A Comparative Analysis: Composition of Environmental Courts of India, New Zealand, And Australia

Paper Details 

Paper Code: RP-VBCL-19-2025

Category: Research Paper

Date of Publication: April 20, 2025

Citation: Ms. Anusha M. Virupannavar, “A Comparative Analysis: Composition of Environmental Courts of India, New Zealand, And Australia", 2, AIJVBCL, 273, 273-286 (2025).

Author Details: Ms. Anusha M. Virupannavar, Karnataka State Law University, Hubballi & School of Law, Governance, and Public Policy of Chanakya University, Bengaluru, Karnataka, INDIA

Download PDF

ABSTRACT

Environmental courts in India, New Zealand, and Australia share a fundamental commitment to addressing complex environmental challenges through specialized legal frameworks. Commonalities include a multidisciplinary composition, combining judicial expertise with environmental knowledge. The National Green Tribunal (NGT) in India, the Environment Court in New Zealand, and Australia's Land and Environment Courts exemplify this approach, reflecting a recognition of the intricate nature of environmental issues. However, distinctions emerge in their structures and jurisdictions. The NGT, with a national mandate, encompasses a broad spectrum of environmental concerns, granting it significant authority to adjudicate on diverse matters. New Zealand's Environment Court primarily focuses on resource management, while Australia adopts a state-specific model, tailoring Land and Environment Courts to regional needs.Varied powers are also evident. The NGT possesses comprehensive authority, including the ability to grant compensation and hear appeals against government decisions. The Environment Court in New Zealand specializes in resource consent appeals and planning document interpretation, emphasizing sustainable development. In Australia, Land and Environment Courts contribute to regional sustainability by reviewing impact assessments and ensuring compliance. Despite these differences, the overarching objective of balancing development with environmental conservation unites these courts. Their unique structures reflect the diverse legal landscapes and regional nuances inherent in each country's approach to environmental governance.

Keywords: Environmental court; National Green Tribunal; Expert body; Multidisciplinary composition; & Sustainable development

INTRODUCTION

The Indian Constitution stipulates in its Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) that the state bears the responsibility of preserving and enhancing the nation's natural resources, including its forests and wildlife, and assigning citizens the obligation of conserving the environment.As a result of several other issues taking precedence over environmental concerns, the government found it challenging to implement DPSPs as soon as independence was achieved. Environmental issues were not given much priority in the effort to address the fundamental challenges of poverty, illiteracy, unemployment, and the provision of basic health care services. As the economy's production increased, an increasing number of industries were established. Due to this, India's ecology has been severely degrading, and throughout the past ten years, environmental conservation has steadily taken precedence.The National Green Tribunal (NGT) Act[1], which was passed by the government in 2010, made it possible to establish a special green tribunal to hear disputes involving environmental concerns. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution of India recognizes the right to a clean and healthy environment, served as the model for this. India is now the third nation in the world, behind New Zealand and Australia, to have special fast-track courts and quasi-judicial entities that handle environmental issues after the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 was passed.[2]

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) has been a potent enforcement or implementation body for Indian environmental laws since its founding. One further variety is added by the National Green Tribunal, which imposes severe penalties for disobeying its orders. When compared to other civil courts that used to handle environmental matters as well, the application of these tribunal rulings leads in the successful handling of such situations.[3]

ORIGIN OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL COURTS IN INDIA

When the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development was convened in Rio de Janeiro, India in 1992, the host nation promised to offer victims of various pollutants and other environmental damage legal and administrative remedies. Considering the type of knowledge required to handle such matters, the Supreme Court of India recommended that regional environmental courts be established, including two specialists and professional judges. The Supreme Court emphasised this because it was necessary to preserve the environment expeditiously and to lessen the load on the High courts, which were overworked and unable to handle cases concerning environmental concerns quickly. The objectives of National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 is defined by the legislative act of Parliament as follows: it establishes a National Green Tribunal to handle cases pertaining to ecological protection, the preservation of nature and other natural resources, the administration of environmental rights, and the provision of relief and restitution for losses to people and property, as well as matters related or connected to it.

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) was established on October 18, 2010, in accordance with the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, in response to the urgent need for prompt justice. It is a legislative tribunal that the parliament established specifically to handle cases involving environmental concerns. It was the outcome of a drawn-out process, with the demand for such a tribunal beginning in 1984 in the wake of the Bhopal gas catastrophe. The Supreme Court then made reference to the necessity of these tribunals in the case involving the Delhi-based gas leak from Shriram Food and Fertilisers Limited.

In several decisions, the Supreme Court emphasised the difficulty judges encounter while deciding intricate environmental disputes and the necessity of creating a dedicated environmental court. Even though the NGT Act, 2010 was passed by the former environment minister Jairam Ramesh, it wasn't until the Supreme Court repeatedly ordered it to be implemented during its consideration of the Special Leave Petition:Union of India v. Vimal Bhai[4].

OBJECTIVES OF THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

To effectively and quickly settle cases pertaining to environmental protection and other natural resources, such as forests, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) was established on October 18, 2010, in accordance with the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. The NGT provides compensation and relief to all parties who have suffered damages for matters related to or incidental to these cases. The National Environment Appellate Authority has been superseded. The main objectives are:

1.      The prompt and efficient resolution of any disputes pertaining to the preservation of the environment and other natural resources. The Tribunal will also make decisions on all previously outstanding matters.

2.      Enforcing all environmental rights legally is its primary goal.

3.      If there is any harm, it takes care of giving justice and recompense to everyone impacted.

COMPOSITION OF NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL

The tribunal will have no more than 20 members, and a minimum of 10 members. This will follow the announcement made by the national government. There will be a combination of judges and members with specialised knowledge of environmental matters. The chairman will have the last say in deciding the matter and ending the impasse if there is a tie between the number of judges voting in favour of or against a ruling. Each tribunal bench must have a minimum of one judge and one expert member.[5]

A person must have served as a chief justice of a High Court or a judge of the Supreme Court to be eligible to serve as chairperson of the tribunal. Similarly, a person must have served as a judge of the High Court to be eligible to serve as a judicial member. A person must hold a master's degree in one of the physical or biological sciences, a doctorate in that field, a master's degree in technology or engineering, fifteen years of experience in that field, and five years of experience in the environment and forestry to be eligible to serve as an expert member of the tribunal. Section 4 of Chapter II of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 provides the National Green Tribunal's composition.

The tribunal shall consist of the following people:

1.      A full-time chairperson.

2.      A minimum of 10 and a maximum of 20 members made up of full-time judges as informed from time to time by the Central Government;

3.      A minimum of 10 and a maximum of 20 members made up of experts as informed from time to time by the Central Government.[6]

Anybody with specialised expertise and experience relating environmental matters submitted before the Tribunal may be invited at any time by the Chairperson to provide assistance. The Central Government may designate by notification the location of the Tribunal's hearings as well as the areas covered by each location. The Central Government may establish regulations governing the protocols and practices adhered to by the Tribunal, in agreement with the Tribunal's Chairperson. These regulations may include the following:

The guidelines governing who is allowed to appear before the Tribunal.

1.      The guidelines governing the process by which the Tribunal considers applications, appeals, and any other question pertaining to these applications or appeals.

2.      The regulations governing the number of members, according to their class or classes, who can consider appeals and applications. An appeal or application should have the same number of judicial members hearing it as well as the number of experts hearing it.

3.      The guidelines governing the Chairperson's transfer of a matter from one location to another.

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL CHAIRPERSON

The Chairperson of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) plays a pivotal role in leading the tribunal and ensuring the effective delivery of environmental justice in India. The Chairperson’s leadership is crucial for maintaining the NGT’s independence and ensuring that it fulfils its mandate of safeguarding environmental rights and upholding sustainable development principles. Its first Chairman was Justice Lokeshwar Singh Panta. December 20, 2017, marked Justice Swatanter Kumar's retirement. Following him, Justice Jawad Rahim served as the National Green Tribunal's acting chairman. Thereafter, retired Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel led the body. Presently, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prakash Srivatsava is serving as the chairperson of the NGT.

Appointment of Chairperson

The National Green Tribunal Act[7] states that the Central Government will nominate the Tribunal's Chairperson, Judicial Members, and Expert Members. The Chief Justice of India is consulted before the Central Government appoints the Chairperson.The selection is conducted through a high-level search committee that recommends candidates for the position.

Qualifications

A person who now serves as or has served as a Chief Justice of a High Court or a Judge of the Supreme Court is eligible to be appointed as Chairperson.[8]Must have expertise in environmental law and matters related to environmental protection, making them well-suited to head the tribunal.

Resignation

The Chairperson may retire from his position by sending a written notice to the Central Government.[9]The resignation becomes effective only after it is accepted by the Central Government.

Removal and Suspension

The Chairperson may be removed from office for any of the following reasons[10]:

1.      He is bankrupt; He has been found guilty of a crime involving moral turpitude.

2.      He is no longer capable, either intellectually or physically.

3.      He now has a financial stake or any other interest that might negatively impact his ability to perform his duties.

4.      He has misused his position to the point that it is detrimental to the public interest for him to continue.

5.      If the Chairperson takes up paid employment outside the office without prior approval during their tenure.

 Tenure

The National Green Tribunal's Chairperson is chosen for a five-year term. The Chairperson is not eligible to continue in office after turning 70 if he is or was a Supreme Court judge. If he is or was a judge of the High Court, he is not eligible to continue in that capacity after becoming 67 years old.

COMPOSITION OF ENVIRONMENTAL COURTS IN AUSTRALIA

The Land and Environment Court of New South Wales is a specialized judicial body dedicated to addressing environmental and planning matters within the state. Comprising a diverse and knowledgeable panel, the court is structured to ensure the fair and informed adjudication of cases related to land use, development, and environmental protection. At the core of the court's composition are its esteemed judges. These jurists are selected for their expertise in planning, environmental law, and related disciplines. As the presiding figures in the court, judges play a crucial role in hearing and delivering judgments on cases brought before them, providing a foundation for legal decisions that impact the environment and land use policies in New South Wales.[11]

Working in conjunction with the judges, the Land and Environment Court may include commissioners. These commissioners bring specialized knowledge to the court, offering insights into various aspects of planning, environmental science, and law. Their role is to assist judges in specific matters, contributing a diverse range of perspectives to the deliberative process.The court is organized into distinct divisions, each tailored to address specific types of cases. For example, the Land and Environment Court Division and the Class 4 Division are designed to handle different categories of disputes. This divisional structure ensures that cases are routed to the appropriate forum, allowing for more efficient and targeted resolutions.

In summary, the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales stands as a vital institution for the adjudication of environmental and planning issues. Through the collective expertise of its judges and commissioners, coupled with a well-defined divisional structure, the court strives to maintain the delicate balance between development and environmental conservation in the state.

The Planning and Environment Court of Queensland is a specialized legal entity entrusted with the resolution of planning and environmental disputes within the state. Distinguished by its unique composition, the court plays a pivotal role in addressing matters related to land use, development, and environmental protection.Central to the court's structure are the esteemed judges who preside over proceedings. These judges are selected for their specialized knowledge in planning, environmental law, and associated fields. Serving as the primary decision-makers, they play a crucial role in hearing cases and delivering judgments that shape the landscape of planning and environmental policies in Queensland.

In tandem with the judges, the Planning and Environment Court may include commissioners. Appointed for their expertise in specific areas such as planning, environmental science, and law, commissioners contribute valuable insights to the court's deliberative process. Their role is to assist judges in navigating the complexities of individual cases, fostering a more comprehensive and informed decision-making environment.The court is organized into distinct divisions, each tailored to handle specific types of cases. This divisional structure ensures that matters are directed to the appropriate forum, promoting efficiency and targeted resolutions. The Planning and Environment Court strives to maintain a delicate equilibrium between development initiatives and environmental conservation through its adjudicative functions.[12]

In summary, the Planning and Environment Court of Queensland stands as a vital institution for addressing planning and environmental challenges. With a composition that includes knowledgeable judges and commissioners, coupled with a well-defined divisional framework, the court is positioned to contribute significantly to the state's sustainable development. For the most accurate and current information on the composition of the Planning and Environment Court, it is advisable to refer to the official court website or consult legal professionals familiar with Queensland's legal system.[13]

 ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

The Environment Court of New Zealand serves as a specialized institution tasked with addressing appeals and disputes pertaining to resource management and environmental issues. The court is composed of Judges, who are appointed based on their expertise in resource management law. These Judges play a pivotal role in overseeing and adjudicating cases brought before the court. Alongside the Judges, the Environment Court may include Commissioners—experts with specific knowledge in planning, environmental science, and law. These Commissioners assist in the decision-making process, offering additional perspectives and expertise.[14]

Supporting the judicial functions, the court relies on a dedicated team of registry staff responsible for managing administrative tasks. This includes handling documentation, scheduling hearings, and providing assistance to parties involved in cases. Additionally, the court may engage Mediators when appropriate, who facilitate discussions between disputing parties with the goal of reaching mutually acceptable agreements.

In contrast, District and Regional Councils in New Zealand, while not courts themselves, play a vital role in the country's resource management framework. Comprising elected representatives such as councillors and mayors, these councils make decisions on resource management policies and applications at the local level. Planning and environmental staff within these councils contribute by processing resource consent applications, monitoring compliance, and offering valuable advice on planning and environmental matters.[15]

Furthermore, the Ministry for the Environment serves as a key government agency responsible for developing and implementing national environmental policies. Led by the Minister for the Environment, the ministry's structure includes policy analysts and advisors. These professionals work on formulating, reviewing, and implementing environmental policies, providing essential expertise to shape the national environmental agenda.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF COMPOSITION

In India, New Zealand, and Australia, the establishment of specialized environmental courts reflects a shared recognition of the need for dedicated institutions to address complex and nuanced environmental issues. These courts, namely the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in India, the Environment Court in New Zealand, and the Land and Environment Courts in Australia, demonstrate a commitment to resolving disputes and promoting sustainable environmental practices.[16]

One key similarity lies in the composition of these courts. Each incorporates a combination of judicial members and experts with relevant knowledge in environmental science, planning, and law. This multidisciplinary approach ensures a comprehensive understanding of the intricate issues brought before these courts, allowing for informed and nuanced decision-making.

Furthermore, these environmental courts share a common goal of balancing development with environmental conservation. They all play a crucial role in interpreting and applying environmental laws, overseeing compliance, and adjudicating disputes related to land use, planning, and natural resource management. This shared objective reflects a commitment to achieving environmental sustainability while accommodating societal development needs.

Despite these similarities, notable differences exist in the specific structures, jurisdictions, and powers of the environmental courts in India, New Zealand, and Australia. In terms of jurisdiction, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in India stands out for its comprehensive national reach, addressing a wide spectrum of environmental issues. In contrast, the Environment Court in New Zealand primarily focuses on resource management, and the Land and Environment Courts in Australia are state-specific, tailored to regional nuances and challenges.

The powers vested in these courts also vary. India's NGT holds significant authority to grant compensation, impose penalties, and hear appeals against government decisions. The Environment Court in New Zealand exercises powers related to resource consent appeals and interpretation of planning documents. Meanwhile, Australia's Land and Environment Courts contribute to sustainable development by reviewing environmental impact assessments and ensuring regulatory compliance.

Additionally, the decentralization of environmental governance is more pronounced in Australia, where each state has its own Land and Environment Court. This state-specific approach acknowledges the diversity of environmental concerns across regions. In contrast, India and New Zealand operate with a more centralized model, with a national tribunal and a single Environment Court, respectively.

These differences highlight the distinct legal frameworks, administrative practices, and regional considerations that shape the environmental courts in these countries. Despite these divergences, the overarching commitment to environmental protection and sustainable development remains a unifying factor.

TABLE 1: COMPARATIVE TABLE-COMPOSITION OF ENVIRONMENTAL COURTS

Feature	National Green Tribunal (India)	Environment Court (New Zealand)	Land and Environment Courts (Australia)
Jurisdiction	Nationwide coverage; handles all environmental disputes.	Nationwide coverage; focuses on resource management and planning issues.	State-specific courts (e.g., NSW, Queensland), each addressing local environmental and planning matters.
Composition	Multidisciplinary: judicial members and environmental experts.	Judges with expertise in environmental law; assisted by commissioners with scientific and planning knowledge.	Judges with specialization in environmental law; some states have commissioners for expert opinions.
Appointment Criteria	Chairperson: Former Supreme Court or High Court judge; Experts: Masters/PhD in environmental sciences, law, or related fields.	Judges: Background in resource management law; Commissioners: Specialists in planning, science, or law.	Judges: Legal experts in planning and environment; Commissioners (where applicable): Experts in planning, science, or engineering.
Authority & Powers	Adjudicates disputes, grants compensation, imposes penalties, and hears appeals against government decisions.	Handles appeals on resource consents, interprets planning documents, and oversees environmental compliance.	Reviews environmental impact assessments, enforces regulations, and ensures development aligns with sustainability goals.
Speed of Resolution	Fast-track tribunal to ensure quick resolution of environmental cases.	Focuses on mediation and dispute resolution to expedite cases.	Case handling speed varies by state, but specialized expertise helps streamline decisions.
Sustainability Focus	Strong emphasis on balancing development and environmental conservation can enforce penalties.	Prioritizes sustainable resource management and planning.	Ensures compliance with environmental laws while considering regional sustainability needs.
Legal Precedents & Influence	Decisions serve as a reference for environmental jurisprudence in India.	Plays a key role in shaping New Zealand's environmental policies.	State-level influence; contributes to national environmental governance.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the environmental courts in India, New Zealand, and Australia epitomize a collective dedication to resolving environmental challenges through specialized legal mechanisms. The shared emphasis on a multidisciplinary composition underscores a commitment to nuanced decision-making, blending legal expertise with environmental insights.While commonalities prevail, disparities in structure, jurisdiction, and powers highlight the distinctive approaches adopted by each nation. India's National Green Tribunal, with its broad national mandate and extensive powers, contrasts with New Zealand's Environment Court, which focuses primarily on resource management. Australia's decentralized state-specific Land and Environment Courts further accentuate the importance of regional considerations in environmental governance.

Despite these divergences, a unifying thread binds these courts—a resolute commitment to harmonizing development with environmental preservation. Their varied structures reflect the nuanced legal frameworks and regional sensitivities inherent in each country's environmental governance. Collectively, these courts contribute to the global effort to strike a delicate balance between human progress and the imperative of safeguarding our planet's natural resources. The diversity in their models serves as a testament to the adaptability required in addressing unique environmental challenges while upholding shared principles of sustainability and conservation.

* Karnataka State Law University, Hubballi & School of Law, Governance, and Public Policy of Chanakya University,  Bengaluru, Karnataka, INDIA.

[1]https://greentribunal.gov.in/sites/default/files/act_rules/National_Green_Tribunal_Act,_2010.pdf

[2]Domenico Amirante, ‘Environmental Courts in Comparative Perspective: Preliminary Reflections on the National Green Tribunal of India’ (2011) 29 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 441.

[3]Gitanjali Gill, Environmental Justice in India: The National Green Tribunal (Routledge 2016) <https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9781315686592/environmental-justice-india-gitanjali-gill> accessed 2 March 2024.

[4] SLP (civil) No(s). 12065/2009

[5]Gitanjali Nain Gill, ‘Environmental Justice in India: The National Green Tribunal and Expert Members’ (2016) 5 Transnational Environmental Law 175.

[6] Section 4

[7] Section 5

[8]Section 6

[9] Section 8

[10] Section 10

[11]Usha Tandon, ‘Environmental Courts and Tribunals: A Comparative Analysis of Australia’s LEC and India’s NGT’ [2016] The Indian Yearbook of Comparative Law 477.

[12]P Smith and K Cunningham-Foran, ‘Court Processes for Environmental and Resource Issues in Queensland, Australia’ <https://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/587207/lc-sp-pas-court-processes-for-environmental-and-resource-issues-in-qld.pdf> accessed 1 March 2024.

[13]Evan Hamman, Reece Walters and Rowena Maguire, ‘Environmental Crime and Specialist Courts: The Case for a “One-Stop (Judicial) Shop” in Queensland’ (2015) 27 Current Issues in Criminal Justice 59.

[14]Trevor Daya-Winterbottom, ‘Evolving Practice-The Environment Court of New Zealand’ <https://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/handle/10289/7136> accessed 1 March 2024.

[15]Ceri Warnock, ‘Reconceptualising the Role of the New Zealand Environment Court’ (2014) 26 Journal of Environmental Law 507.

[16]Domenico Amirante, ‘Environmental Courts in Comparative Perspective: Preliminary Reflections on the National Green Tribunal of India’ (2011) 29 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 441.