JOIN USGreen laws panel members walk out of public hearing
Members of the high-level committee set up by the Centre to review India’s laws on environment and forest protection walked out of a public meeting here on Saturday, even as green activists were seeking their turn to speak.
The three-member panel, headed by former union cabinet secretary T S R Subramanian, arrived for the meeting at 12.05 pm and left by 12.45 pm. The scheduled time for the public hearing was between 12 pm and 1.30 pm.
The green activists questioned the timeframe given by the committee for the hearing. They objected to the fact that only one and half hours were allotted for reviewing five major environment laws. With the committee reportedly dismissing their concerns, one activist claimed that the hearing was a joke.
In response, activists present at the hearing said that Subramanian walked out of the room stating, “Then, we will end the joke here. Any further grievances can be mailed to us later.”
The activists state that soon after the committee members entered the room, representatives from the Karnataka Planters Association and RTI activist ACF Anand spoke about procedural difficulties in securing forest clearance and conforming with pollution control norms for plantations. He said all environmental laws must be translated into regional languages, so that they are understood by all.
Later, the Environment Support Group (ESG), headed by Leo Saldanha, questioned the terms of reference (TOR) given to the committee by the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests. He asked whether the TOR constituting the committee was sufficient for such a massive and onerous task that involved fundamentally reviewing all environmental laws linked to right to life, clean environment and livelihoods.
The issue dragged on for no less than half an hour, even as other green activists were waiting to speak on concerns they felt had to be addressed by the committee reviewing the laws.
One such snubbed group at the public meeting was from Mavallipura, which wanted to seek clarification for certain issues pertaining to garbage dumping in the surroundings of their village.
Aruna Chandrashekar, business and human rights researcher of Amnesty International India, was witness to the entire interaction, wherein the committee did not heed to the concerns of the green activists.
When she tried to raise issues pertaining to India’s obligations under international law to consult affected communities, she, along with others present, was asked to make written representations.
“A committee with such a far-reaching mandate with lasting implications must conduct consultations that are meaningful and allow a wide range of stakeholders to be heard.
Today’s dialogue was far from encouraging.” A release was later issued by ESG, with 25 signatories, suggesting that they were “deeply disturbed by the manner in which the committee treated this public consultation process.”