Proposed NIB would be illegal, she says
Minister of State for Environment and Forests Jayanthi Natarajan has expressed “very serious concern” at the setting up of a National Investment Board to fast-track clearances of major infrastructure projects, saying the “concept is unacceptable,” documents exclusively obtained by The Hindu reveal.
In a five-page letter sent to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on October 9, Ms. Natarajan said the proposal would upturn established procedures of government business, place corporate interests over those of citizens and violate environmental protection mandates imposed by the Supreme Court.
The Hindu had first reported earlier this month that the Department of Economic Affairs-proposed NIB — an empowered standing committee of the Cabinet that will be chaired by the Prime Minister and will include key offices like that of the Finance Minister and the Law and Justice Minister — would hear appeals from companies whose projects had been stalled on environmental grounds, and fast-track clearances.
Pro-corporate body
Ms. Natarajan’s letter says that while the proposal to set up the NIB gives corporations with projects worth “1,000 crore or more a route for fast-track appeal, it does not contemplate giving a hearing to citizens, stakeholders, or NGOs, who may be aggrieved by the impact of the project.”
Her letter points out that the NIB’s powers will, therefore, “be used for the benefit ONLY of large investors, but not ordinary people, local citizens and stakeholders dedicated to preserving environmental integrity.”
Ms. Natarajan notes that there is a conflict of interest between investment promotion and the Ministry of Environment and Forests, which exists “to protect the integrity of the environment, to ensure that our forests and wildlife, and by extension, forest dwellers are protected.”
“Often,” the letter argues, “hard decisions have to be taken to balance the imperatives of the development with the crucial need to preserve the environment. In this context, it would be utterly against the spirit of the Environment Protection Act to allow an investment Board, or the Finance Ministry to overrule, or decide upon environmental concerns.”
Prime Minister Singh, Ms. Natarajan notes in her letter, has voiced a commitment to “the most disadvantaged sections of society, indigenous people, forest dwellers, and the aam admi, whose interests and health are often impacted by unregulated industrial excess.”
UNDUE HASTE
Ms. Natarajan’s letter says the note proposing the creation of the NIB “and the haste with which our reply has been sought is deeply disturbing.” The issue, her letter records, “has never been discussed at the bureaucratic level, by a Committee of Secretaries, and is a proposal which is being brought directly to Cabinet. These proposed changes would have far-reaching consequences on the way Ministries are run, governance carried out, and responsibilities to the Legislature by the Executive discharged.”
The Environment Minister’s letter adds that the NIB will not possess “the domain knowledge, and expert level input of various levels of the Environment and Forest Ministry officers, and Committees, cannot be substituted.” When the Minister of a Ministry, acting upon the expert advice of officers, takes a decision, there is absolutely no justification for the NIB to assume his/her authority, nor will the NIB, have the competence to do so,” the letter states.
“I submit,” Ms. Natarajan writes, “that no entity anywhere in the world has the right to set up a project or an industry anywhere he wants just because of the possibility of large investments. Project location the world over is finalised ‘after’ and NOT ‘before’ looking at key considerations like environmental, and forest aspects, and even national security.”
Ms. Natarajan also challenges the Department of Economic Affairs’ claims that environmental clearances are holding up key projects. For example, her letter records, environment clearance had been granted to 181 coal mines with a total capacity of 83 million tons per annun during the 11th Plan Period, up to August 2011 — doubling India’s current capacity. In addition, 113 coal mines had been granted permission to divert 26,000 hectares of forest land for industrial use.
Indeed, her letter states, clearances have been awarded to projects “far beyond [what] has been targeted in the current and future plans.” “For instance,” the letter states, the “Ministry of Environment and Forests in the five years till August 2011 has granted environmental clearance to 210,000 MW of thermal power capacity. However, most of these projects have not been commissioned.”
LEGAL MORASS
Pointing to serious issues of Constitutional importance, and the functioning of the Cabinet, Ms. Natarajan rejects the notion presented in the draft Cabinet Note, that in the case of “failure” of the Competent Authority/Minister to act, the matter will stand transferred to the NIB. “This concept is unacceptable. The NIB has no constitutional or legal authority to decide upon the failure of any Minister,” she writes.
“If any decision of the Minister for Environment is overruled by the NIB,” the letter asks, “who will answer to this in Parliament?”
Her letter notes that in July 2011, the Supreme Court’s order dated July 6, 2011 had laid down far-reaching directions on the statutory clearance procedures to be followed by the Environment Ministry, which it would be illegal for the NIB to overrule.
Ms. Natarajan warns that clearing projects in the face of these legal mandates could end up eroding investor confidence, by opening the way for litigation. “Today, many projects are being delayed after clearance has been granted simply because we are not able to justify that the statutory procedure for clearance has been followed,” she writes.
Keywords: Jayanthi Natarajan, Minister of State for Environment and Forests, National Investment Board, fast-track clearances, infrastructure projects
Jayanthi Natarajan's stand is fair and just. NIB, a new physical and
political animal will cast its shadow ovr functioning ministries
alongside the burly Planning Commission. Waht are minsiters and civil
servants, cabinet commiottees, GoMs and EGoms for? NIB, with three
high pwoer memebrs, with a secretary and a secretarfiatr is a fifth
wheeel. Further it will create needless friction between the
minsitries and dfcivi servants. We want projectws and quick
implementation thereof. We do not want the creation of a new
hierarchy. It is therefore in national interest if the FM's propoasal
for a high pwoered National Investment Boared is given up.
Ms. Jayanti Natrajan is right in asserting that the legislative and
executive mandates of the important ministries like the MOEF,will take
a severe beating if the NIB is to take shape as the super-arbitrator
for providing speedy clearances to the mega-investment projects.The
government's insensitivity towards the aam admi,the alibi used to push
major decisions which are anti-common man's aspirations, can be
clearly gauged that instead of creating a super committee for fast-
tracking many issues related to tribals,informal workers,forest
dwellers,NIB being thought of,will promote corporate interests without
looking into long term environmental, social,human implications. Any development which does not take a
common man's view of future being planned will eventually end up
lynching his legal and constitutional rights over jal,jangal,zameen.
I am indeed happy to see that Ms.Natarajan has not succumbed to the
pressure of Finance Ministry and the PMO. This is a solid defense of the
existing regulations on environmental clearances. She is absolutely
correct that NIB is a body with no constitutional validity. I hope the
Dr.Singh will intervene and act to dissolve the NIB. Development at what
cost, Dr.Singh?
It is good that Ms Jayanti Natarajan has shown so much concern for the citizens’ interests with regard to environment etc. When the government appointed committee on preservation of Western Ghats submitted its report the same concern for the protecting the Ghats was not seen. In fact an attempt is being made to ignore the report. Obviously, there is an internal power struggle within UPA and Ms Natarajan’s letter is an indicator of that struggle.
I am with you Ms. Natarajan finally I hear some sane voice,you are right I gave you one example that you may know, At present rate of Coal Consumption what was need,Rhyme or Reason to give away 142 Blocks for free and within just few years- If you add all reseve capacity in Coal Blocks, It will last about Hundred YEARS. Five to ten Blocks would have been OK for NEXT DECADES CONSUMPTION. By the way I FULLY AGREE ON ALL OF YOUR POINTS. KEET IT UP.
Public and environmental interests should be placed higher than economic or developmental interests. There can be ways other than by degrading environment, one can achieve progress. The stand taken by Ms. Jayanti Natarajan in this context is highly appreciable. No decision in haste should be taken under pressure from corporates. The issue needs wider consultation and discussions among policy makers before taking any step of establishing a NIB.
NIB is a dangerous step. Usurpation of powers vested in sovereign entities like the executive branch by the cabinet is not acceptable in a democracy. It may be acceptable in monarchies and other forms of authoritarian systems like in China. Where do we stop then? Since courts are taking unduly long time to decide, can we set up a parallel system to judge cases disputing issues above a certain value? Creating special queues is not a good practice in a democratic system. Don’t we need to treat small and medium sized projects equally as well? In many cases, they provide employment for far more number of people than the large ones.
I salute the Minister for defending the need for a proper scrutiny of Environmental Impacts of Development Projects prior to their approval. Its encouraging to see a Minister place so much emphasis on adequate representation from different stakeholders whose lives and livelihood could be impacted by any projects. New projects and infrastructure developments are welcome, but should never be at the cost of environment and sustainability.
Hats off Ms Jayanthi Natarajan!!
This is just territorial - who would like to be invaded? When corrution and nepotism are defended, what commitment is there for ethics and emvironment. If instead of this board, a pliant entity is given free hand and the "family"benefits, there will be no objection. It is like one who says I am also going to the place of worship to a pious individual, but to steal.
Please Email the Editor