Latest news with #ForestConservationAmendmentAct
Time of India
a day ago
- Politics
- Time of India
'Conflict of interest' in CEC may compromise FCAA cases: Retired bureaucrats write to CJI
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel A group of 60 former civil servants has written to the Chief Justice of India, claiming that a "conflict of interest" in the Supreme Court-appointed Central Empowered Committee (CEC) could compromise the outcome of cases challenging the Forest Conservation Amendment Act, their open letter dated June 30, the signatories, including former secretaries, ambassadors, police chiefs and forest officers, said the four-member CEC currently includes three former Indian Forest Service officers and a retired scientist who also worked with the environment ministry for many years. There are no independent experts on the letter said two CEC members recently retired as Director General of Forests and Special Secretary in the environment ministry."A CEC comprising officers who had held the highest positions in the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, and were closely involved in policy-making, can hardly be expected to give independent advice to the Supreme Court , advice that is different from what they gave while they were in the government," the letter retired civil servants, part of the Constitutional Conduct Group, said the CEC, formed in 2002, had a balanced composition until earlier CEC included not only government experts but also two independent members -- a wildlife specialist and a Supreme Court advocate -- who had neither held senior government positions nor been involved in forest policy decisions, "thus ensuring impartiality and preventing conflict of interest", they 2023, a group of individuals challenged the Forest Conservation Amendment Act (FCAA) in the Supreme Court, saying that it would hasten forest decline. In this matter, the court has issued four orders, including one upholding the definition of forests as per the Godavarman order of 1996. The case is pending final retired officials pointed out that a current CEC member, while serving in the environment ministry, had "prepared and defended" the Forest Conservation Amendment Bill before the Joint Parliamentary Committee. The Act, its rules and guidelines were all notified during that said several memos allowing use of degraded, notified and revenue forests for compensatory afforestation, which goes against the 1996 Godavarman judgment, were also issued during the tenure of some present CEC signatories feared that the outcome of the cases against the FCAA 2023, "may possibly be compromised considering the conflict of interest of the CEC", as the Supreme Court might rely on the CEC's advice before making its final advice or report given by the current CEC, given its composition, in cases that challenge the FCAA 2023, "will in all probability be biased in favour of the Act as passed and will thus represent a clear conflict of interest", the letter retired officials said this concern is already reflected in the recent Supreme Court order on Maharashtra's 'zudpi' forests (scrub forests).The court's order dated May 22, 2025, relied heavily on the CEC's advice, which recommended the untrammelled use of these forests for "compensatory afforestation", considering them ecologically inferior as they cannot support dense forest former bureaucrats urged the court to ensure that the CEC includes not just retired government officials but also independent experts from outside, saying there are many such experts in the requested the chief justice not to allow the current CEC to advise the court in the FCAA 2023 cases or other important matters related to forests, wildlife and ecological signatories to the letter included Prakriti Srivastava, former principal chief conservator of forests, Kerala, Navrekha Sharma, former ambassador to Indonesia, N C Saxena, former secretary of the erstwhile Planning Commission, and K Sujatha Rao, former health secretary.
New Indian Express
a day ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Ex-bureaucrats warn of conflict of interest in environment panel advising Supreme Court
A group of 60 civil servants has written to the Chief Justice of India expressing concerns about a potential conflict of interest in the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC)-appointed Central Empowered Committee (CEC), which advises the Supreme Court on environmental cases. The letter, signed by 60 retired seasoned bureaucrats, pointed out that the CEC does not include an independent expert and is instead composed entirely of government officials, which could influence the outcomes of cases concerning amendments to the Forest Conservation Act (FCA) of 1980. The CEC, which should have five members, is currently made up entirely of former government servants, including retired scientists, rather than including at least one independent expert as required. The letter cast doubt on the integrity of the CEC and stated that 'a CEC which is comprised of officers who had held the highest positions in the MoEFCC, and were closely involved in policy making, can hardly be expected to give independent advice to the Supreme Court, advice that is different from what they gave while they were in the government.' The letter cited a writ petition of 2023 which was filed in the Supreme Court by a group of individuals challenging the Forest Conservation Amendment Act (FCAA), 2023. According to the petition, the Act would promote the decline of forests in India.
Scroll.in
a day ago
- Politics
- Scroll.in
‘Conflict of interest' in SC-appointed panel may compromise cases against forest law: ex-bureaucrats
A 'conflict of interest' in the Supreme Court-appointed Central Empowered Committee could compromise the outcome of cases challenging the Forest Conservation Amendment Act, a group of retired bureaucrats and diplomats told Chief Justice BR Gavai on Monday. In an open letter, the Constitutional Conduct Group stated that the four-member committee, set up by the court in 2002 to flag cases of official non-compliance with its environmental conservation orders, initially comprised former officials from the Ministry of Environment and independent experts. The letter said that this ensured impartiality and prevented a conflict of interest. However, since the ministry 'seemingly had complete autonomy' in selecting the members of the Central Empowered Committee in 2023, it nominated three retired Indian Forest Service officers and a retired scientist, who had also previously worked with the Union government, it said. Two of the members had also recently retired as director general of forests and special secretary in the Ministry of Environment, it added. 'There are no independent experts on the committee,' the Constitutional Conduct Group said. The letter said that a Central Empowered Committee consisting of officers who had held top positions in the ministry and were also closely involved in policy-making could 'hardly be expected' to provide independent advice to the court. The Constitutional Conduct Group also noted that a writ petition was filed before the Supreme Court in 2023 against the Forest Conservation Amendment Act, which claimed that the legislation would hasten the decline of forests in India. The Act amending the 1980 Forest Conservation Act that provided legislative support for conserving forest land and its resources, came into force on December 1, 2023. Experts have claimed that the amendments were an effort to open forest land for commercial purposes. During the hearings on the writ petition, the court had already issued four landmark orders that upheld the definition of 'forests' laid down by it in the 1996 case of TN Godavarman Thirumalpad vs Union of India, the Constitutional Conduct Group said. In the 1996 judgement, the court held that a deemed forest would not only include 'forests' as understood by the dictionary meaning of the word – a large area with significant tree cover – but also any areas recorded as forests in government records, irrespective of ownership. Noting that the writ petition was pending before the court, the letter said that the outcome of this case, along with others filed against the Forest Conservation Amendment Act, could 'possibly be compromised considering the conflict of interest' of the Central Empowered Committee. It also noted that the 2023 Forest Conservation Amendment Bill was prepared and defended before a Joint Parliamentary Committee by a Central Empowered Committee member, who was at the helm in the environment ministry at the time. 'The Forest Conservation Amendment Act 2023 which is being challenged in the Supreme Court, was also notified at that time, as were the rules under the Act and the consolidated guidelines,' it added. The letter said that the advice of the committee in any case against the Act 'will in all probability be biased in favour' of the legislation as it was passed and will 'thus be a clear conflict of interest'. The Constitutional Conduct Group noted that this concern was already reflected in a recent court order on the 'zudpi', or scrub forests, in Maharashtra. This order issued on May 22 had relied on the advice of the Central Empowered Committee, which recommended the untrammelled use of the forests for 'compensatory afforestation' after considering them ecologically inferior because they could not support dense forest cover. In its letter, the former bureaucrats urged the court to ensure that the committee was composed not just of experts who were retired government officials but of renowned experts from outside as well. 'We request the CJI to ensure that such a CEC is not allowed to advise the honourable court in the FCAA 2023 cases before it, or be part of other such important cases in the interest of the country's forests, wildlife and ecological security,' the letter added. The signatories to the statement include Punjab's former police chief Julio Ribeiro, Delhi's former Lieutenant Governor Najeeb Jung and former Indian Administrative Service officer Harsh Mander.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 days ago
- Politics
- Business Standard
Conflict of interest in CEC may affect FCAA cases: Retired officers to CJI
A group of 60 former civil servants has written to the Chief Justice of India, claiming that a "conflict of interest" in the Supreme Court-appointed Central Empowered Committee (CEC) could compromise the outcome of cases challenging the Forest Conservation Amendment Act, 2023. In their open letter dated June 30, the signatories, including former secretaries, ambassadors, police chiefs and forest officers, said the four-member CEC currently includes three former Indian Forest Service officers and a retired scientist who also worked with the environment ministry for many years. There are no independent experts on the panel. The letter said two CEC members recently retired as Director General of Forests and Special Secretary in the environment ministry. "A CEC comprising officers who had held the highest positions in the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, and were closely involved in policy-making, can hardly be expected to give independent advice to the Supreme Court, advice that is different from what they gave while they were in the government," the letter read. The retired civil servants, part of the Constitutional Conduct Group, said the CEC, formed in 2002, had a balanced composition until 2023. The earlier CEC included not only government experts but also two independent members -- a wildlife specialist and a Supreme Court advocate -- who had neither held senior government positions nor been involved in forest policy decisions, "thus ensuring impartiality and preventing conflict of interest", they said. In 2023, a group of individuals challenged the Forest Conservation Amendment Act (FCAA) in the Supreme Court, saying that it would hasten forest decline. In this matter, the court has issued four orders, including one upholding the definition of forests as per the Godavarman order of 1996. The case is pending final hearing. The retired officials pointed out that a current CEC member, while serving in the environment ministry, had "prepared and defended" the Forest Conservation Amendment Bill before the Joint Parliamentary Committee. The Act, its rules and guidelines were all notified during that time. They said several memos allowing use of degraded, notified and revenue forests for compensatory afforestation, which goes against the 1996 Godavarman judgment, were also issued during the tenure of some present CEC members. The signatories feared that the outcome of the cases against the FCAA 2023, "may possibly be compromised considering the conflict of interest of the CEC", as the Supreme Court might rely on the CEC's advice before making its final decision. Any advice or report given by the current CEC, given its composition, in cases that challenges the FCAA 2023, "will in all probability be biased in favour of the Act as passed and will thus represent a clear conflict of interest", the letter said. The retired officials said this concern is already reflected in the recent Supreme Court order on Maharashtra's 'zudpi' forests (scrub forests). The court's order dated May 22, 2025 relied heavily on the CEC's advice, which recommended the untrammelled use of these forests for 'compensatory afforestation', considering them ecologically inferior as they cannot support dense forest cover. The former bureaucrats urged the court to ensure that the CEC includes not just retired government officials but also independent experts from outside, saying there are many such experts in the country. They requested the chief justice not to allow the current CEC to advise the court in the FCAA 2023 cases or other important matters related to forests, wildlife and ecological security.
