Suppression of information has been a major stumbling block in environmental litigation. Government authorities frequently evoke the Official Secrets Act to declare documents secret. Even basic information like the area of submergence zone of the Narmada dam is classified.

The state also claims immunity from producing documents in court under Section 123 of the Evidences Act. Ironically, immediately after the Bhopal disaster, the US hastened to enact the Freedom of Information Act to make their system more transparent.

In India, the judiciary has deemed the fundamental right to free speech and expression to include the Constitutional provision on the right to clean air, water and wholesome environment, and, most important, the right to information.

For instance, in the case of L K Koolwal vs State of Rajasthan, on the hazards from inadequate sanitation in Jaipur city, the Supreme Court had observed that a citizen has the right to know about the activities of the state. In a subsequent case, Bombay Environment Action Groups vs Poona Cantonment Board, it was upheld that any group acting in public interest should have full access to information. The Bombay environment Action Group had filed a case against the Cantonment which had suppressed information regarding illegal structures.

"To be aware of environment issues and to be aware of how government decision on development project affects lives is a key to exercising rights," says labour lawyer Colin Gonsalves of Bombay. This demand got sufficient credence from the public interest litigation filed by M C Mehta to get the state-owned media to broadcast environment awareness programmes.

Meanwhile, the Permanent Peoples Tribunal and the International Court of Public Opinion have demanded a charter of rights for workers in hazardous industries, community rights and victim's rights to know about the risks, rights of policing, rights of protection and prevention and right to enforce obligation of authorities, among others.