National

Of Tears And Water

The SC affirms that might is right; the anti-dam lobby searches for a new impetus

Advertisement

Of Tears And Water
info_icon

By giving the nod for the construction of the Rs 18,000-crore Sardar Sarovar dam on the Narmada, the Supreme Court has predictably elicited sharply polarised reactions. Delight among the political class and a shot in the arm for the big-dam lobby in Gujarat, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh. Despondency, mixed with renewed resolve to continue the struggle, within the rank and file of the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA).

After six years, the court disposed of the NBA petition, declaring that the dam shall be built as envisaged by the Narmada Tribunal Award given way back in 1979. In effect, the judgement has given the green signal for construction of the dam up to a height of 90 metres and thereafter up to 138 metres in stages, on getting proper sanction from the authorities. As for resettlement and rehabilitation of the evacuees, an issue at the core of the NBA struggle, the apex court has merely said that it be "undertaken satisfactorily" by the three state governments.

Advertisement

Souring the jubilation of the pro-dam lobby is Justice S.P. Bharucha's dissenting note. He observed: "Notes prepared by the ministry of water resources and ministry of environment and forests leave no manner of doubt that the requisite data for assessment of environment impact of the project was not available when the environmental clearance thereof was granted." Booker-winner Arundhati Roy, a passionate campaigner for the NBA cause, fails to understand how the majority judgement ignored this aspect and instead asked the tribunal to carry on work "expeditiously". "I can't believe it took the court six years to say work was being held up."

Advertisement

So, where then does it leave the NBA, at the vanguard of a 15-year-old movement which agitated against big dams? What recourse does it have? More importantly, what is the organisation's future course of action?

Despite the disillusionment following the ruling and the setback to the movement, NBA members seem to have regrouped and indicated they were ready to fight the battle beyond the judgement. "The court is bound by laws but people are bound by the laws of earning their livelihood," said Medha Patkar, NBA leader, a clear indication that she was still in battle mode. Within hours of the judgement, she proceeded to Badwani in Madhya Pradesh, 5 km from the Narmada banks, to decide with her colleagues on the next course of action. "From a peaceful non-violent struggle, it will now turn into a non-violent war," she told Outlook from Badwani.

As a first step, the NBA plans to highlight the serious anomalies in the 150-page judgement. Over 41,000 families, mostly tribals, are expected to be displaced. "The Madhya Pradesh CM himself has stated that there's no land for the resettlement of the 30,000 recognised families who'll be forced out," says Alok Aggarwal, a frontline NBA member. In an affidavit before the court, the MP government has stated it has no land even to resettle those who would be ousted at a dam height of 90 metres.

The project envisages the construction of 3,200 dams that would redistribute the waters of the Narmada and its 41 tributaries into a series of reservoirs. There will be 30 major, 135 medium and nearly 3,000 small dams to channel waters into the thousands of miles of irrigation canals which will be built.

Advertisement

It is the socio-economic-political issues, not addressed by the apex court, which the NBA seeks to take to the people's court. "In Maharashtra, 33 villages occupying 20,000 hectares would be affected by the dam. The 4,200 hectares being doled out would be barely enough for homesteads for the affected families," says Shripad Dharamadhikari, another leading light in the NBA. In fact, the state government would be doing precious little to compensate the loss of rich agricultural land.

Although the SC has asked the Narmada Control Authority to draw up a plan within four weeks on the relief and rehabilitation work, anti-dam campaigners feel this task would be insurmountable. "Without any plan and land to rehabilitate, it is unthinkable how the court agreed to further construction. This will now amount to nothing less than a flushing out," says Patkar. "There is no land available. The ground reality is entirely different from what the state governments have told the court," adds Dharamadhikari.

Advertisement

It is around these issues that the NBA plans to rally people. The failure of the authorities to allay the fears of those affected has given the NBA a handle with which to go after the project. One hundred representatives of affected villages in the Sardar Sarovar project have assembled in Badwani to chalk out their next course of agitation.

"Resettlement is not just about exchanging one piece of land for another. It's a question of breaking up families and uprooting people from their ancestral homes," says Girishbhai Patel of Ahmedabad's Lok Adhikar Sangh, which has also thrown its weight behind the NBA. Implicit in this argument is the issue of people's right to life and their control over natural resources. "These problems persist and so the court's verdict is neither final nor infallible," says Patel.

Advertisement

Others, like Himangshu Takkar, convenor of the South Asia Network for Dams, Rivers and People, and who was with the NBA for seven years, believes the judgement is a big disservice to the poor. "A pil was admitted as fundamental rights were being violated. That's been glossed over. So I see no option but for the movement to continue."

That the government can't go in for big projects without involving those affected or offering them alternative sources of livelihood may, perhaps, be the twin themes the NBA seeks to highlight. "From this judgement, it's clear the destinies of poor people are easily expendable and it's sad the Supreme Court itself has become part of the power structure," says Harsh Mander of Action Aid, who was also Badwani's collector in 1989. So, he maintains, it gives all the more reason for movements like the NBA to fill the space for peoples' rights.

That the NBA is determined to go in for the long haul, irrespective of the outcome, is evidenced by the swift mobilisation of its cadres. "Personally, I will not allow the dam height to go an inch beyond the present 88 metres," exclaims Patkar. The Friends of River Narmada, another organisation which has lent support to the NBA cause, has mentioned that the Supreme Court has ignored the fundamental flaws inherent to the cost-benefit analysis of the project.

Voices in support of the NBA have grown. Achyut Yagnik of the Gujarat-based Centre for Social Knowledge and Action maintains that unless the Centre comes out with a just policy of resettlement and rehabilitation, movements like the NBA would only grow in strength. Over 30 million people, he says, had been ousted since independence thanks to a lopsided land acquisition policy. Citing the case of those affected in Mahanadi in Orissa, Yagnik says, "People in this region have been ousted and relocated almost three times in as many years."

Advertisement

Author Roy, while expressing shock at the judgement, said: "The issue of basic human rights have been completely ignored." But she felt Justice Bharucha's dissenting judgment of the environmental consequences of the project be taken into account, having struck the right note of caution. She now plans to go to the Narmada Valley to gauge the people's mood. "Their legal options may be closed. But I am sure they will fight it out despite the pressures that come to bear," she said.

The fight against the dam is not over. It may in the coming months take on a new meaning. To borrow a phrase, the interests of the greater common good is still alive.

Advertisement

Tags

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement