MoEF shirks responsibility in reviewing massive environmental and social impacts of Bangalore Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Project

 

Peculiarly decides to review only the “Expressway” Component

 

                                                                                                14 August, 2001

 

Press Release

 

 

The Ministry of Environment and Forests has washed its hands off reviewing the environmental and social impacts of the massive Bangalore Mysore Infrastructure Corridor project promoted by M/s Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise.  Without any logic or rationale and taking an extremely narrow and technical view of its role the Ministry has decided “the scope of the project for the purpose of this clearance under reference is limited to the road/expressway component of the BMIC project”.  It has thus completely shrugged off its responsibility in applying its mind to the extensive and adverse environmental and social impacts anticipated, including the diversion of large tracts of forest-land for the project.  The Expressway is only a very small component of this project for it includes the building of five major cities to locate very large industrial developments, tourism destinations, large golf courses and entertainment centres for the ‘global elite’ and extravagant housing projects.  

 

This project is proposed in the densely populated and highly irrigated major agricultural zone between Bangalore and Mysore.  The 5 lakhs population anticipated to live in these new cities would be in addition to the combined population of 75 lakhs that presently live in Bangalore and Mysore and the cities in between (major ones being Ramnagar, Channapatna, Maddur, Mandya and Srirangapatna).  Over 170 villages will be directly affected by this project and the potential displacement when all components of the project are ready would be in the region of 200,000 according to preliminary estimates. 

 

All along the project has been wrapped in secrecy wherein the Government of Karnataka has defended the right of the company to not share public domain documents pertaining to the project.  This is in stark contrast to the progressive image that the Karnataka Government attempts to project for itself by claiming it is a government that values transparency.  People’s demand for information on this project has been met with brutal attacks by the Police, including in Statutory Public Hearings, and the case of human rights excesses by the State is presently being reviewed by the National Human Rights Commission.

 

Massive Displacement deliberately underplayed:  The state subsidies to this project are shocking indeed.  21,000 acres of land will be acquired by the State for the Project of which 7,000 acres are Government land in the form of forest areas and other revenue land.  This land will be passed on to NICE at Rs. 10 an acre!  The remaining land will be acquired from the farmers and sold to NICE at a highly subsidised rate, presumably Rs. 1 lakh an acre.  Should NICE fail to implement the project, and there are enough and more clauses in the Framework Agreement for it to slip out of its commitment, the land will continue to vest with the company.  Also in variance to normal practice, NICE has been waived the responsibility of undertaking the rehabilitation and settlement of the displaced communities.  NICE has deliberately underplayed the extent of displacement by distorting questionnaires on base level socio-economic information and ridiculously collecting details of some affected persons that include only: the name of the household, its address and the person conducting the survey!

 

Water Supply committed without consultation of downstream cities: The Government of Karnataka has committed to supply the project 150 million litres of water per day to begin with.  This has been done without regard to the fact that such an allotment is about a quarter of the water presently supplied by Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board to the entire 70 lakh population of Bangalore.  Considering that NICE would be allowed to draw this water upstream of the location where Bangalore draws its water from River Cauvery, the crisis of water supply to Bangalore will worsen further.  Per capita consumption of water in Bangalore today is 80 litres per capita per day (lpcd) when the NICE settlements will be assured over 300 lpcd.

 

Fraudulent Claims of the techno-economic capacity of the developer:  NICE has consistently claimed including in all its official correspondence and project documentation that M/s Vanasse Hangen Brustlin of Boston (VHB) is a part of the company and consortium developing the project.  VHB Executive Richard Hangen has asserted that his company has never been involved in the project except for a brief period in the project inception during 1995.  He has even controversially threatened action against the undersigned if they implicated his company in this controversial project.  This matter has been brought to the attention of both the Government and the media.  The Government has not ever bothered to verify this issue, and NICE now claims VHB is involved in the project, and thus sought financing for the project from ICICI.  Needless to say, that it is such whimsical treatment of techno-economic considerations of public funding advanced to so-called private financed projects that has brought many a financial institution to ruin.  Frittering away public savings thus is nothing short of a criminal act.

 

Viable alternatives not examined, perhaps deliberately ignored:  The Government of Karnataka is proposing upgradation of the existing Bangalore Mysore State Highway to a four lane expressway and several experts have confirmed that the existing broad gauge railway corridor could easily and without further land acquisition be doubled.  Not only would this make the NICE ‘expressway’ redundant, but the public support for the same highly controversial and questionable.  Clearly public interest has not formed the basis of this project gaining support of the Karnataka Government and now the Ministry of Environment and Forests.

 

The Ministry of Environment and Forests could have claimed exemption from being responsible for reviewing the financial and techno-economic considerations of the project, but it certainly cannot do the same when there is a clear responsibility vested with it to review environemntal and social impacts of infrastructure projects.  Sec 2 (I) of the Environment Protection Act clearly makes it the inescapable responsibility of the Ministry to coordinate “actions by the State Governments, officers and other authorities _

(a)  under this Act, or the rules made thereunder; or

(b)  under any law for the time being in force which is relatable to the objects of this Act”

 

And the object clearly includes taking “appropriate steps for the protection and improvement of human environment”.

 

The Ministry has also failed to appreciate the fact that the process of review of the project has been mired in controversy, and serious human rights violations have marked the Public Hearings “held” on the project last year.  The National Human Rights Commission has taken cognisance of this and is due to give its decision soon.  But without waiting for the decision of this Statutory Authority, the Ministry seems to have taken a decision to clear the “Expressway” component of the project, claiming the impacts of the other components of the project are not within its realm.   This is a specious claim given the ambit of the Environment Protection Act.  The Ministry’s Executive also seems to have not taken into confidence the Expert Committee reviewing Infrastructure Projects, who recently officially acknowledged that a large number of representations questioning the project had been received and were being reviewed.  No evidence has also been presented in the clearance whether this review of the representations was ever conducted as committed.

 

Not only has the Ministry betrayed the public-trust reposed in them in taking a competent decision, but has also abandoned its mandate.  We challenge this decision as being unconstitutional and will undertake civil and legal action to ensure the project does not proceed on the basis of such questionable review and decisions.

 

 

 

Leo F. Saldanha                    Maj. Gen S. G. Vombatkere                      Dr. H. V. Vasu

Coordinator                          Convenor                                         Convenor

Environment Support Group          Mysore Grahakara Parishat                      Karnataka Vimochana Ranga

Esg@bgl.vsnl.net.in              sgvombatkere@hotmail.com                    kaviram89@hotmail.com

 

PS:  For more documentation on the project and its impacts and a copy of the clearance letter please visit: http://www.indiatogether.org/campaigns/bmic

 

Address for further contact:

 

Environment Support Group ®

S-3, Rajashree Apartments, 18/57, 1st Main Road, S. R. K. Gardens,

Jayanagar, Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore 560 041. INDIA

Telefax: 91-80-6341977 Fax: 91-80-6723926 (PP)

Email: esg@bgl.vsnl.net.in

Website: http://www.altindia.net/esg/index.htm