Leveraging Article 51A(g): Building an enforceable citizen-corporate environmental paradigm

Abstract

Article 51A(g) of the Indian Constitution states that it shall be the duty of every citizen of India “to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures.” Article 51A(g) by default is non-justiciable which means it is not enforceable by itself in the courts although it holds an unexplored potential to become a foundation for an integrated citizen-corporate environmental paradigm. This article talks about how Article 51A(g) can be transformed from a fundamental duty to an enforceable mechanism that would bind individuals as well as corporations into a shared framework of environmental accountability supported by legal, judicial and institutional reforms.

Introduction

Environmental degradation poses a very serious threat to human survival in the 21st century, but it also calls upon us to act out of deeper responsibility to safeguard nature not just for our own well-being but also for the protection of ecosystems and for the rights of future generations. While there have been legal and judicial reforms to address ecological concerns, the involvement of both citizens and corporations have been very low and the enforcement has been even weaker. Article 51A(g) commonly overlooked as it’s unenforceable holds an underutilized promise in this context. It states that it is the fundamental duty of every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment, often viewed as more of a moral rather than legal obligation.¹

Constitutional and Legal context of Article 51A(g)

In 1976, the Swaran Singh Committee recommended the addition of Fundamental Duties by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment. Ten fundamental duties were introduced including Article 51A(g), though Fundamental Duties are not enforceable by courts unlike Fundamental Rights, they have been judicially recognized and used in environmental jurisprudence. One of the first judicial recognitions of Article 51A(g) came in the case of L.K. Koolwal v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.,1986.²

The Rajasthan High Court explicitly referred to Article 51A(g) and stated that:

“Though Article 51A(g) is not enforceable in the court, it provides a guideline and imposes a fundamental duty on every citizen including the municipal authorities to protect and improve the environment.”

This is a well-known landmark case as it laid a foundation for other important cases in the Supreme court such as M.C. Mehta vs Union Of India & Ors in 1988,³ Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union Of India & Ors in 1996⁴ and T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad vs Union Of India & Ors in 1996.⁵

Tech-Backed Environmental Action

There can be legal grounds with global benchmarks which are actionable locally where Article 51A(g) aligned with UN Sustainable Development Goals⁶ can be implemented locally via Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)⁷ and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) programs.⁸ The smaller scale initiatives can start from Monthly Clean-Up Drives, Cycle to Work & Adopting a tree to large scale initiatives like Tree Plantation Drives, Shared Urban Mobility & Zero-Waste Communities.

Enforcing this framework at scale will be a challenge which can be solved with the use of technology like mobile apps for reporting local issues, platforms to gather inputs from citizens and AI-based digital tools to monitor progress which can make a big difference. These tools can help create a practical three-tier model that combines legal backing, clear institutional roles and active participation from people on the ground.

International Models for Environmental Action

The UNECE Aarhus Convention (1998) plays a significant role in global environmental action, particularly in promoting environmental democracy ensuring the public’s right to access environmental information, participation in decision-making and seeking justice when environmental laws are violated.⁹

Lithuania ratified the Aarhus Convention in 2001 and has incorporated its three core pillars: access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice into national environmental legislation.¹⁰ Latvia also ratified the Aarhus Convention in 2002 and integrated its provisions into national law.¹¹ Citizens of these countries gained access to legal tools like Access to Information (ATI) which increased public participation in decision making thereby making corporations become more accountable and transparent with their activities.

According to the Environmental Democracy Index (EDI) by the World Resources Institute (WRI), these countries score very high.¹² Other countries like Russia, US, South Africa and UK also performed strongly in implementation even with the gaps in their legal frameworks.

Top Countries in the world with Strong National Laws for Environmental Democracy

Conclusion

Although Article 51A(g) is not legally enforceable, it reflects a vision of shared responsibility that’s increasingly urgent in the face of today’s environmental crises. There’s an opportunity to turn it into a living framework, one that brings citizens, corporations and institutions together in real and measurable ways.

We can see how countries like Lithuania and Latvia are giving their people the right to access environmental data, encouraging participation in public decision-making and holding authorities accountable through law which has led to more transparent and responsible environmental governance. We can learn from their experience that when people are empowered and when companies are required to engage openly, environmental protection becomes a practice not just a mere policy.

Considering these real world examples, India must build systems that link civic duty with legal tools, corporate responsibility and grassroots involvement. With the right mix of legal support, digital platforms and local participation, Article 51A(g) can evolve from a passive duty into an active force, not only to safeguard nature but also to create a culture of everyday environmental responsibility.

References:

1. India Const. art. 51A(g).
2. L.K. Koolwal v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1988 Raj 2.
3. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1988 SC 1037.
4. Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India, (1996) 5 SCC 647.
5. T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v. Union of India, (1997) 2 SCC 267.
6. United Nations, Sustainable Development Goals, https://sdgs.un.org/goals (last visited July 16, 2025).
7. India Briefing, Corporate Social Responsibility in India, https://www.india-briefing.com/news/corporate-social-responsibility-india-5511.html (last visited July 16, 2025).
8. India Briefing, ESG Reporting in India: New Disclosure Requirements for Sustainability, https://www.india-briefing.com/news/esg-reporting-india-new-disclosure-requirements-sustainability-23471.html (last visited July 16, 2025).
9. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), Aarhus Convention: Introduction, https://unece.org/environment-policy/public-participation/aarhus-convention/introduction (last visited July 16, 2025).
10. Ministry of Environment, Republic of Lithuania, Ratified Conventions, https://am.lrv.lt/en/activities/eu-and-international-cooperation/ratified-conventions (last visited July 16, 2025).
11. Latvian Legal Portal, Aarhus Convention Ratification, https://likumi.lv/ta/en/en/starptautiskie-ligumi/id/1426 (last visited July 16, 2025).
12. World Resources Institute, Best and Worst Countries for Environmental Democracy, https://www.wri.org/insights/best-and-worst-countries-environmental-democracy (last visited July 16, 2025).