|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
| << March22, 2005 - India Thinkers Net |
March23, 2005 - India Thinkers Net >> |
|
1] From: "River Basin Friends\(NE\)" <riverbasinfriends@yahoo.co.in> Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:11am Subject: Pro-Uraniuam,workshop and Human Rights Council Dear friends ,Hi. One side UCIL ( and Govt)is forcefully pushing its agenda , other side we need support in Meghalaya from all corner .it is high time to . ravi Workshop busts mining myths Jamshedpur, March 21: In a bid to counter the negative propaganda that uranium mining causes health risks to the people living around the mines, the Uranium Corporation of India Limited (UCIL) today organised a workshop, ???Awareness of Uranium Mining in India???. The workshop assumes great importance as the company will start mining operation at three of its recently-acquired mines at Banduhurang, Mauldih and Bagjatra as part of its Rs 700 crore expansion project. ???We have been informally informed by the Union ministry of environment about the clearance for mining at Banduhurang and Mauldih. The clearance for the Bagjatra mine is also expected in a few months,??? company sources said. D. Acharya, general manager, mines, inaugurated the workshop that was attended by about 25 village heads from Turamdih, Banduhurang, Talsa, Nandup and Nildungri. For the first time in its presence of over three decades in the area, villagers participating in the workshop were taken inside the Narwapahar mines and allowed to interact with the workers. One of the villagers from Banduhurang, Har Singh Pariah, said: ???People are working there for several years in the mines and if they have not suffered from any disease then why are some people trying to feed us with wrong information???? asked Pariah. ???It has been experimentally proved that the radio-active radiation from our waste is at least 10 times below the permissible limit and there is no health hazard to people living around the mines and processing units,??? said Acharya. One of the officials pointed out that it has been scientifically proved that if an individual crosses the tailing pond (used to dump waste disposal) round the year there would be no harmful effect on his health. Later, the villagers were also shown a documentary on UCIL??™s mining activities in the area. Lapang??™s statement on uranium mining flayed Shillong: The Meghalaya People's Human Rights Council (MPHRC) has strongly criticised the statement made by Chief Minister D D Lapang in the State Assembly regarding the Government's stand to go ahead with uranium mining at Domiasiat, West Khasi Hills. In a statement issued here, MPHRC Secretary General Dino D G Dympep said that Mr Lapang's statement was "an encouragement to another form of genocide" adding that the Government was silent on the demands made by concerned organisations for clarification on the proposed project and its ill-effects. "The movement against uranium mining in Meghalaya is not a recent one. It was much started when Mr Lapang himself was minister in various Governments before. The movement was initiated by renowned politicians including former Chief Minister B B Lyngdoh, Hoping Stone Lyngdoh and former KSU leader Paul Lyngdoh who are now part of the present MDA ministry" the statement said. The MPHRC also said that in the absence of proper baseline study and scientific datas on eco system, environmental impact assesment and health study, the proposed uranium project initiated since the late 1990s had clearly shown the "deliberate negligence" and lack of seriousness on the part of the Government to conduct its own studies. The organisation also said that the State Government was depending on the informations supplied by Uranium Corporation of India Limited (UCIL) and Atomic Minerals Division (AMD) which were "not factual" and "concocted". It also said that starting the uranium project would also result in frequent and major earthquakes putting the lives of people in danger. http://www.theshillongtimes.com/ ----------------------------------------------------------------- 2] Big projects, small people--OUT OF COURT Dear friends, The Courts of India has failed to do justice to the minimum needs of the people's of The Nation. High time to think for action. ravi Big projects, small people OUT OF COURT New Delhi March 23, 2005 There was a time when big projects like dams and thermal generation plants could be built riding roughshod over the lives of tribal and village communities. Relief and rehabilitation (RR) schemes were half hearted. Four decades after Bhakra-Nangal, many displaced people were found to be wandering as mendicants. But over the years, attitudes have changed. Non-government organisations (NGOs), with the affirmative assistance of the judiciary, have intervened to bring social justice to such disaffected people. Last week??™s order of the Supreme Court in Narmada Bachao Andolan vs Union of India is hopefully the culmination of a long litigative saga regarding RR of people displaced by the Sardar Sarovar Project. It involved the Centre and four states benefiting from the scheme. The original plan had not fully taken into account the rehabilitation, livelihood and the right to life of the displaced people. Therefore, a public interest litigation was moved in the Supreme Court. In 2000, the constitution bench of the court delivered its main judgement allowing the height of the dam to be raised after fulfilling the conditions regarding RR. The present petition was moved on behalf of those who were aggrieved by the interpretation given by the Madhya Pradesh government to the earlier judgement and wanted further clarification of that decision. The rehabilitation package offered by MP was so miserly that the displaced people started migrating to Gujarat where the offers were liberal. The present order developed certain principles already set in the earlier judgement regarding RR and they could be a model for future mega-projects. RR, said the court, should be implemented at the same rate as the raising of the height of the dam. In fact, the rehabilitation should be completed one year before the submergence of the habitat of the villagers. There should not be any distinction in treatment between ???permanently-affected??? families and ???temporarily-affected??? families, as the MP government set out to do, in order to reduce its liabilities. Every adult son should be given land. (Gujarat compensated even unmarried daughters). On the other hand, the displaced people cannot normally reject the alternative land offered by the state unless it is shown that the land is not irrigable, cultivable or otherwise unsuitable. The oustees have no right to be relocated as a community. The court had earlier dealt with two major projects in a similar manner, but not gone into the details. In 2003, it delivered its judgement in the Tehri dam controversy in N D Jayal vs Union of India. After hearing the case for several years and examining reports on different aspects of safety and rehabilitation projects, the court ultimately allowed the project but set tough conditions for the construction of the dam. The earliest such case perhaps was Banwasi Seva Ashram vs State of UP (1986). The Centre declared the forests in Mirzapur district in UP as ???reserved???, although the tribal people had been living and cultivating crops there for ages. It then allowed the National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) to set up a thermal power plant there. A large number of tribal people had to be evacuated and a PIL on their behalf was moved in the Supreme Court. While the court allowed the setting up of the plant, it ensured the rehabilitation of the displaced people and compensation to them. It directed the NTPC to operate self-generating schemes for their benefit and that it shall provide good roads, drainage system, water supply, schools, health centres, electricity and toilet facilities. These judgements have now set the norm for displacing people for giant projects. These days when the judiciary is alleged to be stepping on the toes of the legislature and the executive, there might be doubts about whether the courts have the power to pass such orders touching upon the government policy. The courts, in fact, invoke Article 21 that deals with the fundamental right to life and liberty. The state or anyone else cannot violate them and the court has a duty to enforce these rights. The state also cannot violate Article 14, which prohibits discrimination between classes of people. Therefore the courts are only doing what they ought to do. http://www.business-standard.com/common/storypage.php?storyflag=y&leftnm=lmnu5&leftindx=5&lselect=2&chklogin=N&autono=184164 ravindranath AKAJAN District-Dhemaji.787059. Assam. India. Mobile-09435089275 E mail.assamravi@y... |
|
| << March22, 2005 - India Thinkers Net |
March23, 2005 - India Thinkers Net >> |
|
India Thinkers Net Archives Index
|
Subscribe
|
|
|
Archives powered by Zinester's Mailing List Service
Details on India Thinkers Net |
Browse for more newsletters at Zinester's Ezine Directory
Managed by Zinester's Mailing List Management |