Civil society groups urge Rajya Sabha to reconsider disaster management amendment Bill

By A Representative 

A coalition of civil society organisations has intensified its efforts to stall the passage of the Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill, 2024, by appealing directly to members of the Rajya Sabha. Following extensive consultations with stakeholders, the organisations have sent letters to all Upper House members, imploring them to either reject the Bill or refer it to a Select Parliamentary Committee for thorough re-evaluation. The Bill, already passed by the Lok Sabha last year, is anticipated to be tabled in the current Rajya Sabha session.

This renewed appeal builds upon a previous open letter endorsed by 190 civil society organisations, which argued that the proposed amendments would weaken, rather than strengthen, India’s disaster management framework.

The core concerns raised by the civil society groups include:

 * Removal of Loan Relief: The Bill seeks to eliminate Clause 13 of the original Disaster Management Act, which empowered the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) to provide crucial loan relief to individuals and communities affected by disasters. The organisations argue that this omission will severely hinder the recovery process for disaster-stricken populations, citing the recent Chooralmala Mundakai landslide in Wayanad as a stark example. They are demanding the reinstatement of loan relief, including full waivers for agricultural, housing, and livelihood loans, alongside provisions for interest-free credit.

 * Dilution of "Compensation": The Bill proposes replacing the term "compensation" with "relief" in Clause 61 of the Act. Civil society groups contend that this change significantly diminishes the rights of disaster-affected individuals, as compensation implies a right to restoration, while relief is often discretionary and may not adequately address the extent of losses incurred.

 * Lack of Focus on Livelihood Restoration: The organisations highlight the Bill's failure to explicitly define and prioritize livelihood restoration measures for both directly and indirectly affected communities. They point out that current policies often overlook those dependent on asset owners, such as agricultural laborers, artisans, and service providers.

 * Centralisation of Governance: The Bill's emphasis on empowering a High-Level Committee (HLC) and the National Crisis Management Committee (NCMC) at the expense of state governments and local bodies is a major point of contention. Civil society groups -- led by Lara Jesani, Prafulla Samantara, Prasad Chacko, Sarat Cheloor, and Soumya Dutta of the Campaign for Rights based Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill -- argue that this centralisation undermines federalism and could lead to delays in critical disaster response efforts.

 * Insufficient Transparency and Public Disclosure: The organisations are advocating for mandatory provisions in the Bill that ensure greater transparency in disaster governance. This includes the public disclosure of state and national disaster management plans and making disaster databases publicly accessible to enhance accountability and preparedness.

 * Neglect of Slow-Onset Disasters: The Bill's failure to address the increasing threat of slow-onset disasters like heatwaves and coastal erosion, exacerbated by climate change, is a significant concern. The groups are urging for the urgent inclusion of these disaster types within India’s disaster management framework.

 * Weakened Rights-Based Approach: Civil society organisations argue that the Bill falls short of ensuring a people-centric, inclusive, and climate-resilient approach to disaster management. They stress the need to prioritize vulnerable communities, including Dalits, Adivasis, fishworkers, and migrant laborers, who are disproportionately affected by disasters.

The collective of civil society organisations insists that the Disaster Management (Amendment) Bill, 2024, in its current form, represents a missed opportunity to strengthen India’s ability to effectively manage and mitigate the impacts of disasters. They warn that the proposed regressive changes could further undermine disaster response and recovery efforts across the country.

They are urging the government to either withdraw the Bill entirely or, at the very least, refer it to a Select Committee of the Rajya Sabha to facilitate broader consultations and incorporate necessary revisions. They emphasize that a comprehensive, inclusive, and rights-based approach, aligned with the Sendai Framework and India’s constitutional obligations, is paramount.