As Modi man takes over as VP of China-sponsored infrastructure bank, civil society objects to "lack of transparency"
 |
| A cartoon on AIIB appearing in "Business Monitor" in 2014 |
By A Representative
India’s top civil society organizations have taken strong
exception to manner in which India’s membership to the Asian Infrastructure
Investment Bank (AIIB), a multi-national Asian bank founded by the Government
of China, was ratified on January 16 “without any public debate”.
Pandian served World Bank before returning to Gujarat as
head of ex-blue-chip public sector undertaking, Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation
(GSPC) in early 2000s, and has been under scanner for having “misled” the state
about the hype he created around “unverified” oil-and-gas exploration in KG
Basin, leading to heavy losses to the PSU.
India won the post on becoming the second largest investor
to the AIIB, enabling it to elect to its 12 member Board of Directors with
10.34 per cent voting rights.
In a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the civil
society organizations said, “It is unfortunate that the ratification of India’s
membership to the Bank was done without a public debate. This deprives the
citizens of a platform to raise their concerns and apprehensions about the
functioning of the Bank, while the impact of the investments would be borne by
the them.”
The letter to Modi has been signed by National Alliance of
People’s Movements, National Alliance of People's Movements, Narmada Bachao
Andolan, National Fish Workers' Forum, Indian Social Action
Forum, International Rivers, Environics Trust, Environment Support Group,
among others.
From Gujarat, three NGOs, Paryavaran Mitra, Paryavaran
Suraksha Samiti and Machchhimar Adhikar Sangharsh Sangathan signed the letter.
The letter says, India’s ratification without public debate “deprives the citizens of a platform to raise their concerns and apprehensions about the functioning of the Bank, while the impact of the investments would be borne by the them.”
The letter says, India’s ratification without public debate “deprives the citizens of a platform to raise their concerns and apprehensions about the functioning of the Bank, while the impact of the investments would be borne by the them.”
This is particularly serious, India is likely to “receive
half of the $1.2 Billion the bank would disburse for infrastructure projects by
the end of 2016”, the letter says.
“We are aware that AIIB has promised quick disbursal of
funds with ‘high efficiency at low cost’ and takes pride in its ‘lean, green
and clean’ policy”, the letter says, underlining, “While the AIIB seems a
little too eager to start its investments, the same does not reflect on
ensuring a strong set of safeguard policies.”
Pointing out that at present the AIIB is involved in finalizing its Environmental and Social Framework (ESF), the letter says, “This demands a serious debate”, adding, already, the draft has come under criticism for “outsourcing” ESF responsibility to selected clients.
“The need for infrastructure development is one that cannot be discounted in a rapidly growing economy like our country”, the letter insists, adding, “These developmental projects would have the positive impact that the government wishes only when proper safeguards and accountability mechanisms are in place.”
Pointing out that at present the AIIB is involved in finalizing its Environmental and Social Framework (ESF), the letter says, “This demands a serious debate”, adding, already, the draft has come under criticism for “outsourcing” ESF responsibility to selected clients.
“The need for infrastructure development is one that cannot be discounted in a rapidly growing economy like our country”, the letter insists, adding, “These developmental projects would have the positive impact that the government wishes only when proper safeguards and accountability mechanisms are in place.”
Saying that an accountability mechanism is particularly
important for a country like India, the letter says, it alone can take care of
the problems of displacement of local people without proper rehabilitation,
leading to “serious and irreversible damages to its natural resources.”
Demanding an urgent “open debate both within and outside Parliament
on role in and implications for India and ESF”, the letter also wants the
Government of India to conduct “face-to-face consultations with the civil
society groups.”
The civil society organizations’ objections are similar to
the ones raised by the US, which wondered that the AIIB would at all have “high
standards of the World Bank and the regional development banks… particularly
related to governance, and environmental and social safeguards.”
Comments