
India’s balancing act between economic development and environmental conservation has often been precarious. At the heart of this struggle lie two important mechanisms: the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) and the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA). Both were created by the Supreme Court and the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) respectively, to ensure that forest lands diverted for development projects are adequately compensated through afforestation and transparent governance. However, recent revelations and reports especially by the CEC have raised red flags over the misuse, mismanagement, and questionable legality surrounding forest clearances and CAMPA fund utilization.
Understanding the Institutions: CEC and CAMPA
The Central Empowered Committee (CEC) was constituted in 2002 by the Supreme Court in response to ongoing concerns about environmental degradation and forest rights violations. It serves as an advisory body to the Court, tasked with examining cases of forest land diversion, investigating violations of environmental laws, and ensuring compliance with forest conservation guidelines.
CAMPA, on the other hand, was formally established under the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act, 2016. It governs the collection, management, and disbursement of compensatory funds collected from project developers who divert forest land for non-forest use. These funds are meant to be used strictly for afforestation, regeneration of degraded forests, wildlife protection, and forest infrastructure.
As of 2025, over ₹60,000 crore has been collected under CAMPA, making it one of the largest environmental funds in the world. Yet, questions are now being raised about how effectively and ethically these funds are being used.
The CEC Report: A Wake-Up Call
The most recent CEC report submitted to the Supreme Court has exposed several disturbing trends regarding forest clearances and the implementation of CAMPA-funded activities. A few of the major issues flagged include:
- Non-Compliance with Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006:
In multiple cases, the rights of forest-dwelling communities were bypassed while granting clearances for industrial and infrastructure projects. Gram Sabhas were either not consulted or their resolutions were fabricated, undermining the FRA’s fundamental purpose. - Questionable Clearances by State Governments:
The CEC found that in several states, forest land was cleared for mining, highways, and energy projects without adhering to due process. In particular, “in-principle” clearances were granted even when conditions such as consent of affected communities and availability of compensatory land were not fulfilled. - CAMPA Fund Misutilization:
Instead of being used for ecological regeneration, funds have reportedly been spent on building roads, vehicles for forest officials, and non-forestry infrastructure. In some cases, afforestation activities were conducted on non-forest land, including barren or unsuitable land, defeating the very purpose of “compensatory” afforestation. - Lack of Transparency and Monitoring:
The CEC flagged a lack of transparency in the functioning of state CAMPA bodies. There is minimal public access to project details, and the audit of fund utilization has been inconsistent. Several states did not submit compliance reports or expenditure statements to the MoEFCC.
A Legal and Ethical Conundrum
The CEC’s observations point to a deeper crisis of governance in forest conservation. While the legal framework is robust with the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, the FRA, 2006, and the CAMPA Act providing guidelines their implementation is weak. The judiciary, while proactive through institutions like the CEC, often finds itself constrained when state agencies disregard rules or when policy decisions are politically motivated.
The biggest ethical dilemma, however, is the trade-off between development and indigenous rights. Forests are not just ecological zones; they are homes, cultural landscapes, and lifelines for millions of tribal and forest-dwelling communities. The practice of monetizing forest destruction through CAMPA often reduces forests to mere commodity, disregarding their cultural and biodiversity value.
The Way Forward: Reform and Accountability
To rectify these issues, experts and environmentalists are calling for several urgent reforms:
- Independent Audits: CAMPA fund utilization must undergo rigorous annual audits by independent agencies, and results should be made public.
- Community Participation: Forest-dwelling communities must be given a central role in afforestation projects, monitoring, and planning.
- Transparency Portals: A centralized online dashboard should track forest diversions, clearance statuses, and fund usage in real time.
- Strengthening the CEC: The committee’s recommendations should carry binding authority in certain high-impact ecological cases, especially where legal violations are established.
Conclusion
The CEC report has once again reminded the nation that environmental governance cannot be treated as a bureaucratic formality. CAMPA, originally envisioned as a tool for ecological justice, risks becoming an instrument of greenwashing unless enforced with integrity. For India to maintain both its developmental ambitions and environmental commitments, institutions like the CEC and CAMPA must work transparently, lawfully, and in genuine partnership with the communities they aim to serve.
Sources:
- https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-news/delhi-behind-afforestation-spending-but-fares-well-in-greening-report-101753035017678.html?utm_
- https://www.outlookbusiness.com/planet/climate/india-85-percent-afforestation-campa-fund-misuse-governance-gaps?utm_
- https://www.ainvest.com/news/india-compensatory-afforestation-fund-management-planning-authority-campa-report-analysis-fund-utilization-afforestation-targets-achieved-2507/?utm_
More Current Affairs: https://learnproacademy.in/updates/