___________

1. MP of Kalahandi, Bhakta Das, who in recent years has been vociferous against mining by Vedanta once was desperate to have an alumina plant in Lanjigarh. Following is from a report in Hindu.

Today, he is known as a champion of tribal rights and a leader in the fight against Vedanta’s proposal to mine bauxite in Niyamgiri. But 14 years ago, Bhakta Charan Das, Congress MP from Kalahandi sang a different tune. “The Government of India and the Orissa government should take keen interest to set up at least a large alumina plant because we have got a heavy deposit of bauxite in Niyamgiri and Sijimalli of the Kalahandi district,” he had said during a November 1996 debate in the Lok Sabha on the drought situation in Orissa. “If there is an alumina plant, then a minimum of 40,000 people can sustain out of the different kinds of earnings from that.”

When asked about his statements on Thursday, Mr. Das initially insisted that he had only recommended mining in Sijimalli and not Niyamgiri. When faced with the Lok Sabha record, the MP, also the founder of the Green Kalahandi movement, admitted that he had learnt a lot since that day one-and-a-half decades ago.

“I had not visited Niyamgiri then. I did not know of the Dongria Kondh links to that place then. At that point, I did not know it was a densely forested area,” he said, speaking to The-Hindu over telephone immediately after the mass rally was held by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi in the Niyamgiri area.

“Of course, the Kalahandi district needs more industries, but it should not be development at the cost of the people, at the cost of the forests,” Mr. Das said, adding that the Vedanta project had failed to generate sufficient local jobs, or provide health and education facilities. “I will still be happy to support an industry that takes into account the views of the local people, that will ensure the future of all stakeholders, that follows all the laws…There can be other mines, but why don’t they go and find an abandoned mountain, instead of Niyamgiri?”

Note that the government of Odisha (a Congress government led by Janaki Patnaik) signed the first MOU with Vedanta for mining in Lanjigarh in 1997, exactly 13 years ago, a year after the above statement by Bhakta Das.

2. Bhakta Das as well as the Youth Congress Chief of Odisha, Pradeep Majhi (MP Nabarangpur) are not against mining for bauxite. They just don’t want it now in Lanjigarh. Following is from a report in Orissadiary.

Orissa Pradesh Youth Congress chief, Nabrangpur MP Pradeep Majhi on Thursday said Vedanta can look for alternative sites except Niyamgiri from where it can mine bauxite to feed its one- million- tonne alumina refinery at Lanjigarh in Kalahandi district.

He suggests alternative sites—Kuturmali, Bijimali and Sabarmali hills which are in the periphery of Niyamgiri and there are no habitation of tribals in this region. He said The Congress party is not against industrialization. There are many other hills where there are no tribals and that can be used by Vedanta which are only 8 kms from Niyamgiri. But it is clear that no mining would be allowed at Niyamgiri.

3. Not wanting in Lanjigarh and some other place is fine depending on how sacred that mountain is to the local adivasis. But did the activists hyped up the sacredness to stop the project? I have no idea. But the following excerpt from a report in Telegraph seems to suggest that way.

Regarding industrialisation and its effects on Niyamgiri, Jakesia said: “I realised that for bauxite excavation, only the surface level of the rock is used.

This is unlike iron ore and coal mining, where one has to go below the surface. Thus, the process is fairly smooth. You will be surprised to know that puja offered to Niyam Raja was never performed there. Now, after the spread of awareness, the puja is performed on top of the hill.”

4. In http://www.orissalinks.com/orissagrowth/archives/3944 we mentioned several disturbing questions raised by Nilmadhab Mohanty (a senior Fellow, Institute for Studies in Industrial Development, New Delhi) on how the government went about this. The following excerpt from an article in Economic Times raises additional disturbing questions.

On August 24, the Central government said that Vedanta Aluminium had not sought prior approval for expanding the refinery capacity to 6 million tonnes from 1 million tonnes. Another government decision that day, announced by the minister of state for environment and forests Jairam Ramesh, stopping plans to mine bauxite at Nyamgiri near Lanjigarh, attracted much more attention but the brake on the refinery expansion could have a longer term impact on the fortunes of Vedanta. The bauxite was to be supplied to the refinery.

The chief operating officer of the Anil Agarwal-controlled company, Mukesh Kumar, expressed his doubts on Thursday over the “intention” behind these announcements in view of an earlier notification.

The ministry of environment and forests had said on August 19 that for all projects which were increasing capacity and where terms of references—the guidelines and scope for any expansion—have been mentioned and where construction activities have been started, the terms of references may be suspended or withdrawn.

"Instances have come to the notice of this ministry where project proponents have undertaken construction activities without obtaining requisite environmental clearance…No activity relating to any project covered under this notification, including civil construction, can be undertaken at site without obtaining prior environmental clearance," the notification added.

The notification relates to environment impact assessment (EIA)— a crucial part of the project approval process under the Environment Protection Act. The EPA is the umbrella legislation that regulates the impact of all industrial and commercial activities on environment.

The Vedanta official said that no prior approval for expansion was needed according to the rules in place—the Environment Impact Assessment notification of 2006—before the changes announced on August 19.

"There is no threshold limit given in the EIA notification for such a project," Mr Kumar told ET. "Hence prior environment clearance, as per the notification for our proposed expansion, is not mandatory before undertaking any construction activities."

Mr Kumar also referred to a section in the 2006 notification which stipulates that approval to the terms of reference for any project has to be announced within 60 days from the date of submission. "If the decision is not conveyed within 60 days, then the terms of references suggested by the applicant, "shall be deemed as final terms for the EIA study."

Vedanta had submitted its proposal for expanding the capacity to the ministry of environment and forests for approval on October 3, 2007. The company didn’t get approval within 60 days, which is the mandatory period as per the notification.

Mr Ramesh did not respond to calls and text messages sent to his mobile.

We will add more things as they come out. 

Regardless of all of the above, my current view is that stopping Vedanta mining in Lanjigarh, although done in a very partisan and high handed way, was a high profile example to make the point that environment and forest rights need to be taken seriously, to send a message to the maoists that the UPA-2 government (mainly Congress) will protect tribals, and to send a message to the tribals that they can rely on the government.

While a government should treat everyone equally and follow the law and not make one-time examples, the motivation here makes some sense on the ground of greater good of the country that currently faces the maoist menace who reportedly use mining and miners in their recruiting plays.

As I finish writing this, I read an article in Indian Express, that points out many additional interesting issues.