Fwd: [Bangalore Issues] Urgent Endorsement requested to oppose amendment of India's Coastal Zone Regulation Notification
Chakri
From: ESGINDIA <e...@esgindia.org>
Date: 2009/7/1
Subject: [Bangalore Issues] Urgent Endorsement requested to oppose amendment of India's Coastal Zone Regulation Notification
To: esg...@lists.esgindia.org, bangalor...@lists.esgindia.org, india_resear...@lists.esgindia.org
Dear Friends,
We write to you with an urgent appeal to endorse a representation to the Indian Ministry of Environment and Forests to not take any steps to replace the Coastal Zone Regulation Notification with the comprehensively weakened amendment - the Coastal Zone Management Notification. The reasons why your endorsement is immediately required is detailed in the enclosed note.
Environment Support Group is issuing this appeal on behalf of Kerala Swatantra Matsya Thozhilali Federation (Kerala Independent Fishworkers Federation).
All endorsements must include your Name, Organisation, Place and other contact details. Endorsements may be rushed immediately to: Peter...@gmail.com and a copy marked to nan...@esgindia.org.
Thank you for your continued cooperation and support.
Sincerely,
Leo F. Saldanha and Bhargavi S. Rao
Environment Support Group
Bangalore, India
Why opposed the proposed Coastal Zone Management Notification
Over the past decade, as the world has worked to strengthen environmental regulations and norms, India has worked to dilute them. The process began with the BJP led NDA government at the Centre setting up the Govindarajan Committee on Investment Reforms in the late 1990s which was essentially a bureacrat and technocrat led initiative. The Committee's mandate was to identify bottlenecks for investment growth and they zeroed in on environmental, forest and coastal zone regulations as obstacles in assisting India's economic growth. No other consideration, including growing concerns over climate change, seems to have affected the implementation of the Govindarajan Committee recommendations. Subsequent governments have unquestioningly endorsed the Committee's recommendations.
Soon after, the World Bank gave a large IDA grant to the Ministry of Environment and Forests, utilising which the Committee's recommendations were systematically transformed into legislative and policy changes. The most critical changes were to dilute the already weak Environment Impact Assessment Notification and the Coastal Zone Regulation Notification. Both were subordinate legislations, hence any modification and comperhensive amendments were proposed without Parliamentaty oversight and based essentially on consultations with industrial and investment lobbies. Assisting this process was the National Environmental Policy, which was evolved without any discussion on public platforms, legislatures or the Parliament. In 2006, the EIA Notification was comprehensively amended including several undemocratic features to make the clearance mechanisms investment friendly. A thorough analysis of its weaknesses and potential impacts is available in a book ESG published, entitled "Green Tapism". (This book can be downloaded for free from: www.esgindia.org. Print copies are available for sale.)
One of the key reforms that MoEF initiated during this time was to set up the M. S. Swaminathan Committee on Coastal Zone Management. The functioning of this Committee was highly undemocratic and designed to respond to inputs from bureaucratic, technocratic and investment lobbies. The result was the draft Coastal Management Zone Notification to replace the CRZ Notification, issued on 22 July 2008 by MoEF. Fisher communities across India strongly opposed the Swaminathan report and the CMZ proposals on grounds it would open up the beaches, which are commons, to intense commercialisation, infrastructure development, and consequent displacement of traditional communities besides causing widespread and irreversible environmental and social impacts. A Parliamentary Committee has endorsed these concerns and categorically stated that " Govt. should not make haste in implementing the CMZ notification without addressing the conflict of interests between the stakeholders – mainly the fisher folk/coastal communities and all out efforts must be made first to assuage their feelings and meet their concerns which the Committee feels, is not unfound, through education, social mobilization and their active participation and involvement in decision making. Panchayats can play a crucial role in generating awareness among them. For this, Govt. should get the CMZ notification translated into local languages and circulated widely in every village/hamlet so that the local communities are made aware of the actual implications of the notification and are not swayed by hearsay or guided by misgivings about it. Govt. may also seriously think of bringing out a legislation to ensure protection of rights of coastal communities to coastal resources on the lines of the one meant for forest dwellers."
Excerpts of the Committee's Report finalised in March 2009 are enclosed and the full report can be accessed at: http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/content/parliamentary-standing-committee-science-technology-environment-forests-202nd-report-coastal
Mr. Jairam Ramesh, India's Minister for Environment and Forests, has made some very clear and categorical statements clarifying that MoEF will not allow environmental priorities to be subordinated to investment concerns. Soon after his appointment he has travelled across the country meeting various interest groups and communities, and demonstrated a zeal to implement progressive reforms to conserve our environment and livelihood rights. This is a much desired and refreshing change in a Ministry which has largely been a victim of political opportunism, bureaucratic manipulation to advantage investors, and rarely, over the past decade, served the purpose for which it was established. Mr. Ramesh even confirmed in a meeting with us in Bangalore that the further dilution of the EIA Notification (pending since January 2009) by wasy of introducing "self certification" mechanisms for industries to invest and expand, would not be allowed. However, on the issue of the draft CMZ Notification , Mr. Ramesh has proposed that a "hybrid" law would be introduced by July 09. Clearly, this is a highly retrograde step and goes against the very specific recommendations of the Parliamentary Committee not to make haste.
In this context, it is highly critical that Mr. Ramesh must be convinced of the wrongful intent of the CMZ Notification and the critical importance of adopting the steps proposed by the Parliamentary Committee. He must also be encouraged not to yield to strong pressures from industrial and investment lobbies to open up our coastline for what would ultimately be reckless development.
This is why we urge you to immediately endorsed the enclosed representation developed by the Kerala Swatantra Matsya Thozhilali Federation (Kerala Independent Fishworkers Federation).
Due to the urgency of the situation, we request you to take steps to immediately endorse this Petition by emailing your Name, Organisation and Contact Details to Peter...@gmail.com and marking a copy to nan...@esgindia.org.
Excerpts from the DEPARTMENT-RELATED PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, ENVIRONMENT & FORESTS TWO HUNDRED AND SECOND REPORT
ON COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMMES; 20 March 2009
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
"2. Efficacy of CRZ notification has been assessed differently by different stakeholders. While NGOs – proactive in protecting coastal environment and local communities feel that it is an effective tool and stringent enforcement mechanism should be put in place to implement the notification, the pro-development ideologists – which include industries, tourism sector and Central as well State Govt. to a certain level take it to be a taboo. To sum up the issue it may be said that the working of the notification has been a mix of success and failure. The onus of failure lies on those who are the saviours. It is more the absence of firm resolve and strong will-power to enforce the regulation that has failed the notification rather than the notification itself – as is the case with most of the environmental legislation. CRZ rules are being observed more in the breach rather in adherence and this had the tacit support of the administration – Central or State or both. A number of violations of CRZ area have taken place. Destruction of sensitive ecology such as mangroves, coral reefs, breeding sites of endangered species, illegal constructions in ‘No Development Zone’ without adhering to the norms are some of the major violations of the notification. State Govts. have their own alibi in not having sufficient infrastructure to take strict action against violations."
“This Notification raised a lot of heat and dust/unrest among the coastal communities and they became very restive and agitated, since they felt that it is an attempt on the part of the Government to deprive them of their life and livelihood by displacing them from coastal areas, which has traditionally sustained their life and livelihood. It was in this background that the Committee decided to take up this subject for consideration and examination. Besides inviting memoranda/views/comments from the individuals/ organizations...”
“The Committee finds that for a community of nearly 250 million people living within a distance of 50 kms. from the coast, CEE could manage to organise 35 public consultations in nine coastal States and was able to interact with 3714 individuals belonging to various stakeholder groups...”
“10. Around 20 per cent of the population in the country dwells in coastal areas and they depend mainly on fisheries to eke out their livelihood. It is estimated that the fishermen population living along the coastal areas of the country is around 67,30,300 as per livestock census of 1992. The Committee is of the opinion that development should be people and not solely economics oriented. As such the concerns of the poor and marginalized sections of the coastal communities, the Committee feels, must be reflected and addressed in State Policy. No attempt should be such as to divorce the people from their cultural life-style and traditional livelihood or interfere with practices that have sustained communities over three millenniums and more. The Committee is of the opinion that in a country like ours, where a large number of populace depend on natural resources for their survival, social dimensions of livelihood security and biodiversity conservation should be pivotal to all decision making pertaining to development or economic considerations of revenue generation. But the Committee is constrained to observe that these dimensions have not been adequately incorporated in implementation of environmental laws and regulations by the State as a result of which interventions by vigilant public interest groups supported by the positive attitude of the judiciary have played a key role in protecting and conserving environmental resources. India’s natural resources – land, water, forest and air are getting depleted and polluted at an alarming pace and the communities who live on them for their livelihood are being constantly marginalized and displaced.”
“11. The Committee is of the opinion that Govt. should not make haste in implementing the CMZ notification without addressing the conflict of interests between the stakeholders – mainly the fisher folk/coastal communities and all out efforts must be made first to assuage their feelings and meet their concerns which the Committee feels, is not unfound, through education, social mobilization and their active participation and involvement in decision making. Panchayats can play a crucial role in generating awareness among them. For this, Govt. should get the CMZ notification translated into local languages and circulated widely in every village/hamlet so that the local communities are made aware of the actual implications of the notification and are not swayed by hearsay or guided by misgivings about it. Govt. may also seriously think of bringing out a legislation to ensure protection of rights of coastal communities to coastal resources on the lines of the one meant for forest dwellers.”
“12. The Committee, in view of the above, recommends that the implementation of CMZ notification be kept pending/in abeyance till mechanisms/instruments-executive and legislative are put in place for inclusion and integration of coastal communities through participative, decision making and control instruments.”
Appeal issued by KSMTF:
Dear Friends,
The Kerala Swatantra Matsya Thozhilali Federation (Kerala Independent Fishworkers Federation) would like to draw your attention to certain alarming developments with respect to coastal policy reforms. We urge you to join us in immediately resistance.
As you might be aware, the ten-month period that the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) had given itself to vet public comments received on the Draft Coastal Management Zone (CMZ) 2008 Notification comes to an end in June. This Draft, based on the recommendations of the much-criticized Swaminathan Committee Report, was an attempt to dismantle existing coastal regulation and open up coastal regions for fast-paced, destructive economic development. It was opposed not only by coastal communities, environmental groups, women’s organizations, trade unions, NGOs but also by several coastal state governments. The most recent caution against introducing such a coastal management regime came in March 2009 from a high-powered Parliamentary Standing Committee.
In the face of such opposition, the MoEF appears to be resorting to underhand and devious methods to launch the CMZ. The Minister, Jairam Ramesh has announced that on July 16 a fresh ‘hybrid’ rule will be issued that will combine existing rules with the recommendations of the Swaminathan Committee Report. This is nothing but the CMZ in the guise of existing rules, that is to say, illicit new wine in an old bottle!
We must stand united in opposing this appalling move of the MoEF. A statement to this effect is given below which we urge you to endorse. Please write back to us with your endorsement and also do gather and send us endorsements from other organizations.
The email address for responding is given below.
In solidarity,
T.Peter,
President,
Kerala Swatantra Matsya Thozhilali Federation (KSMTF)
Peter...@gmail.com, mobile:09447429243
www.keralafishworkers.org, www.alakal.net
Letter to Mr. Jairam Ramesh for Endorsement:
SAVE THE COASTS! OPPOSE BACKDOOR CHANGES TO COASTAL REGULATION NORMS!
We, the undersigned, strongly oppose the planned move of the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), as recently reported in the press, to introduce by July 16, a new, ‘hybrid’ set of coastal regulatory rules which will combine existing regulation and new rules based on the recommendations of the Swaminathan Committee. This is completely unacceptable and we are outraged by what appears to be a brazen attempt by the MoEF to introduce through the backdoor, pro-industry and anti-people coastal reforms that are being bitterly opposed by fishing and other coastal communities, environmental organizations, women’s organizations, trade unions and NGOs.
The report of the Swaminathan Committee had recommended that existing coastal regulation be dismantled and the coasts opened up to allow a wide range of economic activities; that ‘no-development zone’ restrictions be lifted in sensitive core areas and that the coastal zone be extended up to 12 nautical miles into the sea to make way for Notified Tourism Areas, Special Economic Zones, mining projects, industrial estates, power plants, ports and harbours. The report was rejected by the people who saw it as facilitating the illegal takeover of coastal land from the poor. It was an attempt to clear the path for unchecked coastal commercialization that did not hesitate to put 10 million fisher people in harm’s way; to destroy fragile and life-sustaining coastal ecosystems, and to significantly increase the potential for global warming and climate change through opening up coastal land for grabs.
The irresponsible and scheming recommendations subsequently formed the basis of a Draft Coastal Management Zone (CMZ) 2008 Notification to which objections were invited in May 2008. Several coastal state governments opposed the draft. It was opposed by fishing communities, environmental organizations, women’s organizations, trade unions and NGOs in every coastal state. The recent report submitted by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science, Technology, Environment and Forests clearly recommends that the CMZ 2008 Notification be kept in abeyance. The Parliamentary Panel criticized the Government’s attempt to bring new coastal legislation through an undemocratic and non-participatory process. It has urged the Government to ensure the “inclusion and integration of coastal communities through participative, decision making and control instruments”.
The MoEF statement however indicates that while the CMZ 2008 Notification will be kept pending, the existing 1991 Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification to be issued on July 16 will now include the highly objectionable Swaminathan Committee recommendations. This is nothing but bringing the CMZ Notification through the backdoor! Was the public engagement on the issue no more than mere eyewash to manage dissent? We strongly condemn this underhand move of the newly formed UPA Government!
Reworking coastal rules to accommodate neo-liberal policies will endanger both the coasts and the lives of 250 million coastal dwellers, including 10 million fisher people. Fisher women, whose main activities are shoreline-based, are already suffering due to violations of existing norms which have allowed exploitative economic activities, like mining, tourism and hazardous industries to mushroom in coastal areas. Fisher women are aware that if coastal policy is amended to legitimize full-scale liberalization, they will have to bear the brunt of the resulting livelihood insecurity, coastal erosion, unavailability of basic services, cultural disintegration as well as increased sexual exploitation.
No change to coastal legislation can take place without proper consultations with fishing populations, including women; complete consensus from all coastal states; proper parliamentary discussion and national debate. We therefore reiterate that the only way forward is to:
-
Scrap any moves towards introducing the CMZ 2008 Notification
-
Reject the Swaminathan Committee report recommendations
-
Implement the 1991 CRZ Notification in its original form
-
Immediately identify and punish violations of the original 1991 CRZ Notification
-
Immediately recognize and uphold the traditional and customary rights of fisher people to housing, coastal lands as well as sea and marine resources.
Kerala Swatantra Malsya Thozhilaly Federation(KSMTF)
Kerala Theeradesa Mahilavedi
_______________________________________________
Bangalore_issues mailing list
Bangalor...@lists.esgindia.org
http://lists.esgindia.org/mailman/listinfo/bangalore_issues
--
SAMALOCHANA
For Youth-For social justice
Dno 14-25-7,
KVR Naidu street
Anakapalle-531001
Visakhapatnam dist-AP
ph-(08924)329787
"We are realists. We dream the impossible." - Ernesto CheGuevara