 of the Indian constitution. 21 Right to a healthy environment constitutes as a part of socio-economic rights. Thus, this right is often applied by court to give a meaningful interpretation of right to life when it comes to cases which deal with human life due to environmental degradation.

Conclusion Hence it is concluded that environment rights are evidently very much related to human rights. Connecting human rights and the environment through litigation brings victims of environmental degradation nearer to the mechanisms of protection that are provided under the umbrella of human rights. There has been an increasingly serious impact of degradation on human health and well-being and to cope with that we must protect the foundational stone of human rights and dignity by contributing to those who are engaged in environmental protection and public health and facilitate those who are engaged in conservation. This will result in developing a sustainable model for preservation of resources and natural ecosystem for the usage of both present and future generation. One of the major consequences of involving 19 accessed on 9th July, 2024.

20 ibid.

21 ibid.

principle of human rights with environment is to give opportunity to victims of environmental degradation to access to all round justice. The third-generation human right, as mentioned above, ensures rights such as right to natural resources, right to development, etc to the individuals. The Rio declaration proposed the idea of environmental right as a separate human right; the present as well as the future generations must have a share in the same. The Apex Court of India has over the time elucidated various foreign principles of environmental law while decided cases. Through cases such as Taj Trapezium case, Vellore Citizen Welfare case, etc. , the courts have drawn the inference that these principles are integral part of the environmental law and that the resources must be used in a way that enough resources are left for the future generation for usage.

From the judgment in these various cases, the inference can be drawn as to how right to environment is recognised as a third generation of human rights.