Author: Anuradha Dutt
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: July 13, 2006
Medha Patkar has suffered a setback with the
Prime Minister recently slamming NBA's charges of inadequate rehabilitation
The Narmada Bachao Andolan has had its severest
setback in years. For, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who initiated the process
of formally involving NGOs in policy-making, slammed the NBA's charges of
inadequate rehabilitation of displaced people by submitting a statement in
the Supreme Court that work on the Sardar Sarovar Project must continue as
it was in public interest.
Mr Singh's assent was given in the context
of the Shunglu Committee report on relief and rehabilitation, commending the
rehabilitation measures undertaken by the Madhya Pradesh Government so far.
The Supreme Court order, directing continuation of the work, was passed after
submission of the Prime Minister's note. Evidently eager to undo the past
damage, the note went so far as to state that the shortcomings would be remedied
when work was suspended after the monsoons set in.
The public outcry in Gujarat against actor
Aamir Khan's uninformed endorsement of Ms Patkar's diatribe against the dam
must have convinced the PMO of the wisdom of swimming with the tide. The UPA,
with spiralling inflation and uncurbed terrorism to its discredit, can hardly
afford to make another mistake.
There can be no reversing the judgement now,
though Environment Minister Saifuddin Soz had earlier succumbed to the pressure
exerted by the powerful anti-dam lobby, accused of having the backing of international
pressure groups. He not only tried to halt work, but along with two of his
colleagues, Meira Kumar and Prithviraj Chavan, had given a damaging assessment
of the relief work in the State also.
The credibility of the NBA and Ms Patkar is
now in question, with the Prime Minister himself accepting the committee report.
This is bound to dent the image of anti-development NGOs and others of their
ilk, the activist being a prominent representative of this sector.
Sustained media attention and bestowal of
awards at global fora almost uplifted Ms Patkar to the status of an icon.
She has suddenly been divested of her cause. The Government and the apex court
both favouring construction, there is none she can appeal to against the order.
Nor is she likely to find political backing since no party would be foolhardy
enough to antagonise people in the concerned States by stalling the dam. Worse,
the NBA's source of funding is under scrutiny, with charges of foreign patronage
being levied against it.
By extension, other foreign-funded NGOs, with
a pre-set agenda, also come under the scanner. The decision that surprised
and disturbed many was Mr Manmohan Singh's move to induct some well known
activists, as representatives of the NGO sector, into the National Advisory
Council. They would influence the Government in forming policies. But they
have since had their own role reduced, with some quitting the body in protest.
In the final reckoning, political calculations seem to be prevailing.
The experience of the erstwhile Soviet Union
suggests that increased involvement of such NGOs in governance may eventually
subvert the state. Before the collapse of Communism, the USSR was over-flowing
with activists and watchdogs, and flush with foreign funding for NGOs. Perestroika
and glasnost were the most commonly traded terms, in quite the same way that
the right to information and people's causes are being propagated by well-heeled
proponents.
Post-mortems undertaken of the disintegration
of the USSR tend to conclude that the civil society movement - a sobriquet
for NGO activism - abetted the siege within and dismantling of the Soviet
Union. India needs to learn a lesson from history.
