Showing posts with label POSCO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label POSCO. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
Friday, February 4, 2011
A Dangerous first
The biggest casualty in giving the go-ahead to the single biggest FDI project – Posco – has been the Forest Rights Act.
Till date, the triumvirate of tigerwallahs, industry lobbies and forest bureaucracy were the only ones seen opposed to it. But Congress backed it, using it when the occasion arose in the Vedanta-Niyamgiri case to give Rahul Gandhi the pro-tribal makeover. Jairam Ramesh evoked the provisions of the act, besides other regulations, to shut down Vedanta's aluminium plant in Orissa. The Congress scion flew into the Biju Janta Dal citadel to claim the mantel of "the protector of tribals" and their voice in Delhi.
But with Posco, the UPA government has shown that beyond the political mileage it may get out of the legislation, it can also jettison forest rights out of the way when required.
The act has simple but powerful provisions intended to change the way forestlands are alienated from tribals and those who have traditionally used them. Forestlands are to be handed back to their traditional users – tribals – but also others who have used it for three generations or more. The lands cannot be taken away before their rights are ascertained and then bought by the state government. Crucial to this is the mechanism by which it occurs. The village council is given quasi-judicial powers in the process and in many ways it becomes the key authority – a first in Indian history.
To ensure that the Union environment and forests ministry's forest clearance process was in alignment with these new regulations, Ramesh passed a critical order in August 2009. The ministry would not give a forest clearance – handing the land to project developers – until the state government provided proof that the village council agreed with the takeover of its forests and that all rights had been settled in the area.
Orissa's administration, but not the affected village councils, claimed that it had verified and found that no one had rights in the forestland demarcated for Posco. After violence at the site and complaints from protesters, the Centre sent a committee to review the case.
The Orissa government had done little to identify people who had rights in the forests being handed over, said the four-member committee. In fact they had done much to deny rights to these claimants, said three of the four members.
The environment ministry's statutory Forest Advisory Committee too found that the Orissa government had not provided the requisite evidence under the August 2009 order to show it had met the provisions of the Act. Orissa had instead questioned the very validity of the order.
All three recommended that Posco be denied the forest clearance till the state government adheres to the regulations.
Ramesh disregarded the opinion of his appointed experts.
He instead asked Orissa to give an assurance that no one could claim rights over the forestland. Orissa had already given such an assurance a year ago. But, there is no such provision in the Forest Rights Act for an overriding assurance from the state. The village council is the only body that could have given the nod for diversion of forestland.
One may conjecture that the UPA found a greater economic trade-off in allowing the project that intends to export high-grade iron ore from the country besides producing steel. But the damage caused in pushing it through will reflect on all future cases of forest clearances – and there are hundreds in the pipeline.
Every project developer can now ask for similar favours from the government. The forest bureaucracy and industry was against the August 2009 order of the environment ministry. Now it has been dumped without being revoked. The states may never need to give evidence that they acted legally. They can get away with an assurance, even if it flies in the face of proof.
Aside: it is worthwhile to note that not many self-claimed defenders of forests – the wildlife lobbies – have stood up to oppose this either.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Letter from PSSS to Jairam Ramesh, August 2010
The following is the statement issued by the POSCO PRATIRODH SANGRAM SAMITIon the latest decision of the Environment Ministry on POSCO. The image below from an earlier round of land acquisition attempt is a telling illustration of how the ‘free market’ functions. Received via Shankar Gopalakrishnan. Land being acquired for POSCO. Image courtesy The Hindu Jairam Ramesh and the UPA government have shown their true colours with their decision today on the POSCO project. Ignoring the reports of its own advisory bodies and enquiry committees, violating its own orders and the laws of the land, this Ministry has shown that the naked face of corporate greed – it is not the “rule of law”, the “aam aadmi”, “inclusive growth” or any of these other lies – that rules this country. The decision today can be summarised in one sentence:”Repeat your lies, give us promises that we all know are false, and then loot at will.” We repeat: we will not give up our lands, our forests and our homes to this company. It is not the meaningless orders of a mercenary government that will decide this project’s fate, but the tears and blood of our people. Through the road of peaceful demonstrations and people’s resistance we have fought this project, in the face of torture, jail, firings and killings. If this project comes it will come over our dead bodies. The Orissa government has been asked to give an “assurance” that the affected people of the area are not forest dwellers under the Forest Rights Act, after which the “final forest clearance” will be granted. The Orissa government has already lied on this count on numerous occasions. Indeed, the majority report of the POSCO Enquiry Committee said “The Committee finds that the government’s own records such as census reports and voters list confirm that there are both other traditional forest dwellers (OTFD) and forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes in the project area and the statement of the District Collector of Jagatsinghpur to the contrary is false” (para II.1, Conclusions and Recommendations). Even the dissenting member agreed that the Act had not been implemented. The same finding had been reached by the subcommittee of the Saxena Committee earlier. After the Ministry’s own enquiry committees have found the Orissa government guilty of lying, what is the meaning of saying the project can proceed if the liars repeat their lies? This Ministry has earlier made a song and dance of respect for people’s views and environmental laws. Under the Forest Rights Act, the consent of the gram sabhas of the area is an essential requirement, and this was confirmed by the Ministry’s own order. Three different committees – the Saxena Committee, the POSCO Enquiry Committee and the Ministry’s own Forest Advisory Committee – all therefore said the clearance should be withdrawn. The Minister today claims that the project can go ahead if he and the Orissa government decide they want it to. So much for the law and for people’s rights. On the environment clearance, we recall again the words of the majority Enquiry Committee, which said “Potentially very serious impacts…have not even been assessed, leave alone planned for…The cavalier and reckless attitude of the concerned authorities to such potentially disastrous impacts is horrendous and shocks the collective conscience of the Committee….There appears to be a predominant belief that conditionalities in the EIA/ CRZ clearances are a substitute for comprehensive evaluation and assessment of the environmental impact by the authorities. Imposing vague conditionalities seems to be a way out for the various agencies from taking hard decisions on crucial issues.” Again, it is not us who said this – it is the Ministry’s own Committee! And yet this is exactly what the Minister has chosen to do. Independent reports and studies by reputed academics have confirmed what we have always said – this project will be of no benefit to anyone except POSCO’s profit margins. But yet we find this being called a project of “strategic importance.” To whom? Today the veil stands ripped open; the government stands exposed before the nation, a mercenary willing to put its regulations, officials and security forces at the disposal of the highest bidder. Let the UPA and the Central government answer: where is the rule of law today, in the name of which you crush struggles across the country? Where is your much vaunted love for the people and for the environment? What do you stand for if not for corporate greed? Prashant Paikray
We note the following about today’s decision:
Spokesperson, PPSS
09437571547
Posco clearance: Govt to wait & watch on mining, MoU issues Read more: Posco clearance: Govt to wait & watch on mining, MoU issues - The Times of Ind
BHUBANESWAR: Enthused over the Centre's nod to Posco's mega steel plant, the Orissa government on Monday said it would soon resume land acquisition work at the project site, but preferred a wait-and-watch approach on issues like mining and MoU renewal delaying fruition of India s biggest foreign direct investment.
"We welcome the decision and thank Union environment and forests minister Jairam Ramesh for granting approval, although the process got delayed," steel and mines minister Raghunath Mohanty said. "Posco project is important not only for Orissa but for the country as it will provide employment and spur economic activities. We will begin the land acquisition process as soon as possible," he added.
The state government was forced to halt land acquisition for the 12 billion USD project in August following a central government s stop-work order on grounds of violation of Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006.
Ramesh announced environment clearance for the South Korean company's proposed steel and captive port projects near Paradeep in Jagatsinghpur district, but sought Orissa government's assurance that those claiming dependence on or cultivating land in the project area cannot be categorized as "other traditional forest dwellers" under FRA before it can give final nod for diversion of 1253 hectares of forest land for Posco project.
Posco's bid to access the Khandadhar iron ore reserves in Sunergarh district, around 600 km from the proposed 12 million tonne per annum-capacity steel facility site, is also pending before the Supreme Court.
Possibly keeping these in mind, CM Naveen Patnaik reacted to the development with caution. "It is good news," said Naveen, hours after Ramesh declared his decision in Delhi. "We will take appropriate action," Naveen replied to queries from journalists on when the state government would renew its memorandum of understanding with the company. The state government on June 22, 2005, signed with Posco a MoU valid for five years.
Senior government officers said Ramesh gave the green signal as he did not have "much option", but sounded caution about the Posco project becoming a reality. "A positive step has been taken. But there are a few other issues, most importantly mining, which need to resolved before the project can materialize," a senior government officer said.
Paradeep MLA and minister Damodar Rout attributed the controversy over forest law violations to "wrongful recording of forest land" and said people who cultivated betel vines on government land will be adequately compensated. The administration has identified 1877 people growing betel vines for their livelihood on 304 acres of government land. It had paid compensation to 96 of the farmers and retrieved around 11 acres of land.
Posco welcomed Ramesh's decision and said it appreciated the concerns of stakeholders on sustainability of environment and livelihood of affected people. "We are committed to take sustainable green initiatives and effective measures for conserving the land and marine environment of the area. We are also committed to create sustainable livelihood opportunities for the project affected people by implementing the R&R (rehabilitation and resettlement) package sincerely," it said, adding, "We will continue to work for welfare of the local community and plough back part of our earnings for CSR (corporate social responsibility) after operations commence."
Read more: Posco clearance: Govt to wait & watch on mining, MoU issues - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bhubaneswar/Posco-clearance-Govt-to-wait-watch-on-mining-MoU-issues/articleshow/7400073.cms#ixzz1Ci4lGcUV
Letter from PSSS to Jairam Ramesh, August 2010
http://kafila.org/2010/08/19/posco-pratirodh-sangram-samiti-to-jairam-ramesh/ This is a press release issued in August 2010 by PPSS, pointing out the illegalities being committed by the Orissa government and the Central Ministry of Environment and Forests in connection with the POSCO project. POSCO PRATIRODH SANGRAM SAMITI Dhinkia, Nuagaon, Gadkujang; Jagatsinghpur District, Orissa 11.08.2010 To: Shri Jairam Ramesh Minister of Environment and Forests Paryavaran Bhavan New Delhi Sub: Regarding POSCO project – need for withdrawal of illegal final clearance; new Meena Gupta Committee clearly aimed at delaying matters Dear Sir, We are the people’s organisation spearheading the struggle against the illegal and unjust POSCO project in Orissa. We are writing to you in the context of the ongoing illegalities being committed by the Orissa government and the Central Ministry of Environment and Forests in connection with this project. We also condemn the decision of the Ministry to constitute yet another Committee to “look into the matter” instead of remedying its own illegal decision to grant final forest clearance to the project on December 29, 2009. We wish to bring the following to your attention. While we welcome the stop work order of the Ministry dated August 6, 2010, we condemn the Ministry’s failure to withdraw the illegal clearance granted on December 29, 2009 to the project. We, political leaders and now your Ministry’s own Committee to Study the Forest Rights Act (the NC Saxena Committee) have all pointed out that: 1. We are indeed Other Traditional Forest Dwellers and eligible for rights under the Forest Rights Act, 2006. It may be noted that the palli sabhas of Dhinkia, Nuagaon and Govindpur have also asserted this fact and it is therefore now simply illegal for any other authority to deny it without going through the process under the Forest Rights Act. 2. As we are other traditional forest dwellers, our consent is required for the diversion of any forest land (this is also stated in your own Ministry’s circular of August 3, 2009). The palli sabhas of Nuagaon, Dhinkia and Govindpur have denied consent to any diversion on February 4, 5 and 6 of this year, which has also been admitted by your Ministry in its latest “stop work” order. 3. The process under the Forest Rights Act has not been completed in the area. No rights have been recognised and no claims processed. This has also been admitted by the Ministry and by the Orissa government itself, which has said in writing to you that it has not processed any claims. In short, every single condition required with respect to the Forest Rights Act for a legal forest clearance has not been met; but the clearance was granted anyway on December 29, 2009. Moreover, now that the palli sabhas have denied their consent, all other issues become irrelevant, and the clearance is invalid in any case. If the Ministry intends to comply with the law, it has no choice but to withdraw the clearance and reject the project’s application. Yet instead of doing this, we now find the Ministry has constituted yet another Committee to “investigate” the status of “implementation of the Forest Rights Act” as well as “relief and rehabilitation” (vide its order dated 28.07.2010). It is clear that this new Committee is nothing but a delaying tactic intended to muddy the waters. What exactly is this Committee going to do? Please consider: · The Committee cannot investigate whether or not we are eligible under the Act; we have already produced documentary proof of the same which has been accepted by the NC Saxena committee. In any case, at the most this can only be challenged by anyone through the process under the Forest Rights Act; the District Collector’s lies about the lack of eligible persons have no legal standing and should have been rejected in the first place. How many more Committees do you need to “investigate” this matter? What are they going to “investigate”? · Although we are eligible under the Forest Rights Act, the Orissa government itself admits that it has not processed any claims. It is therefore clear that the Act has not been implemented. What exactly is there for the Committee to “ascertain”? · The fact that the palli sabhas of Dhinkia, Nuagaon and Govindpur have denied consent for the project in February 2010 is known and accepted. This requires no “investigation” except looking at the concerned panchayat registers. The clearance is therefore invalid. How then is any further investigation relevant? · The key question before the government is why the Ministry issued a clearance on December 29, 2009, in violation of the law and its own orders and despite having none of the required documents. This can only be answered by the Ministry, not by any inquiry in our area. · There is a direct conflict of interest in the composition of the Committee, in that the Chairperson was herself the Secretary of Environment and Forests when the project was granted environmental clearance. As such she is being asked to review a project which she has already taken a decision in favour of. We may also note that on June 22 the MoU with POSCO for this project lapsed. In light of this the entire basis for the forest clearance becomes infructuous as there is no longer any project in existence. If a new MoU is signed, the existing clearance is in any case invalid as it relates to the earlier proposal. In sum, there is no purpose in the Committee “investigating and ascertaining” any matters with respect to the Forest Rights Act. It also cannot look into any questions of “relief and rehabilitation” because no rehabilitation has been done yet. It cannot even consider the general wisdom of the clearance because there is no longer any clarity on what the project is. We therefore reject this irrelevant Committee as an obvious attempt to delay and confuse matters. No doubt some elements will try to use it to muddy the waters and come up with bureaucratic excuses for continuing to violate the law. We call upon you to cancel this committee, withdraw the illegal forest clearance and finally reject the application by POSCO India for diversion of forest land in Jagatsinghpur. This is the minimum that is required by law. We will continue our peaceful and democratic agitation for our rights. Sincerely, Abhay Sahoo Chairperson POSCO Pratirodh Sangram Samiti Contact:
Prashant Paikray,
Spokesperson,
POSCO Pratirodh Sangram Samiti
09437571547
Friday, May 8, 2009
Anti-Posco stir gets panchayat seal
http://www.telegraphindia.com/1090508/jsp/frontpage/story_10931535.jsp
Anti-Posco stir gets panchayat seal | ||
| SUBRAT DAS | ||
Bhubaneswar, May 7: Victory of a member of Posco Pratirodh Sangram Samiti (PPSS) in the recently concluded panchayat election has fuelled speculation regarding the fate of the proposed steel plant slated to come up in Jagatsinghpur. The proposed Posco project has been pending for over four years now. While pro-Posco groups have been left wondering, the anti-project group, PPSS, is now upbeat after its secretary, Sisir Mohapatra, was elected as the sarpanch of Dhinkia gram panchayat — at the epicentre of the anti-Posco agitation — yesterday. Another PPSS member Prakash Jena was also elected as the panchayat member from the same area. Panchayat polls were held in the area after a gap of two years. On February 21, 2007, when the rest of the state voted for its sarpanch, widespread violence by anti-Posco agitators in the area kept poll officials at bay. Talking to The Telegraph the new sarpanch reiterated his committed to the anti-Posco stand. “It’s a question of livelihood of the locals. I will definitely stand by them,” Mohapatra said. The proposed project, for which Posco signed an MoU with the government in June 2005, has been a non-starter due to consistent resistance by locals under the banner of Posco Pratirodh Sangram Samiti. Not a single acre of private land, identified for the Rs 51,000-crore project, has been acquired so far because of the agitation. The three panchayats to be affected by the project virtually blocked themselves from the government, the Posco staff and the police officers as villagers erected bamboo blockades. The area also witnessed series of bloody clashes between anti and pro-project groups. Though the anti-Posco agitation had lost its momentum following the arrest of PPSS chief Abhay Sahoo in October 2008, the victory of the samiti leaders in the panchayat poll has obviously given members a moral boost. Also, the present sarpanch and the PPSS second-in-command, Mohapatra, has sworn to prevail upon the government and relocate the project. However, even cynics see a silver lining in the matter. With the Lok Sabha and Assembly poll right around the cornet, the stand taken by local CPI, a party that furiously backed the anti-Posco movement, has softened. Every party has now adopted a wait-and-watch policy to deal with the matter. “If BJD comes to power again after May 16, we will try to resolve the issue (relocation) through negotiation,” said CPI state secretary Dibakar Nayak. He, however, admitted that the release of PPSS leader, Abhay Sahoo, would be the first precondition for the negotiation. Posco authorities are also hopeful that the project would eventually take off. “That the panchayat election was conducted shows that things are moving towards normal. We will now try to strengthen our relation with the displaced people,” said a senior official of the South Korean company. Posco is also looking forward to receiving a Centre and Supreme Court clearance to divert 2,900 acres of forestland that constitutes the a chunk of the total land requirement (4,004 acres). “For us, the transfer of forestland is important,” conceded an official. | ||
Saturday, February 23, 2008
PRESS RELEASE 22
Condemnation of Maoist and State violence in Orissa
We the undersigned strongly condemn the massacre of thirteen policemen
and two civilians in Nayagarh town of Orissa by armed Maoists on
February 17.
At the same time we also condemn, equally strongly, the subsequent
killing of thirty five alleged Maoists as claimed by the Orissa police
in a desperate measure of revenge and to show they are still 'in
control'. Going by past experience there are grave doubts as to who
the people they have killed really are- Maoist guerrillas or innocent
villagers.
Media reports about acts of wanton brutality by the Maoists, such as
burning alive a policeman and castrating another – if true – is
especially condemnable. There can be no justification whatsoever for
such actions, especially by a political group claiming to wage an
armed struggle for social justice and striving to build a new
revolutionary society.
We are completely opposed to this cult of violence, even though we are
fully aware that the way the central and state governments treat
non-violent movements with utter cynicism, they inevitably push people
towards such cults.
The Maoist atrocity in Nayagarh is particularly unfortunate as it is
detrimental to the various democratic mass movements all over Orissa
that are resisting the policies of land grab and diversion of natural
resources to global and domestic corporations. The Orissa government
is bound to use this incident as yet another excuse to crack down on
the militant but non-violent struggles of the people against unjust
development policies in the state.
We also call upon the government of Orissa as well as the Indian
government to stop their brazen misuse of state power to carry out
arbitrary arrests, torture and even murder of innocent citizens in the
name of containing the Maoists. As elected bodies bound by the Indian
Constitution they are expected to adhere to the laws of the land and
democratic norms instead of resorting to vigilante justice.
Finally we request the media in the state to stop labeling activists
fighting democratically against state policies and oppression as
'Maoists' with no evidence to back up such claims.
Amit Bhaduri, Economist, New Delhi
Achin Vanaik, Political Scientist, New Delhi
Apoorvanand, Academic, New Delhi
Aditya Nigam, Political Scientist, New Delhii
Amit Sengupta, Journalist, New Delhi
Mamata Dash, Activist, New Delhi
Praful Bidwai, Journalist, New Delhi
Rabi Shankar, Activist, Kashipur, Orissa
Sumit Sarkar, Historian, New Delhi
Satya Sivaraman, Journalist, New Delhi
Tanika Sarkar, Historian, New Delhi
Subrat Kumar Sahu, Film Maker & Writer, New Delhi
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
