Author: Editorials
Publication: The Hindu
Date: September 20, 2004
URL: http://www.hinduonnet.com/2004/09/20/stories/2004092001701000.htm
That A Mega scheme such as the Sethusamudram
Ship Canal Project (SSCP), which is bound to change the face of regional shipping
and affect the lives of thousands of fishermen, should not be put through
without an informed and many-sided debate is a rule of developmental prudence.
For whatever reason, politicians and the Government seem to be in a great
rush to execute a project that was conceived not less than 144 years ago.
There may be unanimity among political parties in Tamil Nadu on the need for
the SSCP; and a sense of righteous indignation that it has taken so long for
the Centre to clear it. But that does not justify the way in which the public
hearings are being handled in the coastal districts, and opposition to the
project is being dealt with. There may be a host of advantages flowing from
the SSCP for the State, yet the centrality of the social and environmental
concerns is undeniable. Fortunately, a technically competent Environment Impact
Assessment done by the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute
(NEERI) is at hand.
By its very nature, the mega project involves
massive dredging, an estimated 84.5 million cubic metres of sand and spoil
that will need safe disposal. The Sethusamudram Canal will stretch to a length
of about 260 km - from Tuticorin port to Adam's Bridge in the Gulf of Mannar
(GoM) and extending northwards to the Bay of Bengal. The Gulf of Mannar has
been designated a National Marine Park in order to conserve and protect the
wealth of the seas. The M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation (MSSRF), an institution
of world renown, is engaged in a unique promotion of alternative options for
livelihood security in the region, including community-owned small industrial
units and a community-managed artificial reef programme. Time and again, the
Environment and Shipping Ministries have offered the assurance that the proposed
alignment of the SSCP will steer clear of the biosphere reserve and there
will be no threat to the coral reefs and marine wealth of the Gulf of Mannar
region. But nobody, it seems, knows how and where the dredged material will
be disposed of. This issue must be addressed transparently. An equally vital
question is the livelihood of some 20 million fisherfolk in the coastal districts.
The fishing communities are already under tremendous pressure arising from
disputes over fishing rights and specific problems involving Sri Lanka, not
to mention overexploitation and bad fishing practices that have led to "the
near extinction of several marine species unique to the GoM" (to quote
from an annual report of the MSSRF).
When it comes to handling mega projects, notably
big dams such as the Sardar Sarovar, the Indian experience has exposed the
gulf between promise and practice. The relevant State Governments have failed
miserably to deliver on the commitments they made for resettling the large
numbers of people displaced by the project. In the case of the SSCP, the series
of public hearings in the coastal districts has thrown up a hot potato: fisherfolk
have challenged the contention that their livelihood will not be affected.
Predictably, conspiracy theories have surfaced alleging that `outsiders' are
out to sabotage the SSCP. The challenge before the State Government and its
agencies is to face the livelihood concerns of the fisherfolk sympathetically.
Engineers from NEERI and fisheries experts must be allowed to engage seriously
with these issues. Nor should questions relating to the economic benefits
of the SSCP be dodged. Another important task is for the Government of India
to brief the Government of Sri Lanka in a friendly way on the SSCP to rule
out any kind of bilateral problem. New Delhi must also keep in perspective
the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which both Sri Lanka
and India ratified and acceded to in the mid-1990s.
