EIA 2020: A tale of oppression

In midst of the pandemic, we know the government brought about some significant changes in the Education Policy. There is already significant hype around it. Mostly all of us are praising it because of the flexibility and all other advantages that it seeks to inculcate in the education system of India. But while this whole hype was going, a new draft on EIA came out. For those who do not know what EIA is, EIA is Environmental Impact Assessment policy which seeks to protect the environment from the ill effect that may arise from a significant economic project like- mining, infrastructure building, industrialization, etc. It not only seeks to provide relief to the environment but also to the indigenous people who might be affected in due course of the project. So EIA is more than a technical review. It is very obvious that any good that we do to our environment today, will be beneficial in the coming days. So, this policy is essentially looks for sustainability in a project in terms of the environment.

The process of the impact on environment assessment is very simple. The committee that is formed to check on the impact, assesses the site/location selected for the project, analyses the impact, considers alternate scenarios and goes in for a public hearing. Here the gets a chance to voice their opinion about the project. The people of that selected location also get to propose their demands regarding relocation and reimbursement and safety norms. So, this policy not only is about the environment but also about human rights.

What are the changes that are being brought?

1.       Exclusion on waterways and highways project from public hearing.

2.       No information will be provided on ‘Strategic projects’ on public domain.

3.       Reduction of Public hearing time to 20 days.

4.       Projects involving constructions having an area up to 1,50,000 sq. m. will not be required to take any environmental clearances.

5.       Any project operating without environmental clearance may take the clearance later.

6.       The violations can only be pointed out by the companies/corporations who are actually violating the principles and policies of EIA or by Govt. Officials and regulatory bodies.

7.       Any projects from border areas will be exempted from public hearing.

What are the implications of such laws?

This policy amendment reminds me of the economics class in my college where my professor said that there is always a trade-off between economic development and the environmental issues. Now, we must be paying attention to is the vision of the present government. This present government seeks to maximize industrialization in our country be it at the expense of the environment. This aggressiveness can be explained mostly due to the fact the that China’s policy in trade and International relations is making it an unfavorable place for doing business and India wants to take this opportunity to allow more rapid industrialization and thus encouraging FDIs. This move is praiseworthy indeed. But the effects can be dangerous for not only the next generations but also the people of this generation. We have seen how Vishakhapatnam chemical plant disaster happened and affected lives of so many people. The plant was operating without environmental clearance and the new draft is legalizing it. The point is, anyone may set up a factor emitting gases and dislocating people of that area and your opinion about it won’t be given much importance to. Now, who will be answerable to the residents where the project is taking place or to the massive deforestation that may happen due to a project establishment? Also not allowing citizens to report about a violation is highly oppressive in nature.

After publication of this draft, the government allowed public to vent their opinion. It is obvious that several people would oppose to such changes in the EIA. But funnily, after receiving such opinions of the public, the government sent legal notice to several activities for “sending to many emails” and termed the mails as “unlawful” and “acts of terrorism”. Later, the notice was withdrawn saying that it was a “clerical error”.

In my opinion, the dream of rapid industrialization is fine when it is done after striking some sort of balance between human rights and environmental protection. With India shifting its focus from agricultural economy, it is important that this shift is complimented with rise in industries and factories but of course, not at the expense of the environment or the society at large. Also, when you allowed citizens to vent their opinions, you cannot term them as terrorism, that is for sure.