0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)
38 просмотров13 страниц
Lessons to learn: Internal file notings of the Union environment and forests ministry: how to clear a project that has got stuck with expert objections.
A series of half truths and careful skirting of issues permits the MOEF to clear Demwe project
The govt. in Assam was silent when env., forest and wildlife clearance was granted to 1750 MW Demwe Lower project, even though it is a downstream-affected state. The non-official members of the NBWL had unanimously argued that prior approval of Chief Wildlife Warden of Assam is required under section 35 (6) of the WLPA as flow fluctuations will take place inside Dibru-Saikhowa NP and Biosphere Reserve. They were over-ruled, but no reasons provided for over-ruling them, nor was Assam govt. officially consulted.
Now in an ongoing Appeal challenging the forest clearance to the project (Bimal Gogoi & Anr. Vs State of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors., Appeal No. 92 of 2013), the Assam govt. has filed an officially affidavit saying that permission should have been sought from Chief Wildlife Warden of Assam under 35 (6) of WLPA as flow will fluctuate inside Dibru-Saikhowa NP. This raises a vital question on the legality of env. forest and wildlife clearance granted to Demwe Lower project. A clearance (even under EPA or FCA) could not have been given which permits flow fluctuations inside downstream Dibru-Saikhowa in violation of 35 (6) of the WLPA? The law has clearly been bent here by the Central Govt. and the Assam govt. seems to acknowledge that now officially.
The affidavit also makes a more general point about Kaziranga and the need to assess downstream impacts of upstream dams on the park.
Lessons to learn: Internal file notings of the Union environment and forests ministry: how to clear a project that has got stuck with expert objections.
A series of half truths and careful skirting of issues permits the MOEF to clear Demwe project
The govt. in Assam was silent when env., forest and wildlife clearance was granted to 1750 MW Demwe Lower project, even though it is a downstream-affected state. The non-official members of the NBWL had unanimously argued that prior approval of Chief Wildlife Warden of Assam is required under section 35 (6) of the WLPA as flow fluctuations will take place inside Dibru-Saikhowa NP and Biosphere Reserve. They were over-ruled, but no reasons provided for over-ruling them, nor was Assam govt. officially consulted.
Now in an ongoing Appeal challenging the forest clearance to the project (Bimal Gogoi & Anr. Vs State of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors., Appeal No. 92 of 2013), the Assam govt. has filed an officially affidavit saying that permission should have been sought from Chief Wildlife Warden of Assam under 35 (6) of WLPA as flow will fluctuate inside Dibru-Saikhowa NP. This raises a vital question on the legality of env. forest and wildlife clearance granted to Demwe Lower project. A clearance (even under EPA or FCA) could not have been given which permits flow fluctuations inside downstream Dibru-Saikhowa in violation of 35 (6) of the WLPA? The law has clearly been bent here by the Central Govt. and the Assam govt. seems to acknowledge that now officially.
The affidavit also makes a more general point about Kaziranga and the need to assess downstream impacts of upstream dams on the park.
Авторское право:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Доступные форматы
Скачайте в формате PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd
Lessons to learn: Internal file notings of the Union environment and forests ministry: how to clear a project that has got stuck with expert objections.
A series of half truths and careful skirting of issues permits the MOEF to clear Demwe project
The govt. in Assam was silent when env., forest and wildlife clearance was granted to 1750 MW Demwe Lower project, even though it is a downstream-affected state. The non-official members of the NBWL had unanimously argued that prior approval of Chief Wildlife Warden of Assam is required under section 35 (6) of the WLPA as flow fluctuations will take place inside Dibru-Saikhowa NP and Biosphere Reserve. They were over-ruled, but no reasons provided for over-ruling them, nor was Assam govt. officially consulted.
Now in an ongoing Appeal challenging the forest clearance to the project (Bimal Gogoi & Anr. Vs State of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors., Appeal No. 92 of 2013), the Assam govt. has filed an officially affidavit saying that permission should have been sought from Chief Wildlife Warden of Assam under 35 (6) of WLPA as flow will fluctuate inside Dibru-Saikhowa NP. This raises a vital question on the legality of env. forest and wildlife clearance granted to Demwe Lower project. A clearance (even under EPA or FCA) could not have been given which permits flow fluctuations inside downstream Dibru-Saikhowa in violation of 35 (6) of the WLPA? The law has clearly been bent here by the Central Govt. and the Assam govt. seems to acknowledge that now officially.
The affidavit also makes a more general point about Kaziranga and the need to assess downstream impacts of upstream dams on the park.
Авторское право:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Доступные форматы
Скачайте в формате PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd