'No' to Bullet Train

Date: 15-10-2018

To
1.  Shri Shinichi Kitaoka
     The President
     Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)
     l-6th floor, Nibancho Center Building,
     5-25 Niban-cho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102-8012, Japan
2.  Junichi Yamada
     Board Member, JICA & Incharge of South Asia Department
     l-6th floor, Nibancho Center Building,
     5-25 Niban-cho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102-8012, Japan
3.  The JICA representative (India)
     16th Floor, Hindustan Times House,
     18-20, Kasturba Gandhi Marg,
     New Delhi-110001. INDIA

Subject: Bullet Train affected farmers from Maharashtra and Gujarat adopt resolution in presence of representatives from various political parties, Farmers organisations, and other Human rights organisations.

Sirs,
The affected farmers, adivasis (indigenous people) and other affected persons came together today in Delhi at a Jan Manch (peoples' forum) jointly organised with Bhoomi Adhikar Andolan (a group of organisations working on land and livelihood rights of people) at Mavlankar Hall, Constitution Club, Rafi Marg, New Delhi.

Political parties viz.—Indian National Congress, Nationalist Congress Party, Samajwadi Party, Janata Dal (Secular), Rashtriya Janata Dal, Communist Party of India, Communist Party of India (M), Communist Party of India (ML), Aam Aadmi Party, Janata Dal (Loktantrik), SUCI(C), Swabhiman Shetkari Sanghatana, Rashtriya Kisan Mazdoor Sangathan, were represented by their senior members.

During the Jan Manch affected people presented their concerns and experiences regarding implementation of the Mumbai-Ahmedabad High Speed Railway project (popularly known as Bullet Train).

The major issues highlighted during the Jan Manch were that the JICA guidelines for Environmental and Social Considerations are being consistently flouted by the project implementers. As per the said Guidelines, JICA is to assure fairness to the socially vulnerable, reduce the gap between the rich and the poor, reduce the gap among various regions, ensure democratic decision making and information transparency and most importantly, respect for human rights. However, all these are being violated as listed below:
1.  The acquisition of land for the Project is taking place forcibly and thus by disregarding the Human rights of the affected population. The excessive use of police force at all levels—during consultations, during land measurement surveys/discussions etc vitiates the atmosphere and puts tremendous pressure on the affected population.
2.  In Maharashtra, despite the stated position that land will be obtained only through a process of mutual negotiation and that joint measurement of land will take place only after the affected person assents in writing, in reality, a process of forcible take-over is taking place. In Village Kotbi (Palghar district), Notices for Joint Survey of land were issued to people on 5/10/2018 despite the fact that most of them had not given their consent in writing for the same.
3.  The JICA guidelines with respect to Indigenous Peoples are being violated. The JICA guidelines specifically mention that the rights of the Indigenous Peoples in relation to land and resources in accordance with the spirit of the UN Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples shall be respected. Art 10 of the Declaration states that Indigenous People shall not be forcibly removed from their land. Whatever be the reason, no relocation shall take place without the free, prior and informed consent of the Indigenous People concerned. Also, viable Alternatives are to be explored. However, all these safeguards are being violated in the Scheduled Area (predominantly inhabited by indigenous peoples) through which the Bullet Train passes. India may not be a signatory to the UN Declaration, but for JICA, failing to fulfil the provisions of the UN Declaration is non-negotiable.
4.  Environmental and Social Consultations as mandated by the JICA guidelines are carried out in a manner as to ensure that people are unable to participate in an informed manner:
a.  The consultations are announced at a very short notice to the concerned stakeholders. The advance notice period has varied from 24 hours (1 day) to a few weeks.
b.  There is no coherent approach to announcement of stakeholder consultations. At times they are announced for district level and sometimes they are conducted at Taluka levels.
c.  There is no clarification to the stakeholders invited to the consultation whether they should represent on Social concerns or on Environmental issues. In fact, purposely confusions are created. Different public advertisements are published by NHRSCL at same venue and same timing, but for different purpose.
d.  In case of Environmental Consultations the Supplementary EIA copies are kept for public viewing at different places which are hundreds of kms away at offices of NHRSCL. The nearest place is the District Collector office, which in some cases is about 30 kms away. Even these were not made available during consultations in most districts of Gujarat.
e.  Most of the reports are available in the English language, while they should be made available in the local vernacular language for the public to be able to read through and understand, and subsequently participate through an informed representation.
f.   Farmers/affected indigenous population (who are mostly illiterate or semi-literate) are disallowed to raise questions/queries.
g.  Environmental activists/experts are deliberately shunned out of the consultation venue with use of police force. This is violation of basic human rights of the people. And stakeholders are left with no choice to consult or assist during the consultation.
h.  Even farmers and local civil society organisations and other social/environment groups are kept out of the process.
i.   Elected representatives who can potentially raise uncomfortable queries regarding the project are man-handled and taken away before the start of consultations. The Surat consultation is one such example.
j.   The queries raised during the consultations are very casually addressed and there is no written response to the submissions or oral queries raised at the consultations.
k.  The minutes of the consultations are yet to be made public. Neither has the video documentation been made public. These are necessary for a transparent process. Letters seeking copies of the minutes are yet to be responded to.
l.   In Maharashtra the consultations on 2/5/2018 and 2/6/2018 in Palghar district were organised but cancelled by the district administration itself due to lack of proper organising and non-availability of necessary information/documents respectively. NO consultation has been held subsequently. However, the District administration has sent a report to the concerned authorities that the Public Hearing has been completed. This is a blatant lie and misrepresentation of facts.
m. As if it was not enough the recent announcement for the Stakeholder consultations for districts of Navsari and Valsad (both in the state of Gujarat), went one step further. They published invitation in local newspapers for the consultations specifically mentions that 'unauthorised people would not be flowed at the consultation'. One fails to understand what criteria are prescribed under JICA guidelines to segregate attending stakeholders into authorised and unauthorised categories.
n.  From the manner in which the stakeholder consultations are conducted it appears that these are just paper arrangements, with no serious concern to the society and environment seems that in the case of these consultations for the proposed Mumbai-Ahmedabad High Speed Rail project, Participation, Transparency, Respect for basic Human Rights of people etc. are just words to be bandied around, but not seriously considered.
o.  Trampling of basic Human Rights through police force seems to be a part and parcel of the conducting of stakeholder consultations.
p.  It be noted that at several places due to the apprehensions of affected people arising out of the high-handed and opaque functioning for the consultation the atmosphere was vitiated, and the consultations had to be postponed/rescheduled.
5.  JICA's guidelines also lay dawn that the intervention must reduce the gap between rich and poor and among various regions. We fail to understand how this is being addressed through this Project. The Bullet Train will be accessed by only a miniscule percentage of the entire population. The needs of the poor and the middle class will not be met by the bullet train. In fact, the opportunity cost of the expense incurred on the Bullet Train, will impact the availability of funds for social sector spending in the field of health, education etc. The transportation needs of the poor and the middle class will be met if the large outlay on the Bullet Train will be used for the modernisation of the present rail system including increasing safety standards and improving facilities. Regional imbalances are not being reduced by the Bullet Train either.
6.  The JICA guidelines state that JICA will actively support projects that promote environmental conservation and to projects that contribute to global environment eg. attempts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, the claim that the Bullet Train will be "clean and green" has also not been substantiated in the light of "embedded emissions" of CO2 and other pollutants, energy-intensive machinery and construction, per-passenger-Km energy consumption etc.

The Jan Manch today resolved to continue its opposition to the proposed Bullet Train project. All the attending political parties who came to show their support and solidarity with farmers, indigenous people and other project affected people have endorsed their support to the affected population.

We request a personal hearing from the JICA team at the earliest.

Thanking you, Yours faithfully,
Endorsed by:
Bhumi Adhikar Andolan and  represen-tativies of 12 major political parties.

Frontier
Vol. 51, No.27, Jan 6 - 12, 2019