Why Manmohan Singh Doesn’t Respond To Manmohan Singh

The DoPT under the prime minister has ignored five reminders from his own PMO to shield Haryana Chief Minister BS Hooda against a CBI probe. 

Tehelka, 2 August, 2013

The pressure is mounting on V Narayanasamy, Minister of State for Personnel and Training (DoPT), to take up the case of IAS officer Durga Shakti Nagpal who was suspended on 28 July for taking on the sand mafia in Uttar Pradesh. But he may recall issuing a confidential note on 16 February 2012, arguing exactly the opposite. The DoPT note told the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) that the Centre has no jurisdiction to intervene if states violate Central Acts or protect whistleblowers even if they belong to the All India Services.

This has been the Haryana government’s sole defence against instituting a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) investigation into the multi-crore forestry scams and violations of forest and wildlife laws flagged off by a whistleblower IFS officer. Even though this was recommended in March 2012 by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and the CBI itself.

Since May 2012, the PMO has written six times to the DoPT, also headed by Manmohan Singh, asking the department to clarify its note that contradicts a host of Constitutional and legal provisions (see box below). Referring to an interdepartmental (UO) DoPT communication that claimed the matter was forwarded to the Department of Legal Affairs (DLA) intervenfor the Attorney General’s opinion, the last of the PMO reminders in May this year said that “comments in the matter are still awaited and may please be expedited”.

In an RTI reply, the DoPT claimed that the matter had been referred to the DLA back in May 2012. When Tehelka contacted Attorney General GE Vahanvati to inquire why he was sitting on the note for more than a year, his office denied having ever received the file and directed the query to the ministry.

Dinesh Bhardwaj, a joint secretary “handling DoPT” at the DLA, was unavailable and his office refused to take any “question from outside the government”. Sources in the DLA, however, claimed that the file was “sent for processing only towards the end of June”.

It could not be ascertained if the file was sent to the DLA by the DoPT only this June or if it was languishing in the DLA since last May. Despite repeated attempts by Tehelka, neither MoS Narayanasamy nor DoPT secretary Dr Shyamal Kumar Sarkar bothered to respond. The PMO sought the case details but did not respond to an email until the time of going to press. Neither did Bhardwaj reply to queries faxed to the DLA secretary’s office.

Future tense: Haryana Chief Minister BS Hooda

“A large section of the political and bureaucratic system is working overtime to shield (Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh) Hooda from the CBI probe by delaying the process. They have no alternative as the (DoPT) note cannot stand legal scrutiny. But the pm himself is the Cabinet minister in charge of the DoPT and it is surprising that he has not thought it appropriate to intervene yet. This is not the question of one state or an individual whistleblower but the very sanctity of All India Services,” rued a senior MoEF official.

The whistleblower in question, IFS officerSanjiv Chaturvedi — Tehelka readers may recall — has been harassed by the Haryanagovernment since 2007 for exposing corruption and violations of laws that involved Chief Minister Hooda’s office, his key and a host of top IFS and IAS officials.

In the face of stiff resistance from the Haryana government, it took the Centre five years, two Presidential interventions and a MoEF inquiry to revoke the illegal suspension order and chargesheet slapped on Chaturvedi by the state. The whistleblower’s claims were subsequently examined by the CVC and the CBI itself, which recommended a CBI probe on 1 March 2012.

Back in 2011, when Chaturvedi wrote to the PMO seeking a CBI probe into the scams he unearthed, his file was referred to the DoPT. Subsequently, all Central agencies involved agreed that cases flagged by Chaturvedi deserved a CBI probe. But the DoPT came to the Hooda regime’s rescue by claiming that the MoEF inquiry was “ultra-vires of their powers and hence devoid of any force of law”.

A week after the DoPT issued the note in February 2012, MM Joshi, a serving IFS officer in Haryanaand a prime accused in the scams and violations, filed an RTI application. In just three working days, the DoPT handed Joshi the confidential note, a third-party information, without inviting objections from Chaturvedi, which is mandatory under Section 11(1) of the RTI Act. Ironically, the DoPT is the nodal ministry for the RTI Act and for drafting of the Whistleblower Protection Bill. On 5 March 2012, the state government placed the note, obtained by Joshi in his private capacity, in the Assembly to silence the Opposition clamour for the CBI probe.

In August 2012, Chaturvedi managed to move out of Haryana and joined the Union health ministry on deputation as the chief vigilance officer at New Delhi’s All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS). Soon after, Joshi approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Chandigarh, with the same DoPT note for overturning the Presidential order, which had quashed Chaturvedi’s illegal chargesheet.

The case was admitted by Promilla Issar, member, CAT, who was the chief secretary ofHaryana when the scams unearthed by Chaturvedi took place. Due to the conflict of interest, the case was finally transferred to the Principal Bench of CAT in New Delhi last November.

Meanwhile, when Chaturvedi wrote to the PMO in March 2012 about the illegal DoPT note, its unauthorised leakage to an accused officer and misuse by the Haryana government, the PMO disregarded the DoPT note by writing to the MoEFin May 2012 to seek details of the action taken on its inquiry into the irregularities. In the same month, the PMO sought comments from Secretary, DoPT, as well. There have been five reminders since but the DoPT has not budged.

For good reasons, it seems. In November 2012, when an undaunted Chaturvedi filed a Criminal Writ Petition in the Supreme Court seeking aCBI investigation, the Haryana government in its reply to the apex court’s notice again hid behind the dopt fig leaf. Manmohan Singh’s silence maybe earning Chief Minister Hooda’s gratitude but it will be another embarrassment for him if the apex court quashes the note before his DoPT does.

Crossing The Line 

The DoPT note violates the provisions of Article 312 of the Constitution, All India Services Act, 1951, Discipline & Appeal Rules, 1969, Forest Conservation Act, 1980, and Wildlife Protection Act, 1972

Whistleblower: Sanjiv Chaturvedi, Photo: Shailendra Pandey

ISSUE Adverse entries into ACR of All India Service officers
DoPT Role of the Centre limited only to policy formulation
FACT As per Rule 10 of the All India Service (PAR) Rules, 2007, an officer is free to submit a memorial to the President under Rule 25 of the All India Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1969, who can decide the case

ISSUE Posting on non-cadre posts and violation of Cadre Rules , regarding All India Service officers
DoPT Role of the Centre limited only to policy formulation
FACT As per Rules 4, 9 and 10 of ifs (cadre) Rules, 1966, the strength of the cadre is decided by the Centre, whose approval is necessary for the creation of ex-cadre posts and for continuation of a non-cadre officer to a cadre post beyond three months, and keeping a cadre post vacant for more than six months

ISSUE Suspension of All India Service officers
DoPT State government is the appropriate authority to place an officer serving in connection with the affairs of the state
FACT Under Rule 3(6A), the state must send a detailed report to the Centre within 15 days and as per the amendments dated 30.09.2009, suspension order is to be confirmed within 45 days

ISSUE Violation of Forest and Wildlife laws
DoPT MoEF not competent to order inquiry
FACT Forest and wildlife are in the concurrent list and final power regarding clearance, denotification of protected areas/reserve forests lies with the Centre. Sections 2 and 3 of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, and Sections 3, 5, 50, 54, 55 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, give all executive powers to the Centre

ISSUE Departmental chargesheet of All India Service officers
DoPT Role of the Centre is limited only to hear appeals under Rule 16 of All India Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules
FACT Rule 24 (Revision) and 24A (Review) give blanket powers to the Centre to pass any order, on its own motion or otherwise, regarding any inquiry at any stage. Under Rule 25 (Memorial), member of the service can submit memorial to the President against any order of the Central or state governments (the position as on 30.08.2010 when Sanjiv Chaturvedi’s memorial was submitted). As the appointing authority, the Centre has always overriding powers in disciplinary matters

ISSUE CBI investigation
DoPT Initiative for CBI investigation has to be taken by the state government
FACT No bar on the Centre writing to the state government for the CBI investigation, particularly when the matter relates to embezzlement in Centrally-sponsored schemes, violation of Central Acts and harassment of an All India Service Officer

An unchallenged 2004 CAT order in a dispute between Himachal Pradesh and the Centre over the appointment of an IPS officer stated the following:

“The state government does not have the complete or exclusive seisin over a member of the All India Service… in case of an dispute or a doubt, the decision of the Central government shall be final and the state governments are obligated to implement the same…it would lead to an anomalous assault if a member of the All India Service is left at the unintended mercy of the parent state… in all the rules, regulations and orders relating to service conditions of a member of the All India Service, the primacy of the Government of India has been preserved and maintained. It has all-pervasive and overriding powers.”

Global Tiger Day: The game is as good as over for the wild ones

At the present rate of habitat loss due to rapid and mindless development, the World Bank’s promise of doubling the number of wild tigers by 2022 is a joke

FirstPost, 28 July, 2013

Depending on which part of the globe you are in, today and tomorrow will see a series of events to celebrate the tiger’s cause. For example, the big cats at the Smithsonian zoo, where the World Bank launched its Global Tiger Initiative (GTI) in 2008 to double the existing population of 3200-odd tigers by 2022,“will receive special treats in their yards at various times throughout the day”.

Their wild counterparts are supposed to have it even better. More than sixty per cent of the $350 million estimated cost for the first five years of implementation, claims GTI, is “in hand or in process”. That makes more than $60,000 per tiger in the wild or more than $1000 per tiger per month. Lavish, one would say, given that most wild tigers are found in south and south-east Asia where per capita income does not exceed $2000.

Clearly, money is not the issue. Less so in India — home to more than half of the world’s wild tigers — which is apparently flush with conservation cash. A recent study on biodiversity finance published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences puts India far ahead of the 40 most underfunded countries that included China, Australia and France.

In the five years between 2007 and 2011, officially, tiger numbers increased by 295 in India. A number of tiger forests left out during the 2006-07 estimation were covered in 2010-2011. Comparing the common areas assessed on both occasions, the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) modified the population growth to 12% or 170 tigers.

Not only the tiger but every long-ranging animal, particularly the elephant, is paying the ultimate price of local extinction for our unplanned growth. Reuters

It is always difficult to sustain a growth rate as the base grows. But even if we assume that the sarkari claim of 12% population gain every five years will be sustained, it will achieve a net gain of just 43%, not even the halfway mark of the 100% target set by the GTI in 15 years. At this rate, unless the government manufactures more paper tigers, it cannot possibly jack up the population beyond 2050 by 2022.

Even that, frankly, would be no mean feat. While many conservationists keep clamouring for 4000 tigers in next 15 or 20 years, it is reasonable to conclude that India does not have adequate forest cover to safely house more than 2400-2600 tigers, a range closer to the GTI target of doubling the 2007 population of 1400. If only we were on track to achieve that realistic goal.

In the same five years between 2007 and 2011, while claiming a net gain of 12% in the tiger population, the MoEF also recorded a loss of 21,000 sq km or 24% of India’s tiger habitat. In simpler terms, the total number of tigers increased but the area where they were found shrunk by one-fourth. This has two very significant implications.

At this rate, the tiger range will shrink by roughly 58% in the 15 years between 2007 and 2022. It is anybody’s guess how the government plans to achieve that 43% growth in tiger population in that time frame while losing nearly three-fifth (58%) of its territory. Every forest has a natural carrying capacity – availability of land area, food and water — that does not increase dramatically over time. Theoretically, to achieve a 43% growth in tiger number while losing 58% of tiger range will require the remaining tiger forests to increase their carrying capacity by nearly three times – a biological impossibility in just 15 years.

If anything, losing such large chunks of tiger range will only stymie the growth in tiger population. It is easy to blame poachers for the tiger’s disappearance from 22,000 sq km of its 2007 range by 2011. But what equally jeopardises the striped cats is our rush to mine dense forests, drown lush habitats under dam reservoirs and build highways and railways blocking natural passageways that make large areas out of bounds for wildlife.

Not only the tiger but every long-ranging animal, particularly the elephant, is paying the ultimate price of local extinction for our unplanned growth. Ironically, while backing GTI, the World Bank also funds such projects across the tiger range countries. In India, the Plan panel slashed the conservation funds it allocates to the high-profile MoEF, apparently to rein in the ministry which anyway clears 99% of the project proposals it receives.

In such a scenario, whatever success the government claims is limited to “pocket conservation”. Already, a handful of reserves account for more than half of India’s tigers. Business as usual will soon reach a stage where, possibly barring a section of the Western Ghats, tigers will be confined to island forests without any access to the neighbouring population. This will be a genetic disaster in the long term and isolated populations may eventually wither away.

Unfortunately, achieving tiger numbers and the survival of the species in itself is at best of mere welfare value. The importance of protecting the top predator of the Indian wild is in the assumption that the tiger’s welfare reflects the vibrancy of the forests it occupies. The relatively strong focus on tiger conservation has not benefitted many ‘lesser species’ under this umbrella approach. But when the apex species itself disappears from large forest areas so rapidly without a trace of significant reversal, it gives away what is in store.

As increasing pressure on land, water, mineral and timber resources keeps squeezing India’s few remaining old-growth forests, hundreds of tigers may soon have to live on canned food – like a few already do in reserves such as Ranthambhore – and breed happily in “open zoos”. Unlike fortified zoos, these sanctuaries will not stop the big cats from stepping out every now and then and face the bullet (or dart or trap). Until we eventually stop pretending that these are wild, free-ranging tigers and fence the reserves in.

Niyamgiri's Next Dilemma

Developing Kondh villages may change how tribals feel about their sacred hills

Tehelka, 26 July, 2013

Few knew about the Dongaria Kondhs in Odisha until the State decided to mine their hills for bauxite a decade ago. The tribals resisted the move but a massive aluminium refinery came up in the foothills. By then, the prospect of lush hilltops being ripped open by miners attracted many counter-stakeholders. NGOs and activists quickly adopted the ancient tribe’s cause. The Dongaria Kondhs and their Niyamgiri became an international symbol of an indigenous people’s fight against State coercion and corporate greed.

But life has not changed for these tribals. And for all its romance, life in Niyamgiri is far from idyllic. There are no roads, no health centres, no schools, nothing. The state provides 7 kg of rice to each tribal every month. The hills provide the rest, at a steep cost. Drinking water has to be fetched from streams. Basic healthcare is taken care of by traditional medicines. Anything bigger usually means death. In most villages, women outnumber men who often die young.

Though the involvement of so many non-governmental players has not made life any easier in Niyamgiri, the leadership of the anti-mining movement blames the government for abandoning these tribals. Decades after Independence, when the State finally reached Niyamgiri in the beginning of a new millennium, it did not bring healthcare or education along. “It came to rob these tribals on behalf of a company for money. I hope they (the tribals) give a fitting reply tomorrow,” said Lingaraj Azad ofNiyamgiri Suraksha Samiti on the eve of the first palli sabha that was held at Sekarpadhi, a hamlet of 46 voters, on 18 July.

Azad has not been disappointed. Allowed by the Supreme Court to decide if miningwill violate their rights, the Dongaria Kondhs have unequivocally rejected Vedanta Aluminium Ltd (VAL). The pro-mining lobbies pinned their hope on the only non-Dongaria village among the 12 selected by the Odisha government. But on 23 July, even the Goud community, traditional herdsmen who are OBCs, of Tadijhola said no tomining. With the first four palli sabhas setting the tone, it is unlikely that the remaining eight will buck the trend. Guiding me to Sekarpadhi, a candid village youth claimed that “nobody supported the company” and “if anyone did, the rest would tear him into pieces”.

What strikes one the most at Niyamgiri is the unanimity among the tribals. In most other similar campaigns, the younger generation, or at least a section of it, aspires for the so-called good life and fights their elders’ resistance to giving up traditional livelihoods. This generational shift in attitude is usually triggered by the youth’s exposure to modern education and gadgets. A pro-development non-tribal resident of Lanjigarh, where VAL has built its mega refinery, rued that “the State and the company were in a hurry and did not push education and modern amenities such as gas cylinders”. Simply building roads and setting up grocery shops, he claimed, could make a difference.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, an official in the Rayagada district administration agreed that the State missed its chance. “NGOs have a reason to discourage education and keep them (the tribals) in those remote miserable villages. This way, the Dongarias remain wary of the outside world. We have started working. But by the time the State schemes make any difference, it may be too late for the project,” he said.

While a number of Dongaria Kondhs complained about the highhandedness of the security forces, they were not really worried about lack of education or infrastructure. Emotionally attached to the Niyamgiri, they are doing everything in their power to defeat the mining plans. But the dilemma about their future remains. Mining is not the cost they should have to pay for the basic development every community deserves. Yet, if and when it reaches Niyamgiri, will development with all its trappings make them feel differently about their hills? Or will the Dongaria Kondhs find a way to escape the worst of two worlds?

After creating wealth, we have turned to happiness

How deciding what is good for others comes to us naturally

DNA, 24 July, 2013

These are the new creation theories. Well, not so new really, at least not the one about wealth creation. For a long time, economists have wanted us to believe that human enterprise creates assets. All through this pursuit, we have been asked to overlook the fact that material wealth is finite in nature. No business, industry or economy can create wealth out of thin air. It needs resources such as water, land, minerals and so on. Yet, we pompously claim the process of converting and exhausting natural wealth into tradable commodities, and thereby exhausting the resources, as creation of wealth.

In India, the lament over GDP growth rate is a call to extract more coal and minerals, harnessing more rivers for power, sucking out more groundwater for cash crops or gobbling up more land to accommodate growing infrastructure facilities. All of these are part of the grand alchemy of wealth creation that promises us a better life. No matter the simple arithmetic that estimates a requirement of four times the earth’s resources if everyone were to live the American middle class life so many of us aspire to. Naturally, the big majority must live in different layers of poverty so that a few can have that life of wasteful opulence. Yet, the poor are to blame for not being enterprising enough to ‘create wealth’.

If that was not enough balderdash, the neo-creation theory has further evolved. Having learnt to create wealth, now it wants to ‘create’ happiness. Yes, the same happiness we all feel every now and then for reasons we often don’t even remember; and that that eludes so many of us, often for no apparent reason and despite many sessions with psychologists. It is what Hawthorne described as “a butterfly which, when pursued, is always beyond our grasp, but, if you will sit down quietly, may alight upon you”.

But when a company with a proven record of ‘creating wealth’ takes it upon itself to manufacture happiness, it becomes a tradable commodity offered to buy consent from a community fiercely opposed to let anyone rip open a patch of green earth they call home. The Dongriya Kondhs of Odisha’s Niyamgiri hills who have been resolutely fighting Vedanta’s plans to mine their homeland for bauxite, have no roads, health centres, schools, nothing. They live on 35 kg of rice that the government provides each family every month and the fruits of the mountain. The effortlessly organic mangoes, pineapples, jackfruits, bananas and turmeric they sell make no blip on the GDP radar. They drink a lot, take life easy and die young. Yet, they look and sound happier than most I have met in life.

This can be puzzling to us. But instead of trying to understand what keeps these hill people content, we promptly conclude that they don’t feel wretched because they don’t know better. Over the last decade, the debate over Niyamgiri has exposed a few interesting positions. The rabid claims that the opinion or even the wellbeing of a few cannot undermine our national interest. Since the primitive tribes have little or no idea of the Indian nationhood, why not annex their homes as enemy land? The liberal wonders if the government has done enough to educate the tribals about the benefits of mining, implying that such an effort would have surely ended their opposition. After all, how can a bunch of have-nothings resist the lure of the good life? The democrat agrees that the tribal’s have the right to decide but question if their decision was an informed one. Really, should we abandon the Dongria Kondhs who clearly do not know what is good for them?

These are not rants of hair-brained intellectuals. And it is not only the tribal who inspires such condescension. In 2007, for example, when the Left Front government sent armed cadres and police forces to demolish local resistance to development at Nandigram, quite a few jumped in defence of then chief minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee. Among them was the mighty editor of a national daily. In a crafty masterpiece, he did not say a word against the state terror but attacked the Left's narrow politics. He had to devote so many words on the obvious self-destructiveness of the CPI-M only to distinguish between the hackneyed Left and its reformist chief minister.

Soon, he delivered the chilling clincher: the Left must back Buddha, even and particularly after Nandigram, and his economy and if Buddha won, it would have changed the Left, and Bengal, forever. Readers were told that any condemnation of the state terror at Nandigram should also be considered a verdict on Buddha's economics. Expanded, the logic read: Buddha's economics was the only hope for Bengal and he should not be censored for sending armed cops and party cadres to kill and rape at will. The bottomline: the ‘unreasonable’ multitudes are dispensable and it does not matter how they are dispensed with if it is in national interest.

Nobody knows if the state and the company are done with their machinations at Niyamgiri yet or if exposure to modern education or gadgets will change the young Dongriya Kondhs who so resolutely stand by their elders. But, since last week, three village palli sabhas have unanimously rejected the mining proposal. While nobody expects advocates of big development to suddenly welcome the people’s verdict, there is no reason why most pro-business reactions should be so angry and condescending.

In a democracy, it is only fair that different interest groups pursue and stand for different agendas. It is no shame that many of us have our crosses to carry. But we better save those they-know-not-what-they-do lines and let history judge who really needs absolution. Sadly, like wealth and happiness, humility cannot be created.

Niyamgiri vs Vedanta: Tribals learn to film as state may bar media

Hard lessons learnt at the first palli sabha, both state government and Dongriya Kondh tribals redraw strategies for the remaining eleven.

FirstPost, 19 July, 2013

The morning after the first palli sabha at Sekarpadhi, a few villagers in neighbouring Kesarpadhi intently scanned some Odiya dailies. Not the headlines but the photos to check how familiar faces look in print.

In a corner, one made a lively fire to cook chicken and rice for the visitors. The rest debated their options for the second palli sabha on 22 July. A morning tippler emerged from a hut and ambled across the common yard, rehearsing his spirited speech aloud. A couple of youngsters, worried that the perpetually drunk elders would mess up the palli sabha, vowed to axe the salaf trees – a variety of palm prized for its intoxicating sap — of the village.

Villagers in Kesarpadhi scanning local Odiya dailies. Image: Jay Mazoomdaar

In an instant, the can’t-touch-our-Niyamgiri speech changed to a can’t-deny-me-salaf protestation. After all, it is the ‘national drink’ of Niyamgiri. Within minutes, others chose sides. Some would have come to blows had a few activists not intervened. But the edginess hung in the air. Within 24 hours of rejecting Vedanta and staking claim to the entire Niyamgiri hills, the Dongriya Kondhs are worried that Serkapadhi village stopped short of scrapping altogether a recent government verification report that restricted their cultural and religious rights to village peripheries.

“They agreed to sign when a sentence was inserted at the end of the resolution to record that villagers claimed religious and cultural rights on the entire hills. But the resolution also validated a report that claimed to have settled all such rights by identifying areas within the village boundary. We don’t know if the government or the court will misinterpret that. We cannot afford to give Vedanta any excuse to sneak in,” an activist of the Niyamgiri Suraksha Samiti (NSS) translated, as Dongriya Kondh villagers discussed the issue animatedly in Kui, the tribal dialect.

Guttu Sikaka, husband of Parsali sarpanch Telo Sikaka , who was picked up and detained by cops for five months as a suspected Maoist, knows anything is possible. “They asked me to show them the Maoist hideouts. Later, my wife and I were threatened with dire consequences if we did not sign the papers notifying these palli sabhas when we opposed the selection of just 12 villages. They also offered us Rs 2000,” alleged Sikaka, accepting that he took the money because “a panchayat office holder was anyway bound to follow government orders”.

The state officials, however, are equally worried. A Rayagada district official, who was not authorized to speak to media and did not want to be named, regretted the pressure created on the judge by a media overdrive and the presence of too many activists and tribals from other villages at the first palli sabha. The administration, say sources, is hoping that the Bhubaneswar and national press will not stick around. Anyway, it plans to bar outsiders by barricading access routes before holding the remaining palli sabhas. Several officials have already gone on record blaming the activists and politicians for tutoring and instigating the tribals.

An elderly villager at Ijirupa, a desolate Kalahandi village. Image: Jay Mazoomdaar

That seems to be a loaded charge because not a single Dongria Kondh this reporter spoke to wanted mining in their sacred hills. But, being illiterate and shy, most of them are hesitant to speak before strangers. Even the few vocal ones talk mostly in rhetoric without claiming specific rights or articulating how mining activities will affect those. In all fairness, they need a little handholding and encouragement to express themselves in an intimidating formal set up. “We are here to ensure that the tribals are not cheated. They are very clear in their mind but need help to make their points in ways that are legally effective. Calling this tutoring is sheer paranoia,” says Bhala Chandra, a CPI-ML leader.

But with Rs 40,000 crore at stake, and the life, livelihood and religion of several thousands, that paranoia seems infectious. As news arrives that three alleged Maoists were killed in an encounter in the district, an NSS activist claims that this is one of the state’s ploys to intimidate the Dongria Kondhs. “When they hear such news and see so many cops in their village, it makes them worry about the consequences of their fight,” explains Bhala Chandra.

Another activist claims that the govt is building houses at Ijirupa, a desolate Kalahandi village with no inhabitants, to get the palli sabha there rigged. But then who did Rahul Gandhi meet when he famously flew down to this very village in 2008? There was a family there at that time, comes the answer. This reporter found the same family still living at Ijirupa later in the day. Lavanya Gaur, the eldest, emphatically dismissed Vedanta as a “fondi (fraud) company” and his wife Srimati echoed the popular sentiment: “nobody touches our hills”.

There are indeed two new structures in this village of four hutments. Gaur claims that he, not the government, got those erected for family use. The numbers do not add up, though.  Gaur said there were “six more families who keep visiting” and his granddaughter Sulochana counts the total population as 27. While Srimati remembers Ijirupa had eight voters in the last election, an NSS activist claims that the local press reported 80 voters on government records for the Ijirupa palli sabha.

ALSO SEE:

First people's court rejects Vedanta, tribals stake claim to entire Niyamgiri hills

Vedanta vs Niyamgiri: How a tiny tribal hamlet said no to mining

A few kilometres away, Phuldumer village is also preparing for its D-day: 29 July. Vedanta has brought piped water to this village surrounded by massive mango trees but the villagers are not impressed. Young Tongra Majhi went all the way to Sekarpadhi on Thursday to watch the first palli sabha. He claims the experience will help him. “I will say at our palli sabha that we don’t want mining anywhere in Niyamgiri hills. Wherever you slash the body, eventually, it will bleed to death,” he says.

Aware that outsiders, including the media, may not be allowed at palli sabha venues anymore, NSS volunteers are ready with Plan B. At Kesarpadhi, they teach village youths how to use a video camera so that they can record the proceedings on Monday. As for the fight over those salaf trees, the elders have apparently bought peace by promising moderation. “Nothing awakens the confident speaker in Dongriya Kondhs like a tipple or two,” assures a veteran activist, “as long as they watch their limits”.

On Monday though, Kesarpadhi will be more worried about the state machinery crossing the line.

Vedanta vs Niyamgiri: How a tiny tribal hamlet said no to mining

At the first of 12 palli sabhas, nothing deterred 36 Dongria Kondhs who rejected Vedanta’s bauxite mining plans and claimed the entire Niyamgiri as their own

FirstPost, 18 July, 2013

The Serkapadhi village is seen in this photo. Image by Jay Mazoomdar

Serkapadhi, Odisha: If anything, this morning failed to show the day. Neither the routine nor the festive in the build-up could anticipate the acrimonious drama that was soon to follow. In the end, the historic day that saw the first ever palli sabha taking a call on a Rs 40,000-crore mining project was saved, literally, by the sheer resolution of a tiny tribal hamlet.

The build-up was elaborate. Along the two and a half kilometer walk across a stream from Panimunda to Serkapadhi, it was impossible to spot gun toting camouflage in the lush hills flanking the trail. But the CRPF jawans were there, all five platoons of them, positioned early to create a security cordon around Serkapadhi that hosted a pack of officials, including the district judge.

The irony of this sudden over-representation of the state was not lost on a village where the only symbols of sarkar have been a tubewell, two solar poles and a defunct primary school room. What struck a balance was the presence of a larger contingent of politicians, activists, volunteers, media-persons and big support from other Dongria Kondh villages.

Image by Jay Mazoomdar.

Sarat Chandra Mishra, the district judge of Rayagada and the court-appointed independent observer, reached early, wearing a bullet-proof jacket and riding pillion. Cops rested with boxes of tear gas shells under their feet in the shadow of a jackfruit tree weighed down by its bounty. Then, the solidarity march began. More than a hundred Dongria Kondhs from neighbouring villages arrived, walking single file and carrying axes and sticks, to follow the proceedings that commenced sharp at 11 am with 36 of the village’s 44 “alive voters” making up the quorum.

Immediately, Gobinda Sikaka, an angry village youth in a red T-shirt with ‘Max India’ written on it, launched a sharp-tongued attack on a local official, accusing him of betraying the tribals’ cause in the past, and set the tone for the day. After Mishra assuaged Sikaka promising fair play, more than 20 villagers, majority of them women, expressed themselves like probably none in their habitually shy tribe ever dared. They spoke of Niyamgiri as their god and mother, the source of their physical and cultural sustenance, and vowed to die rather than watch it being ravished.

ALSO SEE:

Niyamgiri tribe vs Vedanta: People's court to take a call today

First people's court rejects Vedanta, tribals stake claim to entire Niyamgiri hills

But the stage for confrontation was already set. On 7 July, local revenue and forest officials had conducted a joint verification of the individual and community rights of the villagers and identified areas of religious importance in and around Serkapadhi. Activists held a press conference in  Bhubaneswar last week, alleging that the villagers were tricked by officials in to sign this report that restricted their rights to the village periphery. As the report was scheduled to be endorsed by the palli sabha, the villagers pressed Judge Mishra to reject it in acceptance of the Dongria Kondh’s community right to the entire Niyamgiri hills.

Policeman resting in the shadow a jackfruit tree in Serkapadhi.  Image by Jay Mazoomdaar.

As Mishra insisted that rejecting the report would amount to relinquishing all the rights recorded in it, the meeting hit the first roadblock. After some heated negotiation, villagers gave up the demand for scrapping the report and agreed to a resolution that would note their additional rights. While the resolution was being drafted, someone demanded that the villagers were entitled to a photocopy of the signed minutes, drawing a hasty refusal from Mishra.

Then, Mishra made a costly faux pas. “You are acting too smart despite being illiterate. If you had some education, you would have sold the country,” he snapped. Spoken casually, the words angered an already distrustful crowd. A section of the press contested Sharma while some villagers complained of upper caste prejudice. It was chaos.

Meanwhile, the resolution was ready and was read out aloud. It noted the gist of individual speakers’ statements, highlighting their dependence of Niyamgiri, and also validated the state government’s 7 July report. None objected immediately. Before the draft was offered to the villagers for signing, the judge wanted that the details of the quorum be mentioned in it. In those few minutes, Serkapadhi put its foot down.

Insisting that the resolution mentioned their “additional rights”, Mishra got into an argument to persuade the villagers who refused to budge. At this point, a village elder suggested that the villagers would calm down and agree to sign if the judge left the resolution at the table and waited elsewhere. “How long should I wait,” shot back Mishra, “I’ll have to cancel the palli sabha if they don’t sign.” The final round of argument centred on Mishra demanding geographical specifications of the areas where villagers were to claim their right. “You cannot claim the entire Niyamgiri,” he repeated several times.

With tempers fraying, just when it appeared that the proceedings had hit a dead end, someone in the melee shouted that the villagers were not claiming individual but collective right to the entire hills, a point that was made by others several times before. In an anti-climax, Mishra said he was fine with community rights and added a line at the end of the resolution. The villagers, led by headman Indra Sikaka, queued up in relief. All signatures in place by 2-45 pm, a visibly hassled Mishra shouted at the media for trying to photograph the resolution and left in a hurry.

As the exhausted crowd dispersed, the villagers consulted their leaders in nervous excitement. To many, it was still not clear if it was just a technical confusion that delayed the resolution for over an hour. “All’s well that ends well,” I heard a fellow journalist congratulate a bunch of activists. “Wait until all ends well,” one of them waved back with a wry smile. “There are still 11 palli sabhas to go.”

First people’s court rejects Vedanta, tribals stake claim to entire Niyamgiri hill

FirstPost, 18 July, 2013

The palli sabha at Serkapadhi village registered strong opposition to the proposed bauxite mining by Vedanta and claimed religious and cultural rights on the entire Niyamgiri hills after three and a half hours of high drama today.

At the meeting, Dongria Kondh villagers, both men and women, spoke emotionally and angrily in the presence of the Rayagada district judge appointed as the independent observer.

Village head signs the palli sabha resolution after 3.5 hours of high drama. Image courtesy: Jay Mazoomdar

Tempers soared midway when villagers insisted on scraping a report prepared by the state government limiting their community forest rights last week and later refused to sign the resolution.

As the deadlock continued, the judge at one point threatened to call off the day’s proceedings.

Finally, the Dongria Kondhs relented after the palli sabha resolution was amended to categorically record their claim over the entire Niyamgiri hills.

Following the 18 April Supreme Court order that asked the state to honour the ancient tribe’s religious and other rights within three months, the state government notified on 2 July that palli sabhas would be held at 12 villages in Rayagada and Kalahandi districts between 18 July and 19 August.

Despite severe criticism of its selection of only 12 out of 162 villages in and around Niyamgiri for holding palli sabhas, the state government stuck to its decision after the state’s Advocate General (AG) backed the same.

Even Union Minister of Tribal Affairs V Kishore Chandra Deo was overruled. He had written to the state government, arguing that limiting Gram Sabha proceedings to only 12 villages was not in accordance with the Supreme Court order and directions issued by his ministry under Section 12 of Forest Right Act (FRA).

“The list of villages where rights of forest dwellers are guaranteed under the FRA or where cultural and religious rights are likely to be affected cannot be arbitrarily decided by the state government. It is to be decided by the people (Palli Sabha) where claims would be filed through a transparent manner so that no genuine Gram Sabha which has a legitimate claim is left out of the process,” Vibha Puri Das, secretary, MoTA, had written to the state chief secretary.

Many see a deliberate ploy in the state’s selection of a dozen tiny hamlets to settle the Rs 40,000-crore issue.

“It may not be without reason that a few smaller villages have been chosen, leaving out the bigger ones. We do not know what the government is up to. For example, Ijiurpa, one of the selected villages in Kalahandi district, is non-existent. It has only one non-residential family and no voters,” claims CPI-ML’s Azad.

Wriggling Out Of The Skin

Sansar Chand has already been in jail longer than the Wildlife Act demands

Tehelka, 18 July, 2013

He joined the wildlife trade before turning 13 but it wasn’t until more than three decades later that the law caught up with Sansar Chand. In January 2003, the police in Bhilwara, Rajasthan, nabbed him with two leopard pelts from a train. Until then, Sansar Chand was never caught in possession of any contraband, a key condition for prosecution under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. In the summer of 2004, he was convicted. Soon, he skipped bail and remained wanted till 29 June 2005, the day Delhi Police finally got hold of him near his longtime den in Sadar Bazar.

In many ways, the aura of Sansar Chand has been larger than life. The 57-year-old is blamed for killing at least 250 tigers, 2,000 leopards, 5,000 otters and another 50,000 lesser wild cats and foxes. But to call him a poacher is to undermine his empire of networks. And to portray him as the kingpin running the country’s biggest wildlife trade syndicate is to overlook his rustic, hands-on approach.

In 1990, none of a dozen-odd ‘witnesses’ saw him jump off the terrace of his ancestral home in Delhi’s Sadar Bazar to evade policemen. He loved his ‘sunglasses’ and even posed in them for press photographers while in custody. Tree-huggers and animal-lovers form instant lynch mobs on social media at the mention of his name. And senior journalists in the Hindi press fight over whose “authoritative” crime report Sansar Chand follows to keep track of the cases against him.

Since his arrest in 2005, Sansar Chand has secured bail, over time, in all the cases pending against him. He also served sentences handed out in two cases. On 16 July, a Delhi court refused to charge him under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) that can be evoked only for repeat offenders who have been convicted more than twice in the past. The court apparently disallowed a case under MCOCAbecause it was filed as a supplementary charge. As a result, he is likely to walk free by the time you read this.

This has upset many who find it incomprehensible how the “butcher of Sariska” and “Veerappan of the north” is being allowed to regain control of his sinister trade. But, to be fair, Sansar Chand has already served more than eight years — a year more than the maximum punishment of seven-year imprisonment under the Wildlife (Protection) Act. In fact, he was arrested before the 2006 amendment to the Act that increased the maximum term from five to seven years. Technically, the maximum punishment is the same for killing one and killing a hundred.

Had the agencies wanted to prolong his confinement, they could have coordinated better and saved a charge or two to be pressed after the previous ones failed. But that would not be fair play and anyway could not have compensated for shoddy investigation and weak prosecution. A high-profile accused like him must have been pleasantly surprised when State lawyers repeatedly missed court hearings. The canny operator that he has been, it was anyway extremely difficult to catch him with wildlife contraband.

However, there is one angle of investigation the agencies could have tapped more convincingly. Sansar Chand or his family has no front business and their only significant legal source of income is from the rent of more than three dozen properties across north India. A possible case of disproportionate assets, it could have been probed if and how Sansar Chand inherited or acquired so many properties.

Moreover, Sansar Chand is represented by one of the country’s most expensive law firms, one that also appears, possibly for a nominal fee, for a top conservation NGO. If there is no reason to believe that the firm extends the same courtesy to Sansar Chand, it would be interesting to probe how he can afford his lawyers’ hefty fees. He does not even have a bank account.