From patrickirn@igc.apc.org Fri Oct 6 14:03:09 1995 Received: from lucy.cs.wisc.edu by sea.cs.wisc.edu; Fri, 6 Oct 95 14:03:02 -0500; AA18470 Received: from cdp.igc.apc.org by lucy.cs.wisc.edu; Fri, 6 Oct 95 14:02:25 -0500 Received: from igc4.igc.apc.org (igc4.igc.apc.org [192.82.108.37]) by cdp.igc.apc.org (8.6.12/Revision: 1.207 ) with SMTP id LAA11935; Fri, 6 Oct 1995 11:59:32 -0700 Received: (from patrickirn) by igc4.igc.apc.org (8.6.12/Revision: 1.15 ) id LAA22072; Fri, 6 Oct 1995 11:59:26 -0700 Date: Fri, 6 Oct 1995 11:59:26 -0700 From: Patrick McCully Message-Id: <199510061859.LAA22072@igc4.igc.apc.org> To: ae140@leo.nmc.edu, alau@sirius.com, AniD@aol.com, ashah@dc.asce.org, budaraju@luther.che.wisc.edu, johna@uclink2.berkeley.edu, jvaidya@netcom.com, mdharmaw@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca, narmada@lucy.cs.wisc.edu, srrajan@violet.berkeley.edu, twn@unv.ernet.in Subject: NArmada Update /* Written 11:22 AM Oct 6, 1995 by irndc in igc:env.dams */ /* ---------- "NArmada Update" ---------- */ a The Narmada Struggle International Campaign After the World Bank Pull-Out Narmada Bachao Andolan (Struggle to Save the Narmada) October 1995 When the World Bank pulled out of the Sardar Sarovar Narmada Project in March 1993, it was hailed as a major victory not only for the people's struggle in the Valley, but also for the intense international campaign in which literally thousands of NGOs and individuals all over the world had participated. Ironically, for many, this occasion also meant a virtual end of the Narmada Campaign, or at least a downward shift in the priority list. After all, now that the Bank was out, what role could the international campaign play ? At least for those not in the core of the campaign, it seemed that the World Bank pull-out was the logical point to shift to other campaigns where victory was not yet in sight. For some others, the events in the Narmada Valley after 1993 - the seeming determination of the Government to continue ahead with the project, the increasing human rights violations, and the serious state of the resettlement program -- raised the question -- were we right in insisting for the withdrawal of the Bank ? Or should we have let the Bank remain in the project, and used the leverage to improve the situation ? It is in this context that it becomes important for the international community fighting for just and sustainable development to examine the developments in the Narmada Campaign since March 1993. The Struggle Continues The first, and most important fact is that the struggle in the Narmada Valley is continuing, and in fact, intensifying. The withdrawal of the Bank was a very important, but only the earliest steps in its final goal. This withdrawal however, has been very crucial to the struggle. When the Morse report came out, and the Campaign called for the withdrawal of the Bank from SSP, the Bank had one stock argument - "The situation will be worse without us. Let us remain in the project, we will use our leverage to impose and implement the conditions which will ensure a proper R&R of the oustees. In any case, the Government of India is determined to go ahead with out the Bank, so our pulling out is not going to be of any use." And yet, it has been critical. Of course, the Government kept on saying that they would go ahead with the project. It closed the sluices at the bottom of the dam, pushed ahead the construction, bringing the first submergence in the Valley. However, all this false bravado could not hide the truth - and that is - without the Bank's involvement, the project is finding it extremely difficult to maintain its credibility, and get funds. A Question of Credibility The first impact of the Bank's withdrawal was a blow for the project's credibility. Many people in the country, especially Gujarat, started asking why the Bank had withdrawn if the everything was fine with the project. The withdrawal opened up enormous space in the country for challenging the fundamentals of the project. It must be noted that it is only after the withdrawal of the Bank that the Government of India initiated an Independent review of the Project. This Review, by a Five Member Group headed by the Member (Irrigation) of India's planning Commission (Known simply as the Five Member Group - the FMG) submitted its first report in July 1994, raising substantive issues regarding the project. This had been one of the long standing demand of the struggle, and yet, it was only in August 1993 that the Review Group was formed. In February 1994, the Government of Madhya Pradesh (GoMP), one of of the major party states, announced that it was seeking a reduction in the height of the dam by 19 feet, as it was finding the resettlement of such a large number of oustees impossible. It also pointed out that the hydrological assumptions were wrong, and water yield had been overestimated by over 17 %. Subsequently, the GoMP also called for far larger reduction in the height of the dam. These events really opened up the debate on the fundamental issues, including the alternatives to the project. As a part of the submissions to the FMG, over 100 leading scientists, social scientists, engineers made detailed presentations. This included detailed alternative proposals for both, the power and the water side of the project by some of the leading engineers and scientists of the country. Today, it is likely that some of these proposals could form the basis of consideration of different "solutions" by the Supreme court of India, scheduled to hear the case filed by the NBA soon. One of the most important results of the withdrawal of the Bank was the creation of support for the struggle within the large leftist/socialist parties and their affiliates in India. It is important here to note the timing of the withdrawal. Since 1991, the World Bank -IMF combine had imposed the Structural Adjustment Program on the country, and this had generated a massive opposition from the leftist parties. Large as their strength was, the opposition had been unable to stop the SAP, and by 1993, after two years, it seemed that the Bank-IMF were unstoppable. It was at this time that the NBA was able to kick the Bank out of the project. This really helped create support and sympathy for the struggle in the leftist parties, which are among the dominant progressive force in the country. All this was possible, directly as a result of the Bank's withdrawal and the political space created by it. No Funds, No Project The other aspect is of course, that whatever the Government may say, the withdrawal of the Bank left it in dire financial crisis, leading to serious impact on the project construction. When the Bank withdrew from the project, the Government of India had promised to make good the undisbursed amount to the project. It has still not done so. The project authorities, beset by financial crisis, had to take a decision to offer the power side of the project to private companies. While the decision had been taken over two years ago, there has not been a single response -- indicating the lack of faith in the project, as well as the project's financial unviability. The work on the power side of the project has of course, been going on very slow. The other aspects of the project have also been beset by serious financial problems, and even the work on the canal network -- the major head of expenditure of the project -- is virtually at standstill. As the recent Project Completion Report (PCR) by the Bank itself points out : P 54 Para 10.7 : "Gujarat, which has primary responsibility for financing this project with the assistance of GOI, is currently facing serious resource crunch... Though the first bond issue was successful, it still fell short of the funding requirements for the entire SSP project. It is also difficult to predict whether Gujarat will be able to maintain the attractive rates of the first bond issue and, therefore, continue to raise sufficient funds in the future. Funding for the T/G sets for the riverbed power house was still an issue at the time of the PCR. For these reasons, the Nigam's project implementation schedule now appears optimistic, and the pace of construction on the project as a whole is likely to be slowed not only for technical reasons but also for lack of adequate financial resources". It is thus clear that the withdrawal of the Bank from the project had tremendous impact, destroying a large part of the credibility that the Bank's involvement had undeservedly given to the project; on the other hand, the serious financial crisis in the project after Bank's pull out indicates clearly how it was the Bank's money that was keeping the project alive. Human Rights Violations The Bank's argument that the Human rights situation would be better managed if the Bank was involved also does not hold good. The reality is that serious human rights violations, both, in the narrow sense of police brutalities and use of state power, as well as in the larger sense of forcible evictions etc. were taking place even when the Bank was involved. Our experience in fact shows that the Bank was so involved in defending the project, that it deliberately turned a blind eye to the serious HR violations brought to its notice by many, including the International Human Rights Panel. Even the clear warning by the Morse commission that work could continue only with the help of "unacceptable means" was ignored. Thus, to us it is clear that the Bank's withdrawal has been one of the crucial factors in moving towards the final goal of the struggle. The World Bank -- Out but Yet Not Out Why then, are we still taking about the Bank ? The reason is that the Bank is out, and yet, it is not out of the SSP. For one, the Bank itself is still very much interested in the developments in the project, and is monitoring them on almost day-to-day, or at least development to development basis. In early January this year, the stilling basin, the part of the dam on the downstream side that is supposed to take the force of the overspilling water, suffered serious damage. A Government Dam Safety Panel (DSP) visited the site and came to New Delhi to draft and finalise their report. Before the Indian public had any information, before even the State Governments could see the DSP report, the Bank had it, and the Delhi office had it sent to Washington. Then, three days later, even as the DSP finalised the report, this too was first obtained by the Bank's Delhi office and sent to Washington, before any of the concerned parties in india had seen it. There is also evidence -- from impeccable sources -- that the Bank is still pressurising the Government on the SSP. We have heard that it is "supporting" the proposal of the Government of Madhya pradesh (to lower the height of the dam by 19 feet). Of course, this is being done behind the scenes, so that it does not have to be answerable for its actions. Nor does it have to, then, take into consideration the views of the affected people and concerned NGOs. In March 1995, the Bank came out with the Project Completion Report (PCR) for the two credits/loans given to the SSP. Interestingly, while the PCR upheld many of the things that the struggle had been pointing out, including the serious doubts about project viability, it also said : P 40 Para 187 : "It may be that, once the controversy surrounding the project has subsided, the Bank may consider financing some of the rehabilitation programs." Then of course, there is the clear reference in the Project completion Report that the further credit of US $ 275 million, for the second phase of the Canal network, that was under processing when the Bank was forced to withdraw, has only been postponed. It is clear that the Bank is waiting in the wings, so to say, to come back into the project. What is the Bank's Responsibility to the SSP Affected People ? However, the most important reason why the we still need to focus on the Bank is different. THe key question, now that the Bank is out of the Project is -- does the Bank have any responsibility towards the damages already caused by the project ? It was the Bank's involvement that brought legitimacy and credibility to the project. It was the Bank's financial support that made the project possible, and that kept the project going. For years, the Bank defended the project, and all that was happening, inspite of the warnings by people all over the World. The Bank chose to even disregard, nee, ridicule the warnings by the Morse report. The Bank actively made and influenced decisions regarding the project. Does not the Bank then bear at least a part of the responsibility of the immense damages already caused, the enormous human suffering and misery already being faced by thousands of families ? The serious consequences of the Bank not following its guidelines have been expressed by none other than the Bank's own Operations Evaluation Department (OED). In its Memorandum to the President of the Bank, (March 1995) which accompanies and comments on the Project Completion Report of the SSP, the OED says : " Through out the project preparation and implementation, the Bank supervision missions paid more attention to the engineering than to the environmental aspects of the project." (PCR Annex 1 Page 9 Para 36) "Bank appraisal and supervision performance has been unsatisfactory. Adherence to the Bank's guidelines could have avoided many of the negative consequences of the project - social unrest, diversion of resources (by GOI and the Bank) to address the consequences of inadequate early attention to environment and R&R requirements (especially PAF consultation), delayed benefits and funding difficulties." (OED Memo Page 5 Para 11) "..the lack of prior consultation with the affected families is probably one of the major reasons for difficulties encountered in carrying out socio-economic surveys, preparing satisfactory R&R policies and plans and implementing them in a satisfactory manner..." (PCR Page 35 Para 7.9) There can be no stronger statement about the role of the Bank in the whole issue than the one made by the OED : "While the PCR indicates that the Bank should have taken "stronger action" to correct the R&R and environmental deficiencies during implementation, it does not make a forthright judgment that the Bank's enforcement of covenants was delinquent" (OED Memo Page 5 Para 13) The question is -- given the above facts, what is the Bank going to do about it ? Learning From the Past - At Whose Cost ? Last year, on the occasion of the Bank's 50th Anniversary, it brought out a glossy booklet titled "Learning From the Past, Embracing the Future". The people of the Narmada Valley are saying, "We are the past that you are learning from. And it is a very expensive lesson -- for us. And a very unfair one - you learn, we pay the price." The fact of course is that even the lessons have not been really learnt. This issue is now becoming a very important issue in the campaign against the Bank, for it is not only in SSP that this is happening, but in many other projects. The Bank makes a project possible, sustains it, actively participates in its decision making, and then, suddenly pulls out, as if it does not have to do anything further, except of course, "learn lessons".This then is the next challenge for the MDB campaign -- how to ensure that the Bank takes up the responsibility for things that have gone wrong due to its own actions. It is only when we can do this will the need to learn lessons start being really important for the Bank. When we talk about the Bank accepting its responsibility and doing something about it, many people take this to mean that the Bank would be once again involved in the project. The question is then raised, "You can't have it both ways. You must decide whether you want the Bank to be in, or out". This is a false choice. What we are saying is that the Bank accept its responsibility towards the destruction already caused. This does not mean that the Bank should get back in the project. If someone came into our house and ransacked it, we would demand that that person leave the house never to enter it again. But this does not stop us from saying that he/she must pay for the damages. How Will the Bank Take the Responsibility This is a very important question, and needs extensive debate in the campaign. In the case of the Narmada Project, we of course do not want the Bank to come back into the Project. Under the circumstances, what do we demand from the Bank ? Earlier this year, we wrote a letter to the EDs of the Bank, based on the Project Completion Report. In the letter, we had demanded the following : "1. The Bank must own up moral and legal responsibility - at least a significant share of it - for the destruction that has occurred and is to follow from the SSP. 2. This declaration of the responsibility must be followed by a sincere attempt to compensate for the suffering that the people have had to bear due to the Bank's mistakes. Note that compensating the people for their trauma does not mean helping their displacement. 3. The Bank must make it clear that not only will it never fund the SSP in any form directly, but should also assure the people of India that it will not do so indirectly, through the use of Sector loans. Both the Bank and India must make a public declaration that Bank funds will not be used for SSP - directly or indirectly. 4. The Bank must see that this experience is not repeated again. The only way to do this is by abandoning the funding of large dam projects by the Bank. In our further letter, we also mentioned that the Bank could initiate certain crucial studies related to the project, especially on the alternative strategies for water and energy management with specific references to the SSP. This was in the context of the OED's intention to do some evaluation studies - a few years from now. We had pointed out that a few years from now, the studies would be only of academic interest, useful only for "learning from the past". The important thing is that if at all there is to be any learning from bad experiences, it has to be in such a way that those whose suffering helped the learning must benefit. In essence, what we are saying is that you started it - you better see that it is stopped. And this must be done in a manner that is open, transparent and with the meaningful participation of the affected people. We believe that this has become the most important challenge in the Narmada international campaign, both, in terms of ensuring justice to the people, and for setting precedents for such cases. The Struggle Continues Of course, the biggest rationale for the continuing the international campaign is that the struggle in the valley continues, and international support and solidarity is important, even critical for the success of the struggle, even if the Bank is not involved. It is important because the international opinion counts for a lot in India. It is important because even if the Bank is out, other international agencies -- notable private concerns -- are waiting to get into the project, and the Project Authorities are keen to bring them in. Only last week, the Project has signed a deal with a joint French-US venture for the Canal network automation. These are the French company Gersar and the US based ECI. More such deals are likely to follow. It is important to campaign and see that these companies realise that they are supporting a destructive project, and that they stop doing so. It is important because the Project Authorities have long been planning to tap the international financial markets for funding the project, especially the so called Non Resident Indians (NRIs) -- Indians living abroad. The campaign to counter this is most crucial. In this context, it is important to note that the newly appointed Chairperson of the Nigam (the Government owned corporation that is building the dam), Mr. Jay Narayan Vyas has said that the project has suffered essentially because "We were weak in Public Relations -especially international public relations". He has promised to change this. It is important because the international campaign has played a crucial role in highlighting, and more important, restraining, human rights violations. The immediate and widespread condemnation from all over the world of the attack on NBA's office in March 1994 was critically responsible for the Government supported aggressive campaign to be toned down. However, the most important reason for the international campaign to continue is because we are all fighting for the same larger cause, and linkage and solidarity is essential at all levels for us to succeed anywhere. And hence, on the behalf of the people of the Narmada valley, whose struggle enters a most crucial phase now, we reiterate the need of international solidarity, and the crucial role that it will continue to play in this struggle for justice and sustainability. _________________________________________________________________ Narmada Bachao Andolan (Struggle to Save the Narmada), c/o B 13 Shivam Flats, Ellora Park Road, Baroda INDIA 390 007 Phone : (91)-265-340 168 Fax : c/o (91)-265-330 430 or 338 541 ATTN. NBA 340 168. From jeyaramk@powertech.no Sat Oct 7 14:47:21 1995 Received: from lucy.cs.wisc.edu by sea.cs.wisc.edu; Sat, 7 Oct 95 14:47:18 -0500; AA03427 Received: from login-1.powertech.no by lucy.cs.wisc.edu; Sat, 7 Oct 95 14:47:09 -0500 Received: from [193.71.201.103] (ppp03.vestnett.no [193.71.201.103]) by login-1.powertech.no (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA17617 for ; Sat, 7 Oct 1995 20:46:44 +0100 X-Sender: jeyaramk@mail.powertech.no Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 7 Oct 1995 20:52:41 +0100 To: narmada@lucy.cs.wisc.edu From: jeyaramk@powertech.no (jeyaram K) Subject: INSIDE REPORT from SRI LANKA is on WWW WWW edition of INSIDE REPORT is being published on the WWW since July 1995. It is the first publication on the WWW from Sri Lanka and Tamil Eelam. INSIDE REPORT VOL. 1 No: 25 15th August 1995 Publishers: INSIDE REPORT 144, Aruchchuna Street, Jaffna URL: http://www.powertech.no/~jeyaramk/insrep/ Let me know if you add a link to it. I will then be able to inform you on the developments. regards Jeyaram. K From patrickirn@igc.apc.org Thu Oct 12 21:15:44 1995 Received: from lucy.cs.wisc.edu by sea.cs.wisc.edu; Thu, 12 Oct 95 21:15:41 -0500; AA01290 Received: from cdp.igc.apc.org by lucy.cs.wisc.edu; Thu, 12 Oct 95 21:15:39 -0500 Received: from igc4.igc.apc.org (igc4.igc.apc.org [192.82.108.37]) by cdp.igc.apc.org (8.6.12/Revision: 1.208 ) with SMTP id TAA10792; Thu, 12 Oct 1995 19:14:55 -0700 Received: (from patrickirn) by igc4.igc.apc.org (8.6.12/Revision: 1.15 ) id TAA27721; Thu, 12 Oct 1995 19:14:53 -0700 Date: Thu, 12 Oct 1995 19:14:53 -0700 From: Patrick McCully Message-Id: <199510130214.TAA27721@igc4.igc.apc.org> To: ae140@leo.nmc.edu, alau@sirius.com, ashah@dc.asce.org, budaraju@luther.che.wisc.edu, johna@uclink2.berkeley.edu, jvaidya@netcom.com, mdharmaw@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca, narmada@lucy.cs.wisc.edu, srrajan@violet.berkeley.edu Subject: NBA: Post-1993 SSP Chronology /* Written 7:11 PM Oct 12, 1995 by patrickirn in igc:env.dams */ /* ---------- "NBA: Post-1993 SSP Chronology" ---------- */ From: Patrick McCully The Narmada Struggle A Brief Chronology Since 1993 Narmada Bachao Andolan : October 1995 In July 1993, the world renowned Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Bombay one of the agencies appointed officially for monitoring and Evaluating the resettlement work, brings out a summary report of their work over the last seven years. Their conclusions are clear - resettlement has been a disaster, and the work on the project must stop and the whole issue reviewed thoroughly before going ahead. On 5 August 1993 the Government of India appoints a Five Member Review group headed by the Member (Irrigation) of India's Planning Commission to comprehensively review the SSP. This is in direct response to a strong agitation by the NBA and the tremendous support to it from all over the country and outside. On 7 December 1993, the Central Ministry of Environment and Forest declares that the project has failed in meeting the conditionalities regarding environmental work and resettlement, and calls for a stoppage of work on the project. On 31 December 1993, the Narmada Control Authority endorses the stand of the Ministry, adding that the orders of the Supreme court - that oustees should be resettled at least six months in advance of submergence - have been violated. It also calls for stoppage of work. Finally, on Jan. 12, 1994 the Prime Minister himself is forced to call for a stoppage of work on the project, as the violations are blatant. On 4 March 1994, the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh(M.P.), a major party to the project, writes to the Prime Minister, saying that it was impossible to resettle so many people who would be ousted by the project. He also admits that the water yield of the river has been overestimated by about 17 %, and that the State does not have enough money to complete the project. He further asks the P.M. to intervene and reduce the height of the dam. M.P. has also repeatedly stated that Gujarat - where it hopes most of its oustees will settle - has not been able to show the land availability inspite of many promises. In April 1994, the World Bank publishes a Review of Resettlement of its projects worldwide. The Bank, which had so far defended the project, including its resettlement component, calls the SSP Resettlement as a "bad case" ! In July 1994 the FMG submits the report of its review to the Government of India. A Court order keeps the report sealed. In July, 1994, at least 10 people die on the resettlement sites - Hareshwar, Simamli, Suryaghoda - of cholera and other diseases due to polluted and unclean water. In Nov. 1994- Dec. 1994 the Andolan launches a major action program in Bhopal to protest against the decision to restart the construction on the dam. In December 1994 a team consisting of the Members of the Legislative Assembly of Madhya Pradesh - study the condition of the oustees of MP who have been "resettled" Gujarat. Their report is a damning indictment of the R&R (Resettlement and Rehabilitation) program. They declare that there have been gross violations and people have been shifted without full resettlement. They also express concern over the very feasibility of R&R and recommend immediate stoppage of construction work till the issue is properly settled. Soon after comes the Report of the Committee appointed by the Government of Maharashtra consisting of the local Member of Parliament, and a NGO - and this too unequivocally lambastes the R&R program, pointing out that grave violations have taken place, with land being submerged without the people being resettled. On 13 Dec. 1994 the Supreme court of India orders that the report of the review committee be opened and made public. The report concludes, among other things that : a. The estimate of the total number affected by the project is still not complete, and that an immediate census must be carried out to estimate the numbers of all the different categories of affected people. b. The R&R master plan is not ready. Such a master plan must be made ready within six months (a deadline now expired), including the R&R provisions for non-submergence categories of affected people. c. There is not enough land available to resettle everyone (even while counting only those affected by submergence). d. The police force should be trained (for resettlement work)! e. The water yield of the river appears to be an overestimate. In December, January 1994-1995, the Government of Madhya Pradesh submits on oath its affidavit to the Hon. Supreme Court of India, in which it clearly states that serious violations have taken place in the resettlement of people, and that it believes that Gujarat - which is supposed to resettle the majority of the people - cannot resettle them. GoMP also states that the reduction in height could go much beyond the 19 feet initially suggested by it. Since January 1995, the work on raising the height of the dam has been stopped as the resettlement program is lagging far behind. The target height for 1995 June 1995 was 110 meters - the work has stopped at 80.3 m. In January 1995, the Supreme Court asks the Review Group to study four further aspects of the project namely (a) Hydrology -- whether the water yield has really decreased (b) The Height of the Dam -- whether there is any need to lower the height (c) The Resettlement aspects -- whether R&R is possible or not and (d) The Environmental aspects. This further Report is submitted to the Court in April 1995. While the Report is sure to form an important basis for the case, the Court has ordered that the parties can have it, but it can't be made public. In March 1995, the World Bank comes out with its Project Completion report on the SSP, which agrees that there are severe problems in the Resettlement and rehabilitation, many of them due to the Bank not following its own guidelines. The problems are described as most severe in the crucial areas of consultation with the oustees, maintaining a meaningful dialogue with them and ensuring their participation. The PCR also states that the the Morse Committee was correct in the crucial estimates of the sedimentation in the river and the Bank was wrong. It also says that the Water yield of the river has been overestimated, and the water requirement underestimated. Both these mean that the eventual Command area (benefited area) would have to be reduced by as much as 35 -40 %. Further, the PCR also states that the Irrigation Efficiency assumed by he Project is very high (60 %), and it is more likely to be near about 40 %, again implying that much loss in benefits. PCR also states that the last 30 % of the Command, which is the real drought prone and needy area, would need to be removed from the project benefited zone, as it is unviable to take water there. This in fact destroys the very rational of the project -- the very reason on which the project is supposed to be justified. The PCR also states clearly that the Bank violated its own guidelines and operational directives while appraising, clearing and monitoring the project, and states this as one of the major reasons for the problems faced by the project. Between December 1993 and June 1995 hundreds of families abandon their resettlement sites due to the miserable conditions there, and and return to their original villages. In June 1995 , ARCH-VAHINI, a pro-dam NGO, which has been working jointly with the Government to resettle the people since last seven years, circulates a letter admitting the the enormous problems in the resettlement program since last two years, and resigns from the Government Committee on Resettlement. It should be noted that ARCH was one of the biggest defenders of the resettlement program, and its papers had been circulated worldwide by the World Bank, and it had even been acting as a consultant to the Bank on R&R issues. In June 1995, the new Government in the state of Gujarat announces the launching of a new mega project "Kalpasar", involving the ambitious closing of the Gulf of Khambhat by a dam 56.4 km long to create a freshwater lake of 2900 sq. km. The Government invites international bids for the pre-feasibility studies. The objectives of the scheme -- to supply water to the drought prone regions of Kutch and Saurashtra -- the very objectives of the SSP. Though the Government denies it, the scheme is seen widely as an alternative scheme to the SSP, and it is widely believed that the announcement of this scheme is a clear admission that SSP will not deliver water to these area-- the basis on which the project had been justified. In Sept. 1995, a new Chairperson is appointed to head the Sardar Sarovar Nigam, the Government owned corporation building the dam. The new head, Mr. Jay Narayan Vyas, is known to have had serious reservations about the project in the past. But now, just before he had taken over, he had stated publicly that the failure in SSP is only a failure in the "public relations effort, especially at the international level". He has promised to remedy these ! The Supreme Court of India has fixed 31 Oct. 1995 as the date to begin the final hearing of the comprehensive case filed by the NBA. The hearing, expected to last 5 days, is going to be decisive in the struggle. The judgment could be expected in a month after the hearing. Meanwhile, even as the Supreme Court has indicated implicitly that the construction on the dam should not be stared pending disposal of the case, the Government of Gujarat announces that the they will begin raising the height of the dam from 80.3 m to 85 from 4 Oct. 1995. The NBA announces a major protest action -- a long march from the Valley to N.Delhi, to start on 12 Oct. 1995, which could be followed by even stronger actions if the work is not stopped. The struggle had entered it truly decisive phase. Note : Copies of all the important documents mentioned in the note above can be obtained from NBA. Most can also be obtained from Lori Udall at the International Rivers network. (Ph. 202- 879-4280 Fax 202-879-3186) __________________________________________________________________ NBA, c/o B 13 Shivam Flats, Ellora Park Road, Baroda INDIA 390 007 Phone : (91)-265-340 168 Fax : c/o (91)-265-330 430 or 338 541 ATTN. NBA 340 168. __________________________________________________________________ From patrickirn@igc.apc.org Wed Oct 18 18:45:33 1995 Received: from lucy.cs.wisc.edu by sea.cs.wisc.edu; Wed, 18 Oct 95 18:45:25 -0500; AA05190 Received: from cdp.igc.apc.org by lucy.cs.wisc.edu; Wed, 18 Oct 95 18:45:23 -0500 Received: from igc4.igc.apc.org (igc4.igc.apc.org [192.82.108.37]) by cdp.igc.apc.org (8.6.12/Revision: 1.208 ) with SMTP id QAA22935; Wed, 18 Oct 1995 16:45:02 -0700 Received: (from patrickirn) by igc4.igc.apc.org (8.6.12/Revision: 1.15 ) id QAA16238; Wed, 18 Oct 1995 16:44:57 -0700 Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 16:44:57 -0700 From: Patrick McCully Message-Id: <199510182344.QAA16238@igc4.igc.apc.org> To: 0005614754@mcimail.com, akothari@unv.ernet.in, appa@vax.lse.ac.uk, ecologist@gn.apc.org, ecologist@inbb.gn.apc.org, educserv@sojourn.com, fv016@cleveland.freenet.edu, gautam@qchem.kuchem.kyoto-u.ac.jp, kamal@imsc.ernet.in, L.Mehta@sussex.ac.uk, pchatterjee@igc.apc.org Subject: US Stop Enron Committee Cc: alau@sirius.com, anitapd@aol.com, ashah@dc.asce.org, budaraju@luther.che.wisc.edu, editor@indiacur.com, edutt@mcimail.com, johna@uclink2.berkeley.edu, jvaidya@netcom.com, monitor@essential.org, narmada@lucy.cs.wisc.edu, srrajan@violet.berkeley.edu Date: Mon, 16 Oct 1995 11:21:42 -0400 To: patrickirn@igc.apc.org From: educserv@sojourn.com (Washington Watch) >> Dear Patrick McCully, Please find attached a press release and two articles regarding Enron's project in Maharashtra state. > > Please send these along to all people on your network. > >Sincerely, > > >Shrikumar Poddar K. S. Sripada Raju > for International Service Society > U.S. Committee to Stop Enron in India PO BOX 707 E. Lansing, MI 48826-0707 ============================= NEWS RELEASE For Immediate Release: October 16, 1995 ============================= Contact: Dr. Raju 517-337-7888 Wally Reese 517-333-9273 STOP ENRON COMMITTEE FORMED IN USA Lansing, Michigan -- A Committee of U.S. based Non-resident Indians and Americans interested in India has been formed to STOP ENRON'S PROJECT IN INDIA. Enron proposed building a huge and excessively expensive power generating plant in India's western state of Maharashtra. Today the members of the Committee issued the following statement: "Recently, the state government of Maharashtra in India cancelled the proposed power plant by the Houston based Enron Corporation, costing nearly $3 billion. "A review committee appointed by the state government of Maharashtra, after careful scrutiny of the entire project, concluded that this proposal was not in the public interest. "The detailed report of the committee stated that the project has serious adverse environmental consequences, that the capital costs were excessive, and that very expensive imported fuel would generate very high cost of electricity. "However, due to pressure from the Clinton Administration and the Enron Corporation on the state government, there is a serious danger of the project going ahead. "We, the undersigned, feel that both the U.S. government and the India government should launch a full scale investigation of the Enron Project and ask the Enron Corporation to answer the following questions: (1) Is Enron's project in the public interest? (2) Why has Enron failed to receive clearances from the Central Government's Environmental Ministry? (3) Why has Enron conducted negotiations in secrecy and without competitive bidding? (4) Why does Enron's contract provide that the government of Maharashtra must pay even if the contract is found to be illegal by the courts? (5) To whom did Enron pay $20 million to "Educate Indians," as testified to the U.S. Senate by their spokesperson? (6) How does Enron expect Indian consumers to pay 100% more for electricity in Maharashtra? (7) Why did Enron insist on a 32% internal rate of return on its investment and annual 4% cost escalation regardless of the inflation rate for 17 years? (8) Why does Enron want to go ahead, despite loss of valuable farmland, loss of livelihood for 10,000 families, and serious environmental damage? (9) How will Enron overcome strong opposition by Indian public opinion, and protests by thousands of affected villagers. (10) Will Enron be able to answer serious scientific challenges raised by public interest groups such as PRAYAS, Center for Holistic Studies, and Swadeshi Jagran Manch? "Until satisfactory answers are given to all of the above questions, we call upon the U.S. and Indian governments to stop putting intense pressure on the Maharashtra government to go ahead with this project. "If the Enron Project is not in the interest of the people of India, it is also not in the interest of the people of the U.S. "To build a cooperative partnership between the people of India and the people of the U.S., it is imperative that the public interest be safeguarded and that the highest standards of honesty and integrity prevail in such a partnership. "We urge everyone to contact their two Senators and Representative and to urge them to take a principled stand on this issue." You can join the U.S. COMMITTEE TO STOP ENRON IN INDIA by writing to: DR. K. S. Sripada Raju, STOP ENRON IN INDIA PO BOX 707, East Lansing, Michigan 48826-0707. Signatories: 1. Dr. K. S. Sripada Raju, Intl. Service Society, E. Lansing, Mich. 2. Shrikumar Poddar, President, India Foundation, Lansing, Mich. 3. Satish Bhatnagar, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada 4. G. Nariboli, University of Iowa, Ames, Iowa 5. G. Chandrasekhar, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware 6. Wallace Reese, Michigan Peace Teams, Lansing, Mich. 7. Raja Harish Swamy, Michigan State University, E. Lansing, Mich. 8. Kaleem Kawaja, Touch, Washington, D.C. 9. Balbir Singh Mathur, Trees for Life, Wichita, Kansas 10. Patrick McCully, International Rivers Project, Berkeley California 11. Vinod Mubayi, Ekta, New York, New York 12. Subodh Wagle, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware 13. Steven Letendre, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware 14. Inwhan Jung, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware 15. Lawrence Agbemabiese, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware 16. Dr. Hari Sharma, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada 17. Rev. Peter Dougherty, Covenant for Peace, East Lansing, Mich. 18. Mary Thomas, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. 19. Abhay Bhushan, Indians for Collective Action, Palo Alto, Calif. 20. R. L. Kashyap, Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana 21. Rajeev Patgaonkar, Michigan State University, E. Lansing, Mich. 22. Daniel Wigon, Gandhi Peace Project, Davis, Calif. 23. M. Nagaraju, M.D., Flint, Michigan 24. Kim Joseph, Flint, Michigan 25. Denet Joseph, Flint, Michigan Please note that the organizational names are given for identification purposes only. --=====================_813882102==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ENRON_2.TXT" The decision to scrap the Enron contract is the most signi_cant step to stop the politician's design to mortgage the economic future of India. This decision has sent a strong message to the rulers of India as well as multinational corporations that the plunder of India will not be allowed. The careful examination of all the facts show that Enron's Dabhol Project is economically burdensome, socia lly unjust and environmentally disastrous. First and foremost, the power requirements of the coming years are deliberately in_ated so that the deal could be 'negotiated' in secrecy without competitive bidding. The high capital cost, the guarantee of very high rates of return, central government's counter guarantee, high unit cost of power, and above all disastrous environmental consequences, have been revealed to the public now! The true installed capacity, peak and average demand of the past few years given in Maharashtra State Electricity Board's report, has been glossed over. There already is enough installed capacity to meet the power demands of Maharashtra for the next ten y ears. Moreover, by conservation and streamlining energy use ef_ciency, suf_cient power can be made available at much lower capital costs. The unbridled economic growth mania of the ruling class, bent on promoting conspicuous consumption despite great socio-environmental costs, is at the root of the Enron contract and other so called 'development projects.' The political message from the scrapping of the Enron contract is a great harbinger of self-reliance and swadeshi movement. Hopefully, the foreign powers and multinationals will learn that the people of India are willing to use their democratic power to t hrow out from power any politicians, who want to sell the country for the kickbacks. Where Do We Go from Here ? There is an urgent need to review the energy requirements of the country, and to formulate and implement socially just and environmentally sound alternative energy policy. As of now, there are viable alternatives which will protect India's environment and supplement local power needs where needed to save costly non renewable fuels as well as reduce investments in power transmission infrastructure. Today, in India and elsewhere there are a host of integrated and holistic schemes of power generation through renewable, sources which are much more economically and technically feasible. In India we have abundant sources of easily harnessed low cost renewable energy and successful experimentation with solar, wind, biomass, bio-gas, geothermal, tidal, and micro-hydro power generation at an optimal cost. Energy being the edi_ce of the socio-economic advancement, the forms of energy sources used has a direct bearing on equity and sustainability of the overall developmental process. The global experience suggests that the key to human centered development is harnessing the energy sources which are renewable and at the command of the common people. The key to making development really people-oriented (in place of the project-oriented) is to have energy model and production methods thoroughly decentralized and preserve the sense of community and enhance the quality of life. Need of the hour is clean, cheap and commonly available energy. This alone can bring true peace and prosperity to all people and protect the planet. Please write to: International Service Society P.O. Box 707 E. Lansing, Michigan 48826 --=====================_813882102==_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ENRON_3.TXT" Enron Corporation of Houston, Texas, a powerful politically connected US company, is using its muscle to swindle billions of dollars out of India and other third world countries. Recently, the state government of Maharashtra on the western coast of India cancelled a $3 billion power project after determining that the project was not in the public interest. A government review committee determined that not only did the project fail to meet environmental requirements, but also was awarded without competitive bidding. The project is not in the public interest. Both the Prime Minister of India, Narasimha Rao, and the former Chief Minister of the State of Maharashtra, Mr. Sharad Pawar, approved the project in great secrecy in 1993. Onesided Terms Let us look at the terms of the contract: 1. 16% return in dollar terms for the next 15 years. 2. Payment based on 90% ef_ciency regardless of actual performance. 3. Consumers will have to pay double for electricity. However, bill collection will be the responsibility of Maharashtra State Electricity Board. 4. Even if the courts _nd this con-tract illegal, the government must pay Enron Corporation. An Enron spokesperson told the US Senate, "We spent $20 million for 'educating the Indians.'" Later the Enron of_cials tried to explain away the statement ! $20 Billion Loss The _rst Enron team arrived in India on June 1, 1993. The contract was signed by the of_cials of central and state governments and the project papers moved through various ministries and departments at lightning speed in just _ve days. There are a total of eight such fast track power projects in India, all of them have been awarded without competitive bidding and in great secrecy by various state governments with center's counter guarantees. The total _nancial loss to the Indian consumers, on account of these eight fast track projects is estimated to exceed $20 billion over the next _fteen years. Strong-Arming India There is every kind of conceivable pressure being applied on the Indian of_cials by the Clinton administration to force the Enron project on the people of India. This will adversely affect Indo-US relations. Indian public opinion has turned against this and other fast-track power projects. Multinationals that bribe their way to win lucrative contracts with connivance of politicians, bureaucrats, and other in_uential people in the third world are damaging the US's image abroad. This will make it harder for honest companies to do business without resorting to bribery and corruption. Enron's project in India does not serve the best interests of the people of India or the people of the United States. Enron must be stopped in India. There are strong grassroots groups in India that are determined to _ght them. They need your urgent action and support. What Can You Do? 1. Please read, copy, and circulate these articles widely in the USA and India. 2. Write your Senators and Congressmen and ask them to investigate the Enron project. 3. Support groups in the US and India with contributions to make them strong. Please send comments: International Service Society P.O. Box 707 E. Lansing, Michigan 48826 From patrickirn@igc.apc.org Wed Oct 18 19:22:37 1995 Received: from lucy.cs.wisc.edu by sea.cs.wisc.edu; Wed, 18 Oct 95 19:22:33 -0500; AA05824 Received: from cdp.igc.apc.org by lucy.cs.wisc.edu; Wed, 18 Oct 95 19:22:31 -0500 Received: from igc4.igc.apc.org (igc4.igc.apc.org [192.82.108.37]) by cdp.igc.apc.org (8.6.12/Revision: 1.208 ) with SMTP id RAA00183; Wed, 18 Oct 1995 17:20:49 -0700 Received: (from patrickirn) by igc4.igc.apc.org (8.6.12/Revision: 1.15 ) id RAA20455; Wed, 18 Oct 1995 17:20:08 -0700 Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 17:20:08 -0700 From: Patrick McCully Message-Id: <199510190020.RAA20455@igc4.igc.apc.org> To: acarothers@igc.apc.org, bpandey@garnet.berkeley.edu, deb@edf.org, glenirn@igc.apc.org, irn@igc.apc.org, irndc@igc.apc.org, julietteirn@igc.apc.org, jvaidya@netcom.com, lcortesi@igc.apc.org, leonard@moray.berkeley.edu, mbelcher@igc.apc.org, mgold%uclink3@igc.apc.org, nmorgan@igc.apc.org, npr@igc.apc.org, owenirn@igc.apc.org, pwellner@igc.apc.org, srrajan@violet.berkeley.edu, toma@igc.apc.org, vmenotti@igc.apc.org Subject: Narmada Diary - Video - Fri 27 Oct. UCB Cc: 72242.2261@CompuServe.com, alau@sirius.com, chanda@cse.psu.edu, editor@indiacur.com, foodfirst@igc.apc.org, gef@igc.apc.org, johna@uclink2.berkeley.edu, narmada@lucy.cs.wisc.edu, odn@igc.apc.org, perc@igc.apc.org, pistaff@igc.apc.org, rainforest@igc.apc.org, ranmedia@igc.apc.org, rhayes@igc.apc.org, shm1@axe.humboldt.edu, shomik@uclink.berkeley.edu, telipman@ucdavis.edu --- Leading Indian Film-Maker to Show Narmada Video --- UC Berkeley, Friday 27 October, 8pm NARMADA DIARY, the latest work by Anand Patwardhan and Sima Dhuru, is an hour-long video tracking the main events of the last five years of the struggle against the notorious Sardar Sarovar Dam on India's Narmada River. Patwardhan, one of India's best known progressive film-makers, will be present to introduce the West Coast premiere of NARMADA DIARY, and to answer questions from the audience after the screening. Patwardhan and Dhuru have edited down many tens of hours of footage shot while following the people of the Narmada Valley and the activists of the Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) in their long campaign of non-violent resistance to the Sardar Sarovar Project. The video documents the untiring determination of the dam opponents in the face of state violence and intimidation and the threat of drowning in the rising reservoir. Place of Screening: Room 2040 Valley Life Sciences Building UC Berkeley Time: 8pm Date: Friday 27 October The screening is sponsored by Coalition Against Communalism International Rivers Network Department of Anthropology, UC Berkeley From MATHEW@genius.rider.edu Thu Oct 19 00:50:43 1995 Received: from lucy.cs.wisc.edu by sea.cs.wisc.edu; Thu, 19 Oct 95 00:50:41 -0500; AA09664 Received: from genius.rider.edu by lucy.cs.wisc.edu; Thu, 19 Oct 95 00:50:39 -0500 Received: from genius.rider.edu by genius.rider.edu (PMDF V4.3-7 #10460) id <01HWLVFMSH688Y5DMJ@genius.rider.edu>; Thu, 19 Oct 1995 01:51:05 EDT Date: Thu, 19 Oct 1995 01:51:04 -0400 (EDT) From: MATHEW@genius.rider.edu Subject: Anand Patwardhan & Sima Dhuru's NARMADA DIARY in New York - Fri 20 To: sec-dem-sa@mit.edu, narmada@lucy.cs.wisc.edu Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT --- Leading Indian Film-Maker to Show Narmada Video --- Room 108, Tisch School, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY (NYU) 721, Broadway, NYC 7.00 PM Friday 20th October NARMADA DIARY, the latest work by Anand Patwardhan and Sima Dhuru, is an hour-long video tracking the main events of the last five years of the struggle against the notorious Sardar Sarovar Dam on India's Narmada River. Patwardhan, one of India's best known progressive film-makers, will be present to introduce the East Coast premiere of NARMADA DIARY, and to answer questions from the audience after the screening. Patwardhan and Dhuru have edited down many tens of hours of footage shot while following the people of the Narmada Valley and the activists of the Narmada Bachao Andolan (Save Narmada Movement) in their long campaign of non-violent resistance to the Sardar Sarovar Project. The video documents the untiring determination of the dam opponents in the face of state violence and intimidation and the threat of drowning in the rising reservoir. Admission Free - Donations Welcome From patrickirn@igc.apc.org Mon Oct 30 14:52:06 1995 Received: from lucy.cs.wisc.edu by sea.cs.wisc.edu; Mon, 30 Oct 95 14:51:50 -0600; AA14025 Received: from cdp.igc.apc.org by lucy.cs.wisc.edu; Mon, 30 Oct 95 14:51:49 -0600 Received: from igc4.igc.apc.org (igc4.igc.apc.org [192.82.108.37]) by cdp.igc.apc.org (8.6.12/Revision: 1.211 ) with SMTP id MAA23012; Mon, 30 Oct 1995 12:51:27 -0800 Received: (from patrickirn) by igc4.igc.apc.org (8.6.12/Revision: 1.15 ) id MAA28682; Mon, 30 Oct 1995 12:50:47 -0800 Date: Mon, 30 Oct 1995 12:50:47 -0800 From: Patrick McCully Message-Id: <199510302050.MAA28682@igc4.igc.apc.org> To: rsadve@cat.syr.edu Subject: Re: Anand Patwardhan Film Cc: ae140@leo.nmc.edu, alau@sirius.com, anitapd@aol.com, ashah@dc.asce.org, budaraju@luther.che.wisc.edu, johna@uclink2.berkeley.edu, jvaidya@netcom.com, mdharmaw@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca, narmada@lucy.cs.wisc.edu, srrajan@violet.berkeley.edu Dear Ravi Copies of 'Narmada Diary' are available from International Rivers Network at a price of $52.50 incl. P&P. Send check payable to International Rivers Network to Petra Yee, IRN, 1847 Berkeley Way, Berkeley CA 94703. Tel. 510 848 1155 Fax. 510 848 1008. Payment by mastercard/visa can be made by phone. Patrick McCully From vinish@netearth.iitd.ernet.in Tue Oct 31 22:33:22 1995 Received: from nacho.cs.wisc.edu by sea.cs.wisc.edu; Tue, 31 Oct 95 22:33:20 -0600; AA07514 Received: from sangam.ncst.ernet.in by nacho.cs.wisc.edu; Tue, 31 Oct 95 22:32:44 -0600 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by sangam.ncst.ernet.in (8.6.12/8.6.6) with UUCP id KAA08410 for narmada@nacho.cs.wisc.edu; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 10:04:23 +0530 Received: from hss.iitd.ernet.in (netearth) by henna.iitd.ernet.in (4.1/SMI-4.1-MHS-7.0 ) id AA22497; Wed, 1 Nov 95 09:10:39 IST X-Organisation: Indian Institute of Technology, New Delhi. Received: by hss.iitd.ernet.in; id AA11145; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 09:49:44 +0530 Received: by hss; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 09:49:44 +0530 id AA11145; Wed, 1 Nov 1995 09:49:44 +0530 From: Vinish Gupta Message-Id: <9511010419.hss@iitd.ernet.in> Subject: Narmada update To: narmada@nacho.cs.wisc.edu Date: Wed, 1 Nov 95 9:49:43 IST X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL0] NARMADA UPDATE ----------------------------------------------------------------- This update is for the new members of the network. So a brief history of the NBA also inbuilt into the body of it, for earlier updates and further information you can contact, NBA Baroda/Lorette/Patrick/Alux wilks, ----------------------------------------------------------------- Narmada Update November 1, 1995 * SUPREME COURT HEARING FURTHER POSTPONES, FURTHER DATES WILL BE DECIDED ON 9TH NOVEMBER, POSSIBLY BY THE END OF THE MONTH * NARMADA `NYAY YATRA' ENDS, WITH ASSURANCE ABOUT NO FURTHER INCREASE IN DAM HEIGHT. The struggle of the people in Narmada valley for their right to their livelihood and justice is entering a new phase with their assertion to get justice being presented before the nation during the Narmada `Nyay Yatra'. In last 10 years, the relentless fight of the people against all sorts of injustice and violence inflicted on them, through the construction of Sardar Sarovar Dam and submergence of the forests and agricultural lands, and forceful and involuntary eviction from their ancesterial homes without even compensation, not to mention rehabilitation was building up towards a questioning of the present pattern of development and violence central to it. The struggle was taken on these issues at different levels, including the national and international levels, questioning the world bank and bi-lateral funding agencies whose funding is a very critical factor for initilizing and sustaining project like SSP. Petitions after petitions have been filed from the lower to the highest cause of the country. A comprehensive public interest petition was filed by NBA in May 1994 at Supreme Court(SC) of India. Though many interim orders and directions were issued by SC, a comprehensive hearing of this case is still pending. A five day hearing with two days for NBA and two days for all the for state goovernments and the central govt, and one day for the judgs to clarify the outstanding the issues, which was due from 31st oct. THE CASE GOT FURTHER PPOSTPONED DUE TO THE ILLL HEALTH OF ONE OF THE JUDGS. NOW THE FURTHER DATES WILL BE DECIDED ON 9TH NOVEMBER, AND MAY BE IN THE LAST WEEK OF NOVEMBER OR ON THE FIRST WEEK OF THE NEXT MONTH. Due to sustained campaign from the NBA, Government of India was forced to appoint a five member group (FMG) in August 1993 to review the project. This FMG submitted two reports, July 1994, April 1995 which in general vindicates the stand taken by the Andholan. All these and further details, facts and evidences from the actual field situation make the case for continuation of the project very difficult for the four state Governments, viz Maharastra, Gujarat, Madhyapradesh and Rajasthan and Government of India to defend. HOWEVER FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE VALLEY IT IS CLEAR THAT THE BASIC AND INALIENABLE RIGHT TO LIFE IS BEYOND DISPUTE. SO WHILE THEY ARE VERY HOPEFUL THAT THE HIGHEST INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENT WITHIN THE SYSTEM - SUPREME COURT WILL BE SENSITIVE TO THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES RAISED BY THEM THROUGH THEIR STRUGGLE AND SUFFERING AND BROUGHT TO THE FORE THOROUGH THEIR PETITION, THEY WILL NOT CONSIDER THE CASE AND ITS ORDER AS A FINALITY. People also felt that while the SC admitted the case and the interim orders are issued, the further decision of the resettlement and rehabilitation subgroup to permit further construction on the middle blocks of the dam are a violation of the spirits of the court orders and in tantamount to condemn of the people. Peoples decision to take up this matter directly with the authorities at all level, culminated in the Narmada `Nyay Yatra'. `Nyay Yatra' started from Badwani (MP) in Narmada valley, travelled through the valley and reached Delhi after receiving a rousing reception at all points enroute. At Delhi, 350 strong group of representatives of the villages of the Narmada valley and supporters from all over the country, forced themselves into the Ministry of water resources. After having a long 4 hour long questioning by the people and the total failure by any responsible official of the Ministry to give satisfactory answers, NBA decided to continue a sit in infront of the Ministry till the answers are given by the authorities. Next day, i.e., 19th October, the whole day the protest went on with black clothes tied across the mouth, and observing silence. A 15 member team had further dialogue with the secretary of the ministry of water resources, where assurance was given that there will not be further increase in the height of the Dam till court orders come in. It is understood that though the rehabilitation and the resettlement subgroup has given an approval for the increase in the height of the dam from 80.3 metres to 85.3 metres due to the intense campaign launched by NBA forced the Government to withheld the minutes of that meeting and now pretends as if no such decision was ever taken. This is an important victory for the people as the Government has to change or freeze its own minutes even. Any way people are gone back to their villages with the strong resolve that in any case no further construction will be permitted. ABEY GEORGE NARMADA BASHAVO ANDOLAN.