The new draft Environment Impact Assessment (2020) notification of India is widely criticised for its controversial changes in rules. Experts believe most of the provisions in the new draft EIA prove to be a regressive departure from the earlier version. EIA is aimed at the protection of the environment but this draft does not seem to be concerned about sustainable development. This is a pressing issue and it needs everybody’s attention.

Environmental activists, young Indians, political leaders, celebrities and YouTube stars are coming forward voicing their opinions against the precarious draft.

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on Monday lashed out at the Centre over the draft environment impact assessment (EIA) notification 2020, saying that it must be withdrawn to stop “environmental destruction”. Gandhi alleged that the aim of the EIA 2020 draft notification was clear “loot of the nation”.

Actor Karthi Sivakumar is one of the first few celebrities to raise his voice against the EIA 2020 draft. The actor, in a press release published in July has said that the proposed EIA 2020 Draft has instilled new fears in the minds of the common man and experts.

Parvathy Thiruvothu is also one among the many who urged the public to raise their voice against the draft.

Eco diversity as collateral

1. Violates Freedom of Speech and Expression

The duration to raise public opinion has been reduced from 30 days to 20 days. Moreover, the draft was put out at a time when public hearing was least possible due to the nation-wide lockdown owing to COVID-19 pandemic.

Apart from this, the new draft has not been translated into all regional languages/22 official languages of India, which directly shuts out the voice of half of the Indian population.

2. Strategic projects

Any project that is related to National Security and Defence are considered strategic but according to the new draft, any development on coastal areas, expansion of roads and so on, will fall under the category of “Strategic Project, and hence the details of such projects will not be disclosed to people.

3. Ecologically Sensitive Areas

According to the existing EIA (2006), wetlands, grasslands, and marshlands are considered as Ecologically Sensitive Areas (ESA). These areas are home to various species of animals, birds, plants and indigenous people and therefore, no industry/business can exist here. But the new draft removes these lands from the ESA category. This will definitely shoot the economic development but at the cost of the environment

4. Allows Post-Facto Approval

It simply allows huge projects to start operations without having a clearance certificate. Thus, the 2020 draft paves way for banned industries to function legally. These include 40 ‘Big Projects’ like coal mining extraction of metals and minerals etc.

Earlier, an exemption was given to projects that occupy less than five acres (20,000 sq.mts) to start their business without approval. But the 2020 draft increases the threshold to 40 acres (1.5lakh sq.mts)

EIA has been amended over 12 times since 1994 and each time changes were made favouring the corporates.

People can send their objection mail to: eia2020-moefcc@gov.in . Augut 11 is the last date to submit feedback against draft EIA 2020 notification.

The post Development at the cost of eco-diversity appeared first on The Gulf Indians.

There has been a big outrage in India about the dire consequences of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) 2020 Notification recently. Activists have rallied against the draft, arguing that it undoes a lot of the previous draft’s positive points and encourages environmental violations.

How did it start?

India enacted laws to control water (1974) and air (1982) pollution, soon after the Stockholm Declaration (1972) on Environment was signed.

But it was the Bhopal gas leak disaster in 1984 that triggered the country to legislate an umbrella Act for environmental protection in 1986.

Under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, India notified its first EIA norms in 1994, setting in place a legal framework for regulating activities that access, utilise, and affect (pollute) natural resources.

All development projects since then have to comply with these norms and go through the process for obtaining environmental clearance ever since.

The 1994 EIA notification was replaced with a modified draft in 2006. Earlier this year, the government redrafted it again to incorporate the amendments and relevant court orders issued since 2006, claiming it was a means to make the EIA “process more transparent and expedient.”

However, activists argue that the modified draft achieved the opposite encouraging environment violations in case of large-scale irrigation projects.

Activists claim that the new draft is non-transparent, undemocratic, unjust and unaccountable and hence, approached the court against EIA.

For instance, reports on projects’ potential impact on the environment — the bedrock of the EIA process — are frequently shoddy and consultant agencies that prepare those reports for a fee are left unchecked.

Additionally, there are periodic amendments exempting one category of industries or the other from scrutiny.

Red flags

The draft essentially increases the government’s discretionary power while restraining public feedback regarding environmental safety.

The removal of these conditions means that projects could be proposed dangerously close to eco-sensitive zones.

It was only recently the state government of Goa was caught blatantly engaging in fraud. It submitted a false report to obtain clearance for an airport near the ecologically sensitive Mopa plateau endangering not only flora and fauna but also putting a threat on the livelihood of hundreds of farmers.

Even after this, neither the government officers nor the EIA consultants who attempted the fraud were reprimanded.

Hydroelectric projects lesser than 25MW will not need an EIA, which means that large projects proposed in the Himalayan region or in the western ghats may be split on paper into smaller ones of 25MW, thus overlooking the environmental scrutiny.

All inland waterways, projects and expansion/widening of national highways, including roads, that cut through forests and dredging of major rivers will be exempt from prior clearance.

There is also no scope for any public complaint about violations in the new draft. The violators themselves will have to disclose that they broke the law, which is a major problem.

The question

The Supreme Court, National Green Tribunal and the Madras high court have ruled against it in the past stating that it is “unsustainable-in-law”. India endorses the ‘polluter-pays-principle’; it cannot afford to endorse the “pollute-and-pay” sham.

The Delhi High Court has now extended the deadline for public feedback on the draft till August 11. Many are coming forward and urging the public to comment against the Environmental Impact Assessment which is crucial for saving the natural resources of the country from unchecked plundering.

The question is what is the hurry to bring out this notification in the midst of the pandemic? How can public consultation take place in the midst of death and tragedy?

The post The problematic EIA appeared first on The Gulf Indians.