Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers Association (BELA) Vs.

Bangladesh
WP No. 57 of2010, D-/01-02-2012
(Regulating Saline Water Shrimp Cultivation)
Mr. Justice A.H.M. Shamsuddin Choudhury and Mr. Justice Jahangir Hossain

A.H.M. Shamsuddin Choudhury, J.: The Rule under adjudication, issued on

10.01.2010, was in following terms :
"Let a Rule Nisi be issued calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why
the saline water industrial shrimp cultivation in the agricultural and forest lands,
being violative of the provisiOns of the applicable laws and ·· the
constitutional/fundamental rights of the people of the coastal districts as guaranteed
under Articles 31, 32, 40 and 42 of the Constitution, shall not be declared unlawful,
against national and public interest and why they shall not be directed to stop saline
water industrial shrimp cultivation in agricultural, forest lands and public water
bodies of the coastal districts (Annexure-A) and subject all shrimp cultivation
projects to stringent environmental tests and the requiremerlts of envrronmemal
clearance as mandated under the Envuonment Conservation Act, 1995 and/orsuch
oilier or furr.lier order or orders passed as to this Court may seem ht and proper."
Averments figured by the petitioners are, briefly, summarised below:
The petitioner No. 1 is Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers Association (BELA),
petitioner No. 2 Nijera Kori, is yet another NGO represented by its Coordinator Ms.
Khushi Kabir. Both the petitioners are registered under the Societies Registration Act,
1860.
The petitioners are aggrieved by the facts that despite their own negative findings, the
respondents are not taking measures as required by laws and policies to regulate the
unsustainable, commercial shrimp cultivation in saline water in the coastal areas and, as
such, are failing to protect the agricultural lands, forests, waterbodies, biodiversity and
food security of the people of the said areas from the adverse effects of such shrimp
I
cultivation.
Sub-sector of fishery, shrimp aquaculture as an industry started its journey in Bangladesh
in early 80s and reached its boom during the last few decades. While saline water shrimp
cultivation (Bagda) is limited to the coastal areas of the country, the cultivation of sweet
water shrimp (Gaida) is also expanding fast and is spreading beyond the coastal areas.
Apart from the three hill districts in Chittagong, sweet water shrimp cultivation is being
carried out in the rest of 61 districts since 2005.
The commercial shrimp aquaculture started getting institutionalized in Bangladesh when
the Asian Development Bank under its Aquaculture Development Project (1982-1988)
released funds for such shrimp cultivation in the then dense forest area of the Chokoria,
Sunderbans. Records suggests that out of the total of21 ,020.45 acres of forest land in the
Chokoria district of Cox' s Bazar, 18,500 acres of land was declared Reserved Forest
while 2520.45 acres were declared Protected Forest in 1903. This aquaculture project
( 200
required cutting down of the natural forest which is admitted in the project completion

!
report of the ADB, (1993) which states the disappearance of 800 hectors of man ove
forest in Chokoria, Sunderbans. The act, owever, 1st at a total of the 21,020.45 acres
of11tc mangrove !illest of Chokoria has been completely wiped of with llQ initiati'<'e fram
the government to regenerate thesame. With that, has also disappeared the unique
biodiverSitY and the nch wilillife resources that the natural forest.retrained.
The FO"urth Fisheries Project (1996-2006), of the government also recommended the
coasta1 zones of the southeastern districts as suitable for shrimp cultivation. Based on
such assessment, the government promoted saline water shr·m cultivation in the vast
agricultural and forest area of the coasta 1stricts of southeast and sout west. The
petitioners are aggrieVed by the fact that such decision of the government was a~ved at
having in mind only short-term economic return from export, and without any objective
assessment of social and ecofogical consequeii'ces.
The major part of saline water commercial shrimp cultivation takes place in Khulna,
Bagherhat and Satkhira districts of the southwest and Cox's Bazar district in the
southeast. Despite protests at the local level, the industrial cultivation of saline water
shrimp kept expanding progressively extending more agricultural lands. As such, while
industrial shrimp cultivation was confined to a land area of 20 thousand hectors in the
year 1979-80, the amount of land under industrial shrimp cultivation rose to 217,000
hectors in the fiscal year 2006-2007. Of this, saline water shrimp is being cultivated in
about 1. 72 lakh hectors of land (proposed National Shrimp Policy, 2009) which is about
17% of the total cultivable land of the country (source Dr. Md. Jahangir Alam, BFRI,
2008). In course of time and with inconsiderate policy support of the government,
cultivation of industrial shrimp also expanded to the central coastal district of Noakhali
and Cox's Bazar, including the mangrove forest areas of Sonadia and the 11,000 acres of
the newly emerged char lands in Noakhali. Resultantly, while in the year 1988-1989, the
amount of shrimp produced was 18,235 metric tone, in the year 2006-2007 production
went upto 86,840 metric tons, all at the cost of traditional agriculture, natural resource
base, water courses and overall environment and ecology.
Although in the coastal districts of the coun·try, there was always a tradition of
rice/shrimp rotating, with rice grown during part of the year and shrimp and other fish
species cultured for the rest of the year, such traditional shrimp cultivation reportedly had
no adverse impact on environment and ecology of such traditional mode of shrimp
cultivation. They were usually of small scale, used low inputs and relied on natural tidal
action of water exchange. Chemicals, antibiotics and processed feeds were not used in the
traditional method and the cultivation method was natural. The harvest, though small,
was sustainable over longer periods. Basic characteristics of such method of shrimp
cultivation kept impounded an areas ranging from 2-200 hectore in size, alternating
cultivation of paddy crop with shrimp/fish (inter monsoon), periodic harvesting during
full and new moon periods and salinity variations according to rainfall.
When previously there used to be.traditional fishing (not cultivation) with natural species
of fish including prawns during tidal inundation at slack agricultural seasons, currently

201
the practice is of cultivation occupying huge areas of cultivable lands. The department of
fishetjes claims that Bangladesh produces 5% of the world's commercial shrimp.
Admittedly the adverse impacts of such modem saline water shrimp cultivation includes,
amongst others, shrinkages of agricultural lands (that has raised an alarming level in the
south-western region), increase in salinity level of soil resulting in less soil fertility,
contamination of drinking water resources, loss of biodiversity, livestock and other
sources of traditional livelihood for the poor people and so on.
While agricultural economists have claimed that saline water shrimp cultivation is
causing loss of worth $150 million per year, the Soil Resource Development Institute
(SRDI), (2000) has observed that about 64% of the cultivable land in Satkhira is saline
infested, while about 69% land in Khulna and 61% land in Bagerhat cannot be cultivated
due to salinity intrusion.
Followed by serve tensions in the locality over availability of cultivable lands, ·food and
potable water, an initial assessment done by the Department of Environment (2008)
observed as follows:
"~, ~ -s <!tc•H*&i1 fS~~ \!51~ <!l~ ~~~ &"f1511<11'1t<li'IT ~ <!l<!~ ~
~ ~~~ ~9fl'ftll" ~I ~'llm" ~ fS~~ C'lK<.l! ~~"f ~ ~ ~
~ m_<!t \51Cij<I\C"''Wl ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c<Ef ~ ~ <!l~~
~>'llt•Wt>J:~ ~~<it <!I~~~~~~ I \!51~\;--ottrn
r7~~ <I'C"i ~ ~0-l:lO ~ <!l \!51~ ~ ~-~, ~, ~9ft<'R, ~«'1fiiilll,
l~9ffu ~ -oli1>'11C'lli1 C'll'Vlr ~ ~~ ~'Wf <!l•MI'11~i1 ~ 1"
The said assessment of the Department of Environment further included the following
important findings on loss of cultivable lands, biodiversity and livestock in the Khulna
district.
"~~

-~~~-~~~~~~\!511'<3\5i~<I'OT~

-~~~~~~-~o'R~~

- \!Sit'l", $!", ~, ~, ~, c~, ~, '.(~ ~ <l'<1 ~ ~ o;WIIill'~!>li1 ~

~~<!l~<m~-Wt~i"

The Agriculture Division of the Ministry of Agriculture in its letter dated 26 August,
2009 observed as follows:
"<;<!<t ~ fS~~~ <I'C"i C<l ~ ~ ~\5j ~<>fg

~ I ~~"if C~c:t ~ ~ <I'C"i <!l~ ~~"if ~-.nt 'lli11~<11-olt'1-Wf C~, <I'C"i

~ 'S ~ ~ ~1!51'5R~ .$W~
~I c<!m" <>fiR~ m1f ~ ~ Ci1i<>ft \!5I1'R lfR Dilf ~ ~ ~, <I'C"i ~~ ~
~~

l:l I <!l~ W ~<>fiR~~~~~ .2i't"fl\5t<K~T C~

202

'
 8 I ~ 9flffl~ <1"1\5<11~\1 ""11"~~. 'Rill IS~~~

Ql <'f<l"ct9flffl~~~~~~~~"llffi"te"1J~~~ct
~~~~
~ <!l "1'5J "1C"'T~J@I\5~IC<i ~~ 81", <1<i"ct ~ m_~ Dt"lf ~ ~ ~ <!l~ ~ ~
~IS~~~C\bt~~~~9fl"

According to the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, the
cutch of 100 fries of bagda results in spoiling of 5,000 other s ecies. Other studies
suggcs 1a w 1 e co ec mg s p 1es, o y o o t e catch is utilized. If the claim of
the government regarding the collectors of shrimp fries is accepted, then about 432,000
people are engaged in collection of shrimp fries leaving behind a horrifying picture of
destruction of the aquatic resources.
Further studies/investigative reports of researchers and journalist show that saline water
intrusion in the coastal districts has resulted in changes in the limits of water. To meet the
demand of the shrimp cultivators for flowing saline water, about 15 khals (source of
sweet water) now stand closed. Such changes in the water flow has severely threatened
*·
the popular fish stock of C<!>, ~"if, fi't~ C"!M", ~. c<w1 whereas the fish species of
~ has completely disappeared. The logical conclusion of such facts is that protein
supply for the coastal people has decreased.
In addition to the above stated admitted negative ecological and environmental effects,
the cultivation of commercial and saline water shrimp has also led to severe
consequences in social and law and order situation of respective areas. The conflicts
about control over and access to lands, abuse of women and children, forced intrusion
saline water, have resulted in ever deteriorating law and order situation in the coastal
areas under shrimp cultivation. It is widely believed that the killing of Gobinda Dutta,
village Dohuri Bhaina, Dumuria Upazila, Khulna (died on 22nd July, 1988); Karunamoi
Sadar, village Bigordana, Paikgachha Upazilla, Khuma (died on 7th November, 1990);
Zaber Sheikh, village Korerdon, Batiaghata Upazilla, Khuma (died on 21" September,
1994), Mowla Box, village Mothbati, Upazilla Paikgacha, Khuma (died in 1989) Zaheda
Begum, village Baburabad, Upazilla Debhata, Satkharia (died on 27 July, 1998); Kinu
Gazi, village Khoria, Upazilla Paikgacha, Khuma (died on 24 September, 2008) and
many more are all consequences of their leadership in the anti-shrimp campaigns.
The government is completely ignoring the above-stated negative impacts of saline water
commercial shrimp cultivation and is continuing with its arbitrary support for the same.
The arguments of the government remain that the shrimp sector is the second largest
export sector with an export of taka 3,352 crore that secures 4.23% of the export income,
employs about 1.5 crore people and thus contributes to poverty alleviation.
The above-stated arguments of the government in favour of the shrimp sector come
without any holistic and objective analysis of the entire situation and ofcourse without
doing any impartial Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) and Social Impact
Assessment (SIA). Available statistics suggest that the connotation of the government in
favour of shrimp are fallacious, erroneous, subjective and motivated. While the foreign

203

'
currency earning from the frozen food sector is 4.23% to the total export earning, shrimp
constitutes 80% of the sector. Again, of the total exported shrimp, the larger part comes
from the nature as the farm shrimp contributes to about 39%-46%.
Such in the bias and blindness of the government in favour of commercial shrimp
cultivation that it has, in the draft shrimp policy, claimed that about 1.5 crore people are
employed in the sector while the donor agency USAID reported in 2005 that about 1.2
million people are employed in the shrimp sector. Such claims of the government holds
no water as in th~ readymade garments sector that employs the highest number of people,
admittedly employs about 3 million people. Further, in presenting such figures of
employment, the government has also ignored the fact that the employment in the shrimp
sector dose not come as "addition" rather in most cases it is deviated employment in lieu
of having lost of agriculture earnings, vegetables and fruit production from their
homestead, loss of cattle, loss of fuel and firewood, all due to land being taken away for
shrimp cultivation.
Although the government claims that the shrimp sector has contributed to poverty
alleviation, according to the Poverty Index of the Statistical Bureau of Bangladesh, World
Bank and World Food Programme, the upazilas of Kaliganj , Shyamnagar and Dakop
respectively under the Satlchira and Dakop districts are still the most poverty stricken
areas of Bangladesh. These are amongst the areas that are under extensive saline water
industrial shrimp. While the monga striken areas of Dimla upazila under the Nilphamari
district of North Bengal has a poverty rate of 61%, the poverty rate is 62% in Kaliganj,
65% in Shyamnagar and 60% in Dakop.
Unfortunately, the argument in favour of export earning has taken over all the negative
impacts of such shrimp cultivation and unconscionably ignored the unbearable sufferings
of the local people in relation to their health, lives, livelihoods and well beings. In all
these years, the national interest has been hostaged to the economic interest of a few
business houses and also to the demand of the foreign consumers.
Visits by petitioner organization (2008/2009) in the various unions of the Khulna,
Satkhira and Cox's Bazar districts have revealed .thc following negative impacts of such
Nulino wntcr industriul shrimp cultivotion :
J• hrockl11h wuter hus diminished the greenery;
tho lively coastal districts once rich with unique biodiversity and vibrant with
people's sustainable and traditional activities relating agriculture, are now
listless and indolent;
prolonged presence of saline water has affected the soil fertility and is
rendering agriculture difficult;
vast spreading of saline water has limited rearing of livestock;
fruit and vegetables gardens are disappearing;
sources of potable water has been salinized;

204
 forest has been destructed;
rivers, beach areas and other water bodies are encroached with shrimp ghers;
public embankments are being damaged for regulating in-flow and out-flow
of saline water for shrimp ghers.
Undcr the traditional agricultural systems, lands of the coastal districts produced rice and
also other season vegetables including mustard, sesame (till), potato, sweet potato, ladies
finger, sweet pumpkin, water-melon, green chili, cucumber, bitter-gourd (corolla), com,
pulse that played a crucial role in meeting food and nutrient supply for the local.people.
Partly because of the permanent water logging in some parts of the coastal districts and
partly because of the arbitrary government policy to promote industrial aquaculture for
export earning these districts, since 1982 started experiencing wide spread cultivation of
saline water shrimp cultivation. This seriously deceased rice and crop production in the
coastal districts and attracted many outsiders to invest in these areas for saline water
shrimp cultivation for prompt return of their investment. In connivance with local
administrations, these influential and moneyed outsiders started taking possession of the
lands of local farmers either by payment of a nominal fee (locally known as hari) or
simply by encroaching upon their lands with saline water intrusion compelling them to
surrender the same for usc as shrimp ghcrs.
The instruction of salinity is not only affecting the rice production from the 2,17,877.05
hectors of lands presently used as saline water shrimp ghers/farms, but is also affecting
the production of other crops and rearing of livestock that tradition!llly provided the rural
people with needed supply of food and protein and additional sources of income. Since
the land remains under saline water for considerable period of time, the farmers are not
producing any rice, vegetables or fruits. The salinity is moving inwards and is gradually
diminishing the homestead gardens. The number of fruit trees such as dates, palms,
coconuts, betel nuts, banana and few home based fruit trees such mangoes, jackfruit,
sofeda (sapodilla/chikoo), bel (wood apple), tamarind etc. has decreased significantly
with the living ones hardly producing any fruits. In the absence of grazing fields,
livestock is declining fast. All these factors have turned life into havoc for the local
people who have lost control over the conventional sources for supply of rice, vegetables,
fruits, milk, fish and fuel wood for their family members. The area was known, previous
to the onslaught. of shrimp cultivatio~ in a large scale, as rice, milk and milk products
such as ghee, poultry and egg surplus area.
Due to salinity instruction into the tube wells and ponds, most areas are faced with acute
shortage of drinking water. Further tj:te use of drugs, chemicals and antibiotics in the
shrimp farrns/ghres is polluting the land and adjacent water bodies. While the declining
soil ·· fertility is compelling the farmers of the adjoining lands to switch to high
yielding/terminator varieties, <he direct curse of pollution of the water bodies are on the
wain. In view of declining supply of eggs and milks from household poultry and fish and
water from the ponds, women not only have to walk miles to collect drinking water for
their families, but are also compel.led to engage in shrimp fry/seed collection for extra
earning to meet the family demands. Due to pollution of the water supply sources,

205

'
diseases like dysentery, typhoid, renal disorder, hair loss, irritation of eyes, allergy and
skin problems have increased.
To add to the miseries of the local people, shrimp cultivators in the southwestern districts
use the public sluice gates and embankments to regulate the flow of saline water in their
farrns/ghers. In the process they forcibly flood the lands of adjoining owners and cause
damage to the water management structures that are meant for public benefit and utility.
Although respondent No. 10, the Water Development Board rarely 'files general diaries,
the same are again not followed up by the police administration against the
accused/culprits.
In a case before the Supreme Court of neighbouring India (S. Jagannath Vs. Union of
India, AIR 1997, SC 811), the Indian Judiciary held that "the damage caused to ecology
and economics by the aquaculture farming is higher than the earnings from the sale of
coastal aquaculture produce". The parameters taken into consideration were land,
equivalent wages for the farmers to be earned, equivalent amount of agriculture produce
(rice, husk), loss due to cutting of casuarinas in terms of fuel, loss in terms of grazing
grounds, loss involving asset, loss caused by cyclones due to cutting of casuarinas forests,
loss due to desertification of land, loss in terms of potable water, total loss due to
mangrove destruction, loss in fishing income, loss due to damage of fishing nets and
man-days lost due to non-approachability to sea coast.
In disposing of the case, the Supreme Court of India, while endorsing the principles of
"sustainable development". "intergenerational equity" and "polluter pays", gave, amongst
otliers, the followingrurections:
Prior to permitting shrimp industry or shrimp pond in the ecologically fragile
coastal area, strict environmental test has to be mandated ............... There must
be an environmental impact assessment before errnission is anted to install
commercial shrimp [; cep a frame work of the assessment must
be broad based primarily concerning environmental degradation linked with
shrimp farming. The quality of the assessment must be analytically based on
superior technology. It must take into consideration the intergenerational equity
and the compensation for those who are affected and prejudiced.
The agricultural lands, salt pan lands, mangroves, wet lands, forest lands, lands
for village common purposes and the lan'l'ts meant for pubhc phrposes shall not
be used/converted for construction o~ culture nonds;
No ground water withdrawal be allowed for aquaculture purpose.
The concerned authorities shalrframe scheme/schemes for reversing the
damage caused to the ecology and environment by pollutions m the c11ltstal
State/U~~=~m=i<'t~ett":tirec:s-s,:-----------

Wild seed collection from creek and sea must be prohibited. Seed must be
procured from hatcheries. If seed collection is noticed it must immediately be
seized and dumped back into the creek;

206

'
 An eco-restoration fund must be created b collectin the stipulated fees from
the ~wners o aquacu e .. arms. In addition, certain cent age of total export
earmng per annum must also be collected from commercial aquaculture farm
owners~d used for rejuy~atio'n: of coastal ecosystem with special reference to
planting ormangroves and common eco-sensitive zones;
The waste water treatment system with reuse and recycle must be installed by
all units. The smaller units can form a co-operative and treat their water
through common effluent treatment plant. The aquaculture units must be closed
down if the waste water treatment system is not functioning to its designed
efficiency;
The compensation amount recovered from the polluters shall be deposited
under a separate head and shall be utilised for compensating the affected
persons as identified by the authority and also for restoring the damaged
environment;
The expenditure for reversing the ecology and environment shall be met from
the aforementioned specially created fund, and from other sources provided by
the respective State Government/Union Territory Governments and the Central
Government;
Aquaculture industry/shrimp culture industry/shrimp culture ponds other than
traditional and improved traditional that arc already operating in the coastal
areas shall obtain authorization from the high powered authority directed to be
set up by the Court within given time limit;
Any aquaculture activity including intensive and semi-intensive which has the
effect of causing salinity of soil, or the drinking water or wells and/or by the
use of chemical feeds increase shrimp or prawn production with consequent
increase in sedimentation which, on putrefaction, is a potential health hazard,
apart from causing situation, turbidity of water courses and estuaries with
detrimental implication on local faun.a and flora shall not be allowed by the
aforesaid authority;
Any activity which has the effect of degrading the environment cannot be
permitted. Apart from that, the right of the fishermen and farmers living in the
coastal areas to eke out their living by way of fishing and farming cannot be
denied to them.
The traditional and improved traditional types shrimp-farm technologies are
environmentally benign and pollution free. Other types of technologies-extensive,
modified extensive, semi-intensive and intensive-create pollution and have degrading
effect on the environment and coastal ecology, such type of shrimp farms cannot be
permitted to operate.
The authority shall, with the help of expert opinion and, after giving opportunity
to the concerned polluters, assess the loss to the ecology/environment in the
affected area and shall identify the individual/families who have suffered because
207

'
 of the pollution and shall assess the compensation to be paid to the said
individuaVfamilies. The authority shall further determine the compensation to be
recovered from the polluters as cost of reversing the damaged environment. The
authority shall lay down just and fair procedure for completing the exercise;
The authority shall compute the compensation under two heads namely, for
reversing the ecology and for payment to individuals. A statement showing the
total amount to be recovered, the names of the polluters from whom the amount
is to be recovered, the amount to be recovered from each polluters, the person to
whom the compensation is to be paid and the amount payable to each of them
shall be forwarded to the Collector/District Magistrate of the area concer.ped. The
Collector/District Magistrate shall recover the amount from the polluters, if
necessary, as arrears for land revenue. He shall disburse the compensation
awarded by the authority to the affected persons/families.
Provided they have been continuous service (as defined in S.25B of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947) for not less than one year in the industry concerned before
the said date. They shall be paid compensation in terms of S. 25F(b) of the
Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. These workmen shall also be paid, in addition, six
year's wages as additional compensation. The compensation shall be paid to the
workmen before May 31 , 1997. The gratuity amount payable to the workmen
shall be paid in addition.
Thus in upholding the principle of sustainable development, the Supreme Court of India
dernystified the economic and trade rhetoric around saline water/brackish water shrimp
cultivation.
The adverse effect of saline water industrial shrimp cultivation and the associated social
problems are not unknown to the government. This is evident from the directions that the
government has issued from time to time and also the preamble of the draft shrimp
policy. In response to the public protests against saline water industrial shrimp
cultivation, the government has required the consent of at least 86% people of the given
populace of concerned locality prior to issuing license for shrimp ghers/farrns . The
government has also constituted committees to deal with forced occupation of land or
saline water intrusion and to ensure payment of damages to the adjoining farmers.
Unfortunately, such policy directions have given no effective relief to the suffering local
people and no single case can be traced where a license was cancelled or compensation
was paid to any aggrieved farmer.
Having failed to get any support from the administration against the ill effects of the
saline water industrial shrimp cultivation, spontaneous public movement, resisting. saline
water intrusion and deforestation, has grown in various parts of the coastal districts. As
such the local people of southwestern districts have formed "Lobon Jol Protirodh
Committee", "Dakop Upazilla Nagorik Parishad" and "Shrimp Cultivation Protect
Committee" while in Noakhali "Krishi Jami Rakhha Andholan" and "Noakhali Poribesh
Anodolon" and in Cox's Bazar "Green Cox's hazar " have been formed. In the year
2007-2008 the movements in the Dakop Upazila of.Khulna such a peak that 6,100 ghers

208

'
 out of the total 6,600 have been freed from saline water where local farmers brought back
the greenery by producing rice and other traditional crops including fruits and vegetables.
In the said Upazila of Dakop, prior to elections, the lawmakers and the elected
representatives of the local government agencies also expressed views in writing on
saline water industrial shrimp cultivation.
Apart from the successes of the public movements in Dakop, the lawmaker of Cox' s
bazar accused for setting fire in the coastal mangrove of Sonadia has also been subjected
to legal process whereas the landless people of Noakhali succeeded in getting judicial
interference to resist their eviction from khas lands by the aspirant shrimp farmers.
Despite such adverse effect of saline water industrial shrimp cultivation and wowing
public movements against the same, the government is miserably failing to regulate the
same so as to prevent its expansion in agricultural and forest lands. Instead, the arbitrary
government support for such shrimp farming is continuing on the plea of export earning
and without any impartial and objective EIA, SIA or cost benefit analysis. When people
led movement resulted in resistance against saline water intrusion in the southwestern
coastal districts, the government instead of responding to people's will, engaged itself in
the process of farming u policy proposing to bring all cultivable lands under shrimp
cultivation.
Despite their own findings nbout the negntivc impacts, the respondents have not taken
any effective measures to regulntc the expansion of saline water industrial shrimp
farming in agricultural lands ond forest lands. Consequently vast areas of agricultural
lands are still under saline wntcr intrusion particularly in the southwestern coastal
districts, making traditional agriculture impossible and threatening severely the basic
necessities of life for the bulk of the local people. A visit to the coastal districts having
saline water shrimp cultivation will reveal the miseries of the people who are faced with
severe crisis in earning a livelihood and in obtaining basic necessities including food and
water. Since the fields flooded with saline water produces no rice, vegetables, fruits,
species and instead contaminates land and water of the surrounding areas, coastal people
are not only faced with food crisis, but also lack feed for the livestock, materials for roof
topping and suffer from malnutrition and water included health problems.
The respondents have categorically failed in administering their own decisions as
codified in the documents dated 01101/94 and despite many complaints from the
villagers, have not decided a single case in fovour of the farmers.
The patronage of the government for the saline water industrial shrimp cultivation and
their failure to apply the relevant conditions regarding people's consent and protection of
interest of the marginal farmers and adjoining land owners against forced aquaculture has
seriously threatened the constitutionaVfundamental rights of the villagers of the coastal
districts as guaranteed under Articles 31, 32, 40 and 42 of the Constitution.
While the economist estimate the income from a shrimp farm of one hector as$ 16,000
considering the contribution of m·angrove forest to the fishery, natural disasters, energy
and other sectors, they estimate the return from one hector mangrove forest as $ 61,000.
Unfortunately, due to the short sighted and donor driven decision of the government, the
I
209

f
mangrove forest of the Chokoria Sunderbans and Sonadia Island stand denuded only to
bear the curse of such unconscionable commercial ventures.
Respondent Nos. 3 and 10 have failed to protect the public embankments of the
southwestern coastal districts from unauthorized use by the shrimp farms. As a result,
108 kilometers of polders completely collapsed while 520 kilometers damaged partially
during the tidal surge inducted by the cyclone Aila, subjecting the agricultural fields areas
to tidal forces , preventing any cultivation till date.
Such failure of the respondents to protect the public sluice gates and embankments from
unauthorized use by the shrimp cultivators is derogatory of the provisions of the
Bangladesh Water Development Board Order, 2000. ·.
The negligence of the respondents in regulating saline water industrial shrimp cultivation
is violative of their statutory responsibilities under the Forest Act, 1927, Environment
Conservation Act, 1995 and the rules made thereunder, the Embankment and Drainage
Act, 1952, the Bangladesh Water Development Board Order, 2000, the State Acquisition
and Tenancy Act, 1950, the notifications dated 1 January, 1994, memo:
MAPABI/JEPR0-4/2(66)/93-06; dated 01 January, 1998, memo:MAPABI/JEPR0-
4/2(66)/93-97/01 ; dated 03 September, 1998, memo:MAPABI/JEPR0-4/2(550)/93-
98/243 and other related laws and policies.
Considering the negative impacts of saline water industrial shrimp cultivation on the
surrounding environment and people, an impartial, proper and detailed cost benefit
analysis upon consideration of all associated socio-economic and environmental impact is
crucial in the greater interest of the nation and its people. It is also respectfully submitted
that no saline water industrial shrimp cultivation be allowed without exhausting the
process of environmental clearance as required under the Environment Conservation
Act, 1995 and the Rules made thereunder in 1997.
If cultivation of shrimp in saline water is allowed to be continued without proper
environmental impact assessment and environmental clearance, the same shall frustrate
the spirit of the Environment Conservation Act, 1995, defeat the livelihood pursuits and
violate the constitutional rights of the vast majority of the people suffering from the curse
of such umegulated and unconscionable venture.
Respondent No. 1 has filed an affidavit in opposition figuring the following statements:
The Ministry initiated a project in Noakhali District for maintenance of fisheries, but,
finally it was not approved and no gazette notification was published. Hence neither the
petitioners are aggrieved nor is anything that would harm public interest.
The respondent has no project or plan to invite people for cultivation fish in rice filed by
using saline water. Even the administration does not motivate the people for such kinds
of cultivation. It is fact that thousands of people of south Bengal are engaged in shrimp
cultivation and depending for their livelihood from the earning that emanated from the
same. Shrimp cultivation does not why generative mass employment but also earns
foreign currency from abroad. As area of our land is limited so for the better interest of
our future the government has initiated to create a law to protect agricultural lands.
210
Steps have been taken to stop any further project for fish cultivation by resorting to saline
water.
World Bank also suggested to take these kinds of project to reduce poverty, yet it is them
who are asking us to stop it. The respondents are not in any disagreement on the
contention that these cultivation may environmental danger and hence they are neither
tuking nor, allowing any project for fish cultivation with saline water.
The deponent is not in favor of any further fish cultivation in rice land by using saline
woter. Though the government has initiated to create a law for protection of cultivation
lund, so the writ petition is not maintainable at this stage. If a law is passed in the
parliament the purpose of the petitioners will be fulfilled. Even after passing the new law,
the petitioners may come to fill up the loopholes which will be conducive to public
interest.
Respondent No. 10 has filed an affidavit in opposition figuring the following statements:
«~ ~ 9(\S"ij" ~-~. ~. ~ \!l"ij" l!ill~R c~ 'R-il>, ~of~~. ~~. ~rr/~il>, ~o, ~~.
~~ • .(>:l, >:lo, >:l.( <!l<f~ '=' =' (<>ji'ISiiPI~ ~il>~o 'Wf1:lW ~ ~il>~il>-~~ ~ ~ ~~ C"f1f ~I
4'J'l'!11~ "1["1 tt'IMT f~ ~~ ~ ~~<'l<f"'t "'if.f, <fOUT '8 ~~"if'l!'f
"llll C'11 It~~ 'tl'e~Cil 'PI~~~~ '8 ~~~~~~~~I
11~111 fb "' bl~l•t'1 lli"!Ct!t'fl f6~~ )f""'fli ~ '8 ~"At~~~~~~~~
'1flaC'11 f.ifll~ C'1~1 ~1CI1 '1(l;C(I llli•[Clll~ • •n ~ filf.! ~ ~ ~ ~
'l'C11•1 I f~ 'l'flti'1lt ~~~IC'Iifl "llll.~ "''fol"CII1fil~ ~ ~ ~N ~ C<>ff'ISBf ~ <'l<f"'t
'1tf•1 «!~"' ,.-ift., 1 ~rm ~ ~ ~ ~ \1!RT ~ ~ '1d!f~ QjJ"lt!f <!!~ ~
11\lfl ~ell~~~~~ Cll", c~ ~ liR't1'll' 9f1f.f ~ ~ w~~ ~ ~
v~ "tlfmf~oom~~ ~~~~~"1ftl>~/~~~'11!if~, ~ "11:l,
~1"1Jljll~, ~ iSfl;qt;qf5<l!J "11:l-<>!@t Wlf.1 '8 ~ ~i'!PiiC>ll'!1 ~~ fuli<>f ~~~I
llicrrctJ Cll" tl~ ~ ~~ '8 ~~~~~~~~~I <'i<f"'t 9fif.f ~
'lflU ~I <!!~, C<>ff'ISBf ~ <'i<f"'t 9fif.f ~ ~ '1~~. ~ ~ ~
~~~~~~'IF~~~~C~<'i<f"'t<>flRN~~~~
~~~ ~\!ifil!'f~~~\!i~Bro ~'OM<'i<f"'t "'if.f~~
~ <fmJ ~ \1!RT f.lcifxt ~<lim~ I"

As the rule ripened and came up for adjudication, Ms. Rizwana Hasan for the petitioner
drew our attention to all the odds that saline water oriented shrimp cultivation would
unleash. According to her, the degree of catastrophe that saline water dependent shrimp
cultivation can engender is so overriding that importance of keeping this project at the
bay far transcends the significance of any gain from it. She was quite momentous to foray
that unless drastic and imminent steps are put on the card and we apply our rectitude, a
large area in the southern part of the Republic shall be faced with virtually irretrievable
devastation. She nurtures the view that shrimp cultivated in sweet water also has a
substantial overseas market. In her introspection, if saline water shrimp cultivation is to
be kept on at all, that has to be in line with what the Indian Supreme Court has ordained
in the case cited above. She gave us to believe that it is the native imperviousness of
some awry people which has kept this frenzied project afloat. A greedy conglomerate are
banking on the gullibility of some public functionaries.
211

'
Mr. Delwar Hossain Samaddar on the other had submitted that it is not that the
respondents do not visualise the pathogen, but a balance must be struck to extract
optimum yield without jeopardizing the interest of biodiversity and echology. He went on
to try to lead us to accept that effective measures are in the offing to make things eco-
friendly and congenial.
He however iterated that the petition is not maintainable.
Mr. Monzil Murshed, the learned Advocate appearing for respondent No. 1, stated that a
law in order to protect forests, trees and agriculture land from saline water is already
under active consideration of his client.
For us, the solitary question is whether shrimp cultivation in the prevalent manner, with
the aid of saline water, breaches any legislative scheme and/or whether it is repugnant to
general public interest.
Curiously enough we have witnessed wide area of consensuality in the anxiety and the
dismay both the petitioners and the respondents reflected. Appreciably the respondents do
not appear to be oblivious of the danger that continued and rather extensive use of saline
water may ensue.
The overall scenario that the petitioner has projected is dreadful indeed. What is worse
even is the apparent indolence of some public functionaries, who visibly failed to raise to
the occasion.
While we are in total concord with the foreboding the petitioners have quite astutely and
conscientiously demonstrated, we also remain mindful to the fact that saline water shrimp
culture is admittedly a source of foreign exchange earning to be reckoned, and that the
projects stand as thresholds for the employment of a significant number of people.
It is quite apparent from the affidavits of the respondents that they also admit that saline
water is malevolent to our agriculture products, to the fertility of our land and to our
ecology as a whole and that measures should have been taken to minimize the harm
proliferated by saline water. So, in our reckoning a finely trimmed balance has to be
struck, to emasculate the source of damage caused by saline water on the one hand and
also to devise ways to maintain shrimp cultivation on the other. That also is, we
understand, what the petitioners are after.
We observed in our interlocutory order that the area of agriculture land has been
shrinking day by day and that if unscrupulous and free style shrimp cultivation are
allowed in the present pace, environment as well as existing agriculture land will plunge
into a state haywire.
The respondent must, hence make all possible endeavors to minimize the use of saline
water so that such water can not damage our forests trees, our agriculture land and
imperil public health. Efforts to protect forests, trees, agricultural land, eco-diversity and
public health can not be compromised. So, the authorities must not allow artificial saline
water flow over our forests, trees and agrarian land. The authorities shall also not force
any agriculture land holder to accept saline water on to their land. The authorities shall

212
 limit use of saline water for shrimp culture to such a minimum without which this
industry can not survive. Roguish shrimp cultivators shall not be allowed to damage our
~.:cology by spreading their wing over other people's land and forest land. The authorities
must take appropriate action against those knavish shrimp cultivators who are out there to
put people's interest topsy turvy.
We have perused with meticulous precision the commandments the Indian Supreme
Court has unmasked. Reckoning that our situation is hardly different, we are swayed to
llu.: equation that there exists no reason why those surmons should not apply to us equally
well. They shall, in our view, act as the best balancing factors. We are therefore poised to
endorse, and, indeed adopt them in toto and direct the respondents to implement them
mutatis mutandis.
The rule is made absolute in above terms without any order on costs.

BllnJlllldt•Jh l~ nvlrunmcntul Luwycrs Association (BELA) Vs. Bangladesh

WI' It.l7M nf 20 II, D·/20·02·20 IJ
(l'tnhlhltluu ()pw•utlonnf" lldck Fi 1<.1 & Snw Mills in Protected Forest Area)
Mt , Ju•tlt•, Mit111 llur;Nnln lluldcl' nnd Mr. Justice Muhammad Khurshid Alam Sarkar

MmZA lllJNSAIN IIAJI>l-:1{, .1.: ThiN Rule has been issued calling upon the
f\IHj}IJllll 111 hi Hhow l' llll" l! nH to why the estnbl ishmcnt and o cration of the brickfields
1\lltl Mil\ IIIIIIH wlthltl....Ul 1 cd lll'tln nf I H) {cscrvc ~ orcst in Loha ara azila
111111 t · In vw ttlllm of circulars issued by the Ministry of
lluv llltllll 11l 111111 l'tuuHt vld Anncxures-D unJ E and in violation of ule 8(1) of the
nwtulll (LicorJH ) Rules, 19\l!l respectively, should not be declared to be of without
luwf\1luuthuri1y und or no legal cfTcct, as the same are violative of the provisions of the
existing lows und ufforsaid circulars and further to show cause as to why direction should
not given upon them to take effective and apprgpriate measures to stop the operation of
nil the brickficlds and sawmills jn and aronnd the prohibited areas and to remove the
snmc lrom such prohibited areas. · side re;pondent Nos. 7-11 1 were directed to
Ins e areas as reported in Annexure-A and shutdown all the brickfields and
sowmills situated in such prohibited areas and also to take appropriate action against the
concerned persons of the said brickfields and sawmills, situated therein, within 48 hours
from the date of receipt of this order.
Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 15.12.2011 respondent Nos. 7-11 inspected the
area and inquired into the matter and found that, all the brickfie1ds and sawmills (as
reported in Annexure-A) have been estaBlished within the prohibited areas as provided
under Section 4(5) of the Brick Bnming (Control) Act 1989 and under Rule 8(1) of the
Sawmill (License) Rules, 1998 arid accordingly, responden~7-11 have already shut
.. 1
Government Officials
213