By Simpreet Singh
Development activity of any sort, essentially involves the three
questions of what, how and for whom? What development means, how it is
to be carried out? And for whom it is to be carried out? The protests
all over the country against various projects, be it SEZs, dams,
highways or industries are specifically because of the reasons of not
having a consensus on the above three aspects and instead pushing ahead
the projects by ignoring and bypassing the views and opinion of those
who are to pay cost in terms of their land, livelihood, lives and
culture. Dharavi’s redevelopment, sadly is, another example of the same.
The government of Maharashtra plans to redevelop Dharavi, the so called
largest slum of Asia, spread across more than 500 acres of land.
Dharavi produces goods worth 4000 crores annually, from leather
products that are exported across the world or the papads that are
consumed across the households in this country. The plan is to
redevelop the whole area by constructing high rise buildings for which
global tenders are to be invited. It is climed that the project is
worth 9500 crores.
The notification for Dharavi Redevelopment Project (DRP) was issued on
19th January and afterwards suggestions/ objections were invited on the
same. It is worth mentioning that this process of consultation is a
statutory binding on the State as per the provisions of Maharashtra
Regional Town Planning Act(MRTP) 19 . Though the hearing on the
objections were started in the second week of June the Expression of
Interest(EOI) document which has the cost of Rs 1 lakh was issued on 30
May. Those who participate in the process of Public Hearings are aware
that most of them end up only as mere formalities and nothing more. But
at least as a banality the formalities are undertaken. But in this case
even the formality was violated. The EOI could only have been issued if
the project profile was clear and decided upon. Since an effective
hearing requires due application of mind and that could lead to
fundamental changes to the project parameters and profiles. However
with the EIO passed already before hearing, then what is the meaning of
calling a hearing? This question is to be answered by those undertaking
the project ahead. They owe an answer.
After the 74th constitutional amendment, urban planning has been
delegated to the domain of urban self governance bodies. But the State
governments have been encroaching over their right under several
pretexts. In case of Dharavi Redevelopment, they took the excuse of
section 37 AA of the MRTP Act, which gives power to the state
government to draw development plans for an area in case of issues of
public interest are involved. So DRP can be held valid only if it
stands the test of Public Interest. As per the claims of the Project
proponents, the project will provide for the rehabilitation of some
57,000 families. Surprisingly, the Authorities responsible for the
implementation of the project have not been able to provide the basis
of such a figure. When was the survey conducted, what is the number of
total resident families, number of commercial units etc. As per the
Census data, the population of Dharavi is 8 lakhs, meaning 1 lakh 33
thousand families. So in simple terms it means that redeveloping
Dharavi would leave more than 65,000 families home less. Now any
project that displaces more than it rehabilitates cannot be termed to
be in Public Interest. Any person of sound mind won’t dare to say that!
Our politicians and bureaucrats might!
Surprisingly the earlier rules provided for the mandatory 70 % consent
of the residents for approval of any project. This has been done away
with, in the DRP. On the one hand, we hear every day of people’s
participation and decentralisation, in reality every rule that provided
space for people’s participation is being done away with. Just few kms
away from Dharavi is the office of District Planning Officer, who has
been delegated with the responsibility of formulating the annual plans
for the district, which includes Dharavi. And this process involves the
participation of the local councillors, MLA.s and local residents. The
office surprisingly is unaware of the planning process undertaken for
DRP, as is case of the over all planning of urban development. Though
District Planning Committee has constitutional mandate under the 74th
constitutional amendment, but who cares!
The re-development of Dharavi falls in the line of the over all make
over of the Mumbai city. In 2004, Bombay First a NGO floated by
corporates entrusted McKinsey International of bringing out a Vision
Mumbai report which talked of Shangisation of Mumbai. One of the thrust
areas of the report was slums. It recommended reducing the slum
population of Mumbai to les than 10 per cent of the total population by
2011. But what was not mentioned was the way to achieve this.
Followingly, the state government went on a reckless demolition drive
which rendered more than 3 lakh people home less. This illegal eviction
drive was challenged and resisted by the affected slum dwellers, but
the drive has received fresh impetus with the National Urban Renewal
Mission and the mentioning of Mumbai to be developed as a Global
Financial Centre in this year's Union Budget. The plans are to develop
Mumbai as a hub for the Global financial players to provide financial
services. A High Powered Expert Committee's Report talks of it in great
details. One of the impetus of the Report is to over haul magnificently
the infrastructure of the city. The Report recommends of equipping
Mumbai for this with world class infrastructural facilities, in order
to attract around 50,000 high level people to be employed by global
financial firms.
Now where does Dharavi fits in this scheme? Dharavi today actually lies
in the heart of the city and is the only left vast tract of land that
can be made available for carrying out fresh construction activities.
The tragedy of Dharavi is, that it is in close proximity to the Bandra
Kurla Complex (BKC), the International Financial & Business Centre.
With the proposal of making Mumbai as a Global Finance Centre they
would like to start with the expansion of BKC, for which Dharavi is the
next location. Any way, the other area around, that is the slums of
nearby Kurla area have already been evicted under the pretext of Mithi
River development and huge area has been made available for the
development of corporate sector.
No one would disagree to the notion of redeveloping Dharavi. But
definitely there would be different views of how to go about it. And
the state government with not consulting its residents has given rise
to contestations. Manik Prabhavati, a local activist says "our
politicians are eager to permit the global companies to set there base
in Dharavi, at the same time are evicting thousands of units of self
employment that not only have a turn over of 4000 crores but are also a
source of employment to lakhs of local residents. And for these
activities the locals demand no concessions from the government, as our
corporate houses are availing today under Special Economic Zones. Can
our government just give us the concession of leaving us as we are?"
The questions raised by the protesting residents are simple and similar
to those raised by other project affected. Do they have any rights over
the resources they live on? In this case it is land. Is it not
necessary for our governments to consult its citizens? Or are we
subjects & not citizens. Does they have any share in the
development process that is being carried out? Or they just fit in the
definition of Project Affected People and be contended with
rehabilitation packages and not rights. Do they also keep silence and
let their houses, livelihoods and lives be evicted and destroyed in the
name of larger public interest? The greed of global bidders is
encroaching upon the needs of the local. The State needs to check it
out, in its own interest.
(Simpreet Singh, based in Mumbai, is an activist with Ghar Bachao Ghar
Banao Andolan-NAPM and can be reached at gbgbandolan@gmail.com)