This article is also available at
www.downtoearth.org.in, the online edition of Down To Earth magazine, a leading
science & environment fortnightly published by Society for Environmental
Communications.
The
Story
Legal
landmine
Government
support to Vedanta’s alumina project in Orissa creates more uproar; company pays
token fine
15/09/2005
SATYASUNDAR BARIK
the recently concluded session of the Orissa
legislative assembly once again witnessed a furore over the Rs 4,500 crore
alumina refinery project of Vedanta Alumina Limited (val),
a subsidiary of Sterlite Industries (India) Limited (siil), in the poverty-stricken Kalahandi district. Four
youths from the district disrupted the house’s proceedings by shouting slogans
against the venture from the assembly’s visitors’ gallery. In an earlier
session, chief minister Naveen Patnaik had got his leg fractured when members of
the opposition Congress party created a pandemonium in the well of the house
opposing the deal. Many environmentalists and the civil society also charge
val with violating forest laws and human rights. Both
the Union ministry of environment and forests (moef) and the state government are accused of acting hand in
glove with val, disregarding environmental concerns.
val had, on June 7, 2003, entered into a
memorandum of understanding with the Orissa government to set up an alumina
complex, comprising a one metric tonne per annum (mtpa)
alumina refinery plant, a three mtpa bauxite mining
facility and a 75 megawatt captive power plant at Lanjigarh. To feed its
refinery, val signed a lease agreement with Orissa
Mining Corporation Limited in October 2004 to jointly mine bauxite from
Niyamgiri hills. Mining is to be conducted over a forest area of 672.018
hectares (ha) situated in Niyamgiri Reserve Forest of Kalahandi (South) Forest
Division, Khambesi and Niyamgiri Proposed Reserve Forest and Jungle Block
(Protected Forest) of Rayagada Forest Division. Orissa Industrial Infrastructure
Development Corporation Limited has already acquired 313.8 ha land from six
villages (Kinari, Borbhatta, Bandhaguda, Kothadwar, Bundle and Sindhabhal). The
project would also cover over 26.1 ha of village forests.
Why
the opposition? A study by Orissa-based forum Environment Protection Group (epg)
points out that bauxite deposits are situated on the upper portion of
hills as porous and permeable ‘caps’ that are good retainers of ground water.
“Located at great heights, these deposits effectively act as overhead aquifers,
similar to the glaciers in the Himalayas, feeding rivers with water…Mining of
bauxite will destroy the aquifers,” it explains. The Central Empowered Committee
(cec), created by the Supreme Court (sc) to deal with a range of forest-related matters, affirms
this in its report: “The hills form the origin of Vamsadhara river. The rivulets
coming across these hills are sources of water for local communities. Any mining
in this area is bound to destroy its biodiversity and affect the availability of
water for local people.” epg also seeks to underline
that most of the 25 commonly found wildlife species in the area belong to the
International Union for the Conservation of Nature list of endangered species.
Niyamgiri Hill is also believed to be the only abode of one of most
primitive tribes, the Dongria Kondh, of which there are only about 7,000 people
left. The project will deprive them of their livelihood. The tribes of Orissa
already suffer a lot because the state has not settled their land rights. They
are at the mercy of the forest department, which treats them as encroachers. In
this, cec has equally hurt them. cec has earlier expressed grave concern on Orissa forest
department not owning and controlling forest, thereby disregarding the
non-settlement of tribal rights.
MoEF’s a party
The val project comprises mining and
refinery. While environmental clearance for mining is pending, moef worked overtime to clear the
refinery project on September 22, 2004. This violated the environmental impact
assessment (eia) rules , under
which projects can’t be cleared in parts. There are charges that the
refinery’s construction commenced before September 22. “It is a clear violation
of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 (fca) , as the
area includes around 58 ha of forestland…The state machinery backed the scheme,”
says Biswajit Mohanty, secretary, Wildlife Society of Orissa, an ngo.
The fact that the refinery would cover
forestland was suppressed in the application for environmental clearance.
Neither moef, nor the state
government bothered to verify; otherwise, the project would have required
clearance under fca, which would have delayed it and
also necessitated payment of compensation. moef is also accused of violating its own circular that
prohibits permission to projects requiring diversion of forestlands in Schedule
V areas, which enjoy special constitutional protection to benefit tribal
populations.
Also, as per fca guidelines, if
parts of a project involve the use of forestland, construction work of even
those parts which involve the use of non-forest land cannot begin unless
complete clearance is acquired. moef,
then, shouldn’t have permitted the company to start work on the refinery,
even if the company claimed it did not involve the use of forestland. Even when
legal proceedings, to which moef was a party, started in the cec ,
the ministry did not try to halt construction at the site, which still continues
at a breakneck pace.
The state government too
The
state government’s complicity is evident in that the district collector in his
notice to acquire private lands had categorised some plots as “village forest
lands”, annulling the possibility of private ownership. Eyebrows have also been
raised over the way the state government and val
treaded to get the scheme implemented. At the time of the October 2004
pact, neither of the two possessed even a single mine. “How can anybody enter
into an agreement to deliver property which it does not own?” questions
Mohanty.
In December 2004, three public interest litigations were filed
in the sc against the state government: one by Mohanty,
another by R Shreedar of ngo Mines, Minerals and
People, and a third by Prafulla Samantra, a tribal rights activist. sc’s cec sent a two member
fact-finding team to the site on December 19, 2004. The team submitted a report
pointing out that an alumina refinery could damage the area’s rich biodiversity
and affect the source of two major south Orissa rivers. val
approached the sc in May 2005 to quash cec proceedings. But the court held
that the proceedings would continue; it also directed moef to file its pending affidavit
with the cec and asked cec to
submit its final report by July 2005. cec chairperson
and a member inspected the site again on June 14-15, 2005. Their report is
awaited.
During the cec hearing, the petitioners
alleged that moef and state
government had acted in haste to help the company at any cost, due to several
factors. While the incremental demand for alumina in 2004-2005 was estimated at
5.4 million tonnes, the supply was just 2.7 million tonnes. Also, metal analysts
had predicted that metal prices would touch Rs 16,280 per tonne and further
increase to Rs 19,360 per tonne in 2005. In addition, siil’s alumina refinery in Chhatisgarh was short in bauxite
ore supply and siil had also embarked on a major
expansion of its Korba refinery — hence more alumina requirement.
Damage control
The state government has been
trying to appear impartial ever since cec’s initial
report that mentioned violation of forest law. In a change of stance, Patnaik
recently admitted that val had illegally felled 35
trees on village forestlands at Lanjigarh. Four encroachment cases have been
booked against val and a fine of Rs 11,471 collected
from it. “It’s a cruel joke. The state government, which has all along been
taking the side of val, is trying to present its
impartiality by imposing a fine of a mere Rs 10,000,” thunders Daitari Naik of
Niyamgiri Surakshya Samiti, a local ngo .
Meanwhile, val has already invested over Rs
2,200 crore for the refinery. “It is trying to quickly finish construction so
that it can plead before the sc that it should be
allowed to go ahead with mining too,” explains Ritwick Dutta, counsel for two
petitioners. But the court held that the proceedings
would continue; it also directed moef
to file its pending affidavit with the cec and
asked cec to submit its final report by July 2005.
cec chairperson and a member inspected the site again
on June 14-15, 2005. Their report is awaited.
During the cec hearing, the petitioners alleged that moef and state government had acted
in haste to help the company at any cost, due to several factors. While the
incremental demand for alumina in 2004-2005 was estimated at 5.4 million tonnes,
the supply was just 2.7 million tonnes. Also, metal analysts had predicted that
metal prices would touch Rs 16,280 per tonne and further increase to Rs 19,360
per tonne in 2005. In addition, siil’s alumina refinery
in Chhatisgarh was short in bauxite ore supply and siil
had also embarked on a major expansion of its Korba refinery — hence more
alumina requirement.
Damage control
The state
government has been trying to appear impartial ever since cec’s initial report that mentioned violation of forest law.
In a change of stance, Patnaik recently admitted that val
had illegally felled 35 trees on village forestlands at Lanjigarh. Four
encroachment cases have been booked against val and a
fine of Rs 11,471 collected from it. “It’s a cruel joke. The state government,
which has all along been taking the side of val, is
trying to present its impartiality by imposing a fine of a mere Rs 10,000,”
thunders Daitari Naik of Niyamgiri Surakshya Samiti, a local ngo .
Meanwhile, val has
already invested over Rs 2,200 crore for the refinery. “It is trying to quickly
finish construction so that it can plead before the sc
that it should be allowed to go ahead with mining too,” explains Ritwick
Dutta, counsel for two petitioners.
Copyright © 2002 Society for
Environmental Communications
Down To Earth
is a science and environment fortnightly published by the Society for
Environmental Communications, India. Subscribe to Down To
Earth to read some of the best articles on environment, sustainability and
development.
Click here for
information on advertising opportunities with Down to Earth online, or E-mail:
[email protected]