[BEN USANG]

 

CROSS RIVER STATE CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORK PARTICIPATED IN THE STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ON THE PROPOSED CROSS RIVER STATE SUPERHIGHWAY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT HELD ON THURSDAY 16TH MARCH,2017 AT THE CHANNEL VIEW HOTEL CALABAR

HIGHLIGHTS

1. THE GOVERNOR, DEPUTY GOVERNOR AND SPEAKER OF STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY WERE PRESENT AT THE OPENING FORMALITIES,
2. THE GOVERNOR VIGOROUSLY DEFENDED THE PROJECT SIGHTING HIS VISIT TO KRUGER PARK IN SOUTH AFRICA AND MEXICO WITH SUPER HIGHWAY THROUGH THE FOREST.
3. THE GOVERNOR ALSO SAID SINCE EKURI PEOPLE DO NOT WANT THE ROAD IT WILL BE DIVERTED FROM THEIR FOREST BUT IN FEW YEARS TIME THEY WILL REGRET MISSING THE OPPORTUNITY.
3. THE GOVERNOR SAID THOSE WRITING PETITIONS AGAINST THE PROJECT DID NOT DO SO IN THE INTEREST OF THE STATE AS HIS GOVERNMENT WAS IN A HURRY TO DELIVER THE PROJECT WITH MANY COMMITTMENTS ALREADY FROM PARTNERS.
4. THE GOVERNOR ASK PARTICIPANTS TO SUGGEST WAYS TO ENSURE THE IMMEDIATE APPROVAL OF THE EIA DOCUMENT BUT THERE WAS NO GOING BACK ON THE PROJECT.
5. THE INITIAL SPEAKERS FROM ALL PRAISED GOVERNMENT EXPRESSING THEIR SOLIDARITY, WITH A MASSIVE CARNIVAL LIKE SUPPORT FROM THE STATE LABOUR CONGRESS AND SOME YOUTH GROUPS THAT DID NOT ALLOW PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT OPINIONS FROM GOVERNMENT VIEWS TO EXPRESS THEMSELVES.
6. THE FIRST CIVIL SOCIETY REPRESENTATIVE TO SPEAK AT THE REQUEST OF THE EVENT CHAIRMAN WAS HINDERED SEVERAL TIMES FROM TALKING.
7. THE EVENT CHAIRMAN LATER PREVAILED ASKING ALL CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANISATIONS REPRESENTATIVES TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK UP SO THAT THE PROCESS WILL BE THOROUGH.

8. ALL CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANISAYIONS SAID THEY WERE NOT AGAINST THE SUPERHIGHWAY PROJECT AND ONE ORGANISATION EVEN RESTATED THEIR WILLINGNESS TO ASSIST THE GOVERNMENT TO ESTABLISH ALTERNATIVE ROUTES FOR THE PROJECT THAT WILL ONLY EXTEND THE ROUTE BY FEW KILOMETERS IF THEY AGREED ANOTHER DIVERSION

OBSERVATIONS

SEVERAL OBSERVATIONS WERE MADE ON THE CONTENT OF THE NEW AND THIRD VERSION OF THE EIA DOCUMENT PRESENTED, SOME OF THEM WERE:
A) NO LOCAL CONTENT PLAN DURING IMPLEMENTATION OF PROJECT,
B) NO ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN;,
C)INDEQUATE BASELINE DATA- EXAMPLE THE BIODIVERSITY OF THEAFFECTED AREAS WAS SERIOUSLY UNDER REPORTED;
D) ABSENT OR VERY POOR COMMUNITY /CSOS OR PROFFESSIONAL CONSULTATION DURING THE DRAFTING;
E) THE ENGINEERING DESIGN OF THE PROJECT WAS NOT REFLECTED
F) SOME VERY FEW NEW INPUTS WERE ADDED TO THE CURRENT DOCUMENT BUT OTHERWISE IT WAS JUST VERY MUCH AS THE PREVIOUS ONCE THAT HAD LOT OF IDENTIFIED COMMON ERRORS;
G) THE UNCLEAR POSITION OF THE STATE ON CONSERVATION DUE TO ITS POPLICY STAND ON THE SUPERHIGHWAY LED TO THE WITHDRAWAL OF WORLD BANK FUNDING THAT WAS TO BE FACILITATED BY THE UNREDD PROGRAMME;
H) THERE WAS A AN ATMOSPHERE OF HOSTILITY TO ANYONE THAT HAD ISSUED WITH THE POSITION OF GOVERNMENT;
I) THAT MANY OF THOSE WHOSE LAND HAS ALREADY BEEN DAMAGED DUE TO THE ALREADY STARTED CLEARING FOR THE SUPERHIGHWAY WERE NOT COMPENSATED AND THEY WERE BEGGING FOR GOVERNMENT TO SHOW THEM MERCY.

GOVERNMENT PLEDGE

THE STATE GOVERNMENT FACED WITH ANOTHER POORLY DRAFTED EIA DOCUMENT AGREED THROUGH THE DEPUTY GOVERNOR OF THE STATE THAT THEY WILL SEND THE CONSULTANT OF THE EIA BACK TO THE FIELD TO ADDRESS SEVERAL GAPS IN THE DOCUMENT WHICH COULD NOT BE OVERLOOKED.

CONCLUSION
SOME REPRESENTATIVE OF CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANISATION MET THE REVIEW THE EVENT AND ARRIVED AT MOST OF THE ABOVE RESOLUTIONS. THE SPECIAL ADVISER TO THE GOVERNOR GAVE HIS SUPPORT TO THE BRIEF REVIEW MEETING WHEN HE BRIEFLY DROPPED BY THE MEETING HELD AT THE SAME VENUE, HE SAID HE WILL CONTINUE TO LISTEN TO THE CONCERNS OF THE CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANISATIONS IN THE STATE AND PASS IT ON TO GOVERNMENT