SACW #2 | Oct. 5, 2006 | Pakistan, Bangladesh, India: Big money SEZ grab prime land

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Wire - Pack #2 | October 5, 2006 | Dispatch No. 2300

[1]  Pakistan: No fair play in land acquisition (Saifur Rahman Sherani)
[2]  Bangladesh: Phulbari and the people's verdict (Anu Muhammad)
[3]  India: The great land grab (Praful Bidwai)
[4]  India: Fishworkers - Boatmen Assert Their 
Right To Water and Fisheries in Narmada Valley ()

____


[1] 

Dawn
September 29

NO FAIR PLAY IN LAND ACQUISITION

by Dr Saifur Rahman Sherani

LAND acquisition for private- and public-sector 
projects is becoming an increasingly contentious 
issue. In the past, even mega projects like 
Tarbela and Mangla generated less controversy 
than some recent schemes of vastly lower profile. 
Small, isolated campaigns for compensation and 
resettlement continued long after the dams became 
operational but went almost unnoticed.

It is a sign of the times that the Punjab 
government's acquisition of land for a Mercedes 
assembly plant (Dawn, July 22, 2006), as well as 
the plight of affected landowners, received wide 
press coverage two months ago. 'A questionable 
land deal' (Dawn editorial, July 23) raised real 
issues and particularly stressed the need for 
transparency and public information.

The last few years have seen the emergence of a 
vibrant property market, courtesy a monumental 
increase in housing projects with a seemingly 
insatiable appetite for land. The entire district 
of Gwadar - comprising largely barren terrain 
devoid of water, vegetation or infrastructure - 
became prime land shortly after work on a deep 
seaport in the area started in earnest. The urge 
for possession was so overpowering that land in 
Gwadar fetched prices comparable to those 
commanded by prime urban real estate. In Lahore, 
a strategically sensitive - and therefore 
vulnerable - area close to the Indian border has 
been converted into a housing estate where 
property is available at astronomical prices.

The thriving property market has created powerful 
land mafias that can seize land almost anywhere 
in the country with impunity. With the market 
rife with deceit, fraud and extortion, there has 
been a sharp increase in land-related litigation, 
a boon perhaps for the legal profession.

Matters are complicated by the fact that there is 
no specific law regulating the purchase of 
individually owned land by private-sector firms 
engaged in the business of housing schemes. 
Private housing societies obtain land mostly 
through voluntary sale, but those who refuse to 
come to terms often find themselves on the 
receiving end of strong-arm tactics. Some lose 
their assets or suffer in other ways for not 
toeing the line.

There is, however, a Land Acquisition Act of 1894 
(LAA) that governs the expropriation of private 
land by the government for public purposes and 
for non-state companies. Part VII of the LAA 
(sections 38 to 44) deals with "acquisition of 
land for companies" but the term 'company' is 
loosely defined. It includes entities registered 
under the "Companies Ordinance, 1984 or under the 
[British] Companies Acts, 1862 to 1890, or 
incorporated by an Act of Parliament of the 
United Kingdom or by a Pakistan law, or by Royal 
Charter or Letters Patent and includes a society 
registered under the Societies Registration Act, 
1860, and a Registered Society within the meaning 
of the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912 [LAA 
section 3(e)]."

Such property-acquisition exercises tend to be 
carried out without any consideration of justice 
for the affected individuals and families. The 
person whose land is taken away is defined in the 
LAA as someone who is "interested in 
compensation". Nothing could be more callous.

The "interested" person is entitled to 
compensation determined by the collector in the 
light of market rates. The LAA has provisions for 
compensation for buildings, trees and other 
assets tied to the earth. Compensation at the 
market rate is often determined in relation to 
the average price of land sold in the area in the 
current year or over the last three years. Prices 
recorded in land mutations for that period are 
used to compute the average.

Mutation deeds show great distortions in prices, 
for two reasons. If there is a fear that someone 
may challenge the mutation under the law of 
pre-emption, the price shown in the deed is 
fictitiously inflated. A person who successfully 
challenges the mutation then has to pay the 
inflated price of the land. And if there is no 
fear of the mutation being contested, the price 
shown is slashed to absurd levels to avoid the 
high cost of mutation tax.

The average price calculated is usually the 
primary indicator of the market value of land 
when it is acquired under the LAA. Anyone 
challenging the award of compensation can go to 
court for a settlement. In the meantime, the 
collector will acquire the land and deposit 
compensation in court.

In many countries, land is acquired in this 
manner by governments for projects funded by the 
international financial institutions (IFIs). 
Projects which dispossess people and ruin their 
livelihoods have been criticised on this count 
despite their other wider benefits.

Beginning in the mid-1980s, the World Bank began 
developing policy guidelines for acquisition to 
mitigate the harmful effects on the losers of 
land. Now, all IFIs have developed detailed 
guidelines on the subject and loan-recipient 
countries must follow these recommendations. 
Instead of land acquisition, the IFIs introduced 
the concept of resettlement, calling for far 
broader action that includes compensation at 
replacement value (of land, structures, trees, 
crops and all assets and facilities tied to the 
earth), restoration of livelihoods and provision 
of living standards at par with those enjoyed 
prior to land acquisition. The land loser is 
described as an "affected person", as opposed to 
a person "interested in compensation".

The IFIs stress the rights of all affected 
persons whether they are landowners or users 
without proprietary rights, such as tenants, 
graziers and others entitled to usufruct of land 
in any manner. Illegal occupants of land are also 
treated as legal title holders. Even though the 
loss of community and social networks cannot be 
compensated for - and here the main sufferers are 
women - this is still a major achievement and 
gives a human face to development.

The resettlement plan is required by the IFIs at 
the project preparation stage and it entails high 
costs usually not covered by the loan. Affected 
persons must be consulted and provided with all 
relevant information. Since government officers 
are accustomed to just passing orders, these 
provisions are often circumvented in project 
implementation.

On projects requiring small-scale land 
acquisition, the IFIs frequently do not monitor 
the acquisition process and in many cases people 
are dispossessed without fair compensation. On 
large projects, the resettlement plan is followed 
but is often manipulated for personal gain.

The Ghazi Barotha hydro-power project is a case 
in point. The total land acquired for the project 
was 11,125 acres, most of which was riverbed, and 
its cost was estimated at Rs1.8 billion. A 
collusion of vested interests, including 
government officials and a few landowners, 
resulted in the acquisition cost escalating to 
Rs7.5 billion. NAB investigated the case and 
found that the exchequer suffered a loss of Rs4 
billion on the project. The Chotiari dam in 
Sanghar district allegedly experienced similar 
corruption in land acquisition.

The Lyari Expressway project funded by the 
Government of Pakistan is a particularly tragic 
case. The IFIs reportedly refused funding because 
of the absence of a resettlement plan. The 
project is likely to displace 200,000 persons in 
low-income areas of Karachi. The poverty, misery, 
livelihood losses and social, economic and 
psychological problems caused by this project 
beggar description.

Since 2002, every new phase of this project has 
been heralded by the arrival of demolition squads 
supported by paramilitary forces to evict people 
from their homes by force. They have been offered 
80-yard plots, often in undeveloped areas, and 
Rs50,000 towards construction costs. Over 25,000 
houses have been expropriated under this project 
and hundreds are demolished periodically. Not 
everyone who has been dispossessed has received 
compensation, and the 'successful' ones have 
allegedly had to pay for it. Can anyone construct 
even a room with Rs50,000? Is there any element 
of justice and fair play in this brutal 
expropriation of property? The LAA and the 
resettlement plan are two extremes: one is simple 
expropriation and the other calls for 
extraordinary compensation. The Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) has prepared a draft 
resettlement policy and ordinance, titled 
'Project Implementation and Resettlement of 
Affected Persons Ordinance 2001', which is a 
major improvement on the LAA and also covers land 
acquisition by housing projects. Whether this 
draft, languishing in cold storage for five long 
years, will ever reach parliament is a moot 
question.

The EPA and its donors should have known that 
land acquisition is a provincial subject not 
included in the concurrent list of the 
Constitution. Article 152, relating to 
"acquisition of land for federal purposes", 
clearly states that if land is required by the 
Centre it will ask the provincial government to 
acquire the same on its behalf.

Land records and rights are highly complex 
subjects dealt with by the trained staff of the 
land revenue department while the EPA has no such 
professional skills. The draft prepared by the 
EPA should be sent to the provincial governments 
for comment, amendment and legislation. It is 
high time that justice and fair play became part 
and parcel of the process of land acquisition.

_____


[2] 


The Daily star
September 24, 2006
  	 
PHULBARI AND THE PEOPLE'S VERDICT
by Anu Muhammad

The US ambassador in Bangladesh termed the 
Phulbari uprising as "nonsense." I was not 
surprised. We know very well how the US 
administration looks at people around the world; 
we know how repressive rulers are being 
patronized by them to ensure resource plundering 
from the "poor" countries. We know how they show 
their might to implement projects of mass 
destruction (PMD) around the world.

Historically they have always been behind PMDs. 
The Phulbari open pit mining coal project of Asia 
Energy Corporation (AEC) is one of them (for a 
detailed discussion on the project, see 
meghbarta.org). Therefore, the US envoy's strong 
support for the project is consistent. We also 
understand the British and Australian envoys' 
concern.

However, I was shocked to see a series of 
articles, written by Bangladeshis, living at home 
and abroad, in The Daily Star and some other 
dailies. I wonder how informed, educated people, 
who are supposed to know about development around 
the world, about human potential and human 
suffering, to have the ability to identify right 
and wrong, to understand cost and benefit, could 
be so insensitive, so cruel to the people of 
their own country?

For them the cries of thousands of people to 
cancel Asia Energy's disastrous project are 
comparable to the irrational move by a group of 
students for postponement of examination dates, 
the displacement of 100,000 people from their 
lives and livelihoods is comparable to 
displacement of hundreds to build a highway.

For them, this is capitalism and development, 
therefore, we have to accept it. For them, Asia 
Energy was going to contribute toward development 
in Bangladesh, and the people of that area and 
the national committee were the troublemakers, 
anti-development tall-talkers. For them, Asia 
Energy's views and promises are trustworthy, but 
analyses and views of experts opposing the open 
pit mining (OPM) are not even readable, not to 
mention about the views of local people.

In all those articles we find sentences from 
AEC's long promises, but no mention of the facts, 
figures, or analyses which reveal OPM's 
anti-people and anti-environmental nature. For 
them, giving away a coal mine to a foreign 
company is a much better choice for Bangladesh 
then to keep it for utilization by the country. 
For them, the best utilization of coal could be 
to allow the company to take a huge part of it 
because that would bring some royalty income, and 
the development of roads and ports. For them, it 
is foolish to think of developing our own 
expertise and ability for the fullest utilization 
of natural resources. They are in favour of the 
fullest extraction of coal and its drainage to 
give maximum profit to a foreign company and, 
therefore, against the fullest utilization of 
coal resources for the people and the country.

I am aware of corporate power; there are piles of 
records showing how corporates create lobbyists, 
how they spend huge amounts of money in public 
relation activities. Also, I am aware of 
ideological hegemony, of so-called 
"developmentalism" in corporate terms. These 
writers, clearly imbued with corporate vision and 
interest, were so upset with the victory of the 
people that they could not keep their words in 
check. They used slang and expressed the worst 
possible hatred of the organizers and 
participants of that uprising, and gave wrong 
facts and impressions to the readers.

For the benefit of readers, therefore, I feel 
obliged to give a narration of the occurrences 
before and after August 26. This program on 
August 26 was not a sudden one. It was the result 
of a series of events; the company's moves to 
ensure maximum profit as well as the people's 
reaction to ensure their own safeguards.

The people of Phulbari are not so foolish that 
they will dance to the tune of 
"anti-development," "anti-state conspirators," 
and "talkers" like us. Actually, it was they who 
initiated the struggle as a reaction to the moves 
of AEC, and they eventually contacted us when 
they were looking for a national body that was 
working to preserve national interest and peoples 
lives.

It was the National Committee to Protect Oil, 
Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Port that had 
been working hard on scrutinizing deals on 
natural resources since 1998, and raising their 
voices against bad deals.

On the people's invitation, we first visited 
Phulbari in mid-2005, and after witnessing their 
fear we investigated AEC's documents. Studying 
AEC's own documents, we discovered the intensity 
of danger for the people in the region and to the 
country's economy. In October 2005, we had a 
meeting with experts and had intensive 
discussions on our working paper: "Phulbari Coal 
Project: Whose Fain Whose Losses." That was the 
beginning from our part. By then, AEC had 
submitted the EIA (but before submitting that 
they were given environmental clearance).

Discussion and debates continued. As the days 
passed, we became more and more certain about the 
disastrous nature of the project. We embarked on 
a road march from March 23 to take the facts to 
the people of other regions as well. On March 25, 
there was a big gathering of about 20,000 to 
25,000 Bangali and Saontal women and men in 
Phulbari.

In "Phulbari Declaration" of that road march we stated categorically that:

"Bangladesh does have the need for coal, need for 
fuel, need for electricity, need for development 
and these are presented by the plunderers as 
arguments justifying the project. We want to 
clearly emphasize that these are precisely the 
same reasons why we are making the demand for 
scrapping the project. The project is intended to 
transfer ownership of the valuable coal and other 
mineral resources from the hands of Bangladesh 
people to the plunderer, an inexperienced and 
imposter company named Asia Energy.

"If the project is implemented the coalmine will 
become AEC's property, a small portion (proposal 
was one-third) of extracted coal, to be purchased 
at an exorbitant price, will be offered to 
Bangladesh. Besides, the open pit mining method 
will result in destruction of a prosperous area 
comprising of the thanas of Phulbari, Parbatipur, 
Birampur, and Nawabganj, the cessation of all 
agricultural and other economic activities, 
extinction of schools, colleges, hospitals, 
places of worship and loss of archaeological 
treasures, including eviction of lakhs of people, 
and desertification of a vast area of about 600 
sq km. And pollution of rivers, canals and 
wetlands in the vicinity. Those who attempt to 
portray this project of destruction and plunder 
as 'development,' and propagate the view that 
foreign investments are essential ingredients of 
'development,' are committing a crime.

"On the one hand the life of people in Phulbari 
and surrounding thanas would be ruined, while on 
the other, AEC would gain a huge sum through 
plunder. Those who are prepared to indulge in 
such vicious profit making through siphoning of 
non-renewable resources, born 270-280 million 
years, are the enemy of the people. At the 
different meetings and contacts held during the 
three-day march, a demand has been raised for 
putting the people's enemies to trial. This 
august assembly declares that we shall never let 
our lives and property be sacrificed at the altar 
of racketeers' profit schemes. We shall not let 
local and foreign plunderers plunder our precious 
coal resources.

The people of Bangladesh, and particularly the 
people of Dinajpur, are ever vigilant guardians 
of their resources. We pronounce the following 
demands, from this mammoth gathering of Phulbari, 
to the government of Bangladesh:

     * All secret agreements with AEC shall be scrapped.

     * The ministers and bureaucrats responsible 
for this give-away contract must be penalized 
through forfeiture of property, and be subject to 
exemplary punishment.

     * The recently promulgated coal policy aimed 
at facilitating plunder and appropriation by AEC 
and Tata shall be annulled and a new energy 
policy shall be prepared for maximum utilization 
of oil-gas-coal resources by building a skilled 
human resource and institutional base.

This meeting demands immediate expulsion of Asia 
Energy from Phulbari or else the people would be 
forced to take stern steps including 'gherao' 
unless the demands raised in this meeting are 
fulfilled immediately."

Therefore, we, together with the inhabitants of 
the area, informed the company and the government 
about the people's opinion much earlier. 
Nevertheless, neither the government nor the 
company showed any respect to the people's will. 
They proceeded with the plan to create havoc. 
While the government was saying that no final 
contract had been signed, the AEC was expanding 
their fieldwork, trying to bribe people in many 
ways and therefore made people suspicious and 
terrified. In that perspective, the gherao 
program of August 26 was declared with the hope 
that both the parties would take necessary steps 
to cancel the project before the dateline. They 
did not.

On August 26, 60,000 to 70,000 people were 
marching in Phulbari to say NO to AEC's big open 
pit mining (OPM) project. People wanted to give a 
strong message to AEC that they were unwanted in 
the region, and also in the country. They were 
clear in expressing their verdict that no OPM 
would be allowed in the area. People were angry, 
nevertheless disciplined. They were gathered 
under the banner of the National Committee.

Police and BDR created a barricade in front of 
Choto Jamuna River Bridge about a kilometer from 
the Asia Energy office. Before reaching there at 
around 3.30 pm, we were first hit by several tear 
gas shells and were lathi-charged, but, after the 
initial chaos, we gathered again and marched 
towards the barricade. We stopped there and on 
behalf of the people I read out the declaration 
and Engineer SM Shaheedullah concluded the 
program. It was around 4 pm.

That declaration of the gherao program said:

"Since, Phulbari coal project is an arrangement 
to take away coal resources from the people to 
hand over to a foreign company, and since OPM, a 
profitable means for coal extraction for the 
company, would destroy the region and would 
create a disaster for the peoples lives and 
livelihoods, we are hereby declaring the peoples 
verdict that we do not want a project that would 
destroy our lives, ecology and livelihoods. We do 
not want a project that would plunder our 
resources. We will not give one inch of our land 
to plunder our resources. This project must be 
cancelled immediately. We urge the government to 
protect people's lives and resources, not a 
company's interest.

"In order to grab resources Asia Energy has been 
engaged in the area in fraudulent activities, 
bribing, conspiring, and cheating. In order to 
create chaos and violence in a peaceful rally, 
the company and its collaborators tried to spread 
rumours and panic for the last few days. We are 
hereby declaring people's verdict, this company 
is thoroughly anti-people and its existence will 
cause more harm and violence here, therefore it 
must stop all its activities tonight and must 
leave this place. They are completely unwanted 
here.

"If they do not leave by tomorrow morning they 
will face social boycott. No shop will sell 
anything to them, no transport will take them, 
and no neighbourhood will allow them to carry out 
criminal activities. If Asia Energy do not leave 
this place immediately and if the project is not 
cancelled immediately we will go for further 
programs."

The huge rally endorsed the declaration and the 
whole program ended peacefully. We came down from 
the temporary stage and with the local leaders 
walked down to the other side of the barricade. 
Only 200 yards from there a group of people 
wanted to hear more about the program. I was 
explaining, and suddenly, at that moment, we 
heard sound of gunfire from the bridge. BDR did 
that.

It was around 4.30pm. There were about a hundred 
people on both sides of the bridge, they were 
curious to see what was happening there. Nothing 
happened there to rationalize firing on the 
people. We have reason to suspect that the firing 
by BDR was deliberate, the "authority" had prior 
plans to kill people to create terror in the area.

They probably thought we would break the 
barricade and would not be able to control the 
gathering, so firing on us would be justified. 
However, since we did not break the barricade and 
did not create any violence despite provocation, 
the plan was going to be spoiled, and therefore 
on our return they hurriedly went into action. 
About 20 people were hit by bullets, 5 persons 
were killed and several hundreds were injured.

Killing did not stop people from saying NO, 
rather protests spread countrywide. Women, young 
and old, came out from their weak shelters to 
face aggressive BDR. We found the streets full of 
agitating people, a majority of whom were women . 
From day two, people from adjacent thanas started 
coming in thousands to express their solidarity. 
After four days, being unable to stop the 
spreading anger, the government was compelled to 
sign an agreement with the National Committee, 
where they made commitment for not allowing open 
pit mining any time anywhere in the country. The 
government also declared that it would take 
necessary actions to cancel Phulbari coal project 
and to say good-bye to AEC. It was a victory for 
the people; it was a victory for the country.

The people who are embedded with companies like 
AEC used to see and enjoy the power of plunder. 
But we witnessed people's power, power of the 
powerless, and power of collectivity. Embedded 
persons may see this as disaster since, for them, 
corporate interest must be put above everything 
else, no matter what happens to people or the 
country. For them, whatever FDI corporates do to 
maximize profits that must be the best for 
people, there is no other alternative.

Experiences of many countries of Africa and South 
America, rich in resources but ugly in poverty 
and repression, is irrelevant to them. They 
consider people's cry against genocidal projects 
as "politics" and harmful for "economics." But 
facts and figures, the science, clearly show that 
natural resources in Bangladesh, like in many 
other countries, have turned into a liability, 
and a source of danger for the people, not due to 
lack of FDI but because of it.

A vicious local-global alliance has been working 
on plundering in the name of FDI.

People are not always passive and fatalist like 
this alliance wants them to be. People of 
Phulbari, by sacrificing their lives, have halted 
the process of making PMDs in Bangladesh. That is 
their best gift to the country. They have written 
the people's verdict in blood: people will not 
accept any FDI that goes against the interest of 
the people; second, people will not honour any 
contracts secretly signed by the commission 
agents, keeping people in the dark and against 
their will; and third, natural resources are 
common good, this cannot be privatized for 
corporate profit, but must be used for the 
people's need.

Anu Muhammad is the Member Secretary of National 
Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, 
Power and Port.



_____


[3]

Frontline
Sept. 09-22, 2006

THE GREAT LAND GRAB

by Praful Bidwai

Huge swathes of land are being handed over to 
corporations in `sweetheart' deals and scams 
centred on Special Economic Zones.

PICTURES: P. V. SIVAKUMAR

ANDHRA PRADESH CHIEF Minister Y.S. Rajasekhara 
Reddy addressing delegates at a seminar on 
Special Economic Zones in Hyderabad. A file 
picture.


THE year 2006 will go down in history as one in 
which India witnessed the launching of the Great 
Land Grab, involving the transfer of 
mind-boggling quantities of both agricultural and 
urban land to giant corporations. The year opened 
ominously - with the Kalinganagar firing in 
Orissa, killing 12 Adivasis protesting against 
the acquisition of their land at throwaway prices 
for the construction of a steel mill.

This year also saw the notification of Rules 
under the Special Economic Zones (SEZs) Act, 
2005, which will create up to 300 privileged 
enclaves, each with thousands of acres. 
Simultaneously came efforts to flesh out the 
Rs.50,000-crore Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban 
Renewal Mission (NURM) inaugurated last December, 
which will drastically alter the urban 
development scenario.

This year also saw the emergence of popular 
mobilisations against SEZs, especially in Dadri, 
near Ghaziabad in Uttar Pradesh, and in Haryana 
and Maharashtra. The V.P. Singh-led movement 
against the Dadri SEZ, an Anil Ambani group 
project backed by the Mulayam Singh Yadav 
government, is creating new political divides and 
reshaping party equations in Uttar Pradesh. The 
SEZs have precipitated tensions inside the United 
Progressive Alliance (UPA), and rifts in the 
Union Cabinet. The year might end with the UPA 
ruing what could turn out to be one of its 
greatest political blunders.

Actually, three processes are under way 
transferring control over land in a massive way 
to corporations and private interests in pursuit 
of profit. In addition to SEZs and NURM, there is 
the colonisation of land in the distant suburbs 
and outer peripheries of metropolitan 
agglomerations by private developers and 
builders. This land is being sold by the urban 
development authorities.

This unbridled privatisation of land for purely 
commercial use devoid of public purpose is now 
occurring in almost all big cities. It is fairly 
advanced in the major metropolises.

For instance, Ghaziabad's Dehat Morcha says that 
in the National Capital Region (NCR) around 
Delhi, over 4.20 lakh acres (1 acre = 0.4 
hectares) have been acquired by government 
agencies which plan to sell the land to property 
developers and corporate houses.

The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) has 
recently acquired one lakh acres for transfer to 
builders. The Noida and the Greater Noida 
Authorities have acquired some 80,000 acres 
abutting Delhi, and Hudco 40,000 acres in 
Faridabad in Haryana. Similarly, thousands of 
acres are being bought between Ghaziabad and Garh 
Mukteshwar from farmers at rates as low as Rs.50 
a square metre. Prevalent market rates are 20 to 
100 times higher.

This process will soon unfold into colonisation 
of rural land on an unprecedented scale - the 
Indian version, albeit a more intrusive and 
predatory one, of upper middle class-led 
suburbanisation like, say, that in the United 
States.

Land privatisation has not yet been consummated. 
But property prices have already risen so high 
under speculative pressure that it is virtually 
impossible in the entire NCR to buy even a modest 
flat for under Rs.20 lakhs. For those who cannot 
afford it - and that is the majority in a country 
with a current per capita monthly income of under 
Rs.2,000 - the only alternative is a slum.

However, even this iniquity pales into 
insignificance beside the drive to establish 
SEZs, which is gathering unbelievable speed. 
Between last November and February, the number of 
SEZs cleared by the government rose from 61 to 
117, or at the rate of almost one approval a day. 
Right now, the approved number stands at 150.

Last July, India had 28 SEZs in operation, most 
of them export-oriented. They accounted for just 
5.1 per cent of India's exports. Tamil Nadu had 
the highest number (7), followed by Gujarat (5). 
The Commerce Ministry expects 94 SEZs to become 
operational in the next 18 months, 22 of them in 
six months. It wants a total of 300.

Many of these are multi-product SEZs, each of 
which will colonise 10,000 to 35,000 acres of 
land. They also include single-product or 
sector-specific zones, varying from 25 to 250 
acres. The government has 225 more SEZ 
applications from overseas companies as well as 
Indian corporates like the Ambani brothers, both 
of whom aspire to be big players, Unitech, 
Adanis, Sahara, DLF, Tatas, Mahindras, Hindustan 
Construction and so on.

REVENUE LOSS

The SEZs' rationale is to create incentives for 
exports through huge tax breaks and an 
"internationally competitive" business 
environment. SEZs are duty-free enclaves and 
considered "foreign territories" for the purpose 
of trade operations, duties and tariffs. They are 
meant to attract foreign investment because of 
the high tax-free profits that units located in 
them can generate. Such units can import capital 
goods and raw materials without licence or 
levies. They need not pay the terminal excise 
duty. They have unrestricted access to domestic 
markets. In SEZs, 100 per cent foreign direct 
investment (FDI) will be allowed in manufacturing 
through the "automatic" route. Profits can be 
repatriated freely.

SEZ tax concessions are handsome even by banana 
republic standards. Export units will get a 100 
per cent tax holiday for five years, a 50 per 
cent tax break for five more years, and a further 
five-year tax break on production based on 
reinvested profits. SEZ developers will enjoy a 
tax holiday for 10 years. These, and the import 
duties forgone, will inflict a loss running into 
Rs.90,000 crores, according to Finance Ministry 
estimates.

Such losses are unconscionable on a total 
investment of roughly Rs.100,000 crores. However, 
the Commerce Ministry is hell-bent on pushing 
through these sweetheart deals with industrial 
magnates and real estate developers. It claims, 
on the basis of rosy, unconvincing assumptions, 
that the exchequer will eventually gain Rs.44,000 
crores in additional taxes.

The Finance Ministry and the Reserve Bank of 
India (RBI) seem far closer to the truth. The 
SEZs are certain to be used as tax havens, 
especially by industries such as Business Process 
Outsourcing (BPO), whose existing tax holidays 
are running out.

The Reserve Bank of India says that large tax 
incentives can be justified only if SEZ units 
establish strong "backward and forward linkages 
with the domestic economy" - a doubtful 
proposition. Even the International Monetary 
Fund's (IMF) Chief Economist Raghuram Rajan has 
warned: "Not only will [the SEZs] ... make the 
government forgo revenue it can ill afford to 
lose, they also offer firms an incentive to shift 
existing production to the new zones at 
substantial cost to society."

As much as 75 per cent of the SEZ area can be 
used for non-core activities, including 
development of residential or commercial 
properties, shopping malls and hospitals. 
Developers will surely use this to make money via 
the real estate route rather through export 
promotion. This represents a potentially 
humongous urban property racket of incalculable 
dimensions. India will see a multiplication of 
"Gurgaon-style" development, under the aegis of 
big builders such as DLF, Marathon, Rahejas, 
Unitech, City Parks and Dewan.

Neither the international nor the Indian 
experience with SEZs has been particularly happy. 
Globally, only a handful of SEZs, of the hundreds 
that exist, have generated substantial exports, 
along with significant domestic spin-offs in 
demand or technology upgradation. For each 
successful Shannon (Ireland) or Shenzhen (China), 
there are 10 failures - in the Philippines, 
Malaysia, Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Sri Lanka, 
Bangladesh, why, even India. A 1998 report by the 
Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) on export 
processing zones (EPZs) says: "Customs duty 
amounting to Rs. 7,500 crores was forgone for 
achieving net foreign exchange earning of 
Rs.4,700 crores... ."

Studies on the Santa Cruz Electronics EPZ show 
extremely high rates of labour exploitation and 
job insecurity, especially of female workers, 
poor technology absorption, and dubious long-term 
benefits. Going by past experience, the promise 
of a million new jobs in SEZs means very little. 
All of India's 28 SEZs have together produced 
only 100,650 jobs.

PREDATORY RELATIONSHIP

The SEZs will also be socially retrograde. No 
labour laws will apply to them. Workers will 
enjoy no freedoms and no rights, including the 
fundamental right of association and peaceful 
protest. SEZs will be exempt from environmental 
impact assessment. They will be under no 
obligation to employ local people or share 
profits with them.

Just the contrary, the SEZs will have a largely 
predatory relationship with their environment and 
its people. They will deplete groundwater and 
other resources. They will be islands of 
prosperity in a sea of deprivation and agrarian 
distress.

To top it all, the SEZs are being established 
through land acquisition under special Acts 
passed by the States. Unlike earlier land 
acquisition laws, which require that there be a 
public purpose behind government takeover of 
land, these laws mandate acquisition for private 
profit and without land-for-land compensation or 
serious rehabilitation.

The farmer's experience of land acquisition has 
been extremely negative. For instance, there was 
at least a 10:1 disproportion between market 
rates and compensation paid at Kalinganagar. 
There is a three-fold difference in Dadri and an 
even higher disproportion in Gurgaon. This latter 
(25,000 acres) in India's largest multi-product 
SEZ. It cuts through the Gurgaon-Rewari State 
highway, the Gurgaon-Rewari railway line and the 
Gurgaon-Jhajjar highway. It will also interfere 
with the planned Kondi-Manesar-Palwal Expressway.

The zone abuts the Sultanpur National Bird Park, 
one of the 10 most important bird sanctuaries in 
India. As a bird-watcher, I know that Sultanpur 
was in a state of acute distress for five years 
because it received no fresh water. Many bird 
species, in particular migrants, deserted the 
sanctuary. However, over the last couple of 
years, the jheel has come back to life. As have 
nearby marshlands and water bodies such as Basai.

The Gurgaon SEZ will abort or reverse this 
process. Its construction will also violate the 
normal 8 to 10 km barrier rule. No industrial or 
mining project can be allowed within that 
distance from a nature park or sanctuary. Birds 
will be badly disturbed and their flight-paths 
blocked by the SEZ's construction. Residents of 
the area, as well as Delhi Bird Society, are now 
gearing themselves up for a fight. Haryana is 
likely to witness a serious political 
confrontation on SEZs. Maharashtra too is 
seething over RIL's Pen (Raigand) SEZ project.

SEZs could soon become a heavy liability for the 
UPA. Many Congress Chief Ministers talk warily 
and in hush-hush tones about them.

If lakhs of farmers are displaced and uprooted by 
these zones even as they see the price of their 
now-alienated land doubling and quadrupling, 
there is bound to be serious discontent - and 
political trouble for the ruling State 
governments.

These governments are more sanguine about the 
NURM - if only because easy money totalling 
Rs.50,000 crores has been promised to 63 cities. 
As much as Rs. 4,600 crores has been earmarked 
for this year alone.

But the "renewal", being conducted under the 
direction of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and 
pro-corporate consultants of its choice, will 
typically mean cleansing city centres of their 
poor inhabitants, hawkers, cycle-rickshaw-pullers 
and vendors of sundry but important services.

An attempt will be made to "conserve" and 
"beautify" monuments artificially, while creating 
"modern" middle class facilities like car parks, 
shopping arcades, and stalls selling packaged 
food.

This will radically alter the social mix of our 
inner city-populations - against the interests of 
the majority, by displacing and marginalising the 
poor or making them invisible. Already, lakhs of 
people in Mumbai and Delhi have been brutally 
evicted under Court orders.

The process will be extended to other, smaller 
cities - with terrible consequences and amidst 
great mass misery.

_____


[4]


NARMADA BACHAO ANDOLAN
- 62 Gandhi Marg, Badwani, M.P.  Ph. 07290-222464, 09893204498,
badwani at narmada.org
- Maitri Niwas, Tembewadi, Dhadgaon,  Nandurbar, Maharashtra. Ph:
02595-220620
- C/o B-13, Shivam Flats, Ellora Park, Vadodara-390023
0265-2282232 baroda at narmada.org

Press Release 30th September 2006

FISHWORKERS AND BOATMEN ASSERT THEIR RIGHT TO WATER AND FISHERIES IN
SARDAR SAROVAR

A New Phase Of Struggle Begins In The Narmada Valley

The governments of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat as well as the
Union of India always made propaganda of the rehabilitation policy of the
Sardar Sarovar Project Affected People as that of being an ideal policy.
The Narmada Bachao Andolan pointed out the inadequacies apart from the
lack of implementation, which proved the government affidavits before the
Supreme Court, and compliance reports of various agencies to be false.

The partial reservoir that is created at the height of 119 meters has
brought in severe impacts in the hilly adivasi areas and also the plains
of Nimad, proving NBA's claims to be right.

While there are 35,000 families still in the 122 mts affected area, all
did not face submergence this year and the thickly populated villages were
saved. However, in addition to adivasis losing all their land and
livelihood, a few hundred families in Nimad lost their agricultural land
but a few thousand others, watermelon growers on the riverbank have also
lost theirs. The latter are the families who are otherwise living on
fishing, boating or agricultural labour. Many of these cultivators had
land rights while the others have proofs, of years and decades old
auctions of this land or old encroachments, which give them entitlement
for rights and they earned 15,000 to 50,000 rupees annually from the same.
In spite of the Andolan raising the issue since years, the government has
not even acquired the ‘owned land’ of these poor families and denied them
the right to regularize old encroachments. The families are up against
this injustice, to claim their rights to land, which is illegally drowned.

The traditional fish workers living on fish since generations have no
place in the rehabilitation policy except that the principle of resettling
the affected at a standard of living higher than before displacement is
mentioned. It was in the action plans in the state of Madhya Pradesh and
Maharashtra prepared in the early 1990's, that the promise of settling non
-agriculturist families with an alternative source of livelihood, which
the state government would help them to acquire, was mentioned, but never
fulfilled.

The boatmen, who have the old records of the kings allotting them the
ghats for maintenance and boating as the only mode of transport across the
river, form another category of the deprived but not rehabilitated. There
is no provision for any kind of compensation or alternative source of
income guaranteed to them.

Altogether there are not less than 10,000 families belonging to these
three categories that are offered only the compensation for their affected
houses, which are at the lowest level in all the villages, and house plots
at the resettlement sites. Most of them have genuine complaints of
compensation being inadequate for building a similar house at the new
place, houses being left out of surveys for no justifiable reason and have
a large number have yet to get the alternative house plots even when most
of them in the villages of Badwani and Dhar districts are affected below
110mts and 122mts. They thus have no place to go even when they are either
already affected or can be affected at the present dam height itself. The
Grievances Redressal Authority as well as the Narmada Control Authority
has failed to take cognizance of either individual or collective petitions
since years.

The adivasi fish workers in Jhabua district (M.P.) and Nandurbar district
(Maharashtra), who are also farmers but have lost their main agricultural
land without replacement also demand right to the fisheries, which cannot
go to the big trawler owners and reservoir contractors as has happened
else where. At least five to ten families in every affected village in
above-mentioned districts have their claim to fishing rights and desire to
have necessary equipment for the same.

It was the massive boat rally, (photographs on the website, please
see www.narmada.org) and the large public gathering of fish workers and
farmers on the day of the closure of the ‘Satyagraha’ on 23rd September
2006 that made a beginning of our struggle for our fishing and boating
rights and right to land in lieu of the submerged river-bank land.

The farmers also raised question related to their water rights. Not less
than 10,000 water pumps irrigate thousands of hectares of land in the
river basin, which is beyond the affected area. The townships of Badwani,
Kukshi are also dependent on the Narmada waters for drinking purpose. The
official letter written by the Government of Gujarat to the Narmada
authorities in Madhya Pradesh indicates that no water can be lifted from
the reservoir by the state of Madhya Pradesh.

SINCE THE RESERVOIR WATERS WILL BE RESERVED FOR GUJARAT AND RAJASTHAN,
BOTH MAHARASHTRA AND MADHYA PRADESH WHICH ARE RIPARIAN STATES, WILL LOOSE
THEIR RIGHTS OVER THE RIVER NARMADA FOR A STRECH OF ABOUT 450kms (BOTH THE
RIVER BANKS). How unjust will this be for the generations old riparian
communities, we continue to ask.

How many thousands families will face the impacts which are not assessed,
recognised and compensated, the governments must be compelled to reply.
Will the courts take cognizance of the injustice never brought out before
it, by those who boast of complete and fair rehabilitation? Whatever may
be the answer, considering the examples and experiences of the Bargi and
Tava dam-affected and taking lessons from the same, we will continue to
struggle for rights until we win.

We appeal to the civil society to come forward and join us by extending
‘Jansahayog’ for providing the fish-workers with nets and boats. It was
during the gathering following the boat rally that we made a small
beginning by donating nets to a few adivasis in villages Bhitada, Sugat at
the hands of the well-known Hindi litterateur, Dr. M.B. Shah from Dhule,
Maharashtra.

Ashish Mandloi            Kamla Yadav                 Medha Patkar


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

Buzz on the perils of fundamentalist politics, on
matters of peace and democratisation in South
Asia. SACW is an independent & non-profit
citizens wire service run since 1998 by South
Asia Citizens Web: www.sacw.net/
SACW archive is available at: bridget.jatol.com/pipermail/sacw_insaf.net/

DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed in materials carried in the posts do not
necessarily reflect the views of SACW compilers.