Home / News / Urgent Appeals / INDIA: Victims protest, while the government threatens to drown them

INDIA: Victims protest, while the government threatens to drown them

September 3, 2012

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-162-2012

3 September 2012
------------------------------------------------------
INDIA: Victims protest, while the government threatens to drown them

ISSUES: Right to life and livelihood; right to rehabilitation and compensation; rule of law
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received a report from the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) that a large group of villagers who have been evicted from their land without compensation for the construction of the Omkareshwar Dam are protesting against the illegal increase in the water level, beyond that is allowed by the Supreme Court of India. It is reported that in a unique form of protest held in East Nimaar region in Khandwa district of Madhya Pradesh state, the villagers have been sitting within the dam's catchment area claiming that they are willing to drown to death than been denied their rightful claim for adequate rehabilitation for the lands they have lost.

In the meanwhile, water level is increased gradually in the dam, that soon the water would submerge the protesters. The protest has entered the 10th day today. In a litigation decided by the Supreme Court of India and earlier by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the courts have categorically instructed the government as well as the consortium managing the dam, that the water level should not be increased beyond 196.60 meters and that all steps are to be taken, so that those who are adversely affected by the dam, particularly those who have lost land by submergence, are properly identified and compensated before the reservoir is filled to its maximum capacity. NBA reports that so far the height of water was 189 meters and now the state government has declared that it would increase the water level to 193 meters. This however is done without rehabilitating those who have lost their land to submergence, which is a violation of the commitment made by the government in court and is against the court's directives hence the protest. Civil society groups have condemned the total disregard of the government to the plight of the poor villagers.

CASE NARRATIVE:

The Narmada Valley Project, of which the Omkareshwar Dam is part of, is one of the most controversial development projects in the world. The project is plagued with proven claims of adverse environmental impacts to say the least. Allegations of - absence or partially executed and biased government or privately sponsored impact assessment studies - have rendered the actual human, environment and heritage damage caused by the entire project marred with lack of real information. The entire Narmada Valley Project cost with its projected development benefit assessed against the project's human impact cost is so widely disproportionate, that it does not make monitory or development sense to implement the project. (Narmada Valley project: Development or Destruction?; Ashish Kothari and Rajiv Bhartari, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 19, No. 22/23 (Jun. 2-9, 1984), pp. 907-909+911-920.) Yet the project is at the stage of advanced implementation, of which the Omkareshwar project, is completed.

The Omkareshwar Dam is one of the 30 large dams conceived in the Narmada Valley Project. The Omkareshwar Dam, an intra-state project for generating 520 mega watts of power, which is also projected to irrigate an estimated 147000 hectares of agricultural land, was approved by the Madhya Pradesh State Government, with an assessment that on completion of the project, 30 villages would be submerged at the full reservoir level that is, 196.60 meters.

The Government of Madhya Pradesh framed a rehabilitation and resettlement policy in 1985 (R & R policy) for the oustees of all the Narmada projects in the state. The government amended this policy from time to time vide amendments dated: 9 June 1987; 5 September 1989, 7 June 1991; and 27 August 1993. The policy provided for the allotment of a minimum of 2 hectares of agricultural land; irrigation facilities at government cost; grant-in-aid for small and marginal farmers and Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe families; and to meet the entire cost of the allotted land. The policy further provided that the allotment of agricultural land would be carried out much in advance before dam construction reached crest level. The land required for allotment would be procured in the common area from the farmers having holdings of more than 4 hectares of land.

The state government obtained environmental clearance for the Omkareshwar project from the Ministry of Environment and Forest on 13 October 1993. The Ministry of Welfare granted clearance on 8 October 1993. The Planning Commission of India also granted clearance on the condition of compliance with welfare and environmental clearances vide its order dated 25 May 2001. The Central Electricity Authority accorded techno-economic clearance under the provisions of Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 on 24 July 2001. The Government of India approved and granted financial concurrence from Public Investment Board of the Planning Commission for this project on 17 May 2002. Forest clearance was granted on 20 August 2004 under the provisions of Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for the diversion of 5829 hectares of forestlands.

In the meanwhile, the R & R Policy further stood amended on 3 July 2003, to the effect that agricultural land would be offered to the oustees "as far as possible"; and not to those who would make application in writing to receive compensation for their acquired land. The construction of the Omkareshwar dam began in 2002 and was completed in October 2006. A large number of families have been uprooted on construction of the dam up to its 190 meters height. For the dam site, a huge area of land had been acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The displaced persons were not however offered the land under the R & R Policy, as amended on 3 July 2003; rather compensation for their land was allegedly deposited in their accounts.

Narmada Bachao Andolan had been espousing the grievances of displaced persons by filing Public Interest Litigations before the Madhya Pradesh High Court and to the Supreme Court of India from time to time and a large number of orders had been passed by the courts to redress the grievances of the oustees. When the decision was taken to increase the height of the dam, NBA filed writ petition number 4457 of 2007 before the High Court seeking a number of reliefs, inter-alia, to stop all eviction; directions for serving of life supplies such as drinking water and electricity; not to take any other coercive measures; to stop closure of the radial gates of the Omkareshwar dam above crest level of 179.60 meters; and to stop the blocking of the sluice gates below crest level, until all Project Affected Families were rehabilitated as per the R & R Policy. Further reliefs sought included the issuance of appropriate directions for an assessment by the Grievance Redressal Authority for the Omkareshwar Project of the status of relief and rehabilitation of the oustees affected at Full Reservoir Level and Back Water Level within a stipulated period.

During the pendency of the writ petition in pursuance of the orders passed by the High Court from time to time, the authorities concerned furnished a large number of reports/interim reports. The High Court after considering the said reports and submissions advanced on behalf of the parties passed the impugned judgment and order dated 21 February 2008. The High Court issued a large number of directions as interim measures, including the direction for allotment of land in lieu of land acquired and to treat the major sons of the family, as independent families for the purpose of allotment of agricultural land.

Just as it is the case of all other dams and hydro electrical projects conceived under the Narmada Valley Project, the Omkareshwar project also lacked proper assessment studies before it was conceived and during all stages of its implementation. Of an estimated 1.5 million people who would be evicted from the entire Narmada Valley Project, the Omkareshwar Dam contributes to the submergence of an estimated 30 villages that would adversely affect the livelihood of about 52,000 people. However these estimates are based on the perception that the Omkareshwar project and its implementation would stick to the permitted limits. Unfortunately, as it is in the case of many other projects in the Narmada Valley Project, the government has failed to undertake proper assessment of the villages that would be affected by the project and has repeatedly failed to compensate even those who have been identified as those who would loose their land and livelihood to the Omkareshwar project.

Until recently the water level in the Omkareshwar Dam was maintained at 189 meters. The state government however has declared that it will increase the water level to 193 meters. While it is true that the water level is within the approved limits (196.60 meters) the government has failed to adequately rehabilitate those villagers who have lost their land to submergence. The watershed litigation and the order by the Supreme Court of India in civil appeal 2082/2011 made on 11 May 2011, has in fact assisted the government to disregard the fundamentals of adequate rehabilitation of the victims. While deciding the civil appeal, the Supreme Court diluted the principle of absolute responsibility of the state to rehabilitate persons adversely affected by the development project to "rehabilitate as far as possible".

This inferior interpretation of the principle of absolute responsibility by the court, is as demonstrated today, put to maximum exploitation by the state government, by increasing the water level, which is opposed by the villagers. Similarly the concept of rehabilitation has been reduced to monetary compensation, a principle that negates the understanding of social fabric and sustainable living, particularly given the fact that a substantial number of persons affected by the Omkareshwar Dam are from the tribal or Dalit communities that depended upon not just the patch of land that they owned or occupied as their own, which is now lost to the project, but upon the ecosystem and living patters that the region without the dam sustained and a livelihood they depended upon. It is equally trite for the court to believe that in a country like India, where corruption is rife, all those affected by the project would in fact receive the compensation amount, as suggested and awarded by the Grievance Redressal Authority.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
In the light of these facts, the AHRC urges you to intervene in the case calling upon the Government of Madhya Pradesh to stop immediately the increase in water level in the Omkareshwar Dam and to take all necessary actions with the assistance of organisations like the NBA to adequately rehabilitate those who have lost their land and livelihood to the project. It is also highly desirable that the government take all possible measures within its power to ensure a proper, acceptable and open audit of the villages that are adversely affected by the Omkareshwar project and similar other projects.

The AHRC is also writing separate letters to the UN Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment calling for further intervention in this case.

To support this appeal, please click here: 

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear __________,

INDIA: Please take immediate action to sustainably rehabilitate the evictees of Omkareshwar Hydro Electric Project in Madhya Pradesh

Name of the victim: Villagers affected by the Omkareshwar Hydro Electric Project in Madhya Pradesh, India
Name of the perpetrators:
Government of Madhya Pradesh
Date and time of the incident: Since October 2006
Place of incident: Within the project affected region of Omkareshwar Dam, Madhya Pradesh, India

I am writing to express concern regarding the case of protest held by villagers affected by the Omkareshwar Hydro Electric Project, which is part of the Narmada Valley Project.

The facts of the case reported to me are as follows:

A large group of villagers who have been evicted from their land without compensation for the construction of the Omkareshwar Dam are protesting against the illegal increase in the water level, beyond that is allowed by the Supreme Court of India. It is reported that in a unique form of protest held in East Nimaar region in Khandwa district of Madhya Pradesh state, the villagers have been sitting within the dam's catchment area claiming that they are willing to drown to death than been denied their rightful claim for adequate rehabilitation for the lands they have lost.

In the meanwhile, water level is increased gradually in the dam, that soon the water would submerge the protesters. The protest has entered the 10th day today. In a litigation decided by the Supreme Court of India and earlier by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the courts have categorically instructed the government as well as the consortium managing the dam, that the water level should not be increased beyond 196.60 meters and that all steps are to be taken, so that those who are adversely affected by the dam, particularly those who have lost land by submergence, are properly identified and compensated before the reservoir is filled to its maximum capacity. NBA reports that so far the height of water was 189 meters and now the state government has declared that it would increase the water level to 193 meters. This however is done without rehabilitating those who have lost their land to submergence, which is a violation of the commitment made by the government in court and is against the court's directives hence the protest. Civil society groups have condemned the total disregard of the government to the plight of the poor villagers.

The Narmada Valley Project, of which the Omkareshwar Dam is part of, is one of the most controversial development projects in the world. The project is plagued with proven claims of adverse environmental impacts to say the least. Allegations of - absence or partially executed and biased government or privately sponsored impact assessment studies - have rendered the actual human, environment and heritage damage caused by the entire project marred with lack of real information. The entire Narmada Valley Project cost with its projected development benefit assessed against the project's human impact cost is so widely disproportionate, that it does not make monitory or development sense to implement the project. (Narmada Valley project: Development or Destruction?; Ashish Kothari and Rajiv Bhartari, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 19, No. 22/23 (Jun. 2-9, 1984), pp. 907-909+911-920.) Yet the project is at the stage of advanced implementation, of which the Omkareshwar project, is completed.

The Omkareshwar Dam is one of the 30 large dams conceived in the Narmada Valley Project. The Omkareshwar Dam, an intra-state project for generating 520 mega watts of power, which is also projected to irrigate an estimated 147000 hectares of agricultural land, was approved by the Madhya Pradesh State Government, with an assessment that on completion of the project, 30 villages would be submerged at the full reservoir level that is, 196.60 meters.

The Government of Madhya Pradesh framed a rehabilitation and resettlement policy in 1985 (R & R policy) for the oustees of all the Narmada projects in the state. The government amended this policy from time to time vide amendments dated: 9 June, 1987; 5 September, 1989, 7 June, 1991; and 27 August 1993. The policy provided for the allotment of a minimum of 2 hectares of agricultural land; irrigation facilities at government cost; grant-in-aid for small and marginal farmers and Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe families; and to meet the entire cost of the allotted land. The policy further provided that the allotment of agricultural land would be carried out much in advance before dam construction reached crest level. The land required for allotment would be procured in the common area from the farmers having holdings of more than 4 hectares of land.

The state government obtained environmental clearance for the Omkareshwar project from the Ministry of Environment and Forest on 13 October 1993. The Ministry of Welfare granted clearance on 8 October 1993. The Planning Commission of India also granted clearance on the condition of compliance with welfare and environmental clearances vide its order dated 25 May 2001. The Central Electricity Authority accorded techno-economic clearance under the provisions of Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 on 24 July 2001. The Government of India approved and granted financial concurrence from Public Investment Board of the Planning Commission for this project on 17 May 2002. Forest clearance was granted on 20 August 2004 under the provisions of Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 for the diversion of 5829 hectares of forestlands.

In the meanwhile, the R & R Policy further stood amended on 3 July 2003, to the effect that agricultural land would be offered to the oustees "as far as possible"; and not to those who would make application in writing to receive compensation for their acquired land. The construction of the Omkareshwar dam began in 2002 and was completed in October 2006. A large number of families have been uprooted on construction of the dam up to its 190 meters height. For the dam site, a huge area of land had been acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The displaced persons were not however offered the land under the R & R Policy, as amended on 3 July 2003, rather compensation for their land was allegedly deposited in their accounts.

Narmada Bachao Andolan, had been espousing the grievances of displaced persons by filing Public Interest Litigations before the Madhya Pradesh High Court and to the Supreme Court of India from time to time and a large number of orders had been passed by the courts to redress the grievances of the oustees. When the decision was taken to increase the height of the dam, NBA filed writ petition number 4457 of 2007 before the High Court seeking a number of reliefs, inter-alia, to stop all eviction; directions for serving of life supplies such as drinking water and electricity; not to take any other coercive measures; to stop closure of the radial gates of the Omkareshwar dam above crest level of 179.60 meters; and to stop the blocking of the sluice gates below crest level, until all Project Affected Families were rehabilitated as per the R & R Policy. Further reliefs sought included the issuance of appropriate directions for an assessment by the Grievance Redressal Authority for the Omkareshwar Project of the status of relief and rehabilitation of the oustees affected at Full Reservoir Level and Back Water Level within a stipulated period.

During the pendency of the writ petition in pursuance of the orders passed by the High Court from time to time, the authorities concerned furnished a large number of reports/interim reports. The High Court after considering the said reports and submissions advanced on behalf of the parties passed the impugned judgment and order dated 21 February 2008. The High Court issued a large number of directions as interim measures, including the direction for allotment of land in lieu of land acquired and to treat the major sons of the family, as independent families for the purpose of allotment of agricultural land.

Just as it is the case of all other dams and hydro electrical projects conceived under the Narmada Valley Project, the Omkareshwar project also lacked proper assessment studies before it was conceived and during all stages of its implementation. Of an estimated 1.5 million people who would be evicted from the entire Narmada Valley Project, the Omkareshwar Dam contributes to the submergence of an estimated 30 villages that would adversely affect the livelihood of about 52,000 people. However these estimates are based on the perception that the Omkareshwar project and its implementation would stick to the permitted limits. Unfortunately, as it is in the case of many other projects in the Narmada Valley Project, the government has failed to undertake proper assessment of the villages that would be affected by the project and has repeatedly failed to compensate even those who have been identified as those who would loose their land and livelihood to the Omkareshwar project.

Until recently the water level in the Omkareshwar Dam was maintained at 189 meters. The state government however has declared that it will increase the water level to 193 meters. While it is true that the water level is within the approved limits (196.60 meters) the government has failed to adequately rehabilitate those villagers who have lost their land to submergence. The watershed litigation and the order by the Supreme Court of India in civil appeal 2082/2011 made on 11 May 2011, has in fact assisted the government to disregard the fundamentals of adequate rehabilitation of the victims. While deciding the civil appeal, the Supreme Court diluted the principle of absolute responsibility of the state to rehabilitate persons adversely affected by the development project to "rehabilitate as far as possible".

This inferior interpretation of the principle of absolute responsibility by the court, is as demonstrated today, put to maximum exploitation by the state government, by increasing the water level, which is opposed by the villagers. Similarly the concept of rehabilitation has been reduced to monetary compensation, a principle that negates the understanding of social fabric and sustainable living, particularly given the fact that a substantial number of persons affected by the Omkareshwar Dam are from the tribal or Dalit communities that depended upon not just the patch of land that they owned or occupied as their own, which is now lost to the project, but upon the ecosystem and living patters that the region without the dam sustained and a livelihood they depended upon. It is equally trite for the court to believe that in a country like India, where corruption is rife, all those affected by the project would in fact receive the compensation amount, as suggested and awarded by the Grievance Redressal Authority.

Please therefore take actions to ensure that:
1. The state government will immediately stop increasing the water level at the Omkareshwar Dam;
2. The government will immediately undertake and audit of the evicted villagers;
3. That the government will take without any further delay, all steps required to adequately rehabilitate the villagers who have lost their land to the project, on the basis of land allotted as compensation per land lost;
4. The state government will provide all medical assistance to the villagers who need such assistance after staying in water for the past 10 days.

Yours sincerely,

-------------------------------------------------

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Dr. Manmohan Singh
Prime Minster
Government of India
Room No. 148 B, South Ablock, New Delhi
INDIA
Fax: + 91 11 230116857; 23015603
Email : manmohan@sansad.nic.in

2. Mr. Shivraj Singh Chouhan
Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh
Government of Madhya Pradesh
Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh
INDIA
Fax: + 91 755 2441781; 2540501
Email : cm@mp.nic.in

3. District Collector - Khandwa (MP)
Government of Madhya Pradesh
Civil Lines, Khandwa
Madhya Pradesh
INDIA
Fax: + 91 733 2223333
Email : dm@mpkhandwa.mp.nic.in

4. Chairperson
National Human Rights Commission of India
Faridkot House, Copernicus Marg
New Delhi 110 001
INDIA
Fax: +91 11 2334 0016
Email: chairnhrc@nic.in


Thank you

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-162-2012
Countries :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.