Latest Post
International women day Celebration at Negombo
Written By Freedam to the nation resettlement of IDPs on Saturday, March 28, 2015 | 6:21 AM
Capacity building on VGGT and VGSSF
Written By Freedam to the nation resettlement of IDPs on Wednesday, March 25, 2015 | 2:57 AM
men and women are not against Indian Prime Minister. But they want to highlight their issues
Written By Freedam to the nation resettlement of IDPs on Sunday, March 15, 2015 | 11:11 PM
Government Makes Progress In Rebuilding Constructive Relations
The election of President Maithripala Sirisena and the appointment of a government headed by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe have seen a turnaround in relations with those within and outside the country. The improvement in international relations has been notable. The Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi who won election on a nationalist platform decided to be the first Indian prime minister in 28 years to visit the country. The last Prime Minister of India to visit, Rajiv Gandhi, was almost killed by a blow given to him by a member of the guard of honour who was angry about the signing of the Indo-Lanka Peace Accord which Sri Lankan nationalists felt was an affront to the country’s sovereignty. In the last few years, relations between Sri Lanka and India became strained, particularly on the issue of the post-war political solution promised by the former government, but which was not delivered as promised.
The visit of Prime Minister Modi to Sri Lanka, and the welcome he received from the government was echoed by virtually all sections of the polity. In his speech to the Sri Lankan parliament, the Indian prime minister said that India expected the government to go beyond the 13th Amendment to the constitution which devolved power to the provinces. However, he did not spell out what this would mean, leaving this to the Sri Lankan polity to address. There was also the pledge of greater economic cooperation and people-to-people exchanges. The grant of visa-on-entry facilities to Sri Lankans will be a boon to those who wish to visit India. In recent years there is hardly any country to which Sri Lankans can travel to without obtaining a prior visa. It is to be hoped that the period in which a traveler with a Sri Lankan passport was viewed with suspicion by immigration officials abroad is coming to an end.
Prime Minister Modi’s visit to Sri Lanka also demonstrates that Sri Lanka has much to gain by adopting a friendly attitude and non-confrontational attitude to the world. The confrontational approach of the previous government created an impression of a troubled and troublesome country that caused further problems to the country and its citizens. It was only partly the fear of being pursued for alleged war crimes that caused the former government leaders to take up adversarial stances in international diplomacy regardless of the global power of the countries it sought to confront. There was also a misplaced sense of national pride that came out of an overestimation of their own strength and a fear of the ill will of others that contradicted the ancient wisdom of the Hindu Buddhist ethos that “the world is one family to the wise.”
Delayed Report
The government’s constructive engagement with the international community has also yielded it dividends in terms of the relaxation of post-war pressures for accountability with regard to the war crimes allegations. The UN report of war crimes was not released as scheduled in time for the March session of the UN Human Rights Council. Instead it has been delayed until the September session which gives the government more time to think through its own response and be in a position to show the international community that it will not ignore the issue of accountability. It is also noteworthy that the government has won this concession without itself compromising on the core position taken by the previous government that the issue of dealing with alleged war crimes is for Sri Lankan institutions to deal with, and is not for the international community.
The government’s constructive engagement is not only with the international community but is also domestically with civil society. The previous government’s relationship with civil society groups was strained. Former government leaders viewed civil society, in particular NGOs, as a national security problem and not to be empowered. The previous government brought the NGO Secretariat to which all NGOs were expected to report to the Defence Ministry in order to keep them under tight control. NGOs were compelled to obtain prior approval for their projects in the North and East. Their activities outside the North and East were not required to obtain prior approval, but were sometimes attacked by government sponsored goons with the police standing by. Civic activists were slandered as being anti national and pro LTTE in the government media.
This extremely hostile attitude towards non-governmental activities has changed with the new government. Today NGOs and members of civil society are actively working together with the government in areas that require their specialized skills. They have become editors of government newspapers, involved in anti-corruption investigations and are working as assistants to high ranking government leaders. The government has also invited members of civil society to join the government’s deliberations with South African government representatives over the formation of a domestic truth and reconciliation commission. Although government and civil society, by their very natures, will often see things differently, the sense of being at cross purposes and in an adversarial relationship is no longer prevalent.
Unprecedented Gathering
The new government’s positive relationship with civil society and the NGO sector would be due to the stand that that the latter took against abuses of human rights and good governance under the previous government. Civic activists challenged the previous government through different means, including legal processes, media statements, awareness campaigns and public demonstrations. They did this at considerable risk to themselves in view of the climate of impunity under which the country was functioning. They championed the cause of missing and disappeared persons, opposed violations of human rights and advocated a political solution to the issues that gave rise to the three decade long internal war. They also monitored the presidential election and ensured that the core aspects of a democratic election would not be denied.
The government’s appreciation of the contribution of civil society was highlighted last week by an unprecedented gathering of leaders of all major political parties at a function organized by PAFFREL, which was one of the leading election monitoring organizations active at the presidential election. For over a year PAFFREL had been conducting a series of discussions at different levels of society and with different constituencies, including local and national politicians, government service officers, the business community and civic and religious leaders. The purpose of these discussions was to develop a consensual position on changing the political culture of the country. As a result of these deliberations, an eight point declaration regarding the criteria to be fulfilled by candidates nominated for elections by the political parties was developed. Some of the salient features of the criteria evolved were non-involvement in corruption and violence and equitable representation for women and youth.
The ability of an NGO to bring together all major political parties, including the prime minister and leader of the opposition was a remarkable occurrence and indicative of the strength and effectiveness of civil society in the country. The eight point declaration on the qualities of candidates for elections was signed by the prime minister, leader of the opposition and leaders of all the major political parties. As they signed this declaration in the presence of religious and civil society leaders and the media, there will be considerable pressure on them in the future to ensure that the nominations for candidacy at elections will be according to the declaration. Adherence to the rule of law and to systems of good governance is what distinguishes developed countries from under-developed ones. The eight qualities of a candidate for public office need to become a part and parcel of the political culture of Sri Lanka for this to happen.
Why the Port City must be terminated
Written By Freedam to the nation resettlement of IDPs on Friday, March 13, 2015 | 9:08 PM
We, a broad coalition of civil society groups, environmental
organization, trade unions and
religious bodies, demand that the Colombo Port City Project
which violates Sri Lanka's
environmental laws, is highly likely to exacerbate the
ongoing degradation coastal and inland eco
systems and which will adversely affect the entire
population must be terminated immediately.
The Port City Project, which also compromises Sri Lanka's
sovereignty, will greatly benefit China
while Sri Lanka and its citizens will have to suffer the
consequences of the project for centuries to
come. Not only will the project irreversibly damage Sri
Lanka's environment, but it will adversely
affect millions of Sri Lankans directly and indirectly for
generations. Through this project, which
former President Mahinda Rajapaksa entered into with China
for both diplomatic and for purely
personal reasons, China will also gain unrestricted access
to Sri Lanka's territorial waters. This
alone will rightly anger many of our immediate neighbours in
perpetuity.
Although the new government of President Mithripala Sirisena
and Prime Minister Ranil
Wickramasinghe promised to stop the project and this week
declared that the project is temporarily
suspended, we remain deeply concerned as the final outcome.
A few weeks ago, President
Maithripala Sirisena in a visit to New Delhi agreed to allow
India to also be a stakeholder of the
project. We believe that continuing to engage India and
China merely to fulfill narrow geopolitical
goals will only lead to the destruction of Sri Lanka's
natural resources and adversely affect our
citizens. The new government, which the people elected to
make decisions for the country must
make decisions based on the future of the country.
The impact on Sri Lanka's sovereignty
The Port City is a 233 hectare project, equivalent to 575.7
acres. This project area is divided into
two parts. One part 170 hectares (420 acres) is to be used
for commercial purposes. The other 63 ha
(156 acres) will be used for infrastructure such as roads.
Out of the designated commercial area,
108 hectares (266 acres) will be given to directly to China.
20 (50 acres) forever and 88 (217 acres)
on a 99 year lease. Thus Sri Lanka will receive only 62
hectares (153 acres) of commercial land,
out of which the new government is threatening to give a
portion to India. Thus the people of Sri
Lanka, you and I, will ultimately pay for the construction
and maintenance of the Port City, while
China and India will reap more than half the benefits. This
is perhaps the biggest economic
assassination ever undertaken by the previous government,
which is now in danger of being
continued by the new government.
Furthermore, the Chinese company that is building the Port
City states that they have the right to
call for investors to operate in the lands that will be
given to China. The project has also been given
a 25 year tax concessions through the Strategic Development
Projects Act. The Chinese company
states that they plan to invite investors from Sri Lanka,
Asia, Middle East, Europe and US. By
allowing China to call for investors to operate on Sri
Lankan soil, the sovereignty of the nation is
further compromised. In addition, China will be given the
chance to engage in fishing activities in
Sri Lankan waters. Of the various projects Sri Lanka has
carried out with foreign aid over the past
40 years, all of which came with strings attached, this
project is without doubt the most dangerous
threat to our sovereignty, ever.
The background of the project
The first draft of the Colombo Port City Project was
completed in 1998 when this was proposed as
a part of Colombo Metropolitan Regional Structure Plan in a
bid to create a metropolis by 2030.
The project was drafted by CESMA, a Singaporean company;
however the project was abandoned
due to the cost of the proposed break water, which was
extremely expensive.
In 2011 China Communication Construction Company Limited
presented the Colombo Port City
Development Project to Sri Lanka Ports Authority. An observation
committee appointed by the
Cabinet has assessed the project proposal in September 2011.
This committee instructed the Sri
Lanka Ports Authority and China Communication Construction
Company Limited to enter into a
Memorandum of Understanding in September 2012. The China
Communication Construction
Company Limited then presented a comprehensive project plant
to the Ports Authority. The
Technical Committee appointed by the Ports Authority
assessed the proposal and presented a
Technical Evaluation Report to the Observation Committee
appointed by the Cabinet. The
committee forwarded a report stating that Sri Lanka Ports
Authority and China Communication
Construction Company Limited should enter into an agreement
with the approval of the Attorney
General. The committee also recommended this to be carried
out as a Strategic Development
Project.
By January 2014, the Cabinet approved the recommendations of
the committee. In September
2014, the Secretary to the Ministry of Roads, Ports and
Naval Affairs signed an agreement with
China Communication Construction Company Limited, which also
signed an agreement with the
Ports Authority on September 16, 2014.
The issues of the project process
China Communication Construction Company Limited, the
relevant ministry and Sri Lanka Ports
Authority presented the EIA of the project for public
opinion on September 2011. It is a surprise to
many as to how this happened. By presenting the EIA for
public opinion simultaneous to China
Communication Construction Company Limited presenting the
project proposal to the Ports
Authority, it is evident that the project was formed as a
secret agreement between the Rajapaksa
administration and the Chinese government. This also
indicates that the authorities have
commenced the Port City Project without following the steps
that should have been taken during
the planning stage of a project.
The preliminary feasibility study was conducted in 2010;
this is prior to China Communication
Construction Company Limited presenting the Port City
Project Proposal or before it made an
agreement with the Ports Authority. Meanwhile the Coast
Conservation Department and the Ports
Authority instructed the Moratuwa University to come up with
terms of reference and conduct an
EIA. This sequence of events is highly problematic because
it is usually the project implementer
who commissions the preparation of an EIA. However even
before China Communication
Construction Company limited even presented a project
proposal, the Ports Authority had
commissioned an EIA.
Establishing that the project is illegal
The Coast Conservation Department opened the EIA, which was
completed by April 2011, to the
public on September 2011. However as the project expanded
the Coast Conservation Department
requested the Ports Authority to expand the EIA. The
expanded EIA was handed over to the Coast
Conservation Department on September 2013 by the Ports
Authority. After considering the EIA the
Coast Conservation Department gave conditional approval to
Ports Authority to carry out the
project in October 2014. However currently it is CHEC Port
City Colombo which is affiliated to
China Communication Construction Company Limited that is
carrying out the project. The CHEC
Port City Colombo is currently developing the Port City, yet
approval was only given to the Ports
Authority to carry out the project. This is a further
example demonstrating yet again the illegality of
the project.
Another example. On September 2014 the Geological Survey and
Mines Bureau issued a permit to
excavate sand to the Ports Authority. The Bureau gave
approval to excavate sand before the Coast
Conservation Department gave conditional approval to the
project, based on the EIS. This sequence
of events shows that the EIA was carried out merely as ‘eye
wash’ while the project proceded to be
implemented in accordance with the whims and fancies of the
senior officials of the Rajapaksa
government. It is also another example of who leading
government institutions have carried out the
political needs of the previous government, ignoring EIA
procedures and the environmental laws of
their own departments and the country.
Further compromising the actions of the Coast Conservation
Department is the fact that the
department can no consider two documents, the 2011 EIA and
the ‘add ons’ in 2013 separately and
give approval to a project. If there was a need to include
additional information, it indicates that the
original EIA was insufficient, incomplete or in other easy
weak, whereupon the Coast Conservation
Department has the responsibility and authority to reject
such a document. Sri Lankan
environmental laws do not allow an institution to request
additional information if the initial EIA is
weak. The department has violated the Coast Conservation Act
and the national Environmental Act
by giving conditional approval to the project, based on an
unsatisfactory EIA.
The weaknesses of the EIA
The EIA presented by the Moratuwa University in 2011 was
extremely poor quality, technically
inadequate and clearly incomplete. It appears as if the
University conducted the research to satisfy
the desire of former president Rajapaksa. As environmental
organizations collectively we have
analyzed over 50 EIAs and this is by far the weakest EIA we
have ever seen. Even the weak EIAs
presented for Uma Oya Project, the Weerawila Airport and the
Mattala Airport were not as
incomplete, technically unsound and self evidently biased as
this EIA. The above mentioned EIAs
at least attempted to show that they were impartial and
scientific, however the EIA on the Port City
Project states that there is no environmental impact from
the project! This is possibly the the first
EIA in the world which has stated that no impact on
environment is going to arise from a
development project. We are deeply dismayed by the behavior
of researchers from Moratuwa
University.
The basic facts in the EIA report are wrong. The EIA says
that the Port City will be 300 acres. The
website of the project says that it will be a 233 hectare
project, which is 575.7 acres. It is surely not
difficult to understand why no one takes the EIA report
seriously at all.
Another problem with the EIA is that there is no analysis of
alternative sites. According to
universally accepted standards, researchers preparing an EIA
choose three separate sites and decide
on which is the better place for a project. Thus the policy
makers know what place suits a project
better and where the environmental damage will be less.
As mentioned above even the most abysmal EIA reports,
propping up the most unacceptable
projects, attempted to put at least a veneer of
respectability on their assessments and achieve a
degree of objectivity by having a team of experts that are
necessary to analyze important elements.
Another example: if a project is being carried out in a
coastal area a team conducting the EIA
would have a marine biologist who would inspect the impact
of the project on aquatic life. The EIA
team brought together by Moratuwa University did not include
anyone with a background in
marine biology and as a consequence the impact of the
project on aquatic life – a project that is
proposed to be built in the sea - was not studied at all.
The Port City project is being implemented in an area famous
for its rich marine eco system, in
addition the location is an important marine archeology
site, as Colombo has been a port for
millennia. Although international standards and Sri Lanka's
Antiquities Ordinance demand that
how archeological sites are affected by a project should be
evaluated, adequate attention has not
been paid to this aspect of the project in the EIA. A
separate, independent study by the Department
of Archeology reveals that a number of artifacts have been
found at the location where the project
is being developed. The study by the Department of
Archeology said that ancient cannons have
been found at the site. None of this is mentioned in the
EIA. Instead of conducting a study on
marine archeology, the researchers from Moratuwa University
have listed antiquities found in
locations in nearby land based sites.
By giving conditional approval for a major project, despite
the glaring short coming of the EIA, the
Coast Conservation Department has failed in its statutory
duty to protect Sri Lanka’s coastal
resources and by so doing contributed to future widespread
degradation if not the destruction of
marine resources and literally undermined the future
wellbeing of the citizens of this country.
Although less than 10% of the project has been completed we
already see grave environmental
effects of the project including erosion, reduction
production and siltation. The Coast Conservation
Department is responsible for this.
The harmful effects of the project
In the last three months, fishermen who operate in the
vicinity of the project from which sand is now being
excavated and transported have lost fishing equipment over
Rs 4 million due to damages. In addition the
fishermen are not allowed to operate within 10 kilometers of
'Thamba Gala' where sand is being excavated
although this is a high yielding fishing area. Due to the
excavation of sand and the disturbance to the
sediments a number of breeding sites of fish have been
destroyed and already fishermen have noted a
decline in the population of fish. Thus fishermen from
Negombo, Wennappuwa, Uswetakeiyawa, Hendala,
Panadura, Wellawatte, Mount Lavinia, and Moratuwa have
incurred grave financial losses. Dwindling
incomes of coastal families will lead to social
issues.
The area surrounding 'Thamba gala' is being excavated
throughout the day and the excavated sand is being
transported to the construction site, which is seven
kilometers away, using three ships. Fishing is
prohibited in the excavating and transporting areas
affecting 30,000 coastal fishermen.
According to the initial plan 30 million cubic meters of
sand is required. However since the project
has been expanded the necessary quantity of sand has
drastically increased. Considering the
damage already done due to sand mining, the extent on the
environmental degrading is
unimaginable if the project is implemented fully. Due to the
massive excavation of sand, rocky
reefs, coral reefs and sand dunes are risk of becoming
increasingly smothered or unstable. Since
reefs are areas in which fish and other aquatic species
breed, this is highly likely to severely affect
the population of these species. These consequences of the
project will contribute to the destruction
of livelihoods for thousands of fishermen. It will also
affect the nutritional levels in the country as
fish is the main source of protein for many Sri Lankans.
Moreover 16 million cubes of granite is needed for
reclamation process. There is no mention of the
EIA where the project will obtain the granite, the ability
to obtain such a large quantity, the
ecological impact of excavating the granite or the
inconvenience caused to the people living in the
vicinity of granite mines In Western Province many quarry owners
are already violating the terms
of their licenses, excavating ever larger quantities of
granite, because of the insatiable demand for
granite from the Port City. The overexploitation of granite
resources has caused grave
inconveniences for those who reside near the quarries.
By attempting to excavate this vast quantity of granite the
geology of the country will destablize
leading to increased natural disasters in sensitive areas.
Already Sri Lanka has seen an increase in
land slips in the central province due to mismanagement of
the environment. If granite continues to
be excavated on such a large scale in these areas, the
entire hill country maybe at risk of becoming
destabilized. A granite excavation lowers ground water,
which in turn may lead to a shortage in
drinking water. There is already a high demand for granite
due to a number of development projects
in the country. This demand will only increase in the
future. After the reclamation work for the
project is completed, large buildings need to be erected at
the Port City. These buildings will
require yet more massive amounts of granite. This will
automatically lead to overexploitation of
granite, which will destabilize the entire country and lead
Sri Lanka to natural disasters on
unimaginable scales.
According to experts following the commencement of the Port
City Project wave and sea current
patterns have already undergone changes. The Colombo Port
itself is at risk due to changes in the
pattern of sand flowing in and around the Colombo Port. With
the change in sediment transport and
wave patterns the operations of the Colombo Port maybe be
severely affected, which will adversely
affect the operations of the port and will cost Sri Lanka
greatly. However no attention is paid to
these consequences of the Port City construction by the EIA.
There are many recent examples of this from other parts of
Sri Lanka. By expanding the Colombo
Port, Dikowita fishing harbour is continuously filled with
sand greatly affecting the operations of
the fishing harbour. More recently a lot of media attention
has been given to a breakwater
constructed near the Unawatuna beach. At only 300 metres
long and only one metre high, this
breakwaters is held responsible for a dramatic increase in
erosion of a large stretch of the beach
famous among tourists. A similar fate befell the coral reefs
of Hikkaduwa when a small jetty was
built further along the coast. However the EIA pays no
attention what so ever to these highly
probably eventualities.
In the opinion of many coastal dwellers, the Port City
Project construction has already exacerbated
coastal erosion. Areas to the south of the project including
Panadura and Beruwala and to the north
including Uswetakeiyawa and Negombo are facing grave coastal
erosion. These are highly densely
populated urban areas, with large numbers of houses, hotels
and restaurants close to the beach.
When the beachfront is reduced it adversely affects tourism
industry and fishing communities
living along the coast. The setbacks suffered by these
industries will affect the entire economy and
will give rise to various social issues.
The Kelani River carries a significant amount of sediment
when it enters the ocean at Modara.
These sediment naturally flow into the sea and drift along
the coast with the sea currents in shallow
seas. This is an area where one can find most of the
breeding sites for crabs and lobsters. With the
changes in wave and current patterns, this process becomes
disturbed threatening the survival of
these species and this has affected fishermen who harvest
the crabs and lobsters mainly for tourist
hotels.
When one attempts to reclaim seas to create artificial
islands, even following proper procedure,
there is significant damage to aquatic eco systems. When
United Arab Emirates created palm
Islands, the construction gravely affected aquatic eco
systems. Commenting on the environmental
damage the environmental website the Green Prophet said that
'The construction of the Palm
Islands has had a significant impact on the surrounding
environment, resulting in changes to area
wildlife, coastal erosion, alongshore sediment transport and
wave patterns. Sediment stirred up by
construction has suffocated and injured local marine fauna
and reduced the amount of sunlight
which filters down to seashore vegetation. Variations in
alongshore sediment transport have
resulted in changes in erosion patterns along the UAE coast,
which has also been exacerbated by
altered wave patterns as the waters of the Gulf attempt to
move around the new obstruction of the
islands.' If this can happened when proper EIA procedures
are followed, one simply cannot imagine
the extent of the damage that will be caused by the Colombo
Port City project, which did not follow
EIA procedures at all.
Due to our continuous protests and lobbying, the new Prime
Minister promised the nation that the
Port City project will be terminated when they were elected
to power. However there is now a
grave concern regarding whether this promise that was made
to the people will be kept. China
Communication Construction Company Limited has planned to
invest US $ 1.4 billion for this
project. It is the biggest Chinese investment in Sri Lanka.
There are ominous signs that the new
government is beginning to attempt to justify the project,
despite the currently suspended activities.
We continue to insist - as we did before the elections -
that this is a completely illegal project. We
continue to insist - as we did before the elections – that
the actual sovereign, economic, social and
environmental costs of the project fat outweigh the entire
speculative benefits advance by the
project and its supporters.
Despite ample evidence of the massive potential damage,
there are still certain interest that claim
the project should be continued, arguing that 10% of the
project is already completed. This too is an
utterly is a false statement. It has only been three months
since the construction commenced. Only a
small portion of the most basic foundations and construction
has been carried out. Of these most are
preparatory access ways. In truth less than 1% of the total
project has been completed and yet even
at this stage the damage caused to the environment has
already been unacceptable. What must be
done is to terminate this fraudulent, illegal and wholly
unnecessary project immediately. The laws
of the nation permit and demand this. We propose the new
government undertakes to systematically
dismantle the 1% of construction work that has commenced
since January and use the materials that
are recovered to protect and restore areas affected by
coastal erosion, under the supervision of the
Coast Conservation Department.
