• EFL Head of Legal Nimshi Hirimbura on the importance of the EFL’s work in ensuring rights for citizens and nature

From fighting air pollution in Colombo to protecting the Galle Face Green and safeguarding Wilpattu, the Environmental Foundation Limited (EFL) has taken some of Sri Lanka’s most critical environmental battles to court. On ‘Kaleidoscope’, we spoke with the EFL’s Head of Legal, Nimshi Hirimbura, to discuss how these cases are reshaping justice and conservation. 

Following are excerpts of the interview: 

Q: From clean air in Colombo to safeguarding the Galle Face Green, the EFL has been pivotal in a lot of court battles. What makes litigation such a powerful tool in your fight for the environment?

A: At the EFL, we don’t go straight to court. We use tools like the Right to Information Act, and we also send letters to the authorities, trying our best to resolve matters beforehand. But, when those efforts fail, litigation becomes a very powerful tool because it forces accountability and can also lead to legal precedents that protect the environment for generations to come.

Q: Looking back, what do you see as the EFL’s biggest impact thus far?

A: The biggest impact of the EFL is that environmental protection is now identified as something that can be brought before court and safeguarded. It stemmed from the EFL’s first case in 1984 and continues to this day.

The Constitution protects several rights like the right to equality, the freedom of movement, and the freedom of speech. But, the right to a clean and healthy environment is not explicitly laid down in the Constitution. So, it’s the case law that helps us go to court and protect it. The precedents set by the EFL are its biggest impact.

Q: The Vehicle Emission Test was a direct outcome of the air pollution case filed by the EFL. But, do you see gaps that still need legal or policy intervention?

A: Vehicle emission testing was one of the cases filed by the EFL in the Supreme Court regarding air pollution in Colombo, which identified vehicle emissions as one of the biggest causes of air pollution. This case brought about the vehicle emission testing requirement, which is a very positive first step because now all vehicles must undergo a test before obtaining an annual license. 

However, the problem is not yet completely solved because people have found ways to bypass the system. So, stronger enforcement and, if possible, random regular checks might be required to make it truly effective.

Q: The Galle Face case ruling was a landmark in preserving public spaces. How significant was this case in establishing a legal precedent for protecting other urban communities in Sri Lanka?

A: The Galle Face case is indeed very significant. In that case, the court ruled that the Urban Development Authority had no authority to lease out the Galle Face. It reinforced the idea that these public spaces belong to the people and must be left for public use. This case can serve as a legal precedent in many other cases to protect public spaces, reinforcing that such areas must remain open for the public.

Q: Do you think that there are enough safeguards in place now to protect public spaces?

A: There are safeguards, and there is a way to go to court, but, that doesn’t mean that attempts to acquire State land will stop. Without vigilance and active citizen engagement, public spaces will always be at risk.

Q: The Mining Circular case ended with the State revoking the controversial circular. How do you balance the country’s need for mineral resources with the imperative of ensuring compliance with environmental standards?

A: Minerals are very important, but, they should not be exploited recklessly. They must be managed in a sustainable manner so that something remains for future generations. That is why safeguards such as obtaining clearance from the Central Environmental Authority are mandatory and should not be removed from the mining permit procedure.

Q: The Wilpattu illegal road case was terminated with an undertaking by the State. Does this provide adequate protection for Wilpattu, or does it leave the Park vulnerable to threats?

A: In this case, the State undertook that traffic across the Park would not be permitted and that entry would be as per the law. The law clearly states that to enter a national park, you need a permit, and that permit is only given to study or observe the plants and animals there. It was a positive outcome in stopping road misuse, but, that doesn’t mean that illegal activities inside Wilpattu will completely stop. 

Even now, there is ongoing litigation regarding several illegal constructions of houses inside the Park. So yes, Wilpattu is still at risk, and it is up to the State authorities to protect its boundaries. If they fail, environmental organisations like the EFL will always step in.

Q: Taken together, these cases show both victories and compromises. How does the EFL decide which cases to pursue and which to let go?

A: The EFL is a non-profit organisation with limited resources, so, we have to pick our battles — we can’t go to court on every issue. One of the EFL’s biggest strengths is that we not only have a legal division but also a science division. So, we don’t just look at the legal implications and violations — we also assess the environmental impact, how a particular issue would affect the larger environment, or whether such harm would be irreversible. There are several such considerations in deciding whether to pursue a case or, unfortunately, to let it go.

Q: Looking ahead, what challenges do you foresee, and what are the EFL’s priorities as you continue fighting to preserve Sri Lanka’s natural and cultural heritage?

A: The biggest challenge is financial resources. We have to let go of many cases because of limited funding. It would be greatly appreciated if anyone could contribute to our Justice for Nature Fund so that we can continue this important work. 

As for priorities, we will continue to work for justice for nature and hold authorities and individuals accountable for their actions. And, it’s not only through litigation — we also conserve the environment through projects and advocacy. 

For example, very recently, we identified environmentally sensitive areas outside protected zones, which will help the Government in land use planning to decide where to proceed with development and where to exercise caution. Likewise, there are many other projects, and the EFL will continue to use all these mechanisms to protect and conserve the environment.

Q: What systemic reforms do you believe are most critical to ensure that Sri Lanka’s environment is protected for future generations?

A: There are so many, but, bringing the right to a clean and healthy environment into our Constitution would be a great step forward. Also, justice is expensive — it’s not easy for the general public to fight for their environmental rights. If we had alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, like a labour tribunal or a ‘green court’ in Sri Lanka, it would make litigation much more accessible. 

Throughout my experience at the EFL, I’ve realised that while we have strong laws, enforcement is weak. It would be far more effective if there were stronger networks among the enforcement entities. 

Recently, we did a project where we brought all the enforcement agencies relevant to the wildlife trade together, and it made a major difference — investigations and enforcement became much stronger. So, if we can bring all key agencies relevant to environmental protection together and build a stronger network, that would work wonders.

(The writer is the host, director, and co-producer of the weekly digital programme ‘Kaleidoscope with Savithri Rodrigo’ which can be viewed on YouTube, Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn. She has over three decades of experience in print, electronic, and social media.)