In December of 2022, the Rajya Sabha passed the Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Bill, 2021 brought by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, an amendment of the Wildlife (Protection) Act of 1972. The quintessential aspects of it can largely be accredited to an endeavour by the government to upgrade earlier attempts in safeguarding wildlife legislations and implement regulations in adherence with provisions of CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora). This Convention mandates all countries to regulate the trade of all listed specimens and seeks to regulate the possession of live animal specimens.
The bill aims to fulfill, among other things, three objectives - regulating institutions, rationalising species, and control of trade. In pursuit of the first mentioned, the amendment introduces the constitution of a standing committee replacing State Wildlife Boards. The appointment and actions of a Chief Wildlife warden initially presided over by the state government would now be subject to the guidelines at the centre. A pioneering manoeuvre mechanised through the definition of Invasive Alien species as species of animal or plant not native to India and whose introduction may threaten wildlife. The amendment empowers the central government to supervise the import, trade, and possession of species. The pivotal lens of the legislation also incorporates a provision modulating the transfer of animals for a religious or any other purpose having a valid certificate subject.
In abstraction, the objectives are a consequential step in the right direction apropos of legislation of wildlife animals. However, with increased scrutiny of detail and execution, shortcomings initiate to transpire. The proposed amendment to the Wildlife Protection Act oversees the commercialisation and transfer of captive wildlife, apparently contradicting the said purpose of legislation in the first place. Private ownership of elephants as the only wild animals that can be ‘owned’ by individuals in India when succumbing to word by “religious and other purposes” strays from the protectionist nature of the Wildlife Protection Act. While temple elephants are usually not looked after, in an attempt to balance conservation and tradition, the broadly vague clause exacerbates creating a legal environment where the commercialization and exploitation of elephants are augmented. The absence of a detailed classification of native and non-native ecosystems ignores non-foreign origin species.
The creation of a standing committee weakens the sovereignty of state wildlife authorities and the constitution of no independent experts in them a rubber stamp authority clearing developmental projects in wildlife habitats. The inadequacy of deterrence rears its head with the inclusion of stringent frameworks which without local policing accentuates socio-economic problems borne majorly by marginalised forest-dwelling groups who form a majority of the population in these habitats.
These shortcomings highlight that the current status quo of the bill thus may not be instrumental in bringing about a pragmatic change. The bill provides a breakthrough in India’s wildlife conservation edifice but the polarity in legislation to its authentic ambition is vaguely claused words and a lack of understanding of the ground realities of all stakeholders involved.
Works Cited
Debadityo Sinha. (2022, 12, 13). What the Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Bill Is Trying to Fix. Retrieved from the Quint
Gaurvi Narang. (2022, 12, 7), PETA urges Rajya Sabha to rethink
Retrieved from PETA India
Deeksha Vishwanathan. (2022), The Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Bill, 2022 is a regressive step in our policy; Retrieved from The Leaflet
(2022 PRS India. (2022, 12, 08). The Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Bill, 2021
Retrieved from PRS Legislative Research.
(2022). Explainer, Missed chance: ‘upgradation’ of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972
Retrieved from the Telegraph
The Wildlife Protection Act, 1972
Retrieved from https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1972-53_0.pdf km.
Comments