They viewed traditional judicial qualities such as objectivity and lack of emotional involvement as hindrances which prevented judges from understanding environmental cases, eventually leading to inappropriate decisions. Judges need to be sensitive and able to appreciate the emotional side of environmental cases, said Mr Singh, who has handled 40 major environmental cases, one of which was to order factories to switch fuel from coal to natural gas, to cut down on smog which was gradually corroding the surface of the white marble of the Taj Mahal.
Environmental cases are unlike criminal or civil cases in the process of gathering evidence.
Environmental impact which would become evidence in legal cases could take 10 years to manifest itself. Normal court procedures could not afford to wait that long, he said. Some evidence such as polluted water samples are hard to obtain or even could not be backed by scientific explanation. Scott C. Fulton, judicial officer from the United States Environmental Protection Agency, said judges tended to have a negative view of environmental cases as being emotional and hysterical. The solution was to give them information on environmental cases to help them visualise the environmental impact that could do harm to people.