AIDWA and AIPSN to Launch Joint Campaign Against Misinformation around COVID-19 : From Newsclick

Read the newsclick story here

‘Under cover of the epidemic, attempts are being made by the Sangh Parivar to bolster socially conservative values, communal prejudices and patriarchal notions.’

The All-India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) and the All India Peoples Science Network (AIPSN) will hold a joint campaign against the various superstitions and alleged cures which have been peddled for COVID-19, beginning July 23.

The campaign will kick off on Thursday, the death anniversary of Dr. Lakshmi Sahgal, a freedom-fighter and one of the founding members of AIDWA. Its last day, August 20, was the date on which anti-superstition campaigner Dr. Narendra Dabholkar was murdered by right wing obscurantist forces,” the campaign note said.

The campaign is being launched at a time when solutions like banging plates and untested ayurvedic medicines are being touted as inhibitors or a cure for the novel coronavirus, vaccines for which are under development in various countries, including India.

“Many traditionalist practices which have no proven impact on COVID-19 are being advocated as cures or as having preventive properties. Under cover of the epidemic, attempts are being made by the Sangh Parivar to bolster socially conservative values, communal prejudices and patriarchal notions. This must be resisted unitedly by progressive and democratic forces,” the joint-campaign note said.

The note added that governments, except for Kerala, resorted to “knee-jerk” reactions and a “badly implemented” lockdown to contain COVID-19, and Prime Minister Narendra Modi led the way in exhorting citizens to clap and light diyas to contain the spread of the virus.

The organisations mention that the prescribed remedies included “a number of home remedies like drinking warm water, standing in the sun, growing certain plants at home and so on. Such untested beliefs gained considerable popularity until, under pressure from scientists and people’s organizations and movements, public messaging became more coherent and science-based.”

The note said that such ‘methods of treatment’ have been allowed to foster even by government representatives and spokespersons of the BJP. Such remedies also included Baba Ramdev’s Patanjali coming up with an alleged cure for COVID-19.

The organisations also mention that questionable practices have been adopted by people in states like Rajasthan, Bihar, Tamil Nadu, Odisha and Telangana. Citing attempts made by the right-wing to label the Tablighi Jamaat as a ‘super-spreader’ in the initial days of the COVID-19 fight, the note said that “any rational and unbiased person would understand that the problem is not with the particular religion, but with the practices adopted. Here obscurantist forces are deliberately fanning and spreading communal prejudice, while at the same time devaluing science and rational thought and distracting everyone from governments’ responsibility to provide quality medical care.”

“The campaign would resist attempts by the government and obscurantist forces to take us backwards, and instead uphold the values of secularism, gender justice, critical thinking and scientific temper, all of which are essential for building a forward-looking, democratic society,” the note added.

Joint campaign by AIPSN-AIDWA: Science, not superstition, will help us tackle Covid-19

Science, not superstition, will help us tackle Covid-19.

Background note for a nation-wide AIDWA- AIPSN  campaign

 

Read here the campaign note in English , in Hindi 

Read here the Newsclick story on the joint campaign

 

On 23rd July 2020, All-India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) is commemorating the eighth death anniversary of Captain Lakshmi Sahgal, the revolutionary freedom fighter and tireless campaigner for progressive ideals, democratic rights, gender justice, and an upholder of the scientific outlook throughout her life. She was one of the founding members of AIDWA in 1981, and played a crucial role in taking the organization into the Hindi heartland. As a doctor based in Kanpur, UP, her clinic was a nodal centre for the organization, attracting women seeking medical help and unable to afford it; as well as a site for interaction and meetings of activists. Fortunate were the thousands of babies delivered there, as the parents did not have to worry about becoming impoverished in the process!

 

The All India Peoples Science Network (AIPSN) comprising 37 OrganizatioWwAns all over India, joins AIDWA in remembering and celebrating the enormous contributions of Dr. Lakshmi Sahgal. Significantly, she played a leading role in the founding of the Network in 1987 and was a champion of the battle against obscurantism, and for promotion of scientific temper.

 

The life and work of Dr. Lakshmi Sahgal assumes even greater relevance during the on-going Covid-19 epidemic during which obscurantist forces are playing on the fears of the people, particularly women, to spread superstitions and pseudo-scientific beliefs. . Many traditionalist practices which have no proven impact on Covid-19 are being advocated as cures or as having preventive properties. Under cover of the epidemic, attempts are being made by the Sangh Parivar to bolster socially conservative values, communal prejudices and patriarchal notions. This must be resisted unitedly by  progressive and democratic forces.

 

The message of science

The Covid-19 pandemic hit India in January 2020, and presented a challenge in the early days even to public health experts, doctors and scientists who were still learning about the novel Corona Virus. The Central Government and most State Governments, with the notable exception of Kerala as recognized worldwide,  were quite late in putting together a  coherent, rational understanding and communicating it effectively to the people. A knee-jerk  and badly implemented lock down, dramatic gestures like lighting diyas, clapping, hands, etc, initiated by none other than the PM himself, did not help matters.

 

Not surprisingly, as people desperately sought relief and protection from Covid-19, all kinds of myths and beliefs proliferated to fill the gaps. These included a number of home remedies like drinking warm water, standing in the sun, growing certain plants at home and so on. Such untested beliefs gained considerable popularity until, under pressure from scientists and people’s organizations and movements, public messaging became more coherent and science-based. AIPSN and other organizations of scientists, doctors and public health experts have been at the forefront of informing the public about the correct do’s-and-don’ts related to Covid-19 derived from WHO and ICMR guidelines and expert opinion. A number of popular practices  and home remedies gain acceptance as remedies because in 80% of cases the disease is self-limiting and the patient recovers without much intervention. .

The challenge meanwhile is to stop obscurantist forces and vested interests from using the uncertainty which still prevails, to spread their ideology, and to make their profits. The promotion of do-it-yourself home remedies or traditionalist treatments combine with misleading messages that “no treatment is available for COVID 19” and to distract from the governments failures to provide affordable quality medical care through rapid expansion of public health services. Although there is as yet no curative allopathic medicine, the scientific and medical communities have learned much about the virus and its effects, and are applying this knowledge in testing and treatment of Covid-19, especially in hospital settings with or without oxygen or ventilator support. Further, the search for definitive treatments and vaccines for prevention continues with emphasis on scientific validation especially through clinical trials so as to ensure safety and efficacy.  This isthe scientific approach. Unfortunately, some treatments are pushed even within modern medicine, cutting short scientific procedures, by corporate interests and their supporters in positions of power or influence, motivated by greed for profits or misplaced national pride. The undue haste in pressurizing hospitals to unrealistically accelerate clinical trials of a vaccine candidate, perhaps just to enable a triumphant announcement from the red fort on Independence Day, is a case in point, thwarted only by concerted opposition by the scientific and medical communities and informed public opinion.

Countering pseudo remedies and false propaganda

Some false remedies and fake claims take the form of peddling Covid “cures” or “treatments” in the name of Ayurvedic, homeopathic or other traditional formulations. None of these have any foundation even within these traditions, nor have they been subject to any scientific trials. Yet many such claims have been allowed to propagate. Even some Ministers at the Centre and in several States have made such claims. When the Union Health Minister or leading Government spokespersons were challenged on such claims, they have shied away from outright debunking them, instead saying they may be the “personal beliefs” of those Ministers or leaders.

 

The atrocious and brazen claim of a supposed Ayurvedic “cure” from Baba Ramdev’s Patanjali conglomerate emerged from this trend. The formulation from the Sangh Parivar-linked, politically well-connected Baba was all set for commercial launch based on  spurious “clinical trials,” when a public outcry by scientists, doctors and informed citizens forced the  Health and AYUSH Ministries to debunk this claim and even declare readiness to invoke the law against “magical cures and remedies.” Nevertheless, many so-called immune-boosters and other concoctions to supposedly help people fight-off Covid-19 continue to be propagated, cleverly taking care only not to use the word “cure!”

 

Pseudo-scientific claims have got validated because the party in power and supporting social forces have gone along with such notions. The Prime Minister’s calls for people to come to balconies or doorsteps and clang vessels, and later to shine torches or light lamps, to express support for doctors and health workers, were followed by twitter storms and social media posts claiming that India’s anti-Covid lamps were seen from space by NASA, or that “powerful radiations” or “vibrations” from these public displays would destroy the Corona Virus! No efforts were made by any Government or Sangh Parivar leader to contradict any of these fantastic claims. (Suffice it to say that the virus continues to spread alarmingly!) These kind of claims are being used not just to magnify the PM’s “superpowers,” but also to undermine the influence of science, rationality and critical thinking in society.

The Sangh Parivar and linked forces have also used the Covid19 pandemic to spread communal poison. One highly regrettable mass religious gathering in Nizamuddin, which acted as a superspreader, was used systematically over several months to demonize a particular religious minority as the major cause behind the pandemic. This was carried forward to stigmatize the entire community by spreading false rumours that positive cases from this gathering were deliberately spitting on others to spread the virus, or that buying vegetables from vendors belonging to this community was dangerous etc. The simple fact is, as science teaches us, that it is not the religion that matters but that there was a large gathering, with no physical distancing or other precautions being taken. Indeed, a recent occurrence at arguably the most popular temple in the country where large numbers of priests and devotees have been infected, sharply underlines this fact.

 

The Sangh parivar and linked forces have been utilizing social media to propagate superstitions, communal, traditionalist and obscurantist beliefs in a big way, which have to be countered, through powerful media campaigns of our own based on science.

 

Unmasking the use of religion to reinforce patriarchy. 

The other dangerous development is the invocation of supposed religious beliefs to reinforce obscurantist views and customs, especially by giving it a gender twist, with the virus being personized as an angry goddess. Observations made by AIDWA activists from different states provide some disturbing instances of this growing trend.

In Rajasthan, some well-known temples were surreptitiously opened despite the government’s ban on opening places of worship, by spreading rumours that the doors of the temple had opened “by themselves” and people, especially women, should offer prayers there to “placate the Corona virus.” Women have been told to dip their hands in kumkum water, or in cow dung in UP, and put their imprints on the walls of their homes to pacify “Corona Mai (Devi).”        In parts of Bihar, women are being prompted to go to nearby rivers, dress up and carry sindoor, bindi, sweets etc and take a dip just as they would during Chhat Puja, to appease an angry “Corona mai.” In some places, women get “possessed” and exhort “Corona mai” to go away. Unfortunately, it is observed that women from Dalit and OBC families are especially influenced to act in this manner. The idea of an angry “Corona goddess” is also being propagated in Uttarakhand and West Bengal.

Such notions of an angry or dangerous Goddess who must be appeased have been witnessed earlier too in India. Small pox was associated with female Goddesses, for example Mariamma in Tamil Nadu, and the pox itself was known as “Mata/ Amma/Ammai etc,” as chicken pox, measles etc are often termed even today. Part of this derives from ancient quasi-religious beliefs but also stem from deep-rooted patriarchal culture and ideologies ascribing evil, dangerous and power-hungry characteristics to women as witches, daayin etc.

In Telangana, pro-Sangh Parivar forces, often led by women, are leading “prabhat pheris” or dawn marches, propagating the idea that the Covid epidemic has struck because women have stopped performing pujas and other sanskari or traditional practices, and calling on them to restart them so as to drive away the Corona Virus. The intention is clearly to reinforce traditional patriarchal culture with a subservient role chalked out for women within the lakshman rekha drawn around the home.

In Odisha, pro-Sangh Parivar outfits have been campaigning that temples should not have been closed, and that the Supreme Court did not permit the Rath Yatra because it is pro-Muslim and pro-Christian! In fact, places of worship of almost all religious denominations have been kept closed by the respective religious institutions themselves and by government guidelines.  Where this has not happened, or has happened without observance of physical distancing and hand-hygiene, it has resulted in Covid positive cases spreading from such gatherings. Any rational and unbiased person would understand that the problem is not with the particular religion, but with the practices adopted. Here obscurantist forces are deliberately fanning and spreading communal prejudice, while at the same time devaluing science and rational thought and distracting everyone from governments’ responsibility to provide quality medical care.

In this context, AIDWA and AIPSN would launch joint campaigns starting from 23 July 2020 to combat propagation of superstitions and irrational beliefs by obscurantist forces. We will take inspiration from great fighters like Captain Lakshmi Sahgal, to arm people with science as against superstition, and to demand that the scientific temper enshrined in the Constitution be widely promoted. The campaign would resist attempts by the government and obscurantist forces to take us backwards , and instead uphold the values of secularism, gender justice, critical thinking and scientific temper, all of which are essential for building a forward-looking, democratic society.

 

The Joint AIDWA-AIPSN Campaign would be conducted throughout the country from 23rd July 2020 at least till the National Scientific Temper Day on August 20, the black day on which anti-superstition campaigner Dr.Narendra Dabholkar was murdered by right wing obscurantist forces.

 

 

 

AIPSN Statement on Covid-19 Vaccines and Treatment Drugs

Click here for Press Release of AIPSN5JulyStatementonVaccinesandDrugs

AIPSN Statement on Covid-19 Vaccines and Treatment Drugs

India must follow Transparent, Reliable, Scientific Clinical Trials Protocols

Development of vaccines and medicines that treat Covid-19 are extremely important elements in the ways to overcome the Covid-19 pandemic. Around 150 vaccine candidates are currently undergoing pre-clinical and clinical trials globally, though none are yet available. However urgent the need, this vaccine development must also ensure both efficacy and safety, otherwise it will endanger the efforts to overcome Covid-19 and also vaccine programmes against other infectious diseases.

Scientists working in the National Institute of Virology (NIV) under the ICMR and Hyderabad-based BBIL have developed an inactivated vaccine candidate, BBV152 COVID, using a virus strain isolated in NIV. BBIL got approval for Phase 1 and Phase 2 trials on June 29 from the Central Drugs and Standards Control Organisation (CDSCO) as part of the fast-tracking of the process even while pre-clinical animal trials are still underway. According to the submission of BBIL with the Clinical Trials Registry of India (CTRI) also under ICMR, the enrolment for Phase 1 was to begin from July 13th and the duration of the trial covering all the three stages was to be 15 months. 12 hospitals with widely varying track-record and experience in vaccine trials have been selected for the purpose by ICMR in an entirely arbitrary and non-transparent manner.

On July 2nd, Dr. Balram Bhargava, Director General, ICMR, who is also Secretary, Health Research in the government, sent a letter to BBIL with copies to the 12 chosen hospitals for the trials saying that “it is envisaged to launch the vaccine for public health use latest by August 15th, 2020,” that is in less than 6 weeks compared to the planned 15 months.  The letter demands that subject enrolment be initiated no later than 7th July 2020, even though the CTRI registration itself shows July 13th as enrolment initiation, leaving no time for proper consideration and approval by the respective institutional ethics committees. Finally, the letter threatens these hospitals that “non-compliance will be viewed very seriously,” adding that the vaccine project is “being monitored at the top most level of the Government.”

Since “top most level of government” has been invoked, DG ICMR’s deadline appears for enabling the Prime Minister to announce “successful development of a Covid vaccine by India, before any other country,” from the ramparts of the Red Fort on Independence Day. However, as India’s premier scientific and medical research body, ICMR knows well the rigorous protocols required to be followed for vaccine trials, and therefore also that a deadline of 6 weeks to complete all three phases is scientifically absurd downright dangerous, and will cause serious damage to the reputation of Indian science and research. A desire to grandstand and please the political masters seems to have overtaken science and ethics within ICMR.  AIPSN deplores the emerging trend in India of short-circuiting established protocols for trials of Covid19 vaccines and treatment drugs.

Earlier, there was the instance of Coronil, an ayurvedic mix sought to be launched for treatment of Covid-19 by the Patanjali group headed by Baba Ramdev, based on spurious, improperly conducted and assessed clinical trials. . After uproar by scientists and in the media, the AYUSH ministry prohibited Patanjali from selling or advertising Coronil as a treatment for Covid-19. However, nothing was done about Patanjali not following due process of clinical trials and approvals. Glenmark obtained approval from DCGI for Covid19 treatment without any trials in India for manufacture of the antiviral drug Favipiravir. At a cost of Rs 103 a tablet and needing 122 tablets for a full course, the company stands to make a killing in profits. Highlighting the dangers of such hasty approvals without due process, the Lok Nayak Hospital in Delhi recently decided to stop using Favipiravir for Covid19 treatment following observations of problems in heart rate and uric acid levels in patients.

ICMR has also persisted with guidelines to administer Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) to frontline health care workers and care-givers for patients in home isolation as a prophylactic. It is supposedly a ‘trial’ but without the strict protocols required for a trial. This despite published results of international trials showing lack of efficacy and possible adverse side-effects, and WHO guidelines against use of HCQ.

AIPSN demands that the due process of scientific trials be followed strictly and transparently for all Covid19 candidate vaccines and treatment drugs, regardless of systems of medicine, and overcoming temptations to make haste prompted either by corporate greed or false national pride.

AIPSN calls for a globally coordinated effort that puts people before profits to make drugs and vaccines that will be available free to the public and with allocations to countries made as per needs without any discrimination instead of the current perverted race to develop drugs and vaccines driven by jingoistic-nationalism and corporate profits.

AIPSN demands that the efforts of the scientists who came up with the BBV152 COVID vaccine candidate, or others likely to come up in the near future, not be wasted by such unseemly political pressures which compromise the safety of people by not following due process and which is highly likely to bring Indian science and research into disrepute.

 

 

For clarifications contact:

P. Rajamanickam  9442915101    D. Raghunandan  9810098621

 

 

Press Release of the statement on AIPSN Response to Draft EIA Notification 2020

Click here for AIPSN-Press-Release-Statement-on-EIA-2020-July3

 

Press Statement on

AIPSN Response to Draft EIA Notification 2020

            It is deeply regrettable that the Union Ministry of Environment Forests & Climate Change (MoEFCC) has decided to press ahead with the Draft EIA Notification 2020 (hereafter Draft EIA 2020), despite many Organizations and Experts calling for extending the period for responses beyond 30 June 2020 given the continuing restrictions related to the Covid-19 pandemic. These restrictions have prevented grassroots level consultations, especially with nature-dependent and marginalized communities, that are required for fruitful public participation in discussions on Draft EIA 2020.

Nevertheless, the All India Peoples Science Network (AIPSN), comprising 40 Peoples Science Organizations in 25 States/UTs, has held extensive consultations to the extent possible and has submitted its considered Response to Draft EIA 2020. While our response (click here or here ) contains clause-by-clause critiques and recommendations, a brief summary of salient points is presented here.

            The present Government, since it first took office in 2014, has embarked on a determined course to severely dilute Environmental Regulations and norms in India, and weaken monitoring by regulatory agencies, so as to advance the “ease of doing business” and give corporates greater freedom to set up and run projects at the cost of the natural environment, and at the expense of lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people dependent on it.  Environmental Regulations and systems for appraisal, approval and monitoring of projects have been painstakingly built up over the years under pressure from civil society organizations, affected communities and experts in the environmental and broader scientific community, all of whom have sought sustainable development while protecting the natural environment which sustains life itself.

Unfortunately, far from tightening these norms and closing the many loopholes that have crept in under pressure from vested interests, Draft EIA 2020 has further weakened environmental regulation, and reduced transparency and accountability. In fact, several provisions specifically seek to circumvent National Green Tribunal (NGT), High Court and even Supreme Court rulings based on EIA 2006 and objecting to many Orders/Notifications issued from time to time.

The major objectionable changes sought to be introduced through Draft EIA 2020 include:

 

        re-classification of various types of Projects, with a number of them potentially having considerable environmental impact being placed in Category B2 under which no Appraisal or public consultation/hearing is required: eg. Oil and Gas exploration (such permission was given in the fertile Cauvery delta region leading to farmer uproar in Tamil Nadu and subsequent withdrawal of permission), Water Aerodromes, River Waterways and other projects requiring dredging of river beds (cleverly dropped in Draft EIA2020 from the definition of “capital dredging” which it clearly is), Construction and Area Development Projects of 20,000-50,000 sq.m area (NGT had earlier ruled against an attempt to exempt projects of 20,000 to 150,000 sq.m , therefore this attempt in Draft EIA2020); and “linear projects” which would only be appraised and public consultations held in those districts of National Park, Sanctuaries or Coral Reefs through which they pass (exempting huge tracts through which pipelines etc may traverse)

        another set of Projects with significant environmental impact are now exempted from obtaining Prior Environment Clearance, (a provision originally meant for artisan groups such as Potters etc for excavating of clay) such as Solar Photo Voltaic (SPV) power projects, Solar Thermal power plants, Solar Parks, coal and mineral exploration, and another vague category of “R&D Projects,” Minor Irrigation Projects of upto 2000 ha command area, Hazardous Waste recycling units etc, Defence and Explosives Manufacturing Units,

        defence and national security projects, including projects deemed to be “strategic” by the Central Government,” are to be exempt from Appraisal and public hearings, with the added proviso that that “no information relating to such projects shall be placed in public domain:” classified information of military/security projects need not be disclosed, but external aspects with impact on environment such as area covered, construction in coastal regions, air pollution and/or liquid effluents discharged etc should be disclosed and appraised; further, the declaration of some projects as “strategic” is vague, non-transparent and open to misuse for hiding all kinds of projects from public scrutiny

        notice period for public to respond to Public Consultations reduced from the earlier already inadequate 30 days to a mere 20 days now

        among the most egregious provisions of Draft EIA 2020 related to violations i.e. projects starting construction or operations or expansion/modernization without receiving prior Environment Clearance (EC) would henceforth be given post-facto EC and permitted to continue after paying small fines: (the Vizag LG Polystyrene plant was operating without EC and was seeking post-facto approval) NGT and Supreme Court  have repeatedly ruled post-facto EC to be violative of environmental laws, and Draft EIA 2020 attempts to subvert these rulings by incorporating such provisions in the Notification  

               

 

For clarifications contact:

P. Rajamanickam  9442915101    D. Raghunandan  9810098621

 

 

Comments and observations from AIPSN on draft EIA notification 2020

Click here to see the email submission of this response to MoEF&CC

Click here for the pdf of the submitted response

AIPSN Response to Draft EIA Notification 2020

AIPSN Organization, is a Network of 40 major State-level Member Organizations and is the largest network of organizations working on science and society issues focusing mainly on S&T policy, impact on people particularly the poor and marginalized, and promotion of scientific temper. We were among those who had asked for an extension of the earlier deadline for submitting responses to the Draft EIA Notification 2020 to the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) and are grateful for the extension till 30 June 2020. However, it would have been better if some more time had been given to enable wider consultation and more intensive discussions, which have been highly constrained during the Covid19 pandemic and the various restrictions imposed during it. In any case, we are submitting our Response based on internal deliberations and discussions with different grassroots groups and communities within the constraints of time and Covid19-related restrictions.

In broad terms, we have been observing that the MoEFCC has been issuing various notifications and orders, besides taking many decisions that dilute earlier environmental regulations. Perhaps these steps are being taken because the Union Government feels that this will assist in raising the rank of India in international “Ease of Doing Business” indices. However, in our considered opinion, these dilutions have had a negative impact on the environment and on the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people dependent on it. It has also emboldened manufacturing, mining and infrastructure industries to start projects and conduct operations in an environmentally destructive manner and without consideration for affected communities. We feel the Draft EIA Notification 2020 too is yet another step in the same general direction and further dilutes rather than strengthens environmental regulations in India which is the true mandate of the MoEFCC. We also wish to point out that all these measures put together will have a cumulative impact on India’s Sustainable Development Goals targets which the country has committed itself to in international fora.

With this background, we offer the following responses to different specific provisions in the Draft EIA Notification 2020 (henceforth Draft EIA 2020) for your consideration and also insist that the responses received and discussions be placed transparently in a public accessible website.

 

  • Introductory Paragraphs: At the outset, Draft EIA 2020 begins by giving a background referring to the earlier EIA Notification 2006, the necessity it spelled out for Prior Environmental Clearance (Prior-EC) by the Centre or the concerned State, the 2017 Notification dealing with violations especially starting construction, undertaking expansion or making modifications, and various Judicial and NGT rulings calling for strengthening of monitoring and compliance. It is then stated that the main purpose of Draft EIA 2020 is to “lay down the procedure to bring such violation projects under the regulations in the interest of the environment at the earliest point of time rather than leaving them unregulated and unchecked, which will be more damaging to the environment.” However, detailed perusal of the different provisions made in Draft EIA 2020 show, as discussed further below, that in fact Draft EIA 2020 does not strengthen compliance with environmental regulations but dilutes these very provisions and condones violations, thus weakening environmental protection and regulation.

 

2)  Clause 3: Definitions– Some definitions in Draft EIA 2020 have serious implications. While these have discussed under relevant Clauses where they appear, brief mention may be made here at the outset itself.

 

  1. Clause 3(8) Capital Dredging is defined as “removal of virgin material from the sea bed” alone, and does not cover non-maintenance dredging of river beds, contrary to EIA Notification 2006 which covered both. This is important because capital dredging of river beds for new projects can have considerable environmental and social impact especially on fishers and others. It is strongly urged that the term Capital Dredging include sea as well as rivers and other fresh water bodies.
  2. Clause 3(16) Corporate Environmental Responsibility (CER) defines it to mean that part of the Environment Management Plan (EMP) which the project holder is mandated to implement in the immediate surroundings of the Project arising ether out of the public consultations/hearings or the EIA conducted for the Project. This is an unnecessarily restrictive definition of CER. The EMP covers what the Project holder is required to do as part of the Project itself and should be counted as part of Project Costs, whereas CER should be what the project holder does over and above the EMP as a part of the company’s responsibility towards the environment and society in general, much like Corporate Social Responsibility.

 

  • Clause 4(3) defines Permissible Construction work before Prior-EC/EP as erecting fencing around the project site, but allows “leveling of land without tree felling” and “geo-technical investigations if any.” Levelling of land can fundamentally alter the use of the land after such activity and should not be permitted. Geo-technical investigations which could include test-wells, mineral prospecting could also have serious, even irreversible impact on the environment and should not be permitted without Prior EC/EP.

 

  • Clause 5. Category B2 Projects exempt from Appraisal and Public Hearing     Several types of Projects and activities have been placed by Draft EIA 2020 under Category B2 under which no examination by the Appraisal Committee at either Centre or State/UT level is required, and Prior-Environment Permission (Prior-EP) may be obtained at the relevant level without such Appraisal. Such Projects are also exempt from the requirement for Public Hearing/Consultation. Various types of Projects or Activities placed under Category B2 as Listed in the Schedule include many Projects/Activities with significant impact on the environment, as well as in most cases and on human lives and livelihoods as well, and hence require EIA, Appraisal and Public Hearing. Therefore, the following types of Projects/Activities listed in the Schedule under Category B2 should be shifted to Category B1 (or as otherwise indicated) requiring EIA, Appraisal and Public Hearing, with brief justification for such a shift with additional comments being offered against each:

 

  • Item 2a) Oil & Gas Exploration: Even exploratory drilling can have serious environmental and related human impact as evidenced by public protests in the fertile Cauvery delta region in Tamil Nadu against permissions given earlier this year. The very recent blowout and fire at OIL Well No.5 in the Baghjan Oil Fields also saw an adjacent exploratory workover, with subsequent order by the Assam State Pollution Control Board to close all OIL wells in the area in view of the perceived risk in the whole region, although the order was later withdrawn for reasons best known to them. Further, if exploration yields positive results, this increases likelihood of EC being granted for actual drilling and operation of oil/gas wells with even further environmental impact especially in ecologically sensitive areas. Thus such Projects/Activities be shifted to Category B1.

 

  • Item 10f) Foundries, Rolling Mills etc: Such Projects, which are not too small, may also be problematic and may be shifted to B1.

 

  • Item 16) Chlor-Alkali/Halogen Units: Plants with capacity < 300 tons/day have been placed in Category B2 provided they are located within Industrial Estates. However, since many Industrial Estates are located near population centres, or population centres have come up near these Estates, proper EIA and Appraisal should be done under Category B1.

 

  • Item 32) Water Aerodromes for Commercial Use can have considerable environmental impact on coastal or river/lake ecosystems and therefore should be removed from Category B2 and placed in Category B1.

 

  • Item 34) Various EEZs, Industrial estates: Estates/Zones over 500 ha and without any Projects of Categories A and B1, along with Estates/Zones of any area if it houses at least 1 Category B2 Project, are in Category B2 which is an over-generous leeway given, for instance Estates/Zones of massive size with potential for causing huge environmental damage would be exempt from appraisal! Only Estates/Zones under 500 ha with only Category B2 Projects should fall under this Category.

 

  • Item 37) Capital Dredging for Inland Waterways Projects can have considerable ecological damage along river banks and river beds and require Appraisal. Anomaly arises in the case of Inland Waterways classified as B2 because “Capital Dredging” has been defined wrongly as applying only to sea-based projects (as discussed above), so these should be shifted to Category B1.

 

  • Item 42) Construction & Area Development Projects have been a contentious issue for long. The government had earlier exempted all area development, housing and other construction projects between 20,000 and 150,000 sq. metres from the need to obtain environmental clearances, placed them under the purview of local authorities which would integrate environmental requirements into building bye-laws and approvals. This was however overruled by the NGT as a violation of the 2006 Notification. Draft EIA 2020 now attempts to skirt this ruling by placing Projects of 20,000-50,000 sq.mts of built-up area in Category B2 and exempting them from Appraisal, while requiring only Projects of 50,000-1,50,000 sq.mts of built-up area to seek Appraisal. Such Projects have also been exempt from Public Hearing. It is recommended that all Projects having more than 20,000 sq.mts build-up area be placed in Category B1, and all Projects with built-up area more than 1,50,000 sq.mts be placed in Category A.

 

  • Clause 5(7) Defence, Security and “Strategic” Projects This clause specifies that all projects concerning national defence and security, or involving “other strategic considerations as determined by the Central Government,” shall require prior EC/EP from the Ministry whatever the original category of the project, which is understandable since defence is exclusively a Union subject. However, it is disturbing that the clause further states that “no information relating to such projects shall be placed in public domain.” There are two distinct unacceptable provisions here.

First, many such projects such as shipyards, testing ranges, coastal military bases etc can and do have considerable ecological and social impact. It is a patent infringement on the right to life and livelihoods of affected communities that they do not have access to any information based on which they could object to or otherwise voice their concerns with respect to such Projects. Military or intelligence matters relating to specific projects need not be placed in the public domain but other relevant facts such as area and number of villages to be covered, discharges into the air and onto land, sea, river or other water bodies etc should be disclosed so that affected parties may assess potential ecological and social impact.

Secondly, blanket authority bestowed on the Central Government to deem any project as involving “strategic considerations” allows for too much leeway to arbitrarily declare all sorts of Projects such as, for instance, nuclear power plants, oil wells and rigs etc as “strategic” and hence escape public scrutiny.

Non-military facts relating to military/security Projects should be made available in the public domain, and this Clause should not permit declaration of other types of projects as “strategic.”

The related provision in Clause 14(1)c stating that the “Regulatory Authority may decide on the feasibility and requirement of Public Hearing and/or consultation in the case of defence projects” should also be amended in line with the above.

 

  • Clause 7 State/UT Environment Impact Assessment Authority It is often found that the State Pollution Control Board (PCB) acts as the Secretariat of the State/UT EIA Authority, and Project Proponents often apply to it for, and obtain, permission to set up or operate, even without Prior EC/EP, as happened with the recent LG Polymers Vishakhapatnam. Case. A specific para should therefore be added to this Clause to the effect that State/UT PCBs or any other Agency are not authorized to act on behalf of the State/UT EIA Authority and are not empowered to grant EC/EP

 

  • Clause 14(2) Public Consultation exempts a wide variety of Projects from Public Consultations whether in the form of written submissions or in the form of Public Hearings. This is not only highly objectionable from the point of view of environmental protection which is the goal of the various Environmental Acts and the EIA Notifications, it is also completely unacceptable in a democracy. As stated while discussing the B2 Category of Projects above, many of these Projects potentially have considerable environmental and social impact, and it is inconceivable that potentially affected people and other stakeholders are not given an opportunity to voice their concerns and objections. Exemptions from Public Consultations/Hearings should therefore be withdrawn for the following types of Projects.
  • Projects covered by this include “all Category B2 Projects and activities,” already discussed such as No.s 10(f), 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 36, 40 within Notified Industrial Estates, and No.s 42 and No.43 (Construction and Area Development Projects, and Elevated Roads respectively) in the Schedule, defence/security and other “strategic” Projects as discussed above, and “all linear Projects under item 31 (oil and gas pipelines) and 38 (Highways) in Border Areas.”
  • It may specifically be noted that highways in border areas need not be linear, especially in mountain areas and may indeed have considerable environmental impact in ecologically sensitive areas such as in mountains, glacial areas etc.
  • Further, it is stated that for “linear projects” passing through a National Park or Sanctuary or Coral Reef or other Ecologically Sensitive Area public consultation “shall be limited to [these district (s)].” As is well known, such Projects can also cause substantial ecological damage in adjoining districts as well, so this provision should be withdrawn.
  • Such blanket exemptions from public consultations and public hearings are abhorrent under the relevant Environmental Protection Acts and should be dropped from Draft EIA 2020.
  • Appendix-1 Clause 3.1 under the head Procedure of Public Consultation, states that a “minimum notice period of twenty days shall be provided to the public for furnishing their responses,” compared to the 2006 Notification under which this period was 30 days. It is difficult enough for local affected people such as fishers, coastal people, tribals and hill peoples etc to study all relevant documents, without being pushed into a small window of a mere 20 days. It is suggested that the Notice period for public consultations/hearings be extended to 60 days.
  • Public Hearings/Consultations and consent of gram Sabhas should be mandatory in all Scheduled Areas as per the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act 1996.

 

  • Clause 19 (1) I d: Validity of Prior-EC or Prior-EP for mining projects has been extended from 30 years in EIA 2006 to 50 years covering the entire expected life of the Project, all of which has been inexplicably placed under Construction/Installation phase.  During this prolonged period, most of which would definitely cover operation of the mine, all sorts of changes and modifications would take place, with potential environmental impact. It is recommended that Prior-EC/EP be provided for 30 years after which the project holder be required to seek fresh EC/EP based on updated information.

 

  • Clause 22: Violation Cases These contain some of the most egregious provisions of Draft EIA 2020, effect of which is to gloss over violations, pave the way for their regularization, and enable continuous operation of violators without having to worry about Environmental rules or Regulatory Authorities, all at the cost of the environment. Violations of course, as defined in the Draft EIA 2020 itself, refers to Projects that have started construction, installation or even operations, or expanded or modernized beyond the limits permitted, without Prior Environmental Clearance or Prior Environmental Permission.
  • Clause 22(1) states that violations would be taken cognizance of based on application of the project proponent itself, reporting by any Government authority, found during the Appraisal process, or found during application by the Regulatory Authority. The Clause should be amended to also take cognizance of violations being brought to the attention of relevant authorities by local residents, civil society organizations, lawyers or other stakeholders who have, amazingly, been excluded from this provision.
  • Subsequent Paras of Clause 22 spell out various means and methods for the regularization of such Projects, despite their flagrant violation of Environmental Laws, clearly in the knowledge of the project proponents since any industrialist knows that Prior EC/EP is required. Only those Projects that are simply not permissible in the area concerned, or those Projects that are environmentally not sustainable in the area, in other words such projects that would not have obtained Prior EC/EP had they applied for it, would be closed down. These various means include fines, mandatory environmental remedial measures for damage caused etc.
  • These provisions clearly amount to post-facto regularization of violations and grant of EC as, for instance, is being pursued in the case of LG Polystyrene in Vishakhapatnam which had been operating for years without EC. The effort made by the Ministry in 2017 through a Notification towards the same end, albeit as a one-time amnesty provision, had been struck down by the NGT. The very idea of post-facto EC was declared by the Supreme Court as late as April 2020 to be “in derogation of the fundamental principles of environmental jurisprudence and is an anathema to the EIA Notification.” The attempt by Draft EIA 2020 to give this provision a backing through a fresh Notification is ethically atrocious and is bad in law. These entire provisions should therefore be removed. If at all such a provision is required to be made, in view of the Ministry and regulatory Authority turning a blind eye over the years to perhaps hundreds of such violations, then it should be a one-time amnesty provision with a time frame of not more than 1 year from the date of Notification with a strict stipulation that no future violation will be tolerated at any cost.
  • The same applies to Clause 23 as well.

 

  • . Clause 26: Projects exempt from requiring Prior-EC/EP   Some of the projects covered by this Clause are intended to permit artisanal activities such as extraction of potters’ clay etc. Surprisingly, however, many projects with known and considerable environmental and social impact have also been included under this Clause. It is strongly urged that the following types of Projects be removed from this Clause and placed under the Schedule for Category B1 or B2 Projects (after being amended as suggested here):
  • Clause 26(14): Solar Photo Voltaic (SPV) power projects, Solar Thermal power plants and Solar Parks, which have well-known environmental impacts including diversion of agricultural land, excess demand on subsoil water etc.
  • Clause 26(15): R&D Activities for Activities in Schedule is too broad a categorization. For instance a Fast Breeder Reactor or a Test Well may also be described as an “R&D Project.” This sub-category should be better defined
  • Clause 26(19): Coal and non-coal mineral prospecting which can cause considerable ecological damage, quite apart from the larger extraction projects that may follow
  • Clause 26(21): Minor irrigation Projects with command area upto 2000 ha should not automatically be exempt from Prior-EC/EP
  • Clause 26(24)(a, b): Secondary metallurgy Units are not free of air pollutants, effluent streams and solid wastes including metals, and cannot be exempt from Prior EC/EP
  • Clause 26(24)(c): Recycling Units registered under Hazardous & Other Waste Rules 2016 involve considerable toxic and other wastes, and certainly should not be exempt from Prior EC/EP
  • Clause 26 (25)(a): Re-rolling Mills with Pickling especially of the scale mentioned will certainly involve effluent streams and will require Prior EC/EP
  • Clause 26(36): Defence Manufacturing units or strategic units for explosives etc: the idea that Units under the Ministry of Defence do not require Prior EC/EP is astounding to say the least, since it can be nobody’s case that these Units do not cause pollution. Such Units should be required to obtain Prior EC/EP based on disclosure of such information relating to pollutants generated and measures taken to reduce discharge of pollutants as per relevant industry standards. This is especially so since the Schedule (Item 30) lists explosives etc Projects under Category B1, assuming these to be non-Defence Units?
  • Clause 26(39): Maintenance dredging should clarify that (as per the suggested amended Definition of Capital Dredging) that this does not apply to dredging and removal of virgin material from beds of rivers, lakes or other fresh water bodies.

For clarifications contact:

  1. Rajamanickam 9442915101 D. Raghunandan  9810098621

AIPSN Statement on Assam Gas Blowout and Fire

Click here for statement in English

AIPSN Statement on Assam Gas Blowout and Fire

PSU Oil India Limited’s (OIL) natural gas Well No.5 in its Baghjan Oil Fields in Assam’s Tinsukhia District in Eastern Assam, less than a kilometre from the ecologically rich and fragile Dibru-Saikhova National Park and Biosphere Reserve with several other ecological hotspots in close proximity, suffered a blowout i.e. an uncontrolled release of natural gas, on 27 May 2020, throwing up huge quantities of gas at high pressure into the air. On 9 June 2020, due to yet undetermined reasons, fire erupted at the well and spread quickly over a distance of at least 5km towards the north-east.  The fire has caused deaths of at least 2 firemen, and maybe others in nearby villages, and wreaked havoc on the surrounding ecosystem with extensive damage to human life, habitat, livelihoods and well-being, especially affecting crops, soil, vegetation, water bodies and aquatic life, wildlife especially birds, and micro-organisms. Many nearby houses have been gutted and over 7000 villagers have been evacuated to 12 relief camps.

OIL had called in experts from the Singapore-based Alert Disaster Control Company to assist in controlling the blowout, a day before the fire broke out. Now additional experts from the US and Canada have also been flown in. Heavy machinery and other equipment are being brought from ONGC facilities elsewhere in the region and in AP. An action plan has apparently been prepared and operations are underway to both control the fire and cap the well, a process expected to take about 4 weeks.

This still unfolding incident has once again focused attention on several inter-related aspects namely, frequent industrial disasters and poor safety record of companies in India, continuing dangerous dismantling of environmental regulations by the Central Government, leading to recurrent massive ecological damage along with loss of human lives, livelihoods and habitat.

 

Blowout and Fire

Baghjan 5 is one of the most prolific gas reservoirs of OIL. It produces around 80,000 standard cubic metres per day (SCMD) of gas from a depth of 3,870 metres at a pressure of 4,200 pounds per square inch (PSI), much higher than the normal producing pressure of around 2,700 PSI.

Oil or gas blowouts are relatively rare in modern times, but not unknown, due to improved drilling techniques, better drilling fluids to contain well pressure, and advances such as blowout preventers (BOP pronounced B-O-P not bop). BOPs are extremely heavy valves or similar mechanical devices which physically sit on the well mouth and prevent any venting of gas, oil or internal piping etc from the well, while also enabling pumping in of drilling fluids to maintain pressure balance. Changes in pressure of gas or oil in wells due to many possible reasons cause ‘kicks’ which can be sensed by operators through several indications during drilling operations. If such ‘kicks’ are not controlled, ultimately through deployment of the BOP, then a blowout results.

According to OIL, servicing and repairs of the well-head were taking place at Baghjan 5 on the fateful day.  The well had been ‘killed,’ i.e. production had been stopped and the BOP had been removed to facilitate repairs. Simultaneously, ‘workover’ or test-drilling was underway at an adjacent new sand or deposit. Suddenly, gas started oozing out of Well No.5 and soon broke through the temporary cement barrier and turned into a full-scale blowout.

Again according to OIL spokespersons as quoted in several publications, the first response to the blowout, namely capping the well by replacing the BOP under cover of a water umbrella, continues to pose a huge challenge and high risk because of “very limited space and non-availability of open space above the well head.” This points to a defective design of the well and rig set up. OIL will now have to deploy a heavy hydraulic transporter for capping the well, then pump in drilling mud, and provide for the water umbrella by building a special temporary reservoir in the nearby Dangori river and laying pipelines to the well. This further underlines poor standing arrangements for emergency situations.

Why and how the blowout happened in a killed well is being investigated by OIL, although 2 OIL employees at the site have been suspended for undisclosed reasons. The Assam Government has set up an Inquiry by a senior bureaucrat into the incident.

However, only an independent Inquiry by a Committee of Experts, free of pressures from the powerful PSU OIL, the Central and State Governments, and other regulatory authorities, preferably under judicial supervision, can properly bring out all the reasons behind the disaster and the responsibilities of various organizations and institutions involved.

Since OIL has numerous wells in the region which contribute all of OIL’s crude oil and close to 90% of its natural gas, the lack of OIL emergency response teams and infrastructure within the region is a matter of grave concern, and prompted massive protests in all these locations. OIL’s apparent and continuing lack of in-house expertise in oil/gas blowouts and similar emergencies despite over 100 years of operations in India, first as Burmah Oil, then in Joint Venture with OIL in 1961 and finally as a fully government-owned entity since 1981, as demonstrated in earlier blowouts in the region in 2004 and other accidents, is another matter of concern. OIL needs to urgently address safety and emergency preparedness and response, especially in the 18 other wells in the Baghjan Oil Field and a total of 59 wells in Assam, where public anger and fear is at a peak, after the weak and delayed response by OIL to the Baghjan disaster.

 

Damage to human life, livelihoods, habitat and health                

                The gas blowout spewed out a mix of propane, methane, propylene and other gases which spread over a fairly wide area about 5km in the windward direction. For many days, villagers complained of eyes burning, headaches, gas condensate settling on crops, land and water bodies. While several villagers have reported health complaints, there are to date no confirmed deaths of villagers from the gas or the subsequent fire. Monitoring of health effects will obviously have to continue over an extended period of time. Families of two firemen who apparently died by drowning while attempting to escape from the fire have been assured compensation by OIL.

Around 50 houses in the vicinity have been fully or partially burnt and a few thousand families are now sheltered in relief camps. Rehabilitation of all these families along with reconstruction of homes and compensation for damage incurred will obviously have to follow soon.

Many more people too have been badly affected by damage to their crops, land, livestock and livelihoods. Gas condensate and combustion residues carried over a wide area by wind have been deposited on land, agricultural produce and water bodies. Land used for cultivation of areca nut, banana, tea and bamboo, may have suffered considerable damage even affecting future crops. The Brahmaputra and several smaller rivers are in flood during the monsoons, and have brought condensate into farm lands, water bodies and even homes. The famous Maguri-Motapung Wetlands or beel, located inside the Dibru-Saikhowa Reserve and only 2km from Baghjan 5, has been badly affected, threatening the food supply and livelihoods of almost all households around the beel. Considerable harm has thus been done to human livelihoods and habitat, and to the highly sensitive ecology of the area.

 

Ecological damage

The entire region is home to many reserve forests, wildlife sanctuaries, protected water bodies, forests and other ecosystems. The Dibru-Saikhowa Biosphere Reserve in Assam links up with Namdapha National Park and Deomali Elephant Reserve in Arunachal Pradesh, together forming a large wildlife corridor in the Indo-Myanmar Biodiversity Hotspot.

The Dibru-Saikhowa Biosphere Reserve also includes the Maguri-Motapung Wetlands, rich in aquatic flora and fauna including the endangered Gangetic Dolphin, at least one of which has been found dead. Waters in the Wetland have reportedly turned blue and yellow due to the contamination. The Reserve and Wetland are famous for their resident as well as migratory birds, butterflies, wild cats and feral horses. Since the Reserve is close to the confluence of the Brahmaputra and other rivers of the North-East such as the Lohit, Dibru, Dibang and Siang, contamination from condensate and combustion residues is likely to spread widely through these rivers. Substantial parts of this ecosystem may even have suffered permanent impairment. Damage to wildlife, bio-diversity, water bodies and the broader ecosystem in the area requires systematic and careful assessment so that remedial action may be planned and initiated.

The management plan for the Maguri-Motapung beel highlights oil leaks as a potential hazard to the ecosystem and, having seen the damage from a gas blowout, one can imagine the impact of a blowout at any of the oil wells in the area which would be far greater. The National Board for Wildlife (NBW) during earlier inspections in the area had warned against further expansion of oil drilling activities in this region.

 

Reckless Environmental Clearances

Ironically though, the same NBW recently on 24 April 2020 permitted use of part of the nearby Dehing-Patkai Elephant Reserve for opencast coal mining by North-Eastern Coal Fields (NECF), a subsidiary of Coal India Limited, and a much wider area for underground coal mining. This underlines a sharply increasing trend encouraged by the Central Government to indiscriminately allow extractive industries and infrastructure projects in forests, sanctuaries and protected areas, and to dilute rules and regulations to enable the same.

Thus, the Ministry of Environment & Climate Change (MoEFCC) gave Environmental Clearance as recently as 11 May 2020 for exploratory drilling by OIL for hydrocarbons in as many as 7 locations in the Dibru-Saikhowa National Park. OIL justified this by saying it would “not enter the National Park” but use Extended Reach Drilling (ERD) from a plinth 1.5km outside the Park boundary at a pre-existing well head but reaching into a new well drilled 3.5km under the surface of the Park. Commentators have alleged that this clearance was granted without careful scrutiny by experts. Such extensive exploration and subsequently extraction of oil and/or gas further threatens the sensitive ecosystem of this area and exposes the region to much higher risks of accidents such as the recent Baghjan blowout and fire.

Actually, whether the actual well mouth is inside or just outside the Park, matters little if a blowout or leak occurs. At Baghjan for instance, gas from the blowout and the resultant fire spread over several kilometres of Park and Wetland, and affected bodies and ecosystems far and wide due to condensate being carried in the wind and entering river systems. The hasty and blanket clearances given by MoEFCC without rigorous environmental assessment by experts also emboldens project holders, especially large and powerful PSUs and corporate houses, to ignore environmental considerations, abandon precautionary measures, and turn a deaf ear to public concerns and protests. The Draft EIA Notification 2020 proposes to regularize such blanket environmental clearances for exploration.

To add fuel to the fire of reckless hydrocarbon exploration and extraction, the Directorate General of Hydrocarbons (DGH) announced an Open Acreage Licensing Policy (PALP) in June 2017 which essentially allows private entities to apply for exploration in sites of their choosing. Bidders are required to have only a mere 1 year experience in exploration and related activities, opening the door to inexperienced and unqualified companies merely chasing profits at the cost of the environment and local populations. If even large 100 year-old companies like OIL find it difficult, or do not care, to take adequate safety precautions, one shudders to think what may happen if rank novices enter this sector.

 

Demands                            

The following demands arise from the above:

  • Independent Inquiry by a Committee of Experts led by a sitting Judge or under judicial supervision, should look into:
    • the design and layout of OIL Baghjan Well No.5 and related infrastructure, safety measures and emergency preparedness at the site and in the Baghjan Oil fields in general
    • operational errors and capabilities of OIL personnel on the spot at the time of the blowout, especially of those related to safety and emergencies
    • what if any early warning indications or ‘kicks’ were detected and measures if any taken to prevent the blowout
    • reasons for failure to quickly cap the well after the blowout, and
    • how and why the fire was caused, and precautions if any, taken to prevent it.
    • possible contribution to the blowout by the adjacent workover in a new ‘sand’ outsourced by OIL to M/S John Energy
  • Inquiry Committee should also:
    • assess and recommend compensation and other measures to be undertaken by OIL and costs thereof related to loss of life, livelihoods, habitat and health problems caused by the Baghjan gas blowout and fire
    • assess and recommend measures to be undertaken by OIL and costs thereof related to environmental damage in the area and remedial action
  • Safety Audit should be conducted, preferably by the above Independent Expert Committee, especially as regards emergency preparedness and response, of all other wells in the Baghjan Oil Field and at other OIL sites in the North East
  • OIL be required to deposit with appropriate authorities an amount of Rs.100 crore to cover costs of interim compensation to affected persons for loss of life, homes, crops, livestock and livelihoods, and for immediate clean-up of worst affected parts of the Dibru-Saikhowa National Park and Maguri-Motapung Wetlands pending more detailed assessment by the Inquiry Committee

 

15 June 2020

 

Contact

D.Raghunandan 9810098621

Isfaqur Rahman 7002525784

 

Social Media

Twitter  @gsaipsn

Email  gsaipsn@gmail.com

Facebook @allindiapeoplessciencenetwork

 

AIPSN Statement on LG Vizag Styrene Leak

Click here for press statement LGVizagAipsnStatement25052020

Clicke here for writuep about LG Vizag Styrene Leak-250520

See articles regarding LGVIzag   EnvironmentalImapctAssessment EIA

AIPSN Statement on LG Vizag Styrene Leak

Styrene vapours leaked from the LG Polymers Plant in R.R.Venkatapuram, Vizakhapatnam District, in the early hours of 7th May 2020. The Plant manufactures different materials such as Engineering Plastics, Polystyrene and Expanded Polystyrene using Styrene as raw material, bringing the Plant under the Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Chemical Rules, 1989 and the Chemical Accident (Emergency Planning, Preparedness and Response) Rules 1996.   The Plant had been shut since 25th March under nationwide Lockdown announced by the Central Government.    Many aspects related to the circumstances of the Leak and its possible causes have come to light from local and national media, from analysis by technical experts, and information from the international literature about styrene and production of various materials from it.

 

Causes and Effects of Leak

Several thousand tons of liquid Styrene was stored in tanks at the plant. Styrene storage should be at 20 degrees C, but temperature controls at the tank were apparently malfunctioning. It appears that chemical inhibitors such as Tetra-Butyl-Catechol (TBC), used to prevent self-polymerization of styrene, had not been added in the tank, and sufficient quantities were also not available in the plant, although both are standard practice and mandatory as for hazardous industries. Other prescribed precautions and maintenance had also not been taken, and some other sensors and controls were also in poor condition. Further, safety audit, safety drills and trial runs were not conducted as they should have been after prolonged shut-down.

Sirens meant to alert nearby residents of a leak, were not sounded and no timely guidance was issued regarding precautions or remedial measures either to nearby residents or the authorities.

The sudden imposition of the Lockdown by the Central Government may also have contributed to these problems. This was implicitly acknowledged by the Centre issuing such instructions to all industries, however only after the LG plant leak. At the same time, LG Polymers had passes and time during the lockdown to take precautionary measures, but apparently did not.

Thus LG Polymers appears to be responsible for serious lapses and gross negligence, directly contributing to the massive Leak.

On 7th May, temperatures in the Styrene tank started rising, triggering auto-polymerization and leading to a runaway reaction with rise of temperature and pressure, rate of vaporization and exothermic reaction releasing heat, all feeding each other. At some point, the safety valve blew, releasing styrene vapours high into the air over a long time till the leak was brought under control.

Styrene vapours spread over about 3km from the plant in the direction of the wind, and modeling suggests that styrene levels in the air may have reached 1100ppm in the immediate vicinity of the Plant, 130ppm at 1km distance, and 20ppm at 2-3km from the plant. Although Styrene exposure at low levels may pass out of the body through urine, higher exposure levels than, say, 100ppm over 8 hours specified as maximum in factories, are known to be toxic. However, short- and long-term effects of the extremely high levels of exposure seen during the Leak are not known, and need to be rigorously monitored and necessary treatment extended.  Effects on animals, plants, water bodies and soil also need to be monitored and remedial action taken.

 

Regulatory Violations

The most shocking aspect concerning the LG Polymers Vizag Plant is that it had been operating without Environment Clearance (EC) from 2004 to 2017, either from the Union Ministry of Environment & Climate Change (MoEFCC) or from the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) as required under the EIA Notification 2006. LG applied for EC when it sought to expand capacity of the plant in 2018. AP SEIAA objected stating ECthat the plant did not have prior EC. In an Affidavit filed with SEIAA in May 2019, LG admitted this violation but stated that it had obtained permission from the AP Pollution Control Board. SEIAA referred the case to MoEFCC stating that the plant fell under Category A requiring EC from MoEFCC under the “Violations” category. At some point, LG Polymers seems to have withdrawn its application for expansion, and MoEFCC has shown the case as “Deleted” on its website in November 2019 with a noting that the company “seems to be no longer interested.” However, the Plant continued operating without Environmental Clearance, but with permission from APPCB.

APPCB has no authority to grant such permission without EC from either MoEFCC or SEIAA under the EIA notification 2006. It may further be noted that the Draft EIA Notification 2020, currently awaiting public response, seeks precisely to legalize all such violations and grant them post-facto approval. The LG Polymers case is a text book case why such violations should not be tolerated and why the relevant provisions in Draft EIA Notification 2020 should be withdrawn.

NGT and the Supreme Court have both often ruled against post-facto Environmental Clearance, with SC observing that “the concept of an ex post facto EC… is an anathema to the EIA Notification.” The role of APPCB, especially how it granted permissions to LG Polymers knowing that the company did not have prior EC, is a serious matter, and should be investigated and action taken.

Taking suo motu notice of the LG Polymers Vizag leak, NGT has slapped punitive damages of Rs.50 crore on LG Polymers pending a full assessment of the harm to life and environment caused by the leak, on the grounds that there is a prima facie “failure to comply with the Rules and other statutory provisions… [and that] the statutory authorities responsible for authorizing and regulating such activities may also be accountable for their lapses.”

It may also be noted that the Plant was situated in the midst of heavily populated residential areas, which was not the case when the Plant was established in 1961. Over the years, residential colonies were permitted to come up in the plant vicinity, which is also in violation of regulatory provisions. Here, the Vizag city authorities and State government should have exercised greater vigilance and prevented the settlements coming up.

 

Demands            

In light of the above, AP Jana Vijnana Vedika and All India Peoples Science Network demand that:

 

  • detailed and impartial inquiry, free of influence by Central or State governments or related agencies, be conducted by the Expert Committee appointed by NGT on the Leak;
  • the LGT Inquiry Committee should identify the direct and proximate causes for the Leak, identify lapses and negligence by LG polymers, and fix responsibility as regards:
    • condition of the plant and likely failure of different controls, sensors and gauges
    • failure to sound the siren to warn nearby residents and also to provide timely guidance for precautionary and remedial measures to be taken by residents
    • adequacy of maintenance activities and results during the lockdown period
    • flaws in plant operations especially on May 6 and 7 contributing to the Leak
  • violations of the relevant Regulations governing hazardous materials and industries
  • the LGT Inquiry Committee should also look into the impact of the Leak on human health, milch animals, poultry and other animals, vegetables, plant life, water bodies and soil in affected areas, with assistance of such medical, scientific and technical experts as required, and also recommend rigorous monitoring of this impact, treatment and remedial measures as required at the cost of LG Polymers
  • based on the above, the NGT Inquiry Committee may also recommend compensation by LH Polymers to workers and affected people
  • based on all the above findings, NGT may impose suitable costs on LG Polymers to cover compensation, remedial action, health monitoring and treatment, and penalties
  • Inquiry Committee may also identify violations of the applicable EIA Notification 2006 and also identify failures or collusion by regulatory authorities especially APPCB in this regard and, based on this, NGT may recommend penal or other action in this regard
  • since a Magisterial Inquiry Committee and other inquiries have also been set up, it is strongly urged that terms of reference of these do not overlap with those of the NGT Committee, and the former be directed to focus on subjects not covered by the NGT
  • responsibility should also be fixed for allowing residential areas to come up in the vicinity of the Plant in violation of Regulations and various orders of the Supreme Court and NGT
  • the LG Polymers Plant should be shut till it obtains Environmental Clearance from the MoEFCC and, if granted, shifted to a suitable industrial estate/area at least 5km away from human habitation
  • workers at the LG Polymers Vizag Plant should be paid in full for the period of lockdown and till such time as final decision is taken regarding its closure or re-starting after shifting

 

 

 

For further details contact

D.Raghunandan 9810098621

Srinivas 9848025687

P.Rajamanickam AIPSN Gen Sec 9442915101

Letter to MoEFFC requesting extension of response to 12August

Aipsn-lr-to-MoEFFC

ALL INDIA PEOPLE’s SCIENCE NETWORK (AIPSN)

Regd. No. PKD/CA/62/2020.

AIPSN Central Secretariat,                    E-mail: gsaipsn@gmail.com

O/O Tamil Nadu Science Forum                Ph: 094429 15101       

6, Kakkathoppu Street, MUTA Building, 

MADURAI-625 001-Tamil Nadu

 

President:             General Secretary:                Treasurer:

Dr. S.Chatterjee         Prof. P.Rajamanickam             Dr.S.Krishnaswamy

 

To 

The Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, 

Indira Paryavaran Bhawan, Jor Bagh Road, Aliganj

New Delhi – 110003  

e-mail address: eia2020-moefcc@gov.in  

5 May 2020

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

We are writing to you regarding the Draft EIA Notification 2020 notified on 12th March 2020. As per the notification all suggestions and responses are to be sent by 11th May 2020. 

 

As the largest science movement of the country, the All India Peoples Science Network, comprising over 36 independent Member Organizations, feels that we are an important stakeholder in the process of finalizing this significant Notification through public consultations. The Draft Notification has raised many major issues requiring careful examination. As an all-India movement, this requires is to hold intensive public interactions at the grassroots level, and then consolidating these into considered responses.

 

This Draft Notification was issued when many organizations and institutions were already adhering to work-to-home and physical distancing norms, and the nationwide lockdown was announced soon after, which is still in operation in large parts of the country. No meaningful discussions have been possible during this period, nor are they possible now. 

 

In view of the circumstances, and the importance of public consultations which are not possible under the present circumstances, this letter strongly urges an extension of the deadline for responses by another 3 months at least i.e. till 11th August 2020 at the least.

We sincerely hope that this request for an extension will be granted.

 

Thanking you in anticipation, and with regards

 

Yours sincerely

 

P.Rajamanickam                                            Sabyasachi Chatterjee

Secretary, AIPSN                                                                  President, AIPSN

 

———————————————————————————————————————————–

A Network of nearly 40 People’s Science Movements working in nearly 23 states

Statement on post-3rd May 2020 measures against Covid-19 Pandemic

click here for SummaryofPost-May3-LockdownStatement

click here for English version JSA AIPSN statement_Post-May3_Lockdown 

click here for Bengali versionBengali-JSA-AIPSNstatementonPost3rdMay-measures

Statement on post-3rd May 2020 measures against Covid-19 Pandemic

 Jan SwasthyaAbhiyan (JSA) and All India People’s Science Network (AIPSN)

Background

 The Central Government has persisted with the Lockdown as the main, if not, the only strategy against the spread of COVID-19.  Underway since March 25th, this lock-down has seen two extensions, one on April 20th and now again on May 3rd.  These one-size-fits-all country-wide lock-downs are badly planned and poorly implemented with measures imposed on the country by the Government using centralizing powers under the Disaster Management Act.

More than 28 Joint Statements released till nowby Jan SwasthyaAbhiyan and All India Peoples Science Network (JSA-AIPSN) have been released. These statements explain in detail why such all-encompassing restrictions of movements and activities that India has executed is a fundamentally mistaken approach with limited and temporary benefits, that fails to factor in Indian socio-economic realities. This will lead to many long-term adverse consequences.

WHO, public health experts and best practices of many countries all agree that population lockdowns are at best temporary, locale-specific, emergency measures which need to be accompanied by other more important health-related and socio-economic measures which we list as follows:

  • extensive and rigorous contact tracing, wide-ranging and purposive testing, quarantining and isolation as required, and hospital treatment of infected persons
  • buildingup preparedness of health systems using the lockdown leeway to respond to the anticipated high case load arising from Covid-19
  • ensuring that the health system caters simultaneouslytonon-Covidhealth needs especially relating to maternal and child health, chronic or life-threatening ailments and needs of the elderly, disabled and other vulnerable sections
  • ensuringreliable supply of and access to essential goods and services, especially to meet needs of the poor, elderly, disabled and other vulnerable sections
  • financial and other special provisions for those who would lose essential incomes and jobs, such as migrant workers, daily-wage earners, the self-employed and workers in the unorganized and SME sector
  • humane, effective and non-stigmatizing approach towards infected and suspected cases, and the economically worst-affected populations, with participation of community volunteers and civil society organizations as appropriate
  • effective coordination between Centre and States/UTs, as the latter is being starved off revenues while also coping with demands arising from the Covid-19 epidemic.

However,although the lockdown is being implemented vigorously, none of these parallel measures have been implemented in the required scale and intensity. As a result, the capacity to undertake public health and economic measures to cope with the inevitable increase of infections when the lock down is lifted, are still not in place. The lockdown itself has also been imposed and implemented in a non-transparent manner without the epidemiological evidence required to inform both the classification of areas and the choice of activities to be restricted.

Current Status: The Central Government and its departments/agencies including the Ministry of Health and ICMR have been making various often unsubstantiated claims about the success of the lockdown,such asthat many more cases would have occurred without it, that the rate of new cases is becoming linear, that no community transmission is taking place, and so on. The reality is thatcases are fast rising especially in certain States/Districts, with surprisingly high fatality rates in some. There is substantial uncertainty about the true extent of spread given low testing rates, among the lowest in the world at around 0.4 tests per thousand population compared to the global median of 5.9 tests per thousand. Further, symptomatic cases without contacts have been largely excluded from testing by protocol.  Infection is certainly spreading to new areas through what is euphemistically termed “large outbreaks of local transmission” by the government. There are significant numbers of cases without any connection to persons with travel or known contact history.The rates of increase remain significant and accelerating. Whereas it took 10 days to go from 5000 to 15,000 cases it took only 5 to 6 days to go from 25,000 to 35,000 cases.

However, these all-India numbers mask the stark reality that the case load varies widely between States and also within States.At the time of writing the statement, 5 of the total 36 States/UTs have zero cases,130districts have been classified as “red zones”, 284districts as non-hotspot “orange zones”and319districts in 25 States reporting no new cases in the past 21 days as “green zones”. This colour-coding of districts and containment zones is not based on clear, stable and transparent epidemiological criteria, and yet forms the basis for policy recommendations for containment measures.

On top of this, within the red zones even more intensive “containment zones” or hotspots have been identified based on even weaker and more opaque evidence, but where even stricter forms of lockdowns have been imposed.

In light of this situation, the following steps are urged in the coming period:

  1. Strengthen the disease surveillance mechanism, inclusive of COVID 19 surveillance,with appropriate design for collection, flow and analysis of information so that it can inform decision making for epidemic control at national, state and local levels as well as provide information on collateral costs in lives lost and morbidities due non-COVID causes.
  2. Zero case reporting should not be made the exit criteria for lock-downs or basis for any zoning. Such unnecessary and unrealistic criteria run the danger of systems suppressing data to report zero cases. The realistic objective is to achievea manageable number of infections or case increase rates at any point so as not to overwhelm the system and to reduce deaths by protecting those that are particularly vulnerable to severe disease.
  3. Many restrictions have no rationale in public health such as the country-wide restriction of movement after 7 pm. The specific rationale for such measures should be explicitly stated and subject to audit and review by impartial watchdog bodies.
  4. Adopt a framework of participatory governance for determination of criteria for restriction of movements and activities, and guidelines for implementation of relief measures and allocation of resources. This could subsequently become part of a legal framework that would mandate functional consultative mechanisms involving public health expertise, health care providers and civil society organizations including of working people, all of whom would be affected. Such legislated provisions would also mandate watchdog bodies to ensure that the sweeping powers given under the Disaster Management Act are used in consultation with affected people and groups, and that the participatory framework is maintained.

 

Restrictionson Movements and Activities: It is strongly urged that a calibrated and graded easing of restrictions on movement and social and economic activities takes place, with broad guidelines within which States may decide on the extent of these restrictions.The main principle for making and implementing restrictions is that this must not call for creating or strengthening police raj using Sec 144 and other coercive measures. The public should be treated in a humane manner and as partners in the process, and not as criminals or subjects under colonial rule.

Relaxations should aim at reviving economic activity, especially in the unorganized and small-scale sector  while continuing to practice physical distancing and other precautions, improving services required by common people especially the elderly and vulnerable sections , considerably strengthening the health system to handle both Covid-19 and pressing non-Covid issues, and stepping up efforts at containment through expanded and rigorous testing, tracing, isolation or quarantining, and treatment. We note that several restrictions such as on agriculture, agricultural markets, fisheries, forest produce etc., as well as on enterprises in rural areas and activities by plumbers, electricians and carpenters in urban areas, have already been relaxed.

The following (indicative not exhaustive) additional relaxations beyond those already permitted since 15 April are urged, with States to decide on fewer relaxations in “red zones” if felt necessary:

  1. Inter-State and inter-district movement of all goods should be freely permitted in view of the current severe shortages and supply-chain constraints impacting even food, medicines and other essential goods, besides other manufactured goods;
  2. Students, tourists, and families that are separated and others who have been stranded by the lockdown should be allowed to book tickets in suitable public transport arrangements including special buses, trains and flights which are organized for this purpose, and facilitated to reach their destination within the next few weeks. Migrant workers should be transported to their native villages free of cost, so as not to add to their enormous burden they have already had to take on due to the lockdown.Those with symptoms suggestive of COVID 19 should be checked before travel and retained pending observation and subsequent clearance. . Further restrictions on public transport must be eased based on evidence
  • All small-scale manufacturing and service enterprises be permitted to function in urban areas with suitable guidance on work-from-home where possible, proportion of personnel attending per shift, use of own or company transport, physical distancing and provision of protective measures such as washing stands, sanitizers, masks etc
  1. All home-based enterprises, self-employed occupations and services such as care services, air-conditioner servicing/repairs, water purification and provisioning, neighbourhoodlaundries and pressing, courier services, roadside vegetable/fruit vendors, florists, and other similar categories should be permitted. Only exceptions can be stated such as where services providers are numerous with crowded clientele making social distancing difficult
  2. Skeletal public transport and a limited number of taxiservices should be made availableand personal vehicles be permittedfor essential purposes like access to healthcare and for the vulnerable. Many of these should be decided locally and not micro-managed from the central MHA.
  3. Types of shops allowed to function from local markets may be expanded to include hardware stores, electrical supplies, sanitary ware stores, cell phone repair, bakeries, hosiery and undergarments, stationeryetc., and small restaurants for home delivery.
  4. Based on data related to social mixing and disaggregated infection rates, several countries have worked out risk criteria for different types of services according to which certain services like cinema halls, malls and pubs are kept closed for the time being while some other services such as restaurants operating at 50 percent of less occupancy with physical distancing norms are allowed to open.; some countries have opened up primary schools, others have allowed public transport and so on. Similar risk-criteria may be evolved for India and services opened up accordingly

 The efficacy and effectiveness of the “containment areas” approach is questionable on epidemiological and other grounds and measures implemented within these areas are highly arbitrary and unrealistic. If essential needs like outpatient healthcare or food purchases are disallowed, then people are forced to breach the containment perimeter by subterfuge to meet these needs. Further, once these areas are opened up, they are as vulnerable as before to infection from nearby areas. Whereas neighborhood spread is not a feature of the epidemic, such forms of containment may actively lead to it. This is essentially a policing approach that cannot be a substitute to contact tracing by community health workers with active community participation.

 Hospitals and health care: Focus of the government hitherto has been almost exclusively on preparing public hospitals dedicated to Covid-19 care, to the extent that other important health services have been sidelined causing enormous problems to persons suffering from various chronic or life-threatening ailments and increasingly even to maternal and child health. Earlier JSA-AIPSN Statements have elaborated on this issue in considerable detail. Government claims that sufficient beds are now available for handling Covid-19 patients, but ground realities are that hospital beds have mostly been diverted from other non-Covid requirements, and ICU Units properly equipped with oxygen and ventilators are in extremely short supply even in metropolitan cities, for instance in Mumbai. OPD and many other services in public hospitals have also been suspended with, for example, outstation patients and their caregivers stranded in makeshift shelters in Delhi for over a month waiting for cancer or other treatment.

It is also notable that medical professionals and other health workers and auxiliary personnel have become infected by Sars-Cov-2 in sizeable numbers and hospitals have themselves become major “hotspots” for infection spread for a variety of reasons, most of which were avoidable.

  1. In light of this situation, the following steps are urged in the coming period:
  2. Urgently expand the number of beds and well-equipped facilities for isolation and initial treatment of Covid-19 patientsthrough non-hospital re-purposed facilities such as sports stadia, conference halls, panchayatbhavansetc, including by erecting purpose-built field facilities, so as to reduce pressure on hospitals . Where the patient is COVID 19 positive, institutional isolation with suitable medical care must the only option. Home isolation can only be considered in exceptional circumstances.
  3. Better equip dedicated Covid-19 hospital facilities for management of severe disease.
  4. Stop the conversion of functional multi-speciality public hospitals currently working on full capacity, leading to denial of access to essential healthcare for close to half the population in many medical disciplines. Where there are no other under-utilized public or private hospitals that can be re-purposed, with segregation of one wing of the public hospital and entrance through a separate gate, while ensuring all other departments function in same volumes as before could be a temporary arrangement. But in parallel- the government must rapidly build up new public hospitals.
  5. Conduct independent audit of hospital procedures and protocols to prevent hospital acquired infection using standard quality accreditation guidelines as well as COVID specific guidelines in all hospital, public or private, irrespective of whether they are seeing COVID 19 patients.
  6. Rigorously identify and test all symptomatic patients for Covid-19 infection, as also all patients with co-morbidities that are known for association with COVID 19 infection.
  7. Provide appropriate PPE for all health care and auxiliary personnel in hospitals handling both COVID and non COVID patients.
  8. Extend training, PPE and other support measures commensurate with requirements to ASHA workers and other community health workers, sanitation workers, police personnel, administrative staff, social workers, and volunteers working in potentially high-infection environment.
  9. Ensure continuity in care, including access to diagnostics and medication and out-patient and in-patient care for serious. chronic and life-threatening ailments
  10. Ensure safety of doctors and other health-care workers through provisioning of PPE in requisite quantities and quality standards
  11. Ensureadequate ambulances and/or other vehicles for speedily bringing patients requiring hospitalization for both Covid-19 and non-Covid19 cases
  12. Induct volunteers of recovered Covid-19 patients for interfacing between the public and the health care workers with periodic testing as required to ensure there is no recurrence.
  13. Provide mental healthcare services as required to health workers, Covid-19 patients and their families, and to address mental health issues among school children, adolescents and others arising out of lockdown.
  14. Strongly come down on the touting of fake cures and remedies, “immuno-boosters” and other similar gimmicks, including their advertisement on television and other media

 Quarantine: Contact tracing and quarantine of asymptomatic contacts of Covid- 19 is an essential component of epidemic control. However in densely populated slum and low-income areas in cities, there is little scope for home quarantine due to over-crowding, poor health systems support and lack of trust between authorities and residents. Recent instances of persons being kept in large numbers in a single room in Delhi with a common, dirty toilet, or of poor people being kept in UP like caged animals with food being thrown at them, show the utter callousness and carelessness with which quarantine is being viewed, except for the well-off who may stay in their own homes or even in hotels on payment.

In light of this situation, the following steps are urged in the coming period:

  1. Institutional facilities for hygienic, effective, dignified and humane quarantine must be sharply increased for all classes and categories of persons, with adequate provision of nutritious food and other essentials.
  2. Clear standard norms of institutional quarantine that includes medical and public health features as well as considerations of comfort, convenience, privacy and human dignity should be urgently drawn up, disseminated and rigorously monitored, including through community based people friendly mechanisms.
  3. Such facilities may be created in repurposed public buildings, schools, college and university campuses, and other requisitioned private/institutional buildings or purpose-build facilities as required.
  4. As many of these facilities as possible should be community managed, often engaging recovered patients from that very community in the management, so that there is trust and humanity in the way this is dealt with. Assistance of civil society organizations may be promoted and utilized in a coordinated manner.
  5. In situation where it is reasonable to accept compliance and there is good community support and linkages with the health system, home quarantine can be permitted.

Testing and Tracing: The recommended relaxation of restrictions should be accompanied by expanded and more rigorous tracing and testing of all suspected cases, so that quarantine of contacts, and isolation and treatment of the infected are vigorously pursued towards breaking the chain of infection.In so-called red zones suspected cases,based on clinical symptoms and contacts of known positive cases need to be pro-actively identified through door-to-door surveillance contact-tracing and contact tracing.  Yet despite all the time gained by lock-downs the access to testing remains far below what is required for both individual patient management and for epidemic control.

In light of this situation, the following measures are urgently required:

  1. Testing protocols currently specified by ICMR need to be revised to permit testing of all persons with symptoms suggestive of Covid-19 infection (mild, moderate or severe) as well as asymptomatic contacts. It could be further scaled up to include asymptomatic people without contact history if infection is high enough to label it a “containment” hotspot. Some of those at high risk like health workers in the COVID frontline may require periodic testing, while others may require testing if they develop symptoms.
  2. Access to both viral antigen testing and rapid antibody testing needs to expand. Rapid antibody testingis very useful tool that clinicians can use to rapidly confirm diagnosis within a clinical setting, and for sero-surveillance including in so-called “green zones” for understanding spread of infection and the development of herd–immunity. In many clinical settings viral antigen tests would be required even if it is more difficult to access.

Test kits & PPEs:Test kits and PPEs need to be procured expeditiously in sufficient quantities and distributed to States proportionate to requirement. While government spokespersons have repeatedly released figures of Test Kits and PPE ordered, which was done very belatedly as recent revelations show, delivery has actually been slow. Official statements indicate that the required larger numbers of PPEs and test kits may not be available before end of May or even June, which is totally unacceptable. Poor procurement policies, delayed validation and an over-reliance on one or two foreign suppliers have led to this crisis. Indigenous PPE manufacture has been slow to pick up partly due to lock down related barriers of access to raw materials and labour. Indigenous test kit manufacture has also faced problems of delayed validation and is taking time to scale up to required levels.

In light of this situation, the following steps are urgently required:

  1. Bottlenecks in manufacturing clearances and domestic production need to be urgently addressed, especially as regards supply chains and transportation.
  2. Financial support should be extended to domestic manufacturers in order to scale-up and speed-up production, with products of adequate standards commensurate with international norms; this should be done with a long-term perspective of building up indigenous capability and eco-system in aspects of the value-chain towards a globally competitive medical equipment industry in India.
  3. Validation and other clearances should be accelerated for indigenous tests developed (as for example the Chitra Tirunal RT-LAMP test or the CSIR-IGIB test kit) in order to include them into the program and expand the options available.

 

Stigmatization:The entire approach of the Government as well as its explicit messaging have been founded on creating fear which in turn has been transformed into stigmatization and aversion by a petrified public. Despite all the government-organized clapping and lamp-lighting, doctors, nurses, sanitation workers, testing technicians and even airline pilot and crew have been targets of stigmatization among all classes. Even the dead have not escaped this stigma. Stickers, posters, wall paintings etc. outside the door of quarantined persons have only increased the perception of infected persons as “the enemy,” to be shunned or even fought off. Various tracking apps will only make this worse and add to the surveillance capacity of the government well beyond this epidemic. Without trust and public cooperation they are unlikely to be effective. These tracking apps have therefore been opposed by many civil society organizations, especially those specializing in internet and data privacy.

The communalization of the epidemic, which has itself acquired epidemic proportions, is an extreme form of this stigmatization and needs to be fought back by all concerned, especially by the Government.

In light of this situation, the following immediate actions by the government are required:

  1. Government must actively lead health education (IEC) activities that de-stigmatize the disease and promote a better understanding of how it spreads. Its message should be reviewed to ensure the messaging does promote social solidarity, not fear, guilt or hostility.
  2. All norms of privacy and confidentiality of individuals and communities must be respected. A serious campaign must be organized to de-communalize the disease
  3. Government must stop targeting its political dissent and making arrests and restrictions on political grounds using the opportunities provided under the draconian disaster management act and the difficulties in access to court. This is essential for building a broad based trust.

Gender based violence: The lockdown period has aggravated situations of violence that happen to people on the basis of their gender, sex, or sexual orientation-women, girls, trans-persons, children and others. Being restricted within homes/families has meant for many women and others to be isolated with their abusers. It has not only meant being more exposed to ongoing violence but also the inability to move out seeking protection and care. The sudden enforcement of lockdown and subsequent suspension of transport facilities/mobility has predictably led to this scenario as it created barriers for those who would have wanted to move out of situations of violence in the given context. Even before Covid-19 situation, gender based violence has existed as a pervasive issue having enormous impact on lives of survivors including negative health outcomes, thus forming a crisis situation of its own which was completely overlooked given the way lockdown was enforced with least sensitivity to the needs of these survivors. Overlooking one crisis while gearing upto respond to another- is paradoxical at least; and violation of the rights of survivors at large.

There are also,very disturbing instances of violence against women in quarantine facilities and at hospitals being reported must be urgently looked into and dealt with to ensure that no such violations happen in future. At a crucial time when the hospitals, healthcare workers and systems are seeking support of the communities and its varied members for their voluntary cooperation to control the spread of Covid-19, such incidents unfortunately breaches the trust of the communities, particularly women for trusting their well-being with the government systems.

Given this situation, we call on the government to take the following steps:

  1. Prevention and redress of gender based violence must be made an important aspect of national response plans for Covid-19. The governments must send a clear message against all forms of gender based violence including sexual violence in all spheres of lives including health facilities and quarantine spaces. Public health preparedness, systems and protocols in the current context must take additional measures towards ensuring a dignified healthcare for all women, girls, and other marginalized groups.
  2. Special emergency fund should be declared and allocated for responding to gender based violence in the current context including the utilization of existing Nirbhaya funds with states- with requisite directives and flexibility to draw up response suitable to different contexts.
  3. Essential service providers must be recognized at the administrative level-including government helplines, one stop centres, police, protection officers, medical officers, legal services authorities, counsellors, shelter homes etc. and ensure that they remain operational universally.
  4. Government should call for urgent consultation with women’s groups/organisations working on this issue to ensure a concerted/organized effort during the Covid-19 situation.

 Migrant Workers: Last but not least, is the terrible situation that migrant workers find themselves in, which is a massive blot on the governance system and the reputation of our country. These workers are the backbone of the Indian economy.They earn their livelihoods however meager with dignity, and do not deserve to be treated as supplicants. This crisis must be resolved urgently and humanely.We note that after a long and inexplicable delay, permission has been given to run special trains for migrants to return, but even this move is as yet inadequate in scale and support systems. Moreover, it has been reported that the workers are being made to pay for their travel back, which is completely unethical. Many migrant workers have already been subject to brutal and hostile quarantine conditions and many are exhausted by hunger, disease, heat and the exertion of trying to walk back home.

 

In such a context, we call on government to take the following measures:

  1. Arrange adequate number of special trains for returning migrants to their home states, and further buses within the states for them to reach their home village. These should be provided completely free of cost.
  2. Ensure that those who have symptoms are tested, and allowed to board only if negative. If positive they must be hospitalized at state expense, and when they become negative catch the next train back. Those who have no symptoms can be allowed to return without any further tests.
  3. Arrangements for proper quarantine according to specifications as discussed above should also be made in their native villages or districts, if they are coming from a higher infection zone to a lower infection zone.
  4. Transportation conditions should be decent with food and clean toilets ensuring physical distancing.
  5. Whatever meager support migrant workers have been extended by the Centre and by some of the States where they had come to work and live, has been too little and too late. They require to be compensated for loss of income incurred due to the lockdown, and provided with financial assistance through MGNREGA or other means after they return to their villages.

Relief Measures for all Working People: The government has announced a slew of relief measures. JSA-AIPSN in an earlier statement has pointed out to the inadequacy of many of these measures, both in terms of covering all those who require relief and on the scale of relief provided.

As the government goes into the second extension of the lock-down we note that most of these relief measures are yet to reach the majority for whom it is intended. No further measures from the government have been forthcoming. Only very few states have been able to supplement this package of relief. There are also many categories of workers like non-migrant urban poor staying in the slums, are out of work, and have no access to social security measured and food security entitlements and have no relief package directed at them. A number of NGOs are valiantly try to close the gap with community kitchens,- but the scale of this effort is too small.

In this context we call upon the government to:

  1. First and foremost implement the promises it has made with respect to relief and ensure that bureaucratic barriers and implementation failures do not exclude large sections of those who need relief or fail to deliver the necessary quantity of relief.
  2. Announce an increase in the resource allocation and use this to expand the scope of relief measures that are provided to the working people, especially the most vulnerable sections who are bearing the brunt of this crisis. The longer such lockdown continues the higher would be such burden on them.
  3. Expand food supplementation and food security arrangements as called for by the Right To Food Campaign, without any mandatory requirement of Aadhaar. The FCI currently has a stock of over 60 million tonnes of grain, which should be distributed among the population.
  4. Expand the MGNREGS to reach a much wider section of rural workers and extend it to all urban workers, so that all those in need of employment are able to secure employment for at least 200 days in the coming year, wherever they are resident. The kind of works permitted under MGNREGA should also be expanded and a basic unemployment allowance would be required in many states.

 

 

For more information please contact:

D.Raghunandan – 9810098621

T. Sundararaman – 9987438253

N. Sarojini  – 9818664634

Sulakshana Nandi – 9406090595

 

Follow for regular updates:

Website          www.phmindia.org               www.aipsn.net

Twitter           @jsa_india

Facebook       @janswasthyaabhiyan