Yesterday the Supreme Court ruled on the issue of violation of environmental laws and international conventions by “Vantara” a supposed animal rescue center run by the reliance foundation.
The judgement is peculiar in scope, timing, locus and language. Vantara has been in news ever since the elephant khichri show on prime time television news.
There have been intermittent reports of states transferring prized wildlife to the center. Many eyebrows were raised, when Delhi zoo, which is directly run by the ministry of environment and forest, was handed over to it for redevelopment and administration.
The Delhi zoo is a sprawling 178 acre park in the heart of Lutyens Delhi. People also argued if it was just a real estate project. Then came the PILs, and the Supreme Court formed a 4 member SIT under retired Supreme Court Judge justice chellameswar, of the January 2018 press conference fame.
Strangely enough, the SIT completed its inquiry in just 2 weeks. There were reports from countries like South Africa and German newspapers ran stories about how it might be linked to global wildlife trafficking.
Despite such international sources, the investigation was completed within 2 weeks and the report was submitted to the court on the 12th of September, and the court promptly heard it on the 15th.
The report was submitted in a‘sealed cover’ by the committee and was not shared with the petitioners. Nothing has harmed the reputation of the Supreme Court more than the sealed covers it accepted in the Rafael and judge Loya cases. Now again we have another sealed cover.
This is a public interest litigation, on a matter of‘Public Order Crime’. Admitting sealed evidence in such cases is against the principle of natural justice.
Then comes the wording of the order, saying that there has been no violation of any national or international law, norm or protocol in Vantara and that no further investigation or prosecution can be initiated by any authority, on these set of complaints, implying permanent closure of the case.
Even new facts and evidence cannot warrant any reopening of proceedings. Only new allegations can do so. The court also allowed Vantara to initiate libel proceedings against any contrarian reports and claims, effectively closing any discussion about it.
The timing of the constitution of the SIT , its report, hearing and order all have strange coincidences. The constitution of the SIT came around the time when the 50% tariffs by the Trump administration took effect over Russian oil issues, of which reliance is the biggest beneficiary.
There after there were sudden reconciliatory comments by President Trump , and the report was submitted during the violent overthrow of Nepalese government by the people.
The order has come alongside reports of MHA ordering a detailed scrutiny of all mass movements since 1974.
It is noteworthy that in all the forced regime changes, in South Asia, be it Srilanka, Bangladesh or Nepal, the US agencies are suspected of fueling them.
While Vantara might be a vanity project or a genuine concern of a billionaire kid, the relations with the only superpower should not be a part of it.
