PANOS SOUTH ASIA-KALPAVRIKSH MEDIA DIALOGUES

MissingtheWood for the Trees:

Covering environment in the era ofeconomic reforms.

Session 2

Digging up trouble: Globalisation and the politics of mining

Date: 19th and 20th July2007

Time:14:00 – 17:00

The second session of the PANOS- South Asia- Kalpavriksh Media Dialogues was organized on 19th and 20th July 2007, at India International Centre and YWCA respectively. The session was titled Digging up trouble: Globalisation and the politics of mining. Based on the experience and response from the first session it was decided that there should be change in format of the session. The feedback on the first session was that instead of organizing a full day meeting, it would be better to break it up to two half-day sessions. The mining session was designed based on this.

The main focus of Session 2 was on how the booming extractive mining industry is affecting the Adivasis and the diverse flora and fauna of the mineral- rich areas. All the laws and policies whether it’s the procedures under the Environment Protection Act or the Land Acquisition law, are being moulded or violated to suit the mining industry. The state’s involvement in facilitating speedy mining leases and its impacts on tribal and other local communities and the environment were looked at. The speakers included academicians, representatives of people’s movements, legal practitioners, ex- Government officials and community representatives. The specific cases from different states of India, where mining has taken its toll on people and environment and the aggravated violence and conflicts in mining project areas, were discussed. The speakers included:

  1. Roger Moody, Managing Editor of Mines and Communities, London
  2. E A S Sarma, Former Secretary, Department of Economic Affairs and Energy, Government of India, Hyderabad
  3. Nandini Sundar, Department of Sociology, DelhiSchool of Economics, University of Delhi
  4. Chandra Bhushan/ Monali Zeya Hazra, Centre for Science and Environment, Delhi
  5. Ritwick Dutta, Advocate, Supreme Court of India
  6. Rifat Mumtaz, NCAS, Pune
  7. Sreedhar Ramamurthy, Environics Trust, Delhi
  8. Xavier Dias, Coordinator, BIRSA Mines Monitoring Centre, Ranchi
  9. Rana Sengupta, MLPC, Jodhpur

Apart from the above-mentioned speakers, discussants were present who added value to each session by citing examples from their regions and concerns regarding mining. The discussants included:

  1. Prafulla Samantara, Lok Shakti Abhiyan, Orissa
  2. Ramesh Agarwal, Jan Chetana, Chattisgarh
  3. Alok Shukla, Nadi Ghati Morcha, Chattisgarh
  4. Pankti Jog, Janpath, Gujarat
  5. Sitaram Shashtri, Jan Chetna Sangharsh Vahini, Jharkhand
  6. Rajendra Kerkar, Vivekanand Environment Awareness Brigade, Goa
  7. Dr. Sanjay Raj, Senior Geologist, Rajasthan
  8. Manshi Asher, NCAS, Pune

A media kit was prepared and included briefs of the presentations of most of the speakers. It included 7 articles:

  1. A critique of Orissa mining based economy by Banikanta Mishra
  2. Critical analysis of New National Mineral Policy by Manshi Asher
  3. Mining in Gujarat by Pankti Jog
  4. The Sponge Iron Industry – Blacking out the country side by Rifat mumtaz and Manshi Asher
  5. Digging up trouble: Globalisation and the politics of mining by Xavier Dias
  6. Who are mining corporations accountable to? By Xavier Dias
  7. Nexus between state and the mining industry by E A S Sarma
  8. Undermining India, a publication by Kalpavriksh.

Over two days 15 media persons attended the meeting, both from news agencies as well as mainstream papers. Television and Internet journalists were also present and the session saw a few correspondents from the finance news papers as well. Below are the names of the media persons who attended the session:

  1. Bharat Dogra, News from Fields and slums
  2. Akash Bisht, Hard News
  3. Dinesh C. Sharma, Freelancer
  4. Latha Jishnu, Business World
  5. Himanshu Upadhyaya, Intercultural resources
  6. H. G. Arora, Samaj Dharam
  7. Siddharth Pandey, NDTV
  8. Rahul Kumar, One World
  9. Nitin Sethi, Times of India
  10. Ravleen Saluja, Indian Express
  11. Mrityunjay, Charkha
  12. Vibha Sharma, The Tribune
  13. Sreelatha Menon, Business Standard
  14. Amrish (affiliation not known)
  15. Chetan Chauhan, Hindustan Times
  16. Aman Sethi, Frontline

A brief of the presentations and discussions that were carried out on the two days is as follows:

DAY 1

19 July 2007

At India International Centre, Lodhi Road; New Delhi

The workshop started with Mr. E.A.S Sarma from Forum for Better Vishakha launching the book written by Roger Moody titled Rocks and Hard Places. The PANOS- South Asia publication titled ‘Caterpillar and the Mahua Flower-Tremors in India’s Mining Fields’ was also released and distributed to the participants of the programme.

Roger Moody gave the lead presentation highlighting the global scenario in which the mining industry operates. Based on his experiences of traveling in the Indian states of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Chattisgarh and Orissa, he brought to light the issues of exploitation of labour, ecological devastation, adverse influence of water resources in hills and so on. He raised concern regarding the unprecedented corporate merging in mining industries globally, which has led to increase in mining of non- ferrous and ferrous minerals in last few years. This has definitely led to a decrease in the degree of quality of mineral and increase in the prices. Despite the high metal prices the industry is under constraints. These have been the reason for mergers with the purpose of cutting costs and exploiting the reserves in bigger mines. He also gave insight to the global status of the industry along with use and misuse of the new techniques in the mining sector, which are very harmful for the environment. He also focused on the trends in ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’ that has resulted in partnerships between international conservation groups and the mining industry. These partnerships have failed to address the negative impacts of the sector and instead have lent greater legitimacy to it.

Followed by this, R Sreedhar, a trained geologist spoke on the policy and legal regime governing the mining sector. There are far reaching social and economic implications affecting mining areas. The beneficiaries are clearly the investors, investment bankers, owners and managers, politicians and contractors, consultants, and reclaimers. In the year 2004, the GOI came up with Mine Closure Rule, which applies to all the mines. But due to the lack of a progressive Mine Closure Plan, which needs to be approved by the Indian Bureau of Mines, it has been used, as a tool to getting money for the same work that one wants to do. The political uncertainty, different needs of minerals at different levels and the complex economy structure has further worsened the situation. The laws which exists regarding mining like, Mines and Minerals Development and Regulation Act, the various Cess acts, Goa Daman and Diu Concession Act, Offshore Area Mineral Development Act along with several rules which govern the industry are not properly implemented and this has worsened the situation further.

This was followed by Mr. E.A.S Sarma’s presentation on the case study of a proposed project by the Jindals in Vishakhapatnam for bauxite mining and setting up of a refinery for aluminum production. The permission for bauxite mining in question was given to the Jindals, without any competitive bidding. Samata, an NGO went to Supreme Court and highlighted that the area in question was a Schedule V area as per the Indian constitution. As per the Samata Judgment of the Supreme Court, the order reads that only tribals can own, occupy land and mine in the area, others don't have a right. The government in an attempt to bypass this judgment, asked the Andhra Pradesh Mining Development Corporation to carry out mining along with the Jindals. On 1st July 2005 the State Government and Jindals signed a MOU without the involvement of the Mining Development Corporation of Andhra Pradesh. He highlighted that the construction of the refinery would lead to major impacts including, displacement of people, and access to 8 million gallons of water, in addition to release of harmful chemicals as residue. The public hearing got postponed twice and finally took place on 3rd June 2007. In spite of all the opposition, the Government of Andhra Pradesh is going ahead with the refinery and the mining. The presentation brought forth the point about a clear nexus between a company like Jindal, the government and the other stakeholders as an example to promote privatization and without taking into account the welfare of the people, and the environmental impacts.

Nandini Sundar gave the last presentation of the day. She emphasized the different levels and the kinds of violations related to large-scale mining and related industries. With regard to small-scale mining, there is everyday violence in the villages. There are no big companies but smalltime thekedars (contractors) keeping the local people employed in smelting and other operations. . Even if local people are against mining, they are unable to complain, as mining becomes their source of income. On the other hand there is large scale mining which involves land acquisition and violence at a major level along with problems such as mining accidents and so on. Today there are many instances, and some of them are unknown like Lohandigura where the Tatas are trying to build a steel plant and Nagarnar, where gramsabha records were forged. Violence happen at all levels, against women and in the form of merciless killing. It creates a very threatened atmosphere among the villagers. But often the media presents the picture in such a way that people retaliating are shown to be opposing the prosperity of the nation. Highlighting the link between bureaucracy and crime targeted against the locals as in the case of Salwa Judum, Chattisgarh. Salwa Judum, as believed by many is a weapon used by the Government for land acquisition. . Salwa Judum was formed to fight against the naxalites in the area. But the villagers say, that they have been dragged by the Government to join Salwa Judum. This involves killing, extortion, raping and etc. The Central Government states Salwa Judum as an achievement for setting up a local resistance group and encourages more such groups at the state levels. Groups like Salwa Judum evacuate the area in no time. The people get scared to go back to the villages and it becomes an easy task to give away the land to the industry. The recent development in the area has been, to change these relief camps into permanent houses and this is being funded by the Essar group. This is being done as a part of their regional developmental programme for permanent relocation of the villages, without the consent of the villagers whose land has been acquired. People are also told to give up their land in return of job and security once the units’ comes up in the area. She adds further, “it sounds like a conspiracy theory, but it might not be a causal relationship, but rather be a relationship of affinity or variability”. This example certainly shows some kind of connection between the Tata and Essar Steel with Salwa Judum

Day 2

20 July 2007

YWCA, Connaught Place

New Delhi

The first presentation of the day was by Monali Hazra from Centre for Science and Environment on “ Making Mining Work for the Development”. She took the place of Chandra Bhushan, who was unable to make it due to ill health. The presentation highlighted that out of the 50 top mineral producing districts of India, 60% fall under the 150 backward districts of the country. In states like, Jharkhand, Orrisa and Chattisgarh, which have the maximum “backward” communities, mineral royalty contributes only 6-13% of the revenue receipt. For instance, the iron ore districts of Keonjhar (Orissa) and Bellary (Karnataka) where 50% of the population is below the poverty line, produces 19-21% of iron ore for the country. Similar is the case, of the limestone district Gulbarga, Bauxite district Koraput, Zinc district Bhilwara. The major area of concern is the sensitive location of the mining areas, on forest land, in the watershed areas. The need of the hour is to revise the policies where local benefits and environment welfare are given more attention. The presentation highlighted that the two prevalent myths in the mining industries are: firstly, mining sector is constrained by the forest and environment rules and the secondly, mining is development. Amidst all this, regulation and rules are broken and no legal action is taken. The question then is whether mining and environment is compatible? To make it compatible, the country needs to take strong measures to maintain the fine balance between the interest of nature and people. Otherwise mining will lead to more conflicts, will not be efficient or productive.

Rifat Mumtaz gave the next presentation, on the case against Sponge Iron plant as an allied industry to mining. Sponge Iron has taken an important place in the Steel Industry, as it is considered user friendly and cheaper than scrap and pig iron. India contributes 20% of the Sponge Iron produced through out the world. Factors which have contributed to the growth of this industry lie with delicensing in 1985 leading to the privatization, 100% direct foreign investment, reduction of custom duty of raw materials, liberalization of import technology, higher subsidy on electricity, easy land purchasing and easy availability of scrap iron. According to IISI, by 2010 global demand for steel will grow by 4.9 %, but India will see a much faster growth in consumption, up to of 7 %. There is a clear linkage between the Sponge Iron Units (SIUs) and the Mining Sector. For instance the Keonjhar (Orissa) iron ore is the largest mine in the country producing 2.4 lakhs tones/day, of which 10% is supplied to SIUs. Similarly there are several ores present near the SIUs, such as Raigarh; Durgapur getting supply from Dhanbad; Chandrapur, Hospet and Bellary have attracted SIUs in the Western Ghats. Between 2004-06 MoUs with 42 companies in steel, mining, power and other sectors & more than 50 sponge iron industries were signed. This has led to the global problem of air pollution, water pollution, soil pollution, loss of biodiversity and labour issues. Under the Red Category the SIUs have been assigned as having high pollution potential. There are no standards for preventing pollution in such industries, and neither are there any siting guidelines set yet.

Ramesh Agarwal from Jan Chetana, Chattisgarh spoke about the situation of mining industry in Chattisgarh. 17 units of JSPL, a sponge iron company in Raigarh, against which cases were filed in 2005, under Environmental Protection Act and other pollution control and prevention acts by Chattisgarh SPCB for which primary hearing is still pending. In 2007, SPCB again filed cases against the same units . The fact evident from this case was that SPCB functions under pressure from the Sponge Iron companies and not that, they couldn’t take any regulatory action against these SIUs. Filing the case in the court, denies fast and just actions for most of the cases, which keeps the industries running for indefinite period without any regulatory action. He cited another example of a subsidiary unit of JSPL in Raigarh, which had been granted clearance. The unit in order to withdraw water had submitted a letter to the Ministry. The permission was granted to withdraw with one of the condition stating ground water survey by CGWA. The catch was that, the ground water survey was not in the jurisdiction of CGWA. At present no records exists for this case. According to the Ministry the project has been granted clearance and so the permission for withdrawal of ground water, unaware of the actions taking place at the ground level

The next presentation was by Xavier Dias on Accountability of Mining Industries and the Accountability of the states. He traced the history of the making of Jamshedpur by Jamshedji Tata where mining was the basis of the livelihood. He linked the issue to the World Bank, which came into the scenario when they funded the mining projects in the area. After the Earth Summit at Rio the corporations united very fast and the World Bank became the head of the agenda, which envisaged benefits to both the corporations and the people at the cost of sustainable development. The World Bank had set up an Inspection Panel in Washington, which would look into the compensatory conditions being laid properly. The Chotanagpur Seva Samiti of Adivasi, Hazaribagh helped in filing the petition against WorldBank funded East Parez Mine. The complaint was regarding the non-compensation of the conditions of rehabilitation, house, land and job. The Inspection Panel found the reasons for the complaint true and came out with a report recording 30 violations regarding the clause of “Land for Land”, and others like Cash, housing compensation. As a result, the World Bank came up with another Monitoring Panel which took the responsibility of implementing the compensatory packages, but to the disappointment of the adivasi’s, this panel failed to comply their demands. They granted a meager amount of Rs.300, 000 dollars to the adivasis. The Monitoring Panel rejected the Inspection Panel report in spite of clear and continual requests from the adivasis to grant them all the compensations, promised during the commencement of the project at the East Parez mines. The inadequacy of the World Bank panel to implement and understand the situation reflected the sordid situation of the states as far as accountability of the mining industry is concerned.