Massive Legal Win for Kebaowek First Nation And Allies Against Proposed
Nuclear Waste Dump in Canada
-
Federal Court of Appeal Upholds Victory for Kebaowek First Nation
and Allies in “Species at Risk” Case Against Chalk River Nuclear Waste
Project Kebaow...
Latest Post
Central Water Commission’s Flood Forecasting: Pathetic performance in Uttarkhand disaster
Written By Unknown on Friday, June 28, 2013 | 8:33 PM
Central
Water Commission, India’s premier technical body under Union Ministry
of Water Resources, has once again failed in the Uttarakhand flood
disaster. Even as the Uttarakhand state faced the worst floods in its
history, CWC, which has been given the task of forecasting floods across
flood prone areas all over India, completely failed in making any
forecasts that could have helped the people and administration in
Uttarakhand.
First principle of disaster management
is prior warning. With prior warning, significant proportion of
possible damages and destruction can be avoided. In that respect, one
expected that CWC would play a key role in forecasting the floods.
SANDRP has been monitoring CWC flood forecasts throughout the monsoon
for some years. During June 15-17, when Uttarakhand was receiving the
most intense rains, CWC did not make any forecasts regarding
Uttarakhand. As far as the most severely disaster affected areas of
Ganga basin upstream of Devprayag are concerned (these include the
worst affected Kedarnath and Mandakini valley, the Gangotri and
Bhagirathi valley and Badrinath in Alaknanda valley), CWC has made no
flood forecasts at all this year. Same is the case regarding other
affected regions of Uttarakhand including Yamuna basin including
Yamunotri and Pithoragarh including Goriganga basin. What is than the
role of this premier technical body tasked with flood forecasting?
The only forecast that CWC made for
Uttarakhand this June 2013 were for Rishikesh and Haridwar on June 18,
2013. Even in these instances, CWC’s callousness is reflected. For
example, by the fact that normally when flood forecasts are made for any
site in the first place, the forecasts would be low flood forecast
(where water level is between warning and danger level for the site),
and only in next stage, would medium flood forecast would be made (water
level above danger level). However, in case of both Rishikesh and
Haridwar, CWC straightaway made medium flood forecasts, clearly missing
the low flood forecasts.
In fact looking at the CWC flood forecasting site (http://www.india-water.com/
The callous performance of CWC does
not end there. During June 2-7 this year, CWC flood forecasting site as
also the flood forecasting site of NDMA which also depends on CWC,
stopped functioning. After numerous emails and phone calls from SANDRP,
the website started functioning on June 7, 2013 and Shri V D Roy,
Director (Flood Forecasting Management) of CWC wrote to us, “Due to
technical reasons, the CWC FF site was not working since 2nd June. With
consistent effort, the website was made functional w e f 7th June”.
Pointing out a major blunder of CWC, we had written to CWC on June 12,
2013, “CWC forecast site reported that water level of Brahmaputra river
at Neamatighat site in Jorhat district in Assam had reached 94.21 m at
0900 hrs, which was 6.84 m above the highest flood level of the site at
87.37 m. The FF site also forecast that the level will be 94.15 m at
0900 am on June 12, 2013, that is today. Both the recording and forecast
were clearly wrong, rather way off the mark. The site or the area in
question or upstream and down stream levels do not match with what
the CWC site said y'day.” Needless to add there was no floods in
Brahmaputra in spite of such forecast by India’s highest technical body!
CWC is yet to respond to our emails on this issue.
It is strange that CWC, in stead of
putting its house in order, is acting as a lobby for big dams by making
baseless claims about Tehri dam having saved downstream area of floods,
as reported by Indian Express[i] on
June 25, 2013. This is like adding salt to the wounds of the people of
Uttarakhand who are suffering from the ill effects of lopsided
developments including dams and hydropower projects. It would be better
if CWC tries to improve its flood forecasts rather than indulging in
such lobbying efforts at such times of crisis.
Himanshu Thakkar (ht.sandrp@gmail.com, 09968242798)
South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People (http://sandrp.in/)
For SANDRP blogs on Uttarakhand flood disaster, see:
[i] http://www.indianexpress.
Lethal Assault on Rule of Law: Citizens and World Leaders under Surveillance
“Those
who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either
one.”
Benjamain
Franklin quoted by whistleblower Edward Snowden
“You
can’t have 100 % security and then also have 100 % privacy and zero
inconvenience. Society has to make choices”
Barack
Obama’s reaction to the disclosure that his government has put US citizens
under surveillance
India is the fifth most
spied upon nation in the world. Iran tops the list of being spied upon. But
India is being spied upon despite the fact that Government of India is the
strategic partner of Government of USA. It is now open that Indian Government
is also involved in putting citizens under surveillance at the behest of
corporations of USA and Government of USA.
Twenty nine years old,
whistleblower Edward Snowden’s revelations constitute one of the world’s
biggest intelligence breaches of United States of America (USA). World came to
know about it after Guardian and Washington Post published the disclosures made
by Snowden.
It is now open that UK and
US intelligence agencies spied on world leaders at the G-20 Summit in
2009. In 2005, New York Times revealed
that officials in the George W. Bush led government were eavesdropping on
telephone calls and e-mails of citizens of USA without warrants or judicial
oversight, a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a ten thousand
dollar fine for each offence. Clearly, the laws were violated and the criminals
responsible for breaking the law got away with murder. In 2003, Katharine Gun, a translator had
revealed that US intelligence agency was eavesdropping on the United Nations. The
violators have been granted immunity by the same government which operates
world’s largest prisons for the powerless and the poorest.
The way Obama administration
is pursuing the surveillance policies his predecessor, George W Bush is
reminiscent of what happened during the Watergate scandal and what Gerald Ford
did to Richard Nixon as according to him “law is a respecter of reality.” Republican
President Richard Nixon had to resign from the presidency on August 9, 1974
fearing impeachment in the House of Representatives and a strong possibility of
a conviction in the Senate for putting Democratic Party’s National Committee’s
headquarters at the Watergate complex under surveillance. But his successor,
Gerald Ford on September 8, 1974 issued a full and unconditional pardon of Nixon,
immunizing him from prosecution for any crimes he had "committed or may
have committed or taken part in" as president. In a televised broadcast to
the nation, Ford explained saying it "is an American tragedy in which we
all have played a part. It could go on and on and on, or someone must write the
end to it. I have concluded that only I can do that, and if I can, I
must." Pardoning Nixon contributed to President Ford's loss of the
presidential election of 1976. There were allegations of a secret deal made
with Ford, promising a pardon in return for Nixon's resignation, led Ford to
testify before the House Judiciary Committee on October 17, 1974. Obama’s
defence of putting citizens and world leaders under surveillance echoes what
Ford did earlier.
When Ford died in December
2006, Dick Cheney who was Ford’s former Chief of Staff and the then
vice-president hailed Ford for having pardoned Richard Nixon for Watergate
scandal. Cheney who is accused of involvement in the establishment of “worldwide
torture regime, spying on citizens of USA, outing a covert CIA agent and
obstructing the resulting investigation” has called Snowden as ‘traitor’ for
revealing the surveillance which helped set up.
White House chief of staff,
Denis McDonough has defended the surveillance regime stating that it has helped
prevent potential terror attacks in the US and in more than 20 countries around
the world. This claim merits scrutiny although it is an indefensible effort to
justify undermining of privacy for security.
Government of USA stands
exposed. Its arrogance has been challenged by a citizen who loves and fights
for democratic rights. Those who cherish rule of law disapprove of attempts by
Government of USA to arrogate to itself the right to put anyone, anywhere,
under surveillance.
`War on terror’ unleashed by
discredited Bush regime has become an excuse for social control by any
unethical, illegitimate and illegal means. It is using undemocratic companies
who are technology vendors with least regards for civil rights.
What started as a
wiretapping and surveillance exercise to defeat communism at any cost finds
application on its own citizens and non-communist democratic countries.
Snowden has informed the
world that George Orwell’s prophesy about emergence of a surveillance state in
communist countries has actually been found to have taken birth in capitalist
countries. Led by Government of USA, these governments are ignoring, changing
and manipulating the law to allow warrantless surveillance.
In a bizarre and ridiculous
situation, a warrant is obtained from a secret court. This court issued orders
that are secret and cannot be disclosed to the public making a mockery of
judicial process and rule of law.
Snowden’s disclosure that
even the online communication of the President of USA is under surveillance by
NSA conclusively establishes what was predicted by President Dwight Eisenhower.
He gave the nation a dire warning about threats to democratic government from
the military-industrial complex, a formidable union of defense contractors and
the armed forces. On January 17, 1961, he had said, "In the councils of
government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence,
whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential
for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist."
World is witnessing a
scenario where these fears have come true. A sliding door is being witnessed
wherein personnel are moving between the
government and corporations and facilitating surveillance and data mining
companies for profit at any human cost.
The first set of documents which
Snowden was about previously undisclosed PRISM programme of USA’s National
Security Agency (NSA), the biggest spy surveillance organization of the world. PRISM
programme was initiated in 2007 under surveillance laws passed under Bush
regime. This was renewed by Obama
administration in 2012.
Under this programme NSA
gathered information from world’s leading technology companies. It has now come
to light that telephones and internet of US citizens and foreigners were under
the programme. This creates a case for boycotting companies like Facebook,
Google, Microsoft and others.
Of the two programmes of
surveillance, one was for collecting data on phone calls made by all customers
of Verizon telephone company. A secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
(FISA) court had ordered Verizon to hand over millions of records called “meta
data” to NSA.
It included access to
details like the numbers of both the parties on a single call as well as the
duration of the call. NSA accessed servers of nine internet firms.
The other programme called
PRISM to track online communication provided access to emails of foreigners
wherein US internet companies like Google, Apple and Yahoo are complicit. It is clear that Government of India has made
itself subservient to this programme.
Snowden leaked highly
classified secrets of Government of USA using four computers that made them
accessible to him in Hong Kong’s Mira Hotel on Nathan Road in Kowloon district.
He came to Hong Kong on May 20, 2013.
Snowden has been working for
the private defence contractor Booz Allen Hamilton at the National Security
Agency (NSA), the biggest spy surveillance organization of the world. He is the
most wanted man according to the Government of USA for violating the law and
for committing crime against the nation. Snowden has been charged with
espionage and theft of government property.
World over after Julian
Assange and Bradley Manning, Snowden has joined those who reveal how crime
against humanity and privacy is being committed in the name of illegitimate
laws by governments against their own people.
While the documents that was
leaked by Bradley Manning to Wikileaks was only ‘classified’ those leaked by Snowden
are top secret whose access was highly limited.
Snowden’s crime is that he
informed his fellow citizens that their Government is illegitimately putting
them under surveillance.
It is a revelation akin to
the earth shaking disclosure Lenin had made the Sykes-Picot Agreement of May
16, 1916 during the First World War which was printed in the Manchester
Guardian on November 26, 1917. It was an agreement between France and Britain
for sharing the territories of Middle East after the fall of Ottoman Empire. It
partitioned the Ottoman Empire into regions which were to be controlled by
Britain, France, Russia and allied powers. The agreement revealed the war was
meant to benefit the control of bankers and ruling classes.
Secret treaties of Europeans
then and surveillance of world leaders by government of USA now reveals that
such trust deficit creates an insecure world.
The way Snowden’s disclosure
has embarrassed Government of USA, in the same way France and UK were
embarrassed then. Lenin’s disclosure is
deemed the turning point for the relationship between the West and the Arab states.
Several years ago a
Professor of journalism from USA was asked by a student at the Indian Institute
of Mass Communication as to what should a journalist choose when there is a
conflict between truth and national interest. Without blinking his eyes, the
Professor said, national interest. They say in times of war truth is a
casualty.
In the current era of embedded
corporate interests which are masquerading as national interests, supreme
public interest faces bipartisan assault making truth a casualty even in times
of peace.
When UK Prime Minister David
Cameron was asked about his intelligence agencies snooping on world leaders, he
hides behind the veil of conventional deafening silence.
It may be remembered that
Wikileaks has revealed that USA is deeply interested in the implementation of
biometric UID/Aadhaar surveillance program which is unfolding dressed as a
welfare measure. During his visit to India, President of USA had come with the
heads of biometric and surveillance technology companies and had visited the
UID/enrolment centre.
Has Indian Government
protested against it? Why Indian National Congress led government facilitating
the cyber hegemony of US corporations and US government? In what appears to be
one of the most successful secessionist ventures ruling political class have
seceded from India and joined the elites in USA. There is no other way to
describe the complicit and treacherous silence of the ruling parties in India.
In the aftermath of
Snowden’s revelations, it is clear that Obama is defending the indefensible and
in the process has unmasked himself. He had presented himself to voters in 2008
as someone who will undo the acts of his predecessor George W Bush like
warrantless wiretaps. If the culprits responsible for putting citizens and
world leaders under surveillance are not held accountable and liable for their
acts of omission and commission, this will signal the end of rule of law and
equality before law, the only equality promised by the constitution of USA. Law is no more the King in USA. President was
expected to be subordinate to law has made the law subordinate to him. A
bipartisan consensus of sort has emerged in Washington to once again silence
the voice of truth and Obama is manifestly complicit in it.
US Senator Mark Udall, a
leading critic of the secret programme has announced that he intends to put
forward a bill that would limit the scope of what is allowed under the Patriot
Act. Udall said, "We owe it to the American people to have a debate in the
open about the extent of this programme – you have a law that has been
interpreted secretly by a secret court that then issues secret orders to
generate a secret programme." The citizens world over are outraged at such
unpardonable acts but the "approach of Government of USA" to pardon
likes of Nixon and those responsible for inhuman torture regimes does not
inspire even an iota of confidence. Their sophistry about the problem of
balancing privacy with threat reduction does not sound convincing.
Governments which have
entered into strategic alliance with the Government of USA are colluding with
those who endanger public liberty. No amount of Obama’s oratory can hide the
fact that a centralized government is replicating the abuses of the kings that
divided the human society into favoured and the oppressed.
Indian
Situation
It is relevant to note that
Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) has given contracts to US
companies like Accenture who will have access to the database of biometric
information of Indian residents?
UIDAI’s Chief Nandan
Nilekani's promotion of Hernando de Sotto's book 'The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails
Everywhere Else' through his own book Imagining
India argues that national ID system would be a big step for land markets
to facilitate right to property and undoing of abolition of right to property
in 1978 in order to bring down poverty!
When surveillance is the
real motive such inexplicable assumptions do not appear surprising.
So far the entire political
class in India and informed citizens has remained insensitive to the decision
of the European Court of Human Rights about violation of the right to privacy
and citizens’ rights. The case was heard publicly on February 27, 2008, and the
unanimous decision of 17 judges was delivered on December 4, 2008. The court
found that the “blanket and indiscriminate nature” of the power of retention of
the fingerprints, cellular samples, and DNA profiles of persons suspected but
not convicted of offenses, failed to strike a fair balance between competing
public and private interests and ruled that the United Kingdom had “overstepped
any acceptable margin of appreciation” in this regard. The decision is
nonappealable.
Unmindful of this, in India,
National databank of biometric data is unfolding which is proposed to be linked
to electoral database amidst the political myopia of political parties in the
face of the onslaught of the foreign biometric and surveillance technology
companies. The only saving grace has been Parliamentary Standing Committee that
has taken on board studies done in the UK on the identity scheme that was begun
and later withdrawn in May 2010, where the problems were identified to include
" (c) untested, unreliable and unsafe technology; (d) possibility of risk
to the safety and security of citizens;
and (e) requirement of high standard security measures, which would result in
escalating the estimated operational costs."
It may be recalled that S.Y. Quraishi, the previous Chief
Election Commissioner had sent a dangerous proposal to Union Ministry of Home
Affairs asking it “to merge the Election ID cards with UID”. The same appears
to have been accepted. Such an exercise would mean rewriting and engineering the
electoral ecosystem with the unconstitutional and illegal use of biometric
technology.
This would lead to linking of UID, Election ID and
Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) which is not as innocent and as politically
neutral as it has been made out to be. It is noteworthy that all EVMs have a
UID as well. In the meanwhile, it is reliably learnt that voter registration in
Manipur is happening using biometric data. This makes a mockery of the
recommendations of the Parliamentary Committee on UID which notes that “The
collection of biometric information and its linkage with personal information
of individuals without amendment to the Citizenship Act, 1955 as well as the
Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards)
Rules, 2003, appears to be beyond the scope of subordinate legislation, which
needs to be examined in detail by Parliament”.
In India, opposition parties at the Centre and in the
States appear to be feigning ignorance about these attempts at re-plumbing the
electoral ecosystem and a complicit section of civil society seems guilty of
practicing ‘the economics of innocent fraud’.
This is being done to put entire populations under
surveillance forever.
Notably, such biometric IDs
have been abandoned in the US, Australia, UK and China. The reasons have
predominantly been privacy. In the UK, the current Home Secretary explained
that they were abandoning the project because it would otherwise be `intrusive
bullying’ by the state, and that the government intended to be the `servant’ of
the people, and not their `master’.
While the current UK
government assures its citizens that they will not put them under surveillance
as their masters. But they admit by implication that they continue to put world
leaders under surveillance.
In an interview to the US
Public Broadcasting Service, Nilekani said that “the very nature of privacy is
being redefined”. He says, “I think privacy and convenience are opposites. It’s
always a trade-off”. Giving a speech at the Center for Global Development, Washington,
he argues that it is about “giving up something for something”. He is clearly
indulging in linguistic corruption because UID/Aadhaar is being made mandatory
without citizens being given the choice to trade privacy for convenience. This
choice has been made by the project proponents without any law to define its
limits and its liabilities.
When a question was posed to
him at the Center for Global Development as to “whether or not you think by the
year 2050 there could be a global system … (which) would be a real influence on
knocking down the nation state, which I think needs knocking down” and the
chair of the session asked, “is this the edge of the wedge for the end of
sovereignty?” Nilekani responded, “I have no pretensions. But there is nothing
technologically limiting for having the whole population of the world on the
system.”
Like in US, in India
surveillance, convergence, profiling and tracking systems, a government ridden
with corruption, fake encounters and unregulated intelligence agencies is
gathering sensitive information of their masters, the unsuspecting citizens to
turn them into servile unquestioning and obedient subjects. It is evident that USA
and India do not spare even their own citizens.
Underlining the assault
faced by sovereign citizens, whistleblower Edward Snowden proclaims
courageously and rebelliously, “I don’t want to live in a world where
everything I do and say is recorded.” Government of USA faces isolation on the
issue of Snowden’s heroic whistleblowing act because a human life under
constant surveillance is indeed not worth living. Wheels of the surveillance regime are on the
move but the silence of legislatures and citizens in the face of such lethal
assault is deafening.
Gopal Krishna,
Member, Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties (CFCL),
Mb: 9818089660, 08227816731,
Sushil Modi Proven Wrong, Pollution Control Board Cancels 'No Objection Certificate' of Asbestos Plant
Press Release
Pollution Control Board Cancels 'No Objection Certificate' of Hazardous Asbestos Plant
Sushil Kumar Modi's defence of asbestos plants in State Assembly proven wrong
Patna High Court heard the case today
Bhojpur DM submits report on Utkal's Asbestos plant in Giddha, Koilwar
Patna: Proving Sushil Kumar Modi's defence of anti-environment hazardous asbestos plants in his role as Bihar Environment Minister as an indefensible and wrong act, the Bihar State Pollution Control Board (BSPCB) has cancelled the ‘No Objection Certificate’ given to company in response to Bihar Chief Minister’s promise of ‘puncturing’ hazardous asbestos factories in the fertile State.
Sushil Modi's misleading reply in the State Assembly and the cancellation order of BSPCB is attached. BSPCB's order has been filed in the Patna High Court which heard the matter today following a case filed by the Utkal Asbestos Limited (UAL) Industries Ltd.
Meanwhile, Bhojpur District Magistrate has sent his report on the illegalities and irregularities committed by Utkal's Asbestos plant in Giddha, which commenced without ant public hearing. Paryawaran Swasthya Suraksha Samiti, Koilwar has been campaigning against the asbestos plants of Bhojpur in Bihiya and Giddha.
In his reply in the State Assembly, Sushil Kumar Modi, Bihar Minister of Environment & Forests has been misled into saying “Hon’ble Supreme Court while dismissingthe Writ Petition (Civil) No. 260/2004 filed to get asbestos and products made from it, held that there is no available credible study on the basis of which direct relationship of cancer disease with use of asbestos can be proved.”
Contrary to what the Bihar Environment Minister said, Supreme Court in its judgment in the above mentioned case, dated January 21, 2011at paragraph 14 reads as under:
“14. In the matter relating to secondary exposure of workers to asbestos, though the grounds have been taken in the Writ Petition without any factual basis, again in the Rejoinder filed to the counter affidavit of respondent No.37, this issue has been raised by the petitioner in detail. In the earlier judgment of this Court in the case of Consumer Education and Research Centre (supra), hazards arising out of primary use of asbestos were primarily dealt with, but certainly secondary exposure also needs to be examined by the Court. In that judgment, the Court had noticed that it would, thus, be clear that diseases occurred wherever the exposure to the toxic or carcinogenic agent occurs, regardless of the country, type of industry, job title, job assignment or location of exposure. The diseases will follow the trail of the exposure and extend the chain of the carcinogenic risk beyond the work place. In that judgment, the Court had also directed that a review by the Union and the States shall be made after every ten years and also as and when the ILO gives directions in this behalf consistent with its recommendations or conventions. Admittedly, 15 years has expired since the issuance of the directions by this Court. The ILO also made certain specific directions vide its resolution of 2006 adopted in the 95th session of the International Labour Conference. It introduced a ban on all mining, manufacture, recycling and use of all forms of asbestos. As already noticed, serious doubts have been raised as to whether `controlled use' can be effectively implemented even with regard to secondary exposure. These are circumstances which fully require the concerned quarters/authorities in the Government of India as well as the State Governments to examine/review the matter in accordance with law, objectively, to achieve the greater health care of the poor strata of the country who are directly or indirectly engaged in mining or manufacturing activities of asbestos and/or allied products.”
The Supreme Court in its judgment dated January 21, 2011 in Writ Petition (Civil) No.260 of 2004 referred to its directions of January 27, 1995 in the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 206 of 1986 that are required to be strictly adhered to including fresh International Labour Organisation (ILO) resolution on Asbestos dated June 14, 2006.
It is clear that both the Supreme Court and Court have taken note of the resolution of WHO and ILO which seek elimination of all forms of asbestos.
The then Bihar Environment Minister was asked: Is it true that due to pollution happening due to asbestos factories, diseases like Mesothelioma, Asbestosis, lung cancer occur which is hazardous to health?
He replied, “So far there has been no study in the country to establish this fact in a credible manner.”
The then Bihar Environment Minister should note that Smt Sushma Swaraj has informed the Parliament, “…the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) is of the view that long term exposure to any type of asbestos can lead to development of asbestosis, lung cancer and Mesothelioma” and referred to the need for complying with “ILO directions” as per Supreme Court order on August 13, 2003.
As Bihar Environment Minister Modi failed to note that Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) reports also categorically admits to the relationship between exposure to asbestos and diseases like mesothelioma, asbestosis and lung cancer.
He remained blissfully unaware that Union Minister of Health and Family Welfare, Dr. C.P. Thakur had informed the Parliament that “Some of the countries in the world like France, U.K., Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Netherland, Finland, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Austria, Poland and Saudi Arabia have banned the use of Asbestos” on August 22, 2001.
He remained unaware although he is a member of Bihar Legislative Council (BLC) he feigned ignorance about the views of Chairman, BLC, Dr Thakur and Smt Sushma Swaraj regarding asbestos hazards.
It must be noted that Secretary (Labour), Bihar was a member of a 11 member Working Group of a Planning Commission to prepare the Xth Five Year Plan on Occupational Safety and Health at the workplace under the Chairmanship of Vinod Vaish, Secretary, Ministry of Labour, Government of India vide their order no. M-13015/9/2000-LEM/LP dated 27.04.2001. In its 159 page report dated September 2001, the Working Group noted that “The workers are also exposed to a host of hazardous substances, which have a potential to cause serious occupational diseases such as asbestosis…” It has recorded that various studies conducted by the Central Labour Institute have revealed substantial prevalence of occupational health disorders amongst the workers such as Asbestosis. The prevalence rate for Asbestosis was reported to be 7.25%. It has been acknowledged that “At the same time the number of occupational diseases reported is very meager…This makes it evident that early identification of occupational diseases is required. It has recommended that “To meet these requirements, measures are needed for diagnostic facilities and appropriate training in the field of occupational health. Occupational health hazards and diseases to the workmen employed in asbestos industries are of great concern to the industries, Govt. and the public. The Honorable Supreme Court of India in its judgement dated 27th January, 1995 relating to the Public Interest Litigation No.206 of 1986 had given several directions concerning the protective measures to be taken against the hazards of exposure to asbestos at workplaces such as mining and manufacturing activities. In the light of Supreme Court directives, it is proposed to launch a comprehensive programme for the protection of the health of the workers engaged in hazardous industries with adequate mechanisms for monitoring of work environment and diagnosis and control of disease.”
It is noteworthy that Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar met the leaders of ban asbestos movement met the leaders at his residence at 1, Anne Marg in Patna on February 13, 2013. The Chief Minister expressed outrage at the granting of ‘No Objection Certificate’ by Bihar State Pollution Control Board (BSPCB) to hazardous asbestos based factories in fertile agricultural lands. In a remarkable move Bihar Chief Minister had phoned Chairman, BSPCB and fixed an appointment for the villagers of Vaishali for February 14, 2013 and expressed his disapproval for asbestos based factories to him in front of the leaders of the left parties and the villagers’ committee.
Struggle of villagers of Vaishali’s Chaksultan Rampur Rajdhari near Panapur in Kanhauli Dhanraj Panchayat in Goraul block against asbestos based factory has reached a decisive phase. Villagers have been protesting against this lung cancer causing hazardous plant under the banner of KBJBJC for more than 2 years.
After the villagers Mahadharna of June 14, 2012, the district administration had put a stay on the construction of the factory. When the construction started again on December 16, 2012, the villagers blocked the Mahua-Samastipur road for 9 hours to express their protest against the proposed white asbestos plant of UAL company in their village on June 14.
Cancer causing white asbestos also called chrysotile asbestos is banned in 55 countries.
It is noteworthy that "The Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos." This has been revealed in a concept paper by Union Ministry of Labour revealed during 19-20th September, 2011. The resolutions of WHO and ILO in 2005 and 2006 have called for the elimination of asbestos.
In India, mining of asbestos is technically banned but its import from other countries is yet to be banned. Trade in asbestos (dust & fibers) is also banned.
The dubious designs of the UAL company against the villagers and protesters to protect its hazardous plant at the cost of villagers’ health was condemned by the speakers who spoke at the demonstration. In a dubious move, the UAL has filed case no. 252/2012, 509/2012 and 510/2012 to silence the voice of public interest persons. This appears to be done to trap villagers into concocted cases as part of company’s design to malign the movement of the KBJBJC. The memorandum sought the withdrawal of three fake cases lodged in Mahua Thana, Vaihsali.
Asbestos Virodhi Nagrik Manch, Patna and left and socialist parties participated in the demonstration on January 16, 2012 to express solidarity with the villagers struggle against the asbestos based factory of Utka Asbestos Limited.
Now that the construction of asbestos based factory in Vaishali is all set to be permanently stopped, the issue of three asbestos plants in Bhojpur’s Giddha and Bihiya has come to the forefront where protest has been going onfor more than 2 years. Notably, the Giddha plant is situated behind a B Ed College. The villagers are protesting against this plant. In Bihiya, Tamil Nadu based Ramco Industries is operating two asbestos plants amidst protests from villagers although it has permission for only one. Memorandum has been submitted to the District administration and BSPCB in this regard.
The memorandum to the Chief Minister had demanded white asbestos based plants should be closed in public interest keeping public health in mind and dismissal of fake case registered by Utkal Management.
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) demands that when the State Assembly should be informed of how it was misled by the then Environment Minister. TWA appeals to the Government to stop the hazardous asbestos based plants in Bhojpur as well as it has done in Muzaffarpur and Vaishali.
For Details: Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Mb: 8227816731, 09818089660, Web:www.toxicswatch.org, E-mail:goplalkrishna1715@gmail.com
Ajit Kr Singh, Convener, Khet Bachao Jeevan Bachao Jan Sangharsh Committee
(KBJBJC), Vaishali, Mb: 09931669311, E-mail:ajeetsinghpushkar@gmail.com
Ravindra Prasad Singh, Khet Bachao Jeevan Bachao Jan Sangharsh Committee
(KBJBJC), Vaishali, Mb: 8986980751
Abhimanyu Sharma, Advocate, Patna High Court, Mb: 9631290074
Pollution Control Board Cancels 'No Objection Certificate' of Hazardous Asbestos Plant
Sushil Kumar Modi's defence of asbestos plants in State Assembly proven wrong
Patna High Court heard the case today
Bhojpur DM submits report on Utkal's Asbestos plant in Giddha, Koilwar
Patna: Proving Sushil Kumar Modi's defence of anti-environment hazardous asbestos plants in his role as Bihar Environment Minister as an indefensible and wrong act, the Bihar State Pollution Control Board (BSPCB) has cancelled the ‘No Objection Certificate’ given to company in response to Bihar Chief Minister’s promise of ‘puncturing’ hazardous asbestos factories in the fertile State.
Sushil Modi's misleading reply in the State Assembly and the cancellation order of BSPCB is attached. BSPCB's order has been filed in the Patna High Court which heard the matter today following a case filed by the Utkal Asbestos Limited (UAL) Industries Ltd.
Meanwhile, Bhojpur District Magistrate has sent his report on the illegalities and irregularities committed by Utkal's Asbestos plant in Giddha, which commenced without ant public hearing. Paryawaran Swasthya Suraksha Samiti, Koilwar has been campaigning against the asbestos plants of Bhojpur in Bihiya and Giddha.
In his reply in the State Assembly, Sushil Kumar Modi, Bihar Minister of Environment & Forests has been misled into saying “Hon’ble Supreme Court while dismissingthe Writ Petition (Civil) No. 260/2004 filed to get asbestos and products made from it, held that there is no available credible study on the basis of which direct relationship of cancer disease with use of asbestos can be proved.”
Contrary to what the Bihar Environment Minister said, Supreme Court in its judgment in the above mentioned case, dated January 21, 2011at paragraph 14 reads as under:
“14. In the matter relating to secondary exposure of workers to asbestos, though the grounds have been taken in the Writ Petition without any factual basis, again in the Rejoinder filed to the counter affidavit of respondent No.37, this issue has been raised by the petitioner in detail. In the earlier judgment of this Court in the case of Consumer Education and Research Centre (supra), hazards arising out of primary use of asbestos were primarily dealt with, but certainly secondary exposure also needs to be examined by the Court. In that judgment, the Court had noticed that it would, thus, be clear that diseases occurred wherever the exposure to the toxic or carcinogenic agent occurs, regardless of the country, type of industry, job title, job assignment or location of exposure. The diseases will follow the trail of the exposure and extend the chain of the carcinogenic risk beyond the work place. In that judgment, the Court had also directed that a review by the Union and the States shall be made after every ten years and also as and when the ILO gives directions in this behalf consistent with its recommendations or conventions. Admittedly, 15 years has expired since the issuance of the directions by this Court. The ILO also made certain specific directions vide its resolution of 2006 adopted in the 95th session of the International Labour Conference. It introduced a ban on all mining, manufacture, recycling and use of all forms of asbestos. As already noticed, serious doubts have been raised as to whether `controlled use' can be effectively implemented even with regard to secondary exposure. These are circumstances which fully require the concerned quarters/authorities in the Government of India as well as the State Governments to examine/review the matter in accordance with law, objectively, to achieve the greater health care of the poor strata of the country who are directly or indirectly engaged in mining or manufacturing activities of asbestos and/or allied products.”
The Supreme Court in its judgment dated January 21, 2011 in Writ Petition (Civil) No.260 of 2004 referred to its directions of January 27, 1995 in the Writ Petition (Civil) No. 206 of 1986 that are required to be strictly adhered to including fresh International Labour Organisation (ILO) resolution on Asbestos dated June 14, 2006.
It is clear that both the Supreme Court and Court have taken note of the resolution of WHO and ILO which seek elimination of all forms of asbestos.
The then Bihar Environment Minister was asked: Is it true that due to pollution happening due to asbestos factories, diseases like Mesothelioma, Asbestosis, lung cancer occur which is hazardous to health?
He replied, “So far there has been no study in the country to establish this fact in a credible manner.”
The then Bihar Environment Minister should note that Smt Sushma Swaraj has informed the Parliament, “…the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) is of the view that long term exposure to any type of asbestos can lead to development of asbestosis, lung cancer and Mesothelioma” and referred to the need for complying with “ILO directions” as per Supreme Court order on August 13, 2003.
As Bihar Environment Minister Modi failed to note that Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) reports also categorically admits to the relationship between exposure to asbestos and diseases like mesothelioma, asbestosis and lung cancer.
He remained blissfully unaware that Union Minister of Health and Family Welfare, Dr. C.P. Thakur had informed the Parliament that “Some of the countries in the world like France, U.K., Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Netherland, Finland, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Austria, Poland and Saudi Arabia have banned the use of Asbestos” on August 22, 2001.
He remained unaware although he is a member of Bihar Legislative Council (BLC) he feigned ignorance about the views of Chairman, BLC, Dr Thakur and Smt Sushma Swaraj regarding asbestos hazards.
It must be noted that Secretary (Labour), Bihar was a member of a 11 member Working Group of a Planning Commission to prepare the Xth Five Year Plan on Occupational Safety and Health at the workplace under the Chairmanship of Vinod Vaish, Secretary, Ministry of Labour, Government of India vide their order no. M-13015/9/2000-LEM/LP dated 27.04.2001. In its 159 page report dated September 2001, the Working Group noted that “The workers are also exposed to a host of hazardous substances, which have a potential to cause serious occupational diseases such as asbestosis…” It has recorded that various studies conducted by the Central Labour Institute have revealed substantial prevalence of occupational health disorders amongst the workers such as Asbestosis. The prevalence rate for Asbestosis was reported to be 7.25%. It has been acknowledged that “At the same time the number of occupational diseases reported is very meager…This makes it evident that early identification of occupational diseases is required. It has recommended that “To meet these requirements, measures are needed for diagnostic facilities and appropriate training in the field of occupational health. Occupational health hazards and diseases to the workmen employed in asbestos industries are of great concern to the industries, Govt. and the public. The Honorable Supreme Court of India in its judgement dated 27th January, 1995 relating to the Public Interest Litigation No.206 of 1986 had given several directions concerning the protective measures to be taken against the hazards of exposure to asbestos at workplaces such as mining and manufacturing activities. In the light of Supreme Court directives, it is proposed to launch a comprehensive programme for the protection of the health of the workers engaged in hazardous industries with adequate mechanisms for monitoring of work environment and diagnosis and control of disease.”
It is noteworthy that Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar met the leaders of ban asbestos movement met the leaders at his residence at 1, Anne Marg in Patna on February 13, 2013. The Chief Minister expressed outrage at the granting of ‘No Objection Certificate’ by Bihar State Pollution Control Board (BSPCB) to hazardous asbestos based factories in fertile agricultural lands. In a remarkable move Bihar Chief Minister had phoned Chairman, BSPCB and fixed an appointment for the villagers of Vaishali for February 14, 2013 and expressed his disapproval for asbestos based factories to him in front of the leaders of the left parties and the villagers’ committee.
Struggle of villagers of Vaishali’s Chaksultan Rampur Rajdhari near Panapur in Kanhauli Dhanraj Panchayat in Goraul block against asbestos based factory has reached a decisive phase. Villagers have been protesting against this lung cancer causing hazardous plant under the banner of KBJBJC for more than 2 years.
After the villagers Mahadharna of June 14, 2012, the district administration had put a stay on the construction of the factory. When the construction started again on December 16, 2012, the villagers blocked the Mahua-Samastipur road for 9 hours to express their protest against the proposed white asbestos plant of UAL company in their village on June 14.
Cancer causing white asbestos also called chrysotile asbestos is banned in 55 countries.
It is noteworthy that "The Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos." This has been revealed in a concept paper by Union Ministry of Labour revealed during 19-20th September, 2011. The resolutions of WHO and ILO in 2005 and 2006 have called for the elimination of asbestos.
In India, mining of asbestos is technically banned but its import from other countries is yet to be banned. Trade in asbestos (dust & fibers) is also banned.
The dubious designs of the UAL company against the villagers and protesters to protect its hazardous plant at the cost of villagers’ health was condemned by the speakers who spoke at the demonstration. In a dubious move, the UAL has filed case no. 252/2012, 509/2012 and 510/2012 to silence the voice of public interest persons. This appears to be done to trap villagers into concocted cases as part of company’s design to malign the movement of the KBJBJC. The memorandum sought the withdrawal of three fake cases lodged in Mahua Thana, Vaihsali.
Asbestos Virodhi Nagrik Manch, Patna and left and socialist parties participated in the demonstration on January 16, 2012 to express solidarity with the villagers struggle against the asbestos based factory of Utka Asbestos Limited.
Now that the construction of asbestos based factory in Vaishali is all set to be permanently stopped, the issue of three asbestos plants in Bhojpur’s Giddha and Bihiya has come to the forefront where protest has been going onfor more than 2 years. Notably, the Giddha plant is situated behind a B Ed College. The villagers are protesting against this plant. In Bihiya, Tamil Nadu based Ramco Industries is operating two asbestos plants amidst protests from villagers although it has permission for only one. Memorandum has been submitted to the District administration and BSPCB in this regard.
The memorandum to the Chief Minister had demanded white asbestos based plants should be closed in public interest keeping public health in mind and dismissal of fake case registered by Utkal Management.
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) demands that when the State Assembly should be informed of how it was misled by the then Environment Minister. TWA appeals to the Government to stop the hazardous asbestos based plants in Bhojpur as well as it has done in Muzaffarpur and Vaishali.
For Details: Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Mb: 8227816731, 09818089660, Web:www.toxicswatch.org, E-mail:goplalkrishna1715@gmail.com
Ajit Kr Singh, Convener, Khet Bachao Jeevan Bachao Jan Sangharsh Committee
(KBJBJC), Vaishali, Mb: 09931669311, E-mail:ajeetsinghpushkar@gmail.com
Ravindra Prasad Singh, Khet Bachao Jeevan Bachao Jan Sangharsh Committee
(KBJBJC), Vaishali, Mb: 8986980751
Abhimanyu Sharma, Advocate, Patna High Court, Mb: 9631290074
Hazardous Asbestos Plant 'Punctured' in Bihar following CM's Assurance
Written By Unknown on Tuesday, June 25, 2013 | 10:11 PM
Patna High Court heard the case on June 24
Bhojpur DM undertakes probe of Utkal's Asbestos plant in Giddha, visits factory site to ascertain villagers' grievance
Following bitter resistance of Vaishali villagers to stop cancer causing asbestos factory, Utkal Asbestos company, ‘No Objection Certificate’ given to company has been cancelled by the Bihar State Pollution Control Board (BSPCB) In response to Bihar Chief Minister’s promise of ‘puncturing’ hazardous asbestos factories in the fertile State. The cancellation order which has been filed in the Patna High Court is enclosed.
High Court heard the case Utkal Asbestos Limited (UAL) Industries Ltd. It may be recalled that Justice (Retd) Rekha Kumari, Patna High Court has contended that companies which willfully expose human beings to cancer causing fibers of asbestos must be made criminally liable because right to health is part of right to life in a public lecture on December 24, 2012 at A N Sinha Institute of Social Studies, Patna. Her hand written legal opinion is available with the ToxicsWatch Alliance, which has been campaigning for national ban on lung cancer causing on asbestos products following its ban in over 50 countries.
In the meanwhile, Bhojpur District Magistrate is undertaking probe of Utkal's Asbestos plant in Giddha. He led a team of district administration to the hazardous factory site on the complaint of Dharmatma Sharma of Paryawaran Swasthya Suraksha Samiti, Koilwar. This is being done in compliance of orders from the State Governement. DM Bhojpur has announced that he will hold a public hearing on the gate of the factory to hear the gnawing worries of villagers within two months. Few Weeks back a worker was crushed to death in this very factory.
It is noteworthy that Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar met the leaders of ban asbestos movement met the leaders at his residence at 1, Anne Marg in Patna on February 13, 2013. The Chief Minister expressed outrage at the granting of ‘No Objection Certificate’ by Bihar State Pollution Control Board (BSPCB) to hazardous asbestos based factories in fertile agricultural lands. In a remarkable move Bihar Chief Minister had phoned Chairman, BSPCB and fixed an appointment for the villagers of Vaishali for February 14, 2013 and expressed his disapproval for asbestos based factories to him in front of the leaders of the left parties and the villagers’ committee.
Struggle of villagers of Vaishali’s Chaksultan Rampur Rajdhari near Panapur in Kanhauli Dhanraj Panchayat in Goraul block against asbestos based factory has reached a decisive phase. Villagers have been protesting against this lung cancer causing hazardous plant under the banner of KBJBJC for more than 2 years.
After the villagers Mahadharna of June 14, 2012, the district administration had put a stay on the construction of the factory. When the construction started again on December 16, 2012, the villagers blocked the Mahua-Samastipur road for 9 hours to express their protest against the proposed white asbestos plant of UAL company in their village on June 14.
Cancer causing white asbestos also called chrysotile asbestos is banned in 55 countries.
It is noteworthy that "The Government of India is considering the ban on use of chrysotile asbestos in India to protect the workers and the general population against primary and secondary exposure to Chrysotile form of Asbestos." This has been revealed in a concept paper by Union Ministry of Labour revealed during 19-20th September, 2011. The resolutions of WHO and ILO in 2005 and 2006 have called for the elimination of asbestos.
In India, mining of asbestos is technically banned but its import from other countries is yet to be banned. Trade in asbestos (dust & fibers) is also banned.
The dubious designs of the UAL company against the villagers and protesters to protect its hazardous plant at the cost of villagers’ health was condemned by the speakers who spoke at the demonstration. In a dubious move, the UAL has filed case no. 252/2012, 509/2012 and 510/2012 to silence the voice of public interest persons. This appears to be done to trap villagers into concocted cases as part of company’s design to malign the movement of the KBJBJC. The memorandum sought the withdrawal of three fake cases lodged in Mahua Thana, Vaihsali.
Asbestos Virodhi Nagrik Manch, Patna and left and socialist parties participated in the demonstration on January 16, 2012 to express solidarity with the villagers struggle against the asbestos based factory of Utka Asbestos Limited.
Now that the construction of asbestos based factory in Vaishali is all set to be permanently stopped, the issue of three asbestos plants in Bhojpur’s Giddha and Bihiya has come to the forefront where protest has been going onfor more than 2 years. Notably, the Giddha plant is situated behind a B Ed College. The villagers are protesting against this plant. In Bihiya, Tamil Nadu based Ramco Industries is operating two asbestos plants amidst protests from villagers although it has permission for only one. Memorandum has been submitted to the District administration and BSPCB in this regard.
The memorandum to the Chief Minister had demanded white asbestos based plants should be closed in public interest keeping public health in mind and dismissal of fake case registered by Utkal Management.
ToxicsWatch Alliance demands that Chief Minister should establish an Environmental and Occupational Diseases Compensation Fund and urge central government to refrain from approving asbestos based industrial projects. .
*For Details*: Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA), Mb: 9818089660
(Delhi), Web:www.toxicswatch.org
Ajit Kr Singh, Convener, Khet Bachao Jeevan Bachao Jan Sangharsh Committee
(KBJBJC), Vaishali, Mb: 09931669311, E-mail:ajeetsinghpush...@
Ravindra Prasad Singh, Khet Bachao Jeevan Bachao Jan Sangharsh Committee
(KBJBJC), Vaishali, Mb: 8986980751
Okhla’s Eco-sensitive zone violated by Jindal’s power plant with impunity
Written By Krishna on Saturday, June 22, 2013 | 5:38 AM
Public health disaster imminent due to violation of
eco-sensitive zone
Residents demand closure of the power plant
Disaster management plan missing
New Delhi, June 22, 2013: In a
letter to Jayanthi Natarajan, Union Minister of Environment and
Forests, residents of Okhla complained against the operation of municipal waste
based power plant within the eco-sensitive zone of the Okhla Bird Sanctuary and
Wildlife Park and sought its immediate closure. The
letter is enclosed.
This power plant of M/s Jindal
Urban Infrastructure Limited (JUIL), a company of M/s Jindal Saw Group Limited
owned by Prithviraj Jindal part of O P Jindal Group is facing bitter opposition
from residents, environmental groups and waste pickers and it is facing a case
from Sukhdev Vihar Residents Welfare Association in the National Green Tribunal.
The plant is situated not only in
the proximity of New Friends Colony, Maharani Bagh, Sukhdev Vihar and the
business district Nehru Place - but also several prominent institutions,
including hospitals like Apollo, Escorts and Holy Family and Jamia Milia
Islamia.
Disregarding the vulnerability of
these areas, this power plant has come up deploying unapproved Chinese
technology and in violation of all the relevant environmental regulations and rules.
It is connivance or collusion in the face of such violations that lead to preventable
disasters.
This plant falls within two km of
the Okhla Bird Sanctuary and Wildlife Park (OBS-WP). The plant does not have
the mandatory clearances from the National Board for Wildlife.
The location of the plant in a
Eco Sensitive Zone which is a protected area of the Uttar Pradesh state abuts
into the boundary of Delhi state. This attracts the following MoEF
guideline: "Where the boundary of a protected area abuts the
boundary of another State/Union Territory, where it does not form part of any
Protected Area, it shall be the endeavour of both State/Union territory
governments to have mutual consultation and decide upon the width of the
eco-sensitive zone around the Protected Area in question.” In the case of
Jindal’s power plant in question this has not been done.
Since neither Delhi state nor the
Uttar Pradesh government has submitted the required proposals to date, let
alone hold mutual consultations, the activities prohibited under the issued
guidelines would apply in a 10 km–wide eco-sensitive zone around the OBS-WP, as
per the letter of the Secretary, MoEF.
Residents point out in their
letter that “the disaster in Uttarakhand is being cited as the result of
opposition to the proposed eco-sensitive zone in that state by vested
interests. Surely you will not allow similar
gross eco-sensitive zone violations that could lead to another man-made
disaster – that in the National capital and within 10 km of Parliament.
The project proponent concerning
the EIA and the lack of public consultation have already been pointed out to
the Delhi government by Jairam Ramesh vide D.O. No 1-50 MOS (I/C) E&F dated
1st April 2011 in his stint as environment minister. A report of a
committee headed by chairman, Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) has also
underlined the violations including absence of industrial disaster management
plan.
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA) has
been campaigning against the plant since March 2005 when it was first proposed.
For Details: Gopal Krishna, ToxicsWatch
Alliance (TWA), Mb: 9818089660, E-mail: gopalkrishna1715@gmail.com, Web:
www.toxicswatch.org
Companies are wealth destroyers
Note: Companies Bill, 2012 is supposed to replace the existing Companies Act, 1956. It has been cleared by the Lok Sabha on December 18, 2012. It awaits clearance from the Rajya Sabha.
Earlier, the Companies Bill, 1997 was introduced in Rajya Sabha on 14.8.97. It was referred to the Standing Committee on Home Affairs on July 3, 1998. This Bill was meant to consolidate and amend the Law relating to Companies & to replace the existing Companies Act, 1956. The Companies (Second Amendment) Bill, 1999 was introduced in Lok Sabha on December 23, 1999. It was referred to the Standing Committee on Home Affairs on January 17, 2000. It was meant to amend the Companies Act, 1956. The Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2000 was introduced in Rajya Sabha to provide formation and conversion of cooperatives into companies. The current Bill which was passed by Lok Sabha was initiateted as The Companies Bill, 2008, The Companies Bill, 2009 and The Companies Bill, 2011 as presented to the Parliament to assume its present shape in compliance with the recommendations of the JJ Irani Committee.
In 2011, some 238 companies were identified as vanishing companies. A company is deemed to be a
vanishing company, if it is found to have: a) Failed to file returns with Registra r of Companies (ROC) for a period of two years; b) *Failed to file returns with Stock Exchange (SE) for a period of two years (if it continues to be a listed company); c) It is not maintaining its register ed office of the company at the address
notified with the Registrar of Companies/ Stock Exchange; and d) None of its Directors are traceable.
All the conditions mentioned above would have to be satisfied before a listed company is declared as a vanishing company; The conditions mentioned at (a), (c) & (d) would suffice to declare a company as vanishing if such company has been de-listed from the Stock Exchange.
vanishing company, if it is found to have: a) Failed to file returns with Registra r of Companies (ROC) for a period of two years; b) *Failed to file returns with Stock Exchange (SE) for a period of two years (if it continues to be a listed company); c) It is not maintaining its register ed office of the company at the address
notified with the Registrar of Companies/ Stock Exchange; and d) None of its Directors are traceable.
All the conditions mentioned above would have to be satisfied before a listed company is declared as a vanishing company; The conditions mentioned at (a), (c) & (d) would suffice to declare a company as vanishing if such company has been de-listed from the Stock Exchange.
Gopal Krishna
ToxicsWatch Alliance (TWA)
Text of the full interview done in August 2011
Gopal Krishna is a person who has made a drastic difference
in the world we exist today. He is the convener of Toxics Watch Alliance (TWA)
and an intellect of international repute. He’s been called as a crusader
against those degrading our environment and violators of human rights. His
organization keeps track of callousness, corporate
crimes, military-mining-industrial complex, and their impact on humans,
wildlife and ecosystem. Gopal Krishna has stopped several polluting projects
and resisted anti-environment corporate policies. He is working against trade
in hazardous wastes and obsolete technologies and carbon trade. As part of Water
Watch Alliance, which is allied to TWA he has led the opposition to Diversion
of Rivers in the name of Interlinking of Rivers, world’s biggest project
because it is ecologically disastrous. TWA advocates car free culture. He is a
member of No to Nuclear Energy Forum, All India Coordination Committee of
Anti-Nuclear Movements and Citizens Forum for Civil Liberties. He is an environmental &
occupational health researcher with avid interest in the matter of
civil liberties and public policies. He has been an invitee to UN Meetings,
Parliamentary and Supreme Court's Committees etc. His research deals with
industrial disasters and corporate crimes. He is a commentator
on issues of corporate crimes and accountability of public institutions
for radio, news channels and publications. Gopal Krishna reveals some of his thoughts on current corporate governance
scenarios with Management Mix correspondent Subhash Chandra Yadav.
MM: How do you see the current
corporate scenario in the country with reference to environment?
Gopal Krishna: Since Second World
War, there has been no environmental health impact assessment of irreparable
assault by companies on our ecosystem either in peace time or in war time. Our
country’s economy is merely a subset of world economy which is merely running by mastering the art of cost
externalization wherein corporate business enterprises maximize their profits
by off loading indirect costs and forcing negative effects to a third parties
like labour, communities, future generations and environment. While legislative safeguards for environmental protection do
seem to exist on paper, the role of the political class which is funded by
corporations (under Companies Act, 1956 companies can pay up to 5 % of their
annual profits to political parties) illustrates that homicidal ecological lawlessness
that has led to rampant industrial pollution, soil erosion, agricultural
pollution, and genetic erosion of plant resources are quite crucial and merit
more acknowledgment.
MM: How do you examine the toxic
industries and companies since Independence?
Gopal Krishna:There is an urgent need to examine
the legal instrument called Company. The Parliament of India never found time
to examine the British Companies Act that preceded Indian Companies Act, 1956
in the context of world’s and India’s economic history. This is strange because
we were ruled by a Company for a long time. Since independence companies running hazardous
industries have been funding political parties and have been instrumental in
getting those laws made which suit them.
Consequently, corporate crimes like environmental crimes and pollution
related crimes are not regulated even with the strictness which is reserved for
petty crimes.
MM: How do you compare the
corporate scenario in India with foreign ones?
Gopal Krishna: Free trade fundamentalism rules the
world economy. Indian economy too is hugely influenced by it although
constitutionally, we are a socialist country.
To counter this problem we need to have a robust legislature. A
subservient legislature is being made irrelevant by the transnational
corporations. These companies have become more powerful than the Government of
India and Parliament of India. They are needed to be more assertive and caring
about the country. Our legislators and officials seem to have forgotten the lessons
of slavery to a company.
MM: What shall be the responsibility
of the corporates and should corporate initiate its own regulation?
Gopal Krishna: It is said that laws are the
artifacts of corporations. Corporates are not going to take any moral step
towards these issues because they are artificial persons. And you can’t expect culprits to regulate
themselves. The case of US based Union Carbide Corporation, now a subsidiary of
Dow Chemicals Company and the fake corporate social responsibility of Satyam Company
reveals how inactive out government is and how companies are ungoverned or are ungovernable.
The government seems to be privatizing itself and asking companies to do their
job. In such a scenario, Parliament must assert itself and make the companies
subservient to legislative will.
MM: What solution do you see to this
problem?
Gopal Krishna: The political parties are funded by
the corporates and I believe it is the root of the problem. The companies have indulged
in ‘chemical warfare’ which is poisoning our food chain with impunity. There is
a proposal from Yashwant Sinha headed Parliamentary Standing Committee on
Finance to enhance corporate contribution to political parties from 5 % to 7.5
% of the annual profits of the companies in the Companies Bill, 2009. This is
an anti-environment proposition because the donors are bound to seek lax
environmental laws in return of their contribution to political parties. Unless
there is state funding as has been recommended by a High Powered Multi Party
Parliamentary Committee for political parties to fight elections, it is
unlikely that the structural weakness in the environmental governance can be
rectified.
A Group of Ministers (GoM), headed by the Union Home Minister was
set up on 17th August, 2011 to consider recommendations of the
Indrajit Gupta Committee on State funding of elections. The decision to
constitute the GoM was taken at a meeting of the Union Cabinet, presided over
by then Prime Minister. Even this GoM had Sinha in it. He cannot feign
ignorance about it. The Committee on State Funding of Election, headed by the
former Union Home Minister Indrajit Gupta, had submitted its report to the
Government on January 14, 1999.
The Indrajit Gupta panel had favoured State
funding of elections, saying it was justified constitutionally and legally.
Companies Bill, 2009 must ensure that corporate contribution to political
parties is banned. If this is not done there is no power on this planet that
can arrest the collapse of our ecosystem. Sinha headed Parliamentary Standing
Committee on Finance submitted its report to the Parliament on 31st
August, 2010. It is quite alarming that the new Corporate Affairs Minister,
Veerappa Moily has said that “his utmost priority” would be to pass the
Companies Bill 2009. He said that “In the monsoon session, that will be the
top most agenda.
Even as the Law Minister I had studied the Bill and it is one
of the best Bills. We will meet the monsoon session deadline and we will make
sure that it comes up before the Cabinet immediately”.
If this Bill is passed
without banning corporate funding of political parties, it would be one of the
saddest days for the Indian Parliament and India’s environment.
Environmental
rights are closely linked to violations of human rights. Hence, it’s the
principal duty of the governments to list the environmental criminals, book
them and punish the guilty both under civil laws and criminal laws.
MM: How will the issues like
unemployment and poverty be addressed in the absence of corporate and industry?
Gopalkrishna: Economic census of 2005 tells us that
there are 42 million non-farm enterprises in the country of which less than
300,000 are corporates. The fact is that companies are killing employment in
India. For instance, the Indo-Gangetic plain is the most fertile land in the
world and the industry in this region should be agriculture based. It would be
ecocidal to adopt the toxic model of western industrialization for this region
in particular. What is being done is the lands are turning arid and water
bodies are being polluted by the companies. Health soil and pure water is
wealth.
Take the
case of Ganaga river basin, whose interest is actually being served? Here the
government had to choose between the interest of Ganga and the companies blinded
by lust for profit at any cost. The government that survives on corporate finds
to political parties chose the latter. The companies are wealth destroyers.
The history
of the world economy reveals that there was less poverty in the absence of
companies and employment was not company dependent, it was dependent on skills.
MM: Don’t you think the economic
growth of the country will be hindered?
Gopal Krishna: What kind of economic growth do they
talk about? In 1750, the share of India in total global industrial output was
around 25 percent. Today it’s well below 5 per cent. Unemployment is unmatched
in history. How could it be the real model of industrial growth?
MM: How do you see the difference in
the operations of foreign companies in India and in their mother countries?
(Double standard)
Gopal Krishna: The double standard of the foreign
companies has been exposed. It has been witnessed in the matter of industrial
disaster of Bhopal and in the case of pesticides in soft drinks. There are
numerous such cases. Even Indian companies indulge in double standards. They make two kinds
of goods-the inferior ones for domestic consumption and better ones for abroad.
MM: How human rights are violated by Indian
companies? What solution do you see to this?
Gopal Krishna: Human rights are violated by Indian
companies through their acts of industrial pollution, deforestation, land
grabbing and displacement of tribals and farmers. Companies incorporate sustainability
and adopt corporate governance and corporate social responsibility only as
public relations exercise. Bloomberg collects ESG (environmental, social and
corporate governance) data on 3,500 companies globally including 580 Indian
companies, making India the second largest participant. The fact remains ESG
disclosure is a very small beginning but in India even this is quite poor. It has
been noted that Indian investors are fixed on pure financial returns and least
concerned about human rights, environmental and occupational health rights. As a first step, if companies can be
penalized for their human rights violations, their social and environmental
costs are quantified then they can be regulated. Shareholder activism too can
play a role although it has its limitations because engaging with Indian companies
is a tough task.
MM: How did you see the working of
former Forest and Environment minister Jairam Ramesh?
Gopal Krishna: The fact that Jayanthi Natarajan has
been appointed a junior minister like her predecessor, Jairam Ramesh underlines
that Prime Minister does not accord the priority, environmental issues deserve.
Once again the minister has been kept structurally weak so that whenever there
is conflict between blind economic growth and ecology, the former is given
precedence at the cost of the latter. The Ministry has been designed to be
structurally weaker than all the other ministries, which adversely impact the
environment and poison our food chain. It is that the Cabinet Committee on
Economic Affairs (from which the Environment Ministry draws its mandate) and
the Prime Minister are not yet alive to the collapsing ecosystem. Jairam Ramesh
is now a member of Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs. Hopefully, he would
be able to do all that he could not do as a junior minister to protect the
environment.
MM: What do you expect from the young
generation in this direction?
Gopal Krishna: Young generation should split the
truth about Big Brands wide open and see through them with their own naked eyes
what the advertising and public relations industry does not want them to
see. To begin with, they should boycott
all products of such companies which are anti-environment, anti-labour,
anti-human rights and anti-democracy.