Protests over use of World Bank aid in MP wildlife sanctuary

US human rights activists are protesting that World Bank funds are being used to establish a wildlife sanctuary in Madhya Pradesh that allegedly will displace about 35,000 people.

The Semarsot sanctuary ''is yet another joint project between the Indian government and the World Bank that will wreak havoc on local populations,'' said Anuradha Mittal, the policy director at the San Francisco-based Institute for Food and Development Policy.

The Semarsot area also stretches over 43,000 hectares of the Surguja district bordering Bihar and would directly result in the displacement of 51 villages, according to IFDP. Approximately 85 per cent of the people who would be affected are adivasis.

The World Bank, however, denies it is directly funding the building of the wildlife sanctuary. If Semarsot involves involuntary displacement, it would violate the World Bank's forestry project agreement with Madhya Pradesh, said Ian Hill, manager of the project.

The project involves a World Bank loan of about $ 200 million over 10 years to the state's forestry service to ''improve incentives for forest management, biodiversity conservation, and tree cultivation.'' The project's stated objectives include taking ''special account of the interests of tribal peoples and other disadvantaged groups.''

The IFDP maintains that funds from the forestry project meant for personnel training and equipment are going to the Semarsot sanctuary through the state government.

As the debate over funding continues, more than 5,000 adivasi families have been given ''eviction notices,'' says IFDP. ''Tens of thousands of people will be dispossessed of their traditional lands and resources without any realistic perspective for proper resettlement if the proposed sanctuary is completed,'' Mittal declared.

Under the Indian Wildlife Protection Act, villagers affected by wildlife sanctuaries are allowed to either claim compensation, have their land omitted from the sanctuary or continue to live within the sanctuary in consultation with the forest service.

Yet, this process is being undermined by India's urge to quickly push development projects forward, according to the IFDP.

Under a recent Supreme Court order, all procedures surrounding protected areas have to be finished within one year. ''This move could be disastrous for both local communities and the protected areas,'' Mittal said, adding that a consultative process, fully involving the villagers, could have been carried out to determine the future of the sanctuary if this court decision was not in place.

While the IFDP is calling for a halt to the development of the sanctuary, it is working with local communities and the non-governmental organisation, Kalpavriksha in India, to advocate joint management of the protected areas in such a way that both the natural habitat as well as local livelihoods are protected.

''For centuries adivasis have been living in harmony with the forests and wildlife -- industrialisation and development without local participation, no the adivasis, are the problem,'' Mittal said.

The IFDP says this issue represents a larger trend of 'top down' development projects in which local populations are not involved in the decision-making process.

''It is mainly the Adivasi population and other economically vulnerable people of Indian society that have been falling victim to large-scale displacement as a result of development projects including the construction of dams, mines, industries and wildlife sanctuaries during the past decades,'' said Mittal.

Indian critics say the World Bank recently began investing in forestry and conservation projects to improve their public image in the state. It's reputation was tainted by allegations of human rights abuses and environmental contamination of thermal power plants it funded in the Singrauli region.

When people were first notified in 1986 of the Semarsot project, strong local protests followed and the project was not pursued further until 10 years later. After a second notification was issued in October last year, affected people organised a movement called the Jan Sangharsh Samiti.

A demonstration of 29,000 people was held at the district town of Ambikapur in December. Later, adivasi representatives met with Chief Minister Digivijay Singh without reaching any tangible solution.

After a series of hunger strikes and demonstrations in June, a group of 12 leaders of the movement was allegedly attacked and badly beaten by supporters of state forest service employees, the IFDP claims. The victims were allegedly denied medical assistance and adivasi delegates are still calling on various state officials to investigate the incident.

UNI