[<<The allegations of bias now pale in comparison with the new revelations
that suggest a breach in the confidentiality of a judicial order, and fuel
suspicions regarding the integrity of due process>>]

https://thetimestamil.com/2018/12/16/did-vedanta-pr-firm-access-ngt-order-before-publication-how-deep-is-the-rot-nityanand-jayaraman/?fbclid=IwAR01nq8x2AyPZQkpieK-3TyIITuHTDL8wtaKJMUwf_MMoY6WtagoXQk9Q6g

Did Vedanta PR firm access NGT order before publication: how deep is the
rot?: Nityanand Jayaraman
BY த டைம்ஸ் தமிழ்
திசெம்பர் 16, 2018

Leave a Comment on Did Vedanta PR firm access NGT order before publication:
how deep is the rot?: Nityanand Jayaraman

The allegations of bias now pale in comparison with the new revelations
that suggest a breach in the confidentiality of a judicial order, and fuel
suspicions regarding the integrity of due process
Nityanand Jayaraman

Evidence released by Anti-Sterlite People’s Movement spokesperson Fatima in
Thoothukudi today suggests that persons close to Vedanta may have had
access to a “DRAFT” version of the NGT order well before the actual order
was made public. Fatima has said she would file a police complaint seeking
a probe into the matter, and has urged the Government to do the same.

The revelation lends strength to allegations on social media that Vedanta
had illegally compromised judicial confidentiality and integrity.

“This is a very serious breach of judicial process. If it is proven that
Sterlite’s PR agency accessed the order even before it was pronounced, it
will indicate how far the company has gone to protect itself,” said Justice
D. Hariparanthaman, a retired judge of the Madras High Court.

The evidence emerged after a “draft” version of a Microsoft Word file
containing the order circulated by media people during the early afternoon
of 15.12.2018 was analysed for information regarding its origins. The file,
reportedly circulated by Sterlite’s private PR agency, was titled “Final
Order of VEDANTA DRAFT ORDER-15.12.2018.docx.” A closer look at its
analytics revealed that it was created by an author named “NGT PA” at
07.39.00 that day and modified instantly by author named Aabhas Pandya.
(See Screenshot.jpg)

Coincidentally, one Mr. Aabhas Pandya also happens to be the Senior Group
Head at Adfactors, a PR firm that claims to specialise in public relations,
media relations and crisis communications among other things. Adfactors
manages Vedanta’s account, and Pandya is listed as contact person in
Vedanta communiques. https://www.marketscreener.com/
…/Vedanta-Srinivasan-Venkat…/

The Delhi police must verify if the Aabhas Pandya mentioned in the
analytics of the .docx file is the same as the head of Vedanta’s PR agency.

A PDF version of the order began doing the rounds in social media at around
2 p.m. However, this file too was titled “Final Order of VEDANTA DRAFT
ORDER-15.12.2018.pdf.” This file was also created by author named “NGT PA”
but at 08.01.17+00.00 which is Coordinated Universal Time for 1.31 p.m.
Indian time. That is around the time that the order was uploaded on the
website.

RESTING IN CONFIDENCE

Vedanta was clearly confident of a favourable order despite the findings of
illegalities by the Agarwal Committee. Within hours of the NGT order, a
ship carrying 25,000 tonnes of copper concentrate for Sterlite Copper
arrived in VOC Port in Thoothukudi from Peru, triggering speculation that
the long arms of Vedanta had breached the judicial process. Not only that,
the final order is starkly different from the report of the Committee.
Committee’s findings have been misrepresented, and recommendations
substantially changed in a manner than helps Vedanta.

Take, for instance, what the Order says on the matter of violations in the
manner the copper slag has been handled:
Para 52 of the Order reads: “With regard to (ii), copper slag is not found
to be hazardous nor has been found to be obstructing the flow even on visit
of the site by the Committee. Physical barrier could be directed to be
constructed for the entire area.”

This is in direct contrast to the findings of the Committee, which noted
that the river was dry at the time of its visit.

Para 22(i) of the Committee report states:
“As per our naked eyes, the slag was dumped alongside the bank of the river
Uppar. The river was dry at this moment, but according to the Collector and
others, this dry bed gets filled up with the storm water during the monsoon
season which occurs from October to December.”

Similarly, adverse findings by the Committee on matters that would have
delayed or defeated the prospects of reopening the factory have been
neutralised in the Order.

On the matter of greenbelt, the Committee found that “there was hardly any
greenery inside the factory premises and that it was a concrete jungle. .
.” and recommended that the “Appellant company should be directed that they
shall develop a green belt of 25 mtrs width around the battery limits of
the factory.”

Fact aside that this requirement has been in violation since 1995 when it
was first imposed as a license condition, the NGT has done away with the
recommendation on this front by stating incorrectly that the matter is
covered by the 2013 Supreme Court judgement.

NGT’s treatment of two other recommendations of the Committee are
noteworthy. Recommendations “s” and “t” of the Committee state that the
chimney stack should either be increased to the legally mandated height or
emissions made compliant by bringing production down to match stack height.
Recommendation “u” directs the company to transport its copper ore
concentrate in closed conveyance or a pipe conveyor.

While implementation of these recommendations would have offered some
degree of protection to citizens, the NGT refuses to engage with them and
instead refers the matter to a joint committee of TNPCB and CPCB which will
once again take a view on the matter after giving “due hearing to the
appellant.” Once again, the principles of natural justice are applied to
Vedanta without a reciprocal offer to the citizens of Thoothukudi.


OPEN COURT CONCEPT

On 10.12.2018, the NGT announced that its order would be uploaded on its
website on or before 17.12.2018. That in itself was irregular. Section
23(1) and (2) of NGT Rules require that “Every order of the Tribunal shall
be signed and dated by the Members constituting the sitting of the
Tribunal, which pronounced the order” and that “The order shall be
pronounced in open court.” http://www.greentribunal.gov.in/FileDisplay.aspx…

While the NGT has some leeway in creating its own procedures, the Open
Court Concept is a constitutional principle binding even the Supreme Court.
Article 145(4) of the Constitution states that “No judgement shall be
delivered by the Supreme Court save in open court. . .”

The matter was not listed for hearing on 15.12.2018 – the date of uploading
of the order. Neither has it been listed in the Causelist for hearing on
17.12.2018 suggesting that the order will not be read in open court.

This lapse is not merely technical in nature. In uploading the order on
Saturday during the vacation of the Supreme Court without the benefit of an
open court pronouncement, parties and interveners have effectively lost
their right to request a stay on the operationalising of the order until
they have an opportunity to approach the higher court.

The NGT’s handling of this highly sensitive case has come under severe
criticism with civil society interveners alleging bias, favoured treatment
to Vedanta and violation of principles of natural justice. The Tribunal
headed by Justice A.K. Goel refused to grant interveners any status to
present arguments and denied them access to the report of the Committee
appointed by it. An application by intervener Fatima seeking reconstitution
of the Committee with a retired judge of impeccable integrity to replace
Justice (Retd) Tarun Agarwal who was named as a beneficiary in the
Ghaziabad PF scam was ignored by the Tribunal. The order disposes all
applications of the interveners without hearing.

However, the allegations of bias now pale in comparison with the new
revelations that suggest a breach in the confidentiality of a judicial
order, and fuel suspicions regarding the integrity of due process.

At the very least, Vedanta and Adfactors have some explaining to do. At
worst, the very order of the NGT is thrown in question.

Nityanand is a Chennai-based writer and social activist, and has been a
part of the campaign to hold Vedanta accountable for Sterlite Copper’s
pollution in Thoothukudi.

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to greenyouth+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send an email to greenyouth@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to