Modi govt heavily foreign-funded, says Medha Patkar

From the growing need for dialogue to suppressing dissent, the founder member of the 34-years-old Narmada Bachao Andolan and Right Livelihood laureate Medha Patkar spoke to DH on a range of issues and stressed on the need for people's movements to converge to get the best results.

Governments are known to suppress people's movements...

Yes. People's movements are seen only as resistance. Even the non-violent movements are not given the space that is granted by the constitution. That's why concepts like Urban Naxals have come into force. They distort everything said or done by the activists; the rulers at the Centre have taken the centre-stage. They are the ones who are continuously using violence, but they condemn the non-violence movement as violent. That is a sad story. Having a different ideology doesn't mean people are violent.

Is there any place left for people's politics when the power game is so glaring in the electoral politics?

Electoral politics was based on the Representation of the People Act, 1951. But now they are not representing the people. The whole letter and spirit of the Act have been violated. There is a place for the panchayats in the Act. These units of governance and decision-making are totally bypassed. Instead, [politicians] come from the top, with their capital investment, into the game of managing vote banks. That is how I see the elections now and people are also losing faith in them.

Anti defection law is falling short of the requirement. The party funding has no limits. Now the new [electoral] bonds show that they don't want to be accountable on the funding issue. They have not accepted RTI as applicable to political parties. All these aspects indicate that they don't want to genuinely go in for people's support and support the people in turn. They are only for power-mongering.

That is why the whole character of the democratic fora has also changed. How much can we expect from this system? There is a limit, not that we consider them as untouchables. Wherever there is a response we go and approach them and seek support.

Centrist parties have more space for dialogue, but not the extreme Left and extreme Right. Wherever there is some opportunity for dialogue, we come together. The 'Fronts' of the parties take a different decision than the parties. So, we share the dais with the political party fronts, be it the women's front or the labourer's front or the farmers' front. It is, therefore, necessary that we must try and build a movement to transform electoral politics.

On the other hand, we must save and strengthen non-electoral politics. This was always at the forefront of every people's movement. Be it the freedom movement or the international movements against corporates, WTO and Indian national movements like the Narmada or Nandigram, it has been the civil society that is supporting the movements.

Earlier the governments were open to dialogues and were ready to make the changes if necessary. Now what is happening is that politicians are more interested in changing laws in favour of corporates and abolishing the laws as they have done in the case of 144 labour legislations.

Alliances between various movements strengthen people's politics. That has to be non-corrupt. If there is anything happening in the NGOs, they can be punished. There is a law. Otherwise, they are not looting the common people's resources.

Is the government right in making retrospective amendments to the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA)?

Actually, they have no right to question the foreign funding to NGOs. We [Narmada Bachao Andolan] who have not been dependent on foreign funding are also questioned by them. This is systematically done to target the activists, to defame them.

And they are themselves heavily foreign-funded. And the Modi government is the worst of all. They have all the funding from all the international institutions.

But they are trying every way to finish off resistance and question. There is intolerance, not only on the grounds of religion and caste but also on the ground of development and governance.

Is the government overlooking certain pressing issues?

There is no dialogue, but I can’t say there is no response. Congress brought out many Acts during their regime but they couldn’t capitalise on that. Those Acts were drafted with direct participation. In the Planning Commission, there were working groups, and people who were against many of the Congress policies also were permitted to sit, discuss and suggest. 100% acceptance was never there. But there was dialogue. National Alliance of People’s Movements participated in the process of formulating most of these Acts. Today that kind of dialogue is not taking place.

Recently, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change was trying to change the Forest Rights Act. The draft was ready. It was also sent to the departments for consent. On November 21, there was a huge protest, the same day he had to announce its withdrawal.

We are not dissenting for the sake of it. We want a pro-people approach in the development paradigm, in democratic governance. And all the values, secularism to socialism in the constitution, must get reflected in every policy, every decision, every project that the government brings out.

Where do we stand in achieving sustainable development goals?

International conferences or agendas, be it sustainable development goals or climate change, they remain at the international level. They don’t translate into action. A kind of fakeness is in the air and there is a lot of criticism about it. It is not only in electoral promises or manifestos, but it is also in these kinds of concepts of paradigms.

Sustainability will come in the development paradigm only if those who have sustainable lifestyles get into the decision-making groups. So the community has to be the unit. That is what the constitution says.

Planning of development must start from the community. And those should be incorporated into broader plans. This is called the principle of subsidiarity. Unfortunately, that is not happening. There are no inputs towards sustainability or towards justice in the planning process.

Are people being benefitted from Make in India?

Make in India and India Shining are just slogans. Make in India is happening through machines, not through hands and not through sustainable use of natural resources.

The non-formal sector is actually the mainstream. 93% of workers who are considered unorganised are more organised. They should be called as insecure, unprotected. They are the ones who are really bringing in products that fulfil the basic needs.

This kind of conflict exists because there is no level-playing field. So their livelihoods are finished. So one sector after the other is affected. Not just handloom, but also middle-scale industries, village industries, home industries have no market now. They are considered ancillary. Industrial colonisation is happening now. Nothing is left out for the people who live self-reliant lives, producing things to fulfil the basic needs without much destruction of the environment.

Youth are in action to protect the environment...

There are many issues on which the youngsters got involved. Wherever they are not making it as a glamorous activity, they make a better impact. They bring in a lot of energy, they have all these tools in their hands, they use special media effectively. We all need youngsters around us to energise us, to motivate us and also to support us. They come out with new ideas. They win these small but critical issues.

Tell us about the journey of Narmada Bachao Andolan...

Narmada Bachao Andolan has completed 34 years. It is clear that we compelled the World Bank to withdraw from the Narmada Valley.

The international commission appointed under the chairmanship of UNDP vice-president felt that this project could be completed only through unacceptable means. That whole international experience has resulted in a panel formed within the World Bank. There is an inspection panel, any World Bank funded project-affected people can approach the panel and file a complaint. That panel has given a decision to stop funding the Amaravathi city project in Andhra Pradesh and the Tata Mundra power project in Gujarat. Also, the World Commission on Dams was formed.

Now wrong alternatives are proposed. Interlinking of rivers would further benefit the corporates. These are more centralised, corporatised, and capital-intensive alternatives. [Real] alternatives are in a decentralised approach.

All these things came out of the struggle and thousands of people have got house plots, resettlement sites.

We got five acres of land each, for about 20,000 families. Officials and leaders say that if there was no struggle, this wouldn't have happened. But thousands remain to be rehabilitated.

Potters, boatsmen, many scheduled caste labourers are still to get whatever they are entitled to. We can't stop saying we have achieved a lot.

We are not only continuing the struggle but are also active in reconstructive work through Jeevanshalas.