• PAGE ONE
• INDEX
• HOME

Re-striking roots

Kuldip Nayar

A BOAT lazily took me across the serene Narmada, larger than its size. Even the incomplete dam had at one time caught enough water to submerge a temple. The ascent to Manibeli village, the scene of an anti-dam agitation, was visible from the make-shift d ock, near the temple.

This was the village where the police had used lathis mercilessly many a time to clear a cluster of inhabitants before the impounded Narmada water would flow. Some 55 men, women and children were still perched on a height, determined not to quit. What ha ppened to them? Six years later, after reading the Supreme Court judgment that the dam would go up by another five metres, I am thinking of them. I wish nobody has to leave his or her home or hearth. New places, whatever the facilities, cannot compensate the loss of neighbourhood, friends and the living itself.

But, then, people all over the world have been shifted from their home -- some because of a dam and others because of a factory that has come up and more because of a country's border has changed. None of them has liked the uprooting, but after some time they have taken life in their stride. But many, like the Narmada Bachao Andolan votaries led by Ms Medha Patkar, are conscientious objectors against the very project that disturbs the lives of lakhs, and the environment. And there is a strong segment of opinion which agrees with her.

Whether the Narmada should have been dammed or not is not a debate I want to revive. I have listened to those who have opposed the dam in any shape or form right from the beginning. I have also met those who swear by it. Both get worked up after a few mi nutes of discussion. Both seem to imagine that a stand can only be defended by the language of violence and by condemning those who do not accept their point of view. For both, there are no shades. Only dam or no dam. Black or white.

I want to concentrate on the fallout -- the rehabilitation part. That is the reason why some of us -- human rights activists -- went to Gujarat a few years ago to see if and where the uprooted have re-struck the roots. At that time, some 6,500 families o ut of 41,000 had been rehabilitated, according to official sources. Ms Patkar's supporters put the figure of the affected at two lakh families (10 lakh people).

The estimate by Gujarat non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the Sarvodaya workers were, however, far less -- around 50,000 families, still, three lakh people. The rehabilitation has been, indeed, slow. One, sufficient land is not available. Two, th ere is not enough money to distribute among those relocated to buy cattle, basic utensils, seeds, etc. Even when we went around the places where the people were still living resisting the pressure or where the oustees had been rehabilitated, the conditio ns were difficult. No doubt that life was picking up in a few new colonies but the tales of hardship were unending.

Gujarat is responsible for the settlement of all oustees, whether they are from Maharashtra or Madhya Pradesh. The Narmada Tribunal Award made it clear many years ago that the rehabilitation provision would be made before the people were shifted. None in Gujarat has ever challenged the award. I am glad the Supreme Court has underlined the rehabilitation part in its judgment. ``The government does not have land even to resettle the affected in Gujarat, how is it talking of those in Maharashtra and MP?,'' the non-dam votaries asked me. They appear to be right.

Once Mr P. V. Narasimha Rao, during his tenure as Prime Minister, had brought together the Chief Ministers of Gujarat, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh to discuss rehabilitation. Some firm decisions were taken then. Gujarat has a BJP government now. The Pr ime Minister, Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee, can exert pressure on Ahmedabad to implement the rehabilitation schemes. He can also call a meeting of the three States to ensure that the uprooted get at least some compensation, facilities and concessions, which t he Narmada Tribunal Award had indicated. Now that the Prime Minister has to decide on the dam's height after every five metres added to it, he should constitute a committee of non-officials to advice him. Otherwise, Gujarat would seem winning every time.

I would also like Ahmedabad to ensure that the Narmada water at Sardar Sarovar is primarily used in Saurashtra and the Kutch, where the parched throats are more in need than the parched land. Perhaps, ``an express canal'' can be built to take water strai ght to southern Gujarat. This is scientifically possible. It may be difficult to implement politically, but if done, it would silence a large number of objectors because the benefit will go to the `real needy'. Rich farmers, with their political clout, h ave programmed the Narmada water for new sugarcane factories in northern Gujarat, which is already wealthy. Even the name of Mr Sanat Mehta, once the head of the Narmada project, is connected with a sugar mill. The Gujarat NGOs are unhappy. They want leg islation to stop the use of water in northern Gujarat. The State has reportedly told them it is not constitutionally possible. But after checking with experts in Delhi, I find it can be done. (At present, the share of Saurashtra is 9.5 per cent and of th e Kutch, 1.5 per cent. This is too little.)

``We shall not be a party to the kulaks cornering the gains,'' say the Gujarat NGOs. ``If we fail, we shall be the first to join Medha.'' They will do well to contact her and give personal assurance on rehabilitation of the uprooted. They should also see that the dam's height is restricted so that the number of oustees is minimal. Ms Medha Patkar's fast is a matter of concern. She should not be driven to the wall.