Skip to main content

Statue of Unity: Sardar would have been "uncomfortable" seeing so many laws violated

The "tallest" statue
Counterview Desk
In a sharp critique ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi dedicating the 182-metres high statue of Sardar Patel to the nation, a well-known advocacy group, South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP), has said that even the Sardar would have felt "uncomfortable" with the so-called Statue of Unity. The reason, according to SANDRP, is that the statue has been built setting aside all environmental and legal prerequisites.
SANDRP wonders how "uncomfortable would Sardar be seeing so many violations of law" at a whopping cost of Rs 3000 crore, on hand, and "land acquisition and displacement of so many tribal people, who do not have basic developmental facilities or justice till date", on the other.

SANDRP analysis:

Consider the facts: The 600 feet tall statue of Sardar Patel that the Prime Minister of India will inaugurate on Patel’s Birthday on October 31, 2018 is situated bang in the middle of the Narmada river. To take up such unprecedented construction in the middle of the river would require, at the least, environment clearance, since the construction would have huge impacts on the river. No such clearance was sought or given. It would have required environmental impact assessment, environmental management plan, appraisal, public consultations, monitoring and compliance. None of this happened.
The project involves not only the construction of the statue, but also laying new roads, widening existing roads, setting up five star and other multi star hotels, guest houses by various states, tent city (tender issued), ropeway (tender issued), tiger and crocodile safari, and so on, which would also have adverse impacts, requiring the above procedure, but none happened.
The statue is to be surrounded by water to be dammed by Garudeshwar Dam, on Narmada river, again requiring social and environment impacts assessment and clearances, but none were sought or given.
The statue is built from the southern side of Narmada river, 3.2 km downstream from the Narmada Dam. On northern side is the Shoolpaneshwar sanctuary and reserved forests, which means that such a construction would require wildlife clearance, but again none was sought or given.
How uncomfortable would Sardar be seeing so many violations of law? Seeing the expenditure of Rs 3000 crores? Seeing the land acquisition and displacement of so many tribal people, who do not have basic developmental facilities or justice till date?
Sardar Vallabhabhai Patel, Independent India’s first home and deputy Prime Minister, was a successful lawyer before he left that profession to join Gandhi in freedom struggle. He would have been happy to fight a case against all these illegalities and injustices involved in building the statue.
As he once said:
“If we have to fight, we must fight clean. Such a fight must await an appropriate time and conditions and you must be watchful in choosing your ground. To fight against refugees is no fight at all. No laws of humanity or war among honourable men permit the murder of people who have sought shelter and protection.”
Unfortunately, he may have lost that legal battle. Gujarat High Court, in order dated January 13, 2014, in Writ Petition (PIL) 142 of 2013, challenging the plans of the statue, rejected the petition, without going into issue of impacts or violation of Environment Protection Act 1986 or Wildlife Protection Act 1972.
The Western Zone branch of the National Green Tribunal, in response to application no 32 of 2015 by late Trupti Shah and nine others, challenging the plans of the Statue of Unity, rejected the appeal through an order dated January 28, 2016, without going into merits of the case:
“Considering the fact situation in the instant case, in our considered opinion, instant Application No.32/2015 is barred by limitation and will have to be dismissed. Still however, we make it clear that this dismissal is not to be treated as precedent for other purpose. All the questions related to the matter are kept open for both the sides and may not be treated as foreclosed for any purpose.”
But Sardar Patel was also a staunch satyagrahi and would not hesitate to fight for justice, as tribals and others of Gujarat are now doing.
Sardar Patel said in his presidential address to the Congress in 1931:
“Independent India’s leaders would neither use a foreign language nor rule from a remote place 7,000 feet above sea level.”He would certainly feel very uncomfortable even from that height of 600 feet.

Comments

TRENDING

Girl child education: 20 major states 'score' better than Gujarat, says GoI report

By Rajiv Shah
A Government of India report, released last month, has suggested that “model” Gujarat has failed to make any progress vis-à-vis other states in ensuring that girls continue to remain enrolled after they leave primary schools. The report finds that, in the age group 14-17, Gujarat’s 71% girls are enrolled at the secondary and higher secondary level, which is worse than 20 out of 22 major states for which data have been made available.

Savarkar in Ahmedabad "declared support" to two-nation theory in 1937, followed by Jinnah three years later

By Our Representative
One of the top freedom fighters whom BJP and Prime Minister Narendra Modi revere the most, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, was also a great supporter of the two nation theory for India, one for Hindus another for Muslims, claims a new expose on the man who is also known to be the original proponent of the concept of Hindutva.

Congress 'promises' cancellation of Adani power project: Jharkhand elections

Counterview Desk
Pointing out that people's issues take a backseat in Jharkhand's 2019 assembly elections, the state's civil rights organization, the Jharkhand Janadhikar Mahasabha, a coalition of activists and people’s organisations, has said that political parties have largely ignored in their electoral manifestos the need to implement the fifth schedule of the Constitution in a predominantly tribal district.

Hindutva founders 'borrowed' Nazi, fascist idea of one flag, one leader, one ideology

By Shamsul Islam*
With the unleashing of the reign of terror by the RSS/BJP rulers against working-class, peasant organizations, women organizations, student movements, intellectuals, writers, poets and progressive social/political activists, India also witnessed a series of resistance programmes organized by the pro-people cultural organizations in different parts of the country. My address in some of these programmes is reproduced here... 
***  Before sharing my views on the tasks of artists-writers-intellectuals in the times of fascism, let me briefly define fascism and how it is different from totalitarianism. Totalitarianism is political concept, a dictatorship of an individual, family or group which prohibits opposition in any form, and exercises an extremely high degree of control over public and private life. It is also described as authoritarianism.
Whereas fascism, while retaining all these repressive characteristics, also believes in god-ordained superiority of race, cultur…

Ex-World Bank chief economist doubts spurt in India's ease of doing business rank

By Rajiv Shah
This is in continuation of my previous blog where I had quoted from a commentary which top economist Prof Kaushik Basu had written in the New York Times (NYT) a little less than a month ago, on November 6, to be exact. He recalled this article through a tweet on November 29, soon after it was made known that India's growth rate had slumped (officially!) to 4.5%.

With RSS around, does India need foreign enemy to undo its democratic-secular fabric?

By Shamsul Islam*
Many well-meaning liberal and secular political analysts are highly perturbed by sectarian policy decisions of RSS/BJP rulers led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, especially after starting his second inning. They are vocal in red-flagging lynching incidents, policies of the Modi government on Kashmir, the National Register of Citizens (NRC), the demand for 'Bharat Ratna' to Savarkar who submitted 6-7 mercy petitions to the British masters (getting remission of 40 years out of 50 years' sentence), and the murder of constitutional norms in Goa, Karnataka and now in Maharashtra.

Post-Balakot, danger that events might spiral out of control is 'greater, not less'

By Tapan Bose*
The fear of war in South Asia is increasing. Tensions are escalating between India and Pakistan after the Indian defence minister's announcement in August this year that India may revoke its current commitment to only use nuclear weapons in retaliation for a nuclear attack, known as ‘no first use’. According to some experts who are watching the situation the risk of a conflict between the two countries has never been greater since they both tested nuclear weapons in 1998.

Ships recycling Bill 'allows' India to be turned into a landfill for foreign hazardous waste

Counterview Desk
In a letter to M Venkaiah Naidu, chairman, Rajya Sabha, senior activist Gopal Krishna of the Toxics Watch Alliance has said that the Recycling of Ships Bill, 2019 should be referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science and Technology, Environment, Forests and Climate Change to "safeguard country’s maritime environment from harmful and hazardous wastes and materials".

Worrying signs in BJP: Modi, Shah begin 'cold-shouldering' Gujarat CM, party chief

By RK Misra*
The political developments in neighbouring Maharashtra where a Shiv Sena-NCP-Congress government assumed office has had a trickle down effect in Gujarat with both the ruling BJP and the Congress opposition going into revamp mode.

80 RTI activists killed since 2014, yet Modi govt 'refuses' to implement whistleblowers Act

By Our Representative
Ever since Prime Minister Narendra Modi took over power in 2014 at the Centre, more than 80 have been killed “in their quest for information and accountability” through the Right to Information (RTI) Act, a public hearing in Delhi has been told. Senior politicians from opposition parties, including Congress and Left, heard people express their anguish over the manner in which the government was treating the RTI Act, even as refusing to operationalise the Whistleblower Protection Act, passed in 2014.