Centre’s Commission for Air Quality Management Has Been a Paper Tiger

CAQM has the authority to impose fines and implement anti-pollution measures but faces challenges in enforcement.

The CAQM's failure to enforce meaningful actions and its reliance on outdated measures highlight the systemic issues in addressing Delhi's pollution crisis.

(Photo: PTI)

This year's Diwali has once again highlighted the severe air pollution crisis that plagues the national capital. Despite numerous regulations and bans on firecrackers, the air quality index (AQI) soared to alarming levels.

Pollution in Delhi is caused by several reasons, such as construction work, vehicular pollution, dust, burning of firecrackers, and so on. But during this time every year, everyone suddenly wakes up and talks of pollution. This includes the Delhi government, which randomly imposes several measures, and says that the pollution is happening due to other states. Earlier, it used to blame Punjab, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh; now, because Punjab is also under the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), the Delhi government blames only Haryana and Uttar Pradesh.

The Supreme Court mandated Commission for Air Quality Management (CAQM) to tackle pollution and to coordinate with the states. But this body established by the Central government is now just a paper tiger.

The CAQM's failure to enforce meaningful actions and its reliance on outdated measures highlight the systemic issues in addressing Delhi's pollution crisis. The lack of coordination between the state and Central governments, coupled with the absence of stringent enforcement, has rendered the CAQM ineffective.

The Backstory

Established by the Supreme Court in 1998, the Environmental Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority (EPCA) was given the task of combating air quality issues under the Environment (Protection) Act of 1986. However, its reliance on emergency measures quickly exposed limitations in addressing ongoing pollution sources effectively.

In August 2021, the Central government replaced the EPCA with the CAQM, raising hopes for a more impactful approach. Yet, the CAQM has largely continued the EPCA’s pattern of reactive, seasonal measures.

A prime example of this reactive stance is the reliance on the Graded Response Action Plan (GRAP). GRAP’s protocols only activate during peak pollution months, dealing with immediate symptoms rather than addressing systemic pollution drivers year-round.

Instead of tackling core sources like vehicle emissions, industrial waste, and construction dust through continuous policies, authorities wait until air quality deteriorates to 'severe' levels before intervening.

The pollution issue is not restricted to Delhi alone but extends across northern Indian states such as Punjab, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh. Seasonal stubble burning in these regions contributes significantly to the crisis. Despite awareness of these sources, regulatory actions remain sporadic and fragmented.

Without comprehensive policies and constant enforcement, the CAQM risks becoming yet another ineffective entity in the fight against pollution, merely continuing the paper trail left by its predecessor, the EPCA.

CAQM's Challenges

The CAQM has the authority to impose fines and implement anti-pollution measures but faces substantial challenges in enforcement. Despite repeated warnings and mandates, the CAQM struggles to ensure compliance.

The Supreme Court has frequently criticised the commission for its inability to enforce environmental laws effectively, emphasising that the CAQM’s credibility is weakened by these enforcement gaps. Most recently, in late September, Justice AS Oka said, "There has been total non-compliance of the (CAQM) Act. Please show us a single direction issued to any stakeholder under the Act."

The CAQM Act of 2021 was intended to address critical pollution issues through stringent, enforceable measures. However, recent reports highlight substantial non-compliance; over 1,000 cases of stubble burning were documented in Punjab alone, yet fines were collected from fewer than half of these incidents.

Similarly, Haryana saw hundreds of stubble-burning occurrences, but legal follow-ups and penalties remain limited. The Supreme Court has pointed out that without proper mechanisms to enforce penalties under the Environment (Protection) Act of 1986, the CAQM’s measures remain largely ineffective.

Political Differences, Administrative Bottlenecks

Air pollution in Delhi-NCR is a complex, regional issue that necessitates coordinated efforts across multiple states. Despite the CAQM's formation, there has been a notable lack of effective collaboration among the states of Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, and Rajasthan. Each state has its own unique set of priorities and challenges, resulting in fragmented and inconsistent implementation of pollution control measures.

Punjab and Haryana, where stubble burning is most prevalent, have struggled to provide farmers with viable alternatives. Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan have different industrial and vehicular pollution challenges that require tailored solutions. The absence of a unified strategy and the CAQM's inability to harmonise these efforts exacerbate the pollution problem.

Furthermore, political differences and administrative bottlenecks often impede the enforcement of pollution control measures. The lack of a central authority to oversee and coordinate actions across state boundaries means that pollution control efforts are often disjointed.

This undermines the overall effectiveness of the CAQM, as air pollution is not confined to political borders and requires a holistic, integrated approach. Therefore, without a concerted, collaborative strategy, we will continue to suffer from severe air quality issues, especially during critical periods like the post-Diwali week and the stubble-burning season.

The time for mere lip service and blame games is over – what Delhi needs is decisive action and accountability from all the stakeholders involved.

(The author, a columnist and research scholar, teaches journalism at St. Xavier's College (autonomous), Kolkata. He tweets at @sayantan_gh. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)