UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

Climate Justice in Asian Jurisprudence: A Comparative Analysis of Bangladesh and India

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.47772/ijriss.2026.100800029

Auteurs

Golam Sarwar · Faijul Islam · Md Mursalin · Forhad Hossain

Année déclarée

2026

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:04:47.943243+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-09T19:04:47.943243+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

Premier University · Prime University · University of Chittagong

Pays d’affiliation déclarés

BD

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

It is a comparative research paper that gives a comprehensive analysis of the conceptualization, development and constitution of climate justice in the top judiciary of Bangladesh and India. Both South Asian countries are in the frontline of the global climate vulnerability crisis, and are experiencing a number of serious socio-ecological issues such as fast sea-level rise, soil salinization, increasing rate of glacial retreat in the Himalayas and occurrence of extreme weather events. Without a wide-ranging and legally binding domestic climate change law in place, both supreme courts have developed expansive environmental and climate constitutions through the prism of transformative constitutionalism. The present study documents the doctrinal evolution from the traditional environmentalism which was localised to a new kind of environmentalism – climate justice – through a comparative approach with reference to supranational cases. The present study shows the evolution of the doctrine from the traditional environmentalism which was localised to a new one of environmentalism / climate justice based on a comparative analysis of landmark cases at the supranational level. The Supreme Court of India in M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India (2024), expressly incorporated a separate ‘right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change' in the constitution, which was stated to have been derived from the right to life (Article 21) and the right to equality (Article 14). The higher judiciary in Bangladesh has facilitated an anthropocentric environmentalism to an ecocentric jurisprudence, as seen in the Turag River Case (2019), which recognized all rivers as legal persons and living entities with independent rights. The study also assesses the effectiveness of the institutional level of specialized environmental tribunals and compares the working of the National Green Tribunal of India and the Environment Courts of Bangladesh. It brings into focus the legal invisibility of climate-displaced populations in the shared Sundarban delta; and the hydropolitical conflicts over the Ganges-BrahmaputraMeghna basin. Finally, the report looks at state and corporate accountability in landmark cases of resource extraction and industrial pollution and presents a list of recommendations for action to make environmental governance in the region more climate.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

W7204643645

DOI

10.47772/ijriss.2026.100800029

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Doctrine

Types déclarés par les sources

article

Juridictions étudiées — sources explicites

BD · IN

Entités naturelles mentionnées

Fleuve / rivière · Mer

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.47772/ijriss.2026.100800029
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W7204643645

Statut documentaire

Publication académique détectée

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.