Zia v. WAPDA

Several residents sued the Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) over plans to build a high-voltage electricity grid station in their neighborhood. They claimed that the electromagnetic fields that would be produced would harm their health. The case went straight to the Supreme Court of Pakistan because it was brought as a human rights case.

The case helped establish a right to a healthy environment in the Pakistani constitution, and that the precautionary principle should be applied in Pakistan.

Background
Several residents sued the Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) over plans to build a high-voltage electricity grid station in their neighborhood. They claimed that the electromagnetic fields that would be produced would harm their health. The case went straight to the Supreme Court of Pakistan because it was brought as a human rights case.

Relevant Laws and Principles

 * Pakistani Constitution
 * Article 9
 * Article 14
 * Precautionary Principle
 * Right to a Healthy Environment

Ruling
The Court accepted the petitioner’s argument that it should adopt the precautionary principle set out in the 1992 Rio Declaration, whereby the lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason to prevent environmental degradation. The court also ruled that the right to a healthy environment was part of the fundamental right to life and right to dignity, under Article 9 and 14 of the Pakistan Constitution, respectively. The Court ruled that the word "life" covers all facets of human existence, all such amenities and facilities that a person is entitled to enjoy with dignity, legally and constitutionally.

However, in regards to the proposed electric grid station, the court ruled that more review was needed. Ultimately, after further review and mitigation measures put in place, the electric grid was allowed to move forward.

Takeaways
The case is important for climate litigation in two respects. First, it sets a precedent that the precautionary principle can be applied in Pakistan. Second, the court took a board view of the right to life under the Pakistani constitution, ruling that the word "life" covers all facets of human existence, all such amenities and facilities that a person is entitled to enjoy with dignity, legally and constitutionally. This established that the right to life includes a right to a healthy environment, an important precedent for later climate litigation cases in Pakistan.