The Background
“You should reap the benefit-because no one can stop this project, no matter which political party comes to power tomorrow. No one can stop this as the Govt. of India has given the orders. These projects are not meant to harm or bring tension to anyone….Anyone who disturbs this project is not a Sikkimese. He might be born in Sikkim but is a useless person if he opposes such a good project; such people are your opposition and anti-social elements…but because you are in the opposition, you are opposing the Government…since you are opposing the Government of India you are an anti-national…” [link]
The above authoritarian remarks were made by the Chairperson of the Sikkim Pollution Control Board, during a public hearing conducted on September 18th 2006 for the Teesta III hydel power project in Sikkim, referring to all those protesting against large power projects on the Teesta river. These remarks by a government official raise serious doubts about the political system and the nature of democracy in the North Eastern State. The State has repeatedly referred to all those opposed to the slew of mega hydroelectric projects planned in the region as ‘anti-nationals,’ a standard lament that has an unmistakable whiff of totalitarianism. Similar sentiments were expressed by Jawaharlal Nehru, while speaking to villagers who were to be displaced by the Hirakud Dam in 1948: “If you are to suffer, you should suffer in the interest of the country.” This evoking of the ‘national interest’ to justify exploitation of natural resources for economic gain and to suppress local agitations and voices of resistance raises several important questions: who really owns and has rights over resources like land, water, rivers, forests and hills?
“MOU Virus”
The North East Himalayan region has been identified as “India’s future powerhouse.” The fast flowing perennial rivers with their steep slopes and gorges provide a lucrative opportunity for power developers and dam engineers to “produce cheap and plentiful power” by constructing mega hydroelectric projects. The Chief Minister of Sikkim said in his speech in 2001, “If utilised with wisdom, these rivers and streams could be converted into a white gold [sic].” A “gold rush” is on in Sikkim for hydroelectric projects, and hydro power today is “the biggest business going in the state,” notes Latha Jishunu in the Business Standard. The Sikkim Government has planned 29 mega hydel projects on the Teesta and its tributaries within Sikkim which are part of the Indian Government’s 50,000 MW Hydroelectric Initiative. The CAG (Comptroller and Auditor General of India) report of 2009 notes that, “[w]ith the liberalisation of the power policy by the Government of India, the State government, also opened the power sector to private developers, with the objective of rapidly harnessing the hydro power potential of the state and thereby gaining in a big way by exporting electricity to other power hungry states of the country.”
The Union Minister of State for Power, Jairam Ramesh, also raised concern about what he called the ‘MoU virus’ which was affecting States like Sikkim, referring to the very rapid pace at which agreements were being signed by these Governments with private hydropower companies. With the government bending over backwards to bring in private companies, entrepreneurs from across the country – many with no experience in the power sector – have rushed to the Himalayan state to set up hydel projects. The CAG also mentions that hydro power projects were handed over to private companies “at throwaway charges which compared very poorly with the charges imposed by all other hydro power States in the country.” Land acquisition, environment and forest clearances that normally take three to four years are done in two years. “We took up the project because the Sikkim government is proactive and quick in decision-making,” says Y.N Apparao, managing director of Teesta Urja Ltd, which was setting up the largest project in the state.
“Dams in Dzongu over our dead bodies”
Picture: Frontline, "Teesta's Tears"
“Dams in Dzongu will be built over our dead bodies,” proclaimed a banner which marked the 200th day, of the historic satyagraha organized by the Affected Citizens of Teesta (ACT). In 2007 members of the ACT, mainly those belonging to the Lepcha community, had taken to the streets of Gangtok and participated in 915 day relay hunger strike to save Dzongu, their sacred homeland near Mt. Kanchenjunga from being destroyed by mega-dams. It was one of the most inspiring youth-led campaigns, a peaceful non-violent protest which received both national and international attention because of the extraordinary courage and sacrifice of the protesters. They demanded that the government “duly recognise the sanctity of the Lepcha’s ancestral roots in Dzongu and safeguard it from greedy capitalism.” Their peaceful nonviolent protest was a fight for social justice, to oppose their unjust displacement from their homeland in the name of development or State ‘interest.’ The activists explain that “[w]e respect national interest and that of the State government but we are here to fight for our rights.” The river Teesta is not merely source of water but is considered to be the lifeline of Sikkim. The Lepcha community and their supporters were deeply concerned about what would happen to the free flow of the Teesta, and were protesting the dams on many grounds. Their protest narrative incorporated several issues such as ownership, tradition, culture, religion and concern for the environment, says Kerry Little in her paper Lepcha narratives. These young men, some who had to be hospitalized and tube-fed, were starving, risking their lives to save the river which was considered sacred by their community. They said they would rather “choke on the tubes and die” than let tunnels destroy their river and their sacred lands.
Beloved Children of Mother Nature (Mutanchi Rong Kup)
Mayel Lyang in the Lepcha language means ‘the land of Hidden paradise’ a ‘land blessed by God’, a land considered to be holy by the Lepchas who believe that the rivers and the sacred peaks of Mount Kanchendzonga in Dzongu are their places of origin and final resting. “In Mayel Lyang, the nature-worshipping Lepchas include every leaf, blade of grass, all creatures, and the water from the heavens, rivers and lakes in their prayers.” “It is where the largest tree is never cut down, the strongest deer is never hunted and wild orchids sprout aimlessly from the top of trees, making pink and purple bursts in the sky” describes Kerry Little. The culture, customs and traditions of the Lepchas are inextricably linked to nature and there are several rituals connected to the land, forests, mountains and lakes. Their ancient lore suggests a cohesive world in which gods, goddesses, people, animals and nature coexist and there are numerous myths and legends about the sacred mountains, peaks, rivers and caves. They continue to practice their traditional nature worship rituals alongside the Buddhist doctrine which they now follow.
In her examination of sacred landscapes of the Lepchas in Sikkim and referring to the sacred landscape of Tholung in Dzongu, sociologist Vibha Arora relates: “not a single leaf or a pebble can be taken away from this sacred area.” She says that the protests against dams in Dzongu are not merely on grounds of displacement but the fact that the region’s cultural and ethnic traditions are rooted in the river Teesta and its environs. Azuk Tamsangmoo Lepcha says that “Dzongu is a holy place, where our age old culture and traditions are still intact. We believe that our souls rest here after death. We will not tolerate any dislocation and threat to this place.” Lyangsong Tamsang-Lepcha writes meanwhile, that “[n]o sensible Lepcha in this world can sit silently, their hands folded, and look at Dzongu, the holy land of theirs, being defiled, raped, disgraced and dishonoured today.” On June 10th 2007 representatives of the Buddhist monasteries of north Sikkim resolved to unanimously support the activists plan to launch an indefinite hunger strike, since some sacred sites would be desecrated by the massive destruction of the landscape due to large scale construction activities. Athup Lepcha emphasises, “We don’t want to lose our Mayellyang, if it is desecrated then our culture becomes extinct!”
“People of the Ravine”
Dzongu is a mountainous terrain consisting of steep valleys and ravines where the numerous waterfalls and streams that feed the Rangyong and the Teesta rivers originate. It is a part of the ‘Kanchenjunga Landscape,” which has been described as one of the richest landscapes among the ‘Himalayan biodiversity hotspots.’ The region, which consists of dense subtropical forests, and is home to many endemic and endangered species of flora and fauna, borders the Kanchenjunga National Park. It also lies within an area recognized by UNESCO as the Kanchenjunga Biosphere reserve besides being designated as an ‘Important Bird Area.’ The Lepchas who inhabit these valleys and forests call themselves “Rong-Kup”- people of the ravine. Their main livelihood activity is a mixed farming system which includes agriculture, home gardens, horticulture, livestock rearing, and agro-forestry which provides sustenance to the local communities while preserving the biodiversity of the region. Known for their deep knowledge of ecology and botany, the Lepchas have a history of coexistence with nature and their religious beliefs restrain them from cutting trees, polluting lakes, destroying hills and cliffs. They believe that such activities would have unpleasant consequences and result in calamities or bloodshed. Being aware of the consequences that the construction of large dams would have on the ecologically and geologically sensitive landscape, the Lepchas for whom environment and religion are intertwined are also opposing dams in Dzongu on environmental grounds. Several scientists and experts have acknowledged the unique and rich biodiversity and the ecological significance of the region. According Dr Kunte, president of the Indian foundation for butterflies, Dzongu is an area where one would find most of the 650 identified species of butterflies of Sikkim. “The biodiversity of the entire region is at stake,” claims Dawa Lepcha who fears that the fragile ecology of Dzongu, will get destroyed because of the dams.
According to Shripad Dharmadhikary, The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) reports, mandatory for large projects rather than being honest assessments of the environmental impacts presuppose the building of the dam, and are the “shoddiest documents” around, in which “vital facts are ignored, and impacts downplayed.” The controversial Panan hydroelectric project is one of the most disputed projects proposed for Dzongu, as it lies within the area of the Kanchenjunga Biosphere reserve and is also dangerously close to the Kanchenjunga National Park. Some of the proposed tunnelling work for the dam is inside the buffer zone of the park. This project was granted environmental clearance in spite of the recommendations of the National Wildlife Action Plan which requires an area within 10 Km radius around sanctuaries and National Parks to be treated as no-go areas for such projects. Earlier the Teesta III project was granted environmental clearance despite being inside the Biosphere reserve and full-scale construction work was allowed to begin without the required wildlife clearance from the National Board for Wildlife. Predictably, there have been instances of endangered species being killed near some of the project sites. The EIA reports do a very good job of underplaying these impacts by claiming that the impacts due to extensive deforestation, high levels of noise due to blasting and tunnelling and indiscriminate dumping of excavated muck in the river and valleys would only be “temporary” and, “limited to the construction phase.” The recommended “mitigation measures” in these reports which include construction of “butterfly parks”, “compensatory afforestation” and documenting “traditional knowledge” are absurd considering the fact that losses to habitats and biodiversity are irreversible.
The Disappearing River
The Lepchas are concerned that the water from the sacred Rangyong, which they consider their holiest river, will be diverted into underground tunnels for the Panam Project in Dzongu. The run of the river dam projects being constructed in Sikkim involve diverting the river through tunnels and bypassing long stretches (approximately 20 km) of the natural course, before the water is released into the river at a downstream location. Upto 85-90% of the flow in the lean season will be diverted through tunnels. A cascade of projects along these rivers will mean that most of the river would essentially end up flowing in tunnels, and its natural course will dry up. The affected citizens of Teesta have aptly described this, stating that “[o]ur sacred Teesta is being converted into an underground river.” The significance of rivers in Lepcha mythology and folklore has been described by Kerry Little, “[n]arratives relating to the rivers of Sikkim flow through Lepcha folklore and a story about the uniting of the rivers Teesta and Rangit, features prominently in Lepcha marriage ceremonies.” It is believed that when a Lepcha dies the Mun (Lepcha priestess) carries his soul up the Rangyong river, a tributary of the Teesta which flows through Dzongu, all the way to the Mount Kanchendzonga, which believed to be the most sacred peak. The Lepchas fear that the diversion of sacred rivers through tunnels and making them flow underground would infringe upon their religious sentiments and beliefs and defile places of worship and ritual. If the Teesta IV project is allowed to be constructed it would mean that the last free flowing stretch of the Teesta river will also be diverted through tunnels. “The main river of Sikkim is disappearing underground. Is this development?” asks a member of the ACT.
Rivers are an integral part of a complex, dynamic system of interactions between land, water and biological life and serious concerns have been raised by environmentalists that the dams would result in the destruction of riverine ecology. The CAG (Comptroller and Auditor General) report of 2009 mentions that, “The creation of reservoirs, fluctuation in natural river discharge and the diversion of river waters through closed tunnels would completely change the ecological conditions of the river systems.” While referring to the Teesta V project it notes that, “About 23 km of the river Teesta between the dam site and the tail end of this project was diverted through tunnels. The fish species and other aquatic organisms along with stretch of river thus already suffered possible damages due to the changes in the flow of water.” Despite these evidences, the Sikkim Government continues to promote the ‘run-of-the river’ dam projects (which involve smaller submergence of land as compared to conventional storage dams) as being “environmentally benign.” “It is the most eco-friendly project,” says an official from the Sikkim Energy and Power Ministry. The Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) reports also make use of incredible arguments to justify construction of the dams. For instance the EIA report for the Teesta IV project first clearly spells out the likely disruption of aquatic ecosystem by saying that construction of the dam will lead to “habitat fragmentation, hamper the fish migration and pose serious threat to biota within the stretch…..Regular fluctuation in the water level will also disturb the biotic communities and would isolate many pools (spawning grounds of fish). These isolated pools cause high mortality of fish fry.” However it adds that that since construction of a dam downstream (Teesta V) have already blocked fish migration, and there are more dams being constructed upstream, “the likely impacts of the proposed project will be limited.” This line of reasoning tries to argue that the dams constructed so far have already killed the river and the aquatic ecosystem, so now that the damage is already done, let’s go ahead and dam the rest of it.
Uttani musa (Mountain Mouse)
Government documents and Carrying Capacity studies have cautioned that the onslaught of dams on the Teesta river is likely to be environmentally hazardous, and neither its fragile geology, prone to earthquakes and heavy landslides, nor its unique ecology can sustain projects of this magnitude. The Disaster Management section of CAG report mentioned that the projects “entailed extensive excavation, blasting, construction of mammoth water reservoirs, power houses and allied activities…[that puts] tremendous stress on the fragile environment of the State which could bring about unanticipated disasters and calamities…[threatening] tremendous loss of life and property besides long term damage to environment.” With several dams on the Teesta already constructed and many more underway, their grave impacts on the sensitive terrain, environment and people are already manifest. The people near the Teesta V dam site have been suffering due to the reduced flow of the river which has affected access to water and disrupted farming activities. A resident of the Singbel village was rendered homeless when his house cracked open as a result of continuous blasting and drilling of tunnels during dam construction. Similarly, an increased number of landslides and cracking of houses near other dam sites bring in the need for evacuation and resettlement of villages once the project work is already underway. But when questioned about the dangers of dams in a seismically sensitive zone the government officials seem indifferent and unconcerned “[n]o one can prove that people’s homes were damaged owing to the blasting. It could be for other reasons such as earthquakes or landslides.”
According to an ancient Lepcha myth, says sociologist Vibha Aurora, “an infuriated Teesta caused a deluge when he lost a race to his lover, the sacred river Rangit. In this ancient myth, the rest of Sikkim was flooded and all life perished.” Therefore every year the Lepcha’s pray to propitiate gods and spirits to ensure fertility of the land and maintain peace and environmental balance. She goes on to say that, in context of the Teesta hydel power protests, this myth has a renewed ecological relevance as it encodes an environmental wisdom that has sustained the Lepchas in this shifting, precarious landscape for centuries and reminds us that a furious Teesta is capable of merciless ecological destruction in the region. The CAG reports warn that “unless a robust disaster management plan is prepared…the State would suffer tremendous loss of life and property besides long term damage to the environment.” An RTI application by ACT revealed that 48 persons were killed during the construction of the Teesta V, and about 31 seriously injured, confirming the hazardous nature of work involved and the lack of sufficient safety measures. Despite all these evidences and warnings, the Sikkim government continues to insist that the projects are harmless showing a callous disregard towards both the environment and safety of the people. With their bulldozers cutting up slopes, slicing through hills, digging deep inside the mountains and drilling tunnels and channels to divert the river, the power companies in Sikkim have earned themselves the name “uttani musa” (or ‘mountain mouse’ in the Nepali language).
The Vanishing Tribe
Another important concern is that construction of dams in Dzongu will lead to the erosion of the unique Lepcha culture. The Lepchas, an indigenous tribal community are also Sikkim’s earliest inhabitants but over the past two centuries, they have been outnumbered by other communities who migrated into Sikkim, and their population is approximately 40,000, less than 7 per cent of the total population of the state. Lepchas are now a minority in their own homeland, a dying race, often referred to as the vanishing tribe. Vibha Arora says that Dzongu represents “the last bastion of their cultural heritage and the only place in the region where they feel free to follow their distinctive religious and cultural traditions.” The region of Dzongu which consists of many villages having a total population of 7000 Lepchas, is protected under Article 371-F of the Constitution and is recognized as a reserved area for the indigenous Lepcha tribe. No one is allowed to enter the reserve without a special permit from the government. The intense local opposition by the locals to mega projects in the vicinity of this area is triggered partly by the concern that it would involve large influx of migrant workers, who they fear would outnumber the Lepcha population and dilute and destroy the Lepcha culture. “With just one project, we will be outnumbered. Our culture is under threat,” says Dawa. In a letter to the government The ACT had also cited the Article 7 Part – II of the declaration that stated, “Indigenous peoples have the collective and individual right not to be subject to ethnocide and cultural genocide.” “If the project is allowed to come [up] the Lepcha will be in [a] museum.” says Gyatso lepcha.
Local Pain for National Gain
The government tries to paint a win-win picture by touting the hydel power projects as “harbingers of immense wealth, prosperity and economic development of the region” and the rationale is “to utilize its available natural resource to attain self-reliance…bring about socio-economical upliftment of the Sikkimese people and…generate adequate revenue for the State to usher it to the 21st century.’ One needs to critically assess if grandiose schemes such as mega hydro-projects are appropriate for the region considering that a “comprehensive options assessment of water and energy resource development” was never carried out. Neither was a basin wide understanding of the ecology of the rivers and the dependence of local communities on them undertaken before the dam projects were initiated. One also needs to ask if the present development “needs” have been formulated through transparent, democratic and participatory processes. This becomes especially critical when it comes to decisions which involve the irreversible exploitation of resources vital to sustenance for short term gains or profits. As any kind of public debate and participation are “dangerous” for the promoters and builders of these projects, the public hearing, a platform for people to voice their opinions against the proposed projects has become a farce. Those opposing the project are rarely given the opportunity to speak and anti-dam protestors are labelled as anti-development or anti-state and accused of “threatening democracy and peace and tranquillity in Sikkim.”
If one were to look at the processes guiding the development of dams in Sikkim over the past few years it is evident that the hydropower corporations were supported by the government in their endeavour to subvert the environmental clearance process. The Government awarded projects to private developers at “throwaway charges” to reap financial and political gain while they were in power and almost all projects were given environmental clearance despite local opposition and ecological considerations. The State Government also made desperate attempts to make MoEF overturn its decision to disallow dams in certain ecologically sensitive regions in the State, in spite of the recommendations of the CISMHE carrying capacity study. The fact that the State is acting solely in the interest of private developers is also glaringly evident in a letter from the Energy and Power Department, Govt. of Sikkim, to ACT, in which argued that any action to stop the Panan Hydro-electric project will cause “severe losses” to the Company, in this case the Himagiri Hydro Energy Pvt. Ltd., as they had invested “huge amount of money and other resources” for the project, and also to the State, as it will have to compensate the Company for its losses. Also, says the letter, such a precedent would create a “negative environment” for hydropower development projects in other parts of Sikkim.” When the same company, Himagiri Hydro Energy Private Limited bought land for setting a colony for migrant workers in Dzongu near the dam site of Panan HEP, in blatant violation of the environment clearance condition, instead of appropriate action being taken against the company, 43 local protestors were arrested and had to spend three months in jail. The rush to development has put strain on democracy; democratic processes of consultation and the freedom of people to protest and voice their opinions.
Meaningful Development not Destructive Development
For decades, the Lepchas had worked their land, but the failure of the cardamom cash crop was responsible for their increased dependence on other sources of income. Local people who have land but no money obviously find the lure of hard cash difficult to resist, some are ill informed or gullible and believe that the dam projects would bring benefits like employment [or jobs], education, business and better infrastructure and make their lives more prosperous. Others are victimized and afraid of the government, but a large majority are simply unaware of the impacts of dams or the environmental and cultural price they would have to pay in the long term if they surrender their livelihood for monetary compensation or temporary and menial jobs. The anti dam protesters value the sanctity of the land and river above short term economic gains and believe that while development is important resources vital to sustenance need to be safeguarded. The concept of a Biosphere reserve advocates a reconciliation of the objectives of conservation of biological and cultural diversity and socio-economic development and the need to demonstrate innovative approaches to sustainable development based on local community efforts. Besides warning about the dangers of dams, the CISME carrying capacity report also recommended local development measures such as reviving agriculture, organic farming and minor irrigation projects, infrastructure for floriculture, improving schools and health care facilities, protecting biodiversity and endemic species.
Picture: Action Aid, "Damming Northeast India"
One good alternative that has considerable local support is eco-tourism, that is emerging as a source of work for young enterprising Lepchas. The breathtaking landscape of Dzongu, with its wild flowing rivers, dense forested valleys, remarkable wildlife, glacial streams and waterfalls, hot springs known for their healing properties, sacred caves, groves, monasteries, and magnificent views of Mount Kanchenjunga gives it tremendous potential for sustainable, cultural and ecological tourism with the participation of local communities. In December last year, the royal family of Norway visited Dzongu, and stayed in a home-stay at Passingdang village. They were delighted with the quiet and serene beauty of the place and praised the hospitable village tourism in Dzongu. This has served as a huge morale boost for the other villagers who are also looking forward in promoting the same and getting involved. The proposed dams in the region which threaten to tunnel the river and drastically alter the landscape will destroy any such possibility. The educated younger generations who were the key participants in the anti-dam struggles are often referred to as anti-development but they have their own plans for Dzongu. They want to return there and start new businesses in organic farming and eco-tourism; build good schools so that the next generation could be well educated without having to leave Dzongu. They are questioning the development model which is being promoted by the state. “Should development mean that their culture, identity and all that is sacred to them is subsumed?” A banner of the Affected Citizens of Teesta (ACT) during its 900 day satyagraha in 2007-9 against the rush of dams in Sikkim read: “Meaningful development, not destructive development.”
We want Dzongu to be Left Alone
Picture: Kerry Little, "Lepcha Narratives"
According to Athup Lepcha, the word Lepcha originates from the union of two Lepcha words Lep and Tsa which means to belong to a place.’ Geographer Maitreyee Choudhury has documented the high level of awareness among the Lepchas about “their rights as indigenous people, including the right to self determination, protection of from cultural ethnocide and the right to control, use and oppose the alienation of natural resources.” Even though the Lepchas often describe themselves as shy nature-lovers, the prospect of losing their land and culture energised many to take up activism and fight a long, sustained battle against dams in Dzongu and Sikkim. They are fighting a battle to let their rivers to flow freely, to prevent the irreversible destruction of biological and cultural diversity and the plundering and polluting of their resources and resisting the transformation of a common natural resource into a commodity. It is a democratic mode of protest demanding environmental and social justice. “We will die in our efforts, but we will not see our land being plundered by capitalists” were one of the protesters’ inspiring words during their historic hunger strike which lasted for more than 90 days. Despite being arrested, harassed, abused, criticised and “in some cases actually starved of sustenance” they come across as morally strong everyday heroes who continue their battle to save Dzongu and the Teesta river, “uncompromising and determined to see their Dzongu remain their sacred homeland that is the life-force of identity for Lepchas everywhere.”
Save Dzongu 