Nasheman

India's largest selling Urdu weekly, now also in English

You are here: Home / Archives for Greenpeace

Greenpeace India’s FCRA registration cancelled by government

by

greenpeace

New Delhi: The Centre has cancelled the FCRA licence of Greenpeace India, the NGO claimed in a statement that was confirmed by the home ministry. Loss of FCRA licence means the NGO will not be able to accept foreign donations.

“The Greenpeace legal team has learnt that the Ministry of Home Affairs has notified the Delhi high court that Greenpeace’s FCRA registration has been cancelled. This news comes just a day before a scheduled hearing at the Delhi high court that was examining the merits of MHA’s arbitrary action,” the NGO’s statement said.

Interim co-executive director of Greenpeace India, Vinuta Gopal, in a statement said that Greenpeace will continue its campaigning undeterred, and “is in fact launching a new creative campaign” to highlight the nationwide crackdown on civil liberties.

“The cancelling of our FCRA registration is the government’s latest move in a relentless onslaught against the community’s right to dissent. It is yet another attempt to silence campaigns for a more sustainable future and transparency in public processes. Cutting access to our foreign funding may be a desperate attempt to get us to cease our work, but the MHA probably didn’t count on our having an amazing network of volunteers and supporters who have helped us continue our work despite the government crackdown. Since the majority of our funding comes from Indian citizens, most of our work can indeed continue.

We are responding to this latest melodrama by launching a new creative online campaign and are confident that people will show they are ready to fight back in style, and send a clear message to those in power: you just can’t muzzle dissent in a democracy,” Gopal said.

MHA had frozen bank accounts of Greenpeace besides issuing it a show-cause notice on April 9.

(Agencies)

Sexual harassment, rape allegations rock Greenpeace

by

Greenpeace

New Delhi: Environment rights NGO Greenpeace India could be in for more trouble as an ex-staffer has gone public with allegations of rape and sexual harassment by her colleagues.

The organisation’s inaction against the perpetrators has spurred more female ex-employees to come out with similar accusations. Now, the NGO is at the receiving end with activists lambasting the organisation’s irresponsible handling of the cases.

Recently, Greenpeace was in the news after the government froze it’s accounts for non-compliance of norms. The Delhi High Court, however, released two of its accounts so that it could function.

In an article published on a web forum last week, an ex-employee (name withheld) of Greenpeace alleged that she had to leave her job in 2013 after being sexually harassed and raped by her colleagues.

Narrating her ordeal, she said that it started a year after she had joined the NGO at their Bengaluru office. The first incident happened during an official trip in October 2012. “I got a call from a senior colleague at 11 pm, asking me to vacate my room and insisting that I sleep in his suite. In another incident, he approached me physically despite my discomfort, insisted on force-feeding me birthday cake,’ she told IANS.

Though she registered a written complaint with the HR manager, she did not receive any verbal or written communication from the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) of the organisation, which looks into sexual harassment cases. To her shock, she learnt that the person was a serial offender and no action had been taken against him despite his misbehaviour with two other female employees.

However, she said, she was blamed for registering the complaint. “Once in an official meeting, in my absence, two senior employees indulged in character assassination against me. Even some female colleagues, part of the ICC, made me feel that I was at fault, that I didn’t know how to ‘set boundaries’,” she said.

However, matters came to a head in 2013. “It was after a party, when a male colleague whom I knew quite well found me unconscious and raped me. You cannot imagine the pain and fear I went through. I was terrified to speak and I knew even if I had, no one in this organisation would come to my aid. I did not have the strength to report my rape, neither to the police, nor to my employers. How could I, when the processes had failed me once already?” she asked. Traumatised, she left the NGO after a few months.

She said it took her long to overcome the incident, and finally, she decided to tell her story through a Facebook post in February this year. Immediately after her post, Greenpeace issued an apology on their website and promised her to re-investigate the case in an adequate manner. Admitting the lax attitude in dealing with the case in 2012, the statement said, “The victim deserves both an apology and a meticulous examination of what happened.”

However, the victim pointed out that the NGO’s subsequent actions exposed their empty talk. “The ICC, which convened in March, recommended the termination of the offender, but the executive director overrode the decision on some pretext and the only thing I received was a written apology from the molester,’’ she said.

Supporting the claims of the victim, another ex-senior manager Reema Ganguly, who was a part of the ICC, told IANS that she quit Greenpeace in May after executive director Samit Aich overrode the committee’s recommendation. “The committee’s suggestion of terminating the molester was overturned by the executive director, and they dismantled the committee which was only three months old, whereas the duration (for such a committee) is for three years. It was very clear that the committee is an eyewash by the NGO,’’ said Ganguly.

However, Aich defended the decision to dismantle the committee. ”We came to know that the committee decisions were leaked to many people in the office. So I sought legal opinion on this and I was told that since its leaked, the decision stands invalid. So we dissolved the committee and reconstituted it,” said Aich.

When asked why they did not follow the committee’s decision of terminating the offender, Aich said a strong warning was given to the person. “I have given a strong warning to the person and as a result, he has put in his papers. I admit that there have been flaws in our earlier system and we will tighten our disciplinary actions in future,” he added.

Reacting to the allegations, Programme Director for Greenpeace India, Divya Raghunandan, told IANS that the former employees had raised some valid issues and that they will investigate it in a “serious manner”. Acknowledging that there were flaws in the earlier system, Raghunandan said, “When we revisited the cases, we felt that it should have been handled in a better way.”

Asserting that they were re-evaluating the overall procedures for handling complaints of sexual harassment, she said that the employee in question had resigned. “We have reconstituted the ICC and ordered an audit into the old cases. The implicated employee has put in his papers already,’’ she said.

However, activists and former employees question the failure of the NGO in punishing a serial offender and protecting him for years.

Holding the executive director of Greenpeace India responsible for the shabby handling of the cases, Kavita Krishnan, Secretary of the All India Progressive Women’s Association, said that the events had tarnished the image of the NGO. “Greenpeace failed to stand by their promise of punishing the offender. They disbanded a committee, which recommended punishment for the molester. The NGO is muzzling voices of dissent. They have stretched the cases for so many years. The punishment has to be spelt out clearly,’’ Krishnan said adding that they have written to Greenpeace International and were waiting for their response to act further.

Voicing similar concerns, Usha Saxena, a former employee, alleged that she was forced to quit Greenpeace because she took a stand against the rampant cases of harassment in the NGO. Saxena, who joined Greenpeace in 2009, said that her protests against sexist jokes and remarks fell on deaf ears. “I filed a misconduct complaint against senior HR director for making discriminatory and threatening remarks about my gender, my age and ordering me to seek ‘psychological counselling’. For that, I was bullied out in 2013,’’ Saxena told IANS.

Another ex-staffer (name withheld) also said that she was harassed by the same person implicated in the first incident. She said she resigned in March 2015 after inaction by the NGO. “He made some objectionable comments in front of many senior colleagues, including the executive director. No one reacted, rather they were all amused. “Though she registered a complaint with the HR Department the next day, it met the same fate as the previous ones,” she told IANS. She also said she would take further legal action if the offender is not punished.

(IANS)

Greenpeace activist barred from entering India

by

Expulsion of Australian activist despite having visa is government’s latest attempt to stifle free speech, group says.

The government has previously frozen bank accounts belonging to the organisation and banned activists from travelling [AFP]

The government has previously frozen bank accounts belonging to the organisation and banned activists from travelling [AFP]

by Al Jazeera

An Australian member of Greenpeace has been prevented from entering India without explanation, according to the environmentalist lobby group’s Indian arm.

Aaron Gray-Block was not allowed to enter the country on Saturday despite having all relevant visas and documents needed to enter, the group said, adding the Australian was not officially deported despite being put on a flight back to Kuala Lumpur.

“There is absolutely no reason why one of its staff members should be treated in such an arbitrary way, and we expect the Ministry of Home Affairs to offer a full explanation,” said Divya Raghunandan, the programme director for Greenpeace India.

If confirmed, the incident will be the latest episode in a dispute between the Indian government under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Greenpeace.

Activist Priya Pillai was prevented from boarding a flight to London in January and had a travel ban placed on her until it was overturned by a court in March.

In April, the Indian Ministry of Home Affairs banned the group’s domestic branch from accepting donations from abroad after accusing the group of not declaring transactions, and in May, bank accounts belonging to the group were shut down over the same issue.

At the time, Nalin Kohli, a spokesman for the ruling BJP party, told Al Jazeera that Greenpeace was not following the provisions of the law and did not disclose how they obtained their funds.

Greenpeace says it is being targeted by the Indian government over its activism.

“Denying entry to a Greenpeace employee with a valid visa is yet further proof of the extent to which the Indian government is prepared to go in violating Greenpeace’s right to freedom of expression under international law and under India’s Constitution,” a statement by the group said.

Rahul Gandhi backs Greenpeace, meets activist Priya Pillai and others

by

Rahul-Gandhi

New Delhi: Opening another front against the Narendra Modi Government, Rahul Gandhi on Thursday met members of civil society including Greenpeace activist Priya Pillai, who had a running feud with NDA dispensation and expressed solidarity with their struggle.

Opening another front against theNarendra Modi Government, Rahul Gandhi on Thursday met members of civil society including Greenpeace activist Priya Pillai, who had a running feud withNDA dispensation and expressed solidarity with their struggle.

“Rahul Gandhi expressed full solidarity with the people’s struggle to safeguard hard-won Constitutional freedoms.

“A wide cross-section of Civil Society Leaders met Rahul Gandhi on the issue of BJP Govt’s continuing attack on Freedom of Speech & Dissent,” the twitter handle of Rahul’s office said on the microblogging site after the meeting.

Pillai, a Greenpeace senior campaigner was “offloaded” at Delhi airport on January 11 from a flight to London where she was scheduled to make a presentation before British MPs regarding alleged human rights violation at Mahan in Madhya Pradesh.

The incident had happened a few months after the blocking of funds to Greenpeace by the Home Ministry. The issue had led to a huge controversy.

A joint press release by the members of the civil society said that they met Gandhi and expressed concern about “attack” by the government on their freedom and autonomy and right to dissent.

Besides Pillai, RTI activist Nikhil Dey from MKSS, Ravi Nair, South Asia Human Rights Documentation Centre, Tapan Bose, South Asia Forum For Human Rights, M J Vijayan, General Secretary, Programme for Social Action (PSA), Rajendra Ravi, National Alliance of People’s Movements and Jarjum Ete, President of All India Union of Forest Working People(AIUFWP) met the Congress Vice President.

In the interactive session, Gandhi assured the members of civil society that the Congress Party would be in the vanguard of defending and enhancing all the fundamental fights and directive principles enshrined in the Indian Constitution.

“He said that he shared the concerns raised by the delegation on democracy and dissent being curbed,” the release said.

Their meeting with Rahul is the first in a series of meetings with all political parties “not in alliance with the BJP-led NDA” and seeks to explore commonalities of how civil society across India can encourage a broad anti-authoritarian, pro-poor, pro-environment platform, the activists said.

The civil society members, many of whom alleged that from “draconian” changes in the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act and its authoritative misuse, to attack on Human rights defender and environmental activists, the

Modi led NDA regime is involved in “stifling” democratic dissent and subversion of constitutional rights.

They demanded that all Intelligence agencies should be brought under the purview of Parliament and the Comptroller and Auditor General.

The activists said that their meeting with the Congress Vice President addressed the urgent need to put the brakes on the rise of “Hindutva authoritarianism as exemplified by the BJP-RSS combine”.

The civil society members alleged that in the past one year, the NDA government has “targeted” the country’s robust civil society organisations.

“With an authoritarian government in place and a shrinking space for dissent, the members of civil organisations have called upon all political parties that are not a part of the BJP-led NDA to support them reclaim the space they deserve in a democracy,” they said.

They said that certain provisions of laws governing voluntary organisations (VOs) like the Societies Registration Act of 1860, the Indian Trusts Act (1882), the Charitable and Religious Trust Act (1920), Section 25 of the Indian Companies Act (1950), Foreign Contribution Regulation Act of 1976 (FCRA) and similar legislation need to be redrafted.

(Agencies)

Court allows Greenpeace to operate two domestic accounts

by

greenpeace

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday allowed NGO Greenpeace India to operate two of its domestic accounts to accept fresh domestic contribution which it can use for its day-to-day functioning.

The high court bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher also allowed Greenpeace to encash its fixed deposits and utilise the funds for running the organisation.

The court said it was giving the interim relief to the NGO so that it can continue to work at the moment. The court clarified that the NGO cannot utilise the amount frozen by the government.

The court was hearing a plea of Greenpeace India to de-freeze its international and national bank accounts, which were blocked following a home ministry directive last month.

(IANS)

'NGOs are not anti-national just because they differ with government on some matters'

by

ngos

Here is the full text of the letter, which has been signed by members of civil society urging Narendra Modi to “review all orders placing restraints on organisations, and revoke such orders where due process has not been followed by the government, no redress mechanism is clearly stated, and grounds are vague, subjective or flimsy”.

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

We write to you today as members and representatives of Indian civil society organizations and, most importantly as Indian citizens, to express our deep concern at how civil society organizations in general and their support systems, including donors, are being labeled and targeted.

Funds are being frozen, intelligence reports are being selectively released to paint NGOs in poor light, disbursal of funds are being subjected to case-by-case clearance, and their activities are reportedly being placed on ‘watch lists.’ As a result several NGO projects have shut down, donors are unable to support work, and there is an overall atmosphere of State coercion and intimidation in India’s civil society space.

Today, standing in solidarity with India’s most marginalized communities, with the NGO sector and donors who support us, affirmed by the guiding principles of our Constitution – justice, equality and liberty – we address you through an open letter.

As you are aware, NGOs work both in the welfare sector and in empowering people to be aware of and enforce their rights as enshrined in our Constitution. Such action may include questioning and protesting decisions taken by government in many areas. This work is both our right and our responsibility as civil society actors in a democratic nation. Indeed the Indian government acknowledged this. At the Universal Periodic Review of India at the UN Human Rights Council in 2012, the Government spoke of “…the Government’s active association with civil society and the increasing and important role that civil society and human rights defenders are playing in the area of human rights.’”Government of India further said that, “The media, civil society and other activists have helped the Government to be vigilant against transgressions.”

Many of us receive both Indian and foreign donations in compliance with laws and carry out activities intended to help those marginalized in India’s development. Many of us have partnered with Government, both at State and Central levels, towards many goals – achieving universal education, access to health care, women’s empowerment, and providing humanitarian relief in times of tragedy such as the recent earthquake. We have also worked in pilot projects – some over the years have been scaled up, and others have richly contributed to the policy framework of the Government of India. It should be a matter of pride for any government and a sign of robust people-centric engagement that NGOs and citizens have impacted State policy.

On other issues, your government and indeed previous governments may or may not agree with some of our views. These may include the issue of nuclear power plants, acquiring tribal and other lands, upholding Dalit rights, protecting rights of minorities against the scourge of communalism, protecting rights of sexual minorities, or campaigning for the universal right to food. Yet, we expect that Government protect our right to work and express our views.  It does not behoove the Government to label any and every conflicting voice on these issues as “anti-national”,”‘against national security” or “donor driven” and seek to create a public atmosphere that justifies “a crack down on NGOs.” These very words shame any society. “Watch lists” and “crack-downs” belong in another age and have no place in a modern democracy.

Your government has raised the issue that some NGOs may not have complied with the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act, the law governing receipt of foreign donations in India. We state categorically that we stand fully for transparency and accountability in both government and NGO practice, and it is in fact civil society actors who have fought hard for these principles to be enshrined in all areas of public life. So let us constructively ensure transparency and legal compliance across the vast NGO sector, including societies, trusts and a range of public and private institutions. However, such efforts cannot be capricious, selective or based on flimsy grounds. At the moment it seems that ‘compliance’ is serving as a garb to actually target those organizations and individuals whose views the government disagrees with, and indeed to monitor and stifle disagreement itself.

There is irrefutable documentary evidence that State action against select organizations has been arbitrary, non-transparent, and without any course of administrative redress. The effect has been to harm important work being done by NGOs at the grassroots and send a signal of threat to civil society. Our concern includes the manner in which many Indian NGOs and  international partners have been targeted for different reasons. Thus, civil society organizations in India today find themselves in a situation where the only avenue of redress appears to be through the judiciary. Mr. Prime Minister, this kind of coercive domestic environment being created under your watch does not augur well for the worlds largest democracy that professes aspirations to being a global leader in promoting freedoms and democratic values.

Further, in an increasingly globalized world, where even business interests freely collaborate across national boundaries, to label any individual or NGO that engages with international forums or any donor who supports such NGOs, as “anti-national” is illogical. India is signatory to international conventions and treaties and seeks to adhere to the highest international standards of democracy, liberty, justice and human rights. The Government of India regularly reports at these forums. It is accepted practice that NGOs and civil society actors also present their views at these forums, often disagreeing with the views of their respective governments. Many of us, signatories to this letter, engage in active advocacy at international forums. This upholds the best traditions of global democratic debate, and the right to seek a more just nation and more just world. It is not anti-national to do so. We do not believe that any government can claim that it alone has the prerogative to define what is ‘national interest’. The citizens of this country, who elect the Government into power, are the ultimate stakeholders, and must be allowed to define, articulate and work towards their idea of ‘national interest’ too, whether or not it concurs with the views of the Government.

Mr. Prime Minister, it does your Government no credit to use its power to stifle the rights of individuals or NGOs to legally and freely associate, to work with communities, to receive donations to do such work, and to express their views on a range of issues that directly affect our country and its people. An atmosphere of hostility against civil society actors in a democracy, and the uncertainty and insecurity created among communities across the country, can only be to the detriment of our society and the Government.

We therefore ask the Government to:

1. Put an end to coercive actions against NGOs and donors, without reasonable cause or due process, or seek to cripple the ability of these organisations to carry on their legitimate and sanctioned work.

2. Urgently review all orders placing restraints on organizations, and revoke such orders where due process has not been followed by the government, no redress mechanism is clearly stated, and grounds are vague, subjective or flimsy. Those we are currently aware of include, among others, INSAF, Peoples Watch, Sabrang Trust, Greenpeace India, Ford Foundation, HIVOS and ICCO.

3. Initiate an immediate dialogue between the NGO sector and Government to address our concerns going forward. Amend the presently opaque FCRA rules and regulations; ensure complete clarity and transparency on provisions and processes, as well as forums and mechanisms of redress; remove all provisions that are amenable to subjective interpretation; ensure their uniform application to all NGOs, trusts, foundations, and societies.

We look forward to your response and action on these vital issues of national interest.

Greenpeace says it may shut India operations in a month

by

Greenpeace says the government restrictions are an "attempt to silence criticism"

Greenpeace says the government restrictions are an “attempt to silence criticism”

The environmental group Greenpeace has said it may be forced to shut down in India in a month because the government has frozen its bank accounts.

The pressure group said it had only about 30 days’ worth of funds with which to pay office costs and salaries.

India blocked the group’s accounts last month, accusing it of violating tax laws and working against its economic interests.

Greenpeace says the restrictions are an “attempt to silence criticism”.

The group, which says it is being targeted because of its campaigns on issues such as pollution and harmful pesticides, is preparing a legal challenge.

“We have one month left to save Greenpeace India from complete shutdown, and to fight MHA’s [ministry of home affairs] indefensible decision to block our domestic accounts,” Greenpeace India official Samit Aich said in a press release on Tuesday.

The group has been present in India for 14 years and employs 340 people.

An official in India’s home ministry told the BBC they had not seen the Greenpeace release and hence could not comment on it.

In April, while freezing its bank accounts for six months, the government accused Greenpeace of not fully declaring the amount of foreign funds it brings into the country.

Greenpeace India rejected the charge – it said it had complied with the law governing foreign contributions.

In a long-running dispute India has accused the environmental group of “stalling development projects” by protesting against large infrastructure plans.

Since coming to power in May last year, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has pushed through a series of long-awaited reforms and new policies making it easier for companies to win approval for new projects.

Greenpeace activists have accused him of watering down environmental rules after the government allowed industries to operate closer to protected green zones.

(BBC)

US seeks clarification from India over putting Ford Foundation on 'watch list'

by

FF_LOGO

Washington: The United States on Friday expressed concern over India’s crackdown on Ford Foundation and Greenpeace, and said it is seeking “clarification” on the action.

“We are aware that the (Indian) Ministry of Home Affairs suspended the registration of Greenpeace India and has placed the Ford Foundation on a prior permission watch list,” State Department Deputy Acting Spokesperson, Marie Harf, told reporters at her daily news conference.

“We remain concerned about the difficulties caused to civil society organisations by the manner in which the Foreign Contributions Regulations Act has been applied,” she said in response to a question.

“We are concerned that this recent ruling limits the necessary and critical debate within Indian society and we are seeking a clarification on this issue with the appropriate Indian authorities,” Harf said.

In a crackdown on foreign funding to NGOs, the Union Home Ministry has put the Ford Foundation of the US on its “watch list” and ordered that all funds coming from the international organisation have to be routed only with its nod due to “national security concerns”.

The Home Ministry said it has decided to keep a watch on all activities funded by Ford Foundation and by exercising the powers conferred under Section 46 of Foreign Contribution Regulation Act 2010, directed Reserve Bank of India to ensure that funds coming from it be brought to the notice of the Home Ministry.

The Ministry said it wanted to ensure that funds coming from Ford Foundation is utilised for “bonafide welfare activities without compromising on concerns of national interest and security”.

The move came after Gujarat government asked the Home Ministry to take action against Ford Foundation as it alleged that the US-based organisation was “interfering in the internal affairs” of the country and also “abetting communal disharmony” through an NGO run by social activist Teesta Setalvad.

Early this month, the Home Ministry had frozen seven bank accounts of Greenpeace India and barred it from receiving foreign funds for allegedly violating FCRA and “prejudicially” affecting the country’s public and economic interests.

(PTI)

Merely expressing dissent is not anti-national: 180 activists defend Greenpeace in letter to Rajnath

by

greenpeace

Here is the full text of their letter:

“The move by the central government to freeze Greenpeace India’s bank accounts and block sources of funds, is a blatant violation of the constitutional rights to freedom of expression and association. It also seems to be an attempt to warn civil society that dissent regarding development policies and priorities will not be tolerated, even when these are proving to be ecologically unsustainable and socially unjust. These are dangerous signs for the future of democracy in India.

Specific allegations of legal violation contained in the Ministry of Home Affairs’ notice are aspects Greenpeace India needs to respond to. However, the notice also charges the organisation with adversely affecting ‘public interest’ and the ‘economic interest of the State’. These charges give the impression that Greenpeace India is indulging in anti-national activities, using foreign funds. However, dissenting from the government’s development policies, helping communities who are going to be displaced by these policies to mobilise themselves, and generating public opinion for the protection of the environment can by no stretch of imagination be considered anti-national, or against public interest. Quite the contrary, any reasonable policy of sustainable development (which the government claims to adhere to) will itself put into question quite a few of the mining, power, and other projects currently being promoted.

Civil society organisations in India have a long and credible history of standing up for social justice, ecological sustainability, and the rights of the poor. When certain government policies threaten these causes, civil society has a justified ground to resist, and help affected communities fight for their rights. This is in fact part of the fundamental duties enjoined upon citizens by the Constitution of India.

In two recent court judgments involving previous attempts by the government to muzzle Greenpeace India, the democratic principle of dissent has been upheld. In January 2015, the Delhi High Court observed: ‘Non-Governmental Organizations often take positions, which are contrary to the policies formulated by the Government of the day. That by itself…cannot be used to portray petitioner’s action as being detrimental to national interest.’ In March, the Delhi High court observed that ‘contrarian views held by a section of people…cannot be used to describe such section or class of people as anti-national.’ The court also observed that there was nothing on record to suggest that Greenpeace India’s activities ‘have the potentiality of degrading the economic interest of the country’.

It is shocking that despite these clear judicial pronouncements, the government has for a third time acted against Greenpeace India. We cannot but conclude that this is an attempt to divert attention from the serious issues that Greenpeace India and many peoples’ movements and NGOs are raising, regarding the need to respect the rights of adivasis and others who depend on the forests, wetlands, coastal areas, and other ecosystems, and the need to move towards policies that are ecologically sustainable and do not cause further climate change. Large-scale mining, such as in the areas that peoples’ movements are active, are a threat to forests and other natural ecosystems, to communities that depend on them including tribal peoples. These and other issues are highlighted by organisations such as Greenpeace India, which also generate significant information on the environment, crucial for taking the right decisions regarding sustainable well-being.

It is also shocking that while alleging violations regarding FCRA, the government ordered the blocking of even those accounts where Greenpeace India uses its domestic funding (and it is relevant here to note that the majority of its funds according to its audited accounts are from thousands of Indian individuals). It has even blocked its online donation facility.

The government should immediately take back these illegitimate, unfair, and repressive moves, and provide  Greenpeace India a fair opportunity to respond. More generally, it must respect the freedom of speech that all Indian citizens have a constitutional right to, including the right to dissent, upheld by court judgments. The government’s attempts to browbeat civil society will not make the issues of social and environmental injustice disappear. We assert that long as these issues remain unresolved, civil society actors will continue to do all that is necessary towards a just and sustainable society.”

World’s richest one percent undermine fight against economic inequalities

by

‘We cannot rely on technological fixes. We cannot rely on the market. And we cannot rely on the global elites. We need to help strengthen the power of the people to challenge the people with power.’

Farmers with the Landless Workers’ Movement (MST) protest the concentration of land ownership in Brazil, during a Feb. 21 demonstration in support of the occupation of part of the Agropecuaria Santa Mônica estate, 150 km from Brasilia. (Credit: Courtesy of the MST)

Farmers with the Landless Workers’ Movement (MST) protest the concentration of land ownership in Brazil, during a Feb. 21 demonstration in support of the occupation of part of the Agropecuaria Santa Mônica estate, 150 km from Brasilia. (Credit: Courtesy of the MST)

by Thalif Deen, IPS News

United Nations: The growing economic inequalities between rich and poor – and the lopsided concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the world’s one percent – are undermining international efforts to fight global poverty, environmental degradation and social injustice, according to a civil society alliance.

Comprising ActionAid, Greenpeace, Oxfam and Civicus, the group of widely-known non-governmental organisations (NGO) and global charities warn about the widening gap and imbalance of power between the world’s richest and the rest of the population, which they say, is “warping the rules and policies that affect society, creating a vicious circle of ever growing and harmful undue influence.”

The group identifies a list of key concerns – including tax avoidance, wealth inequality and lack of access to healthcare – as being unduly influenced by the world’s wealthiest one percent.

In a statement released Thursday, on the eve of the World Social Forum (WSF) scheduled to take place in Tunis Mar. 24-28, the group argues the concentration of wealth and power is now a critical and binding factor that must be challenged “if we are to create lasting solutions to poverty and climate change.”

The statement – signed by the chief executives of the four organisations – says: “We cannot rely on technological fixes. We cannot rely on the market. And we cannot rely on the global elites. We need to help strengthen the power of the people to challenge the people with power.”

“Securing a just and sustainable world means challenging the power of the one percent,” the group says.

The signatories include Adriano Campolina of ActionAid, Dhananjayan Sriskandarajah of Civicus, Kumi Naidoo of Greenpeace and Winnie Byanyima of Oxfam.

Asked about the impact of economic inequalities on the implementation of the U.N.’s highly touted Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), Ben Phillips, campaigns and policy director at ActionAid International, told IPS economic inequalities have meant that in many countries progress on poverty reduction has been much slower than it would have been if growth had been more equal.

For example, he said, Zambia has moved from being a poor country (officially) to being (officially) middle income. Yet during that time the absolute number of poor people has increased.

India’s persistently high child malnutrition rate and South Africa’s persistently high mortality rate are functions of an insufficient focus on inequality, he added.

Papua New Guinea has the highest growth in the world this year and won’t meet any MDG, because the proceeds of growth are so unequally shared, he pointed out.

Speaking on behalf of the civil society alliance, Phillips said inequality has also been the great blind spot of the MDGs – even when countries have met the MDGs they have often done so in a way that has left behind the poorest people – so goals like reducing maternal and infant mortality have been met in several countries in ways that have left those at the bottom of the pile with little or no improvement.

The four signatories say: “We will work together with others to tackle the root causes of inequality. We will press governments to tackle tax dodging, ensure progressive taxes, provide universal free public health and education services, support workers’ bargaining power, and narrow the gap between rich and poor. We will together champion international cooperation to avoid a race to the bottom.”

The statement also says that global efforts to end poverty and marginalisation, advance women’s rights, defend the environment, protect human rights, and promote fair and dignified employment are all being undermined as a consequence of the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a few.

“Decisions are being shaped in the narrow interests of the richest, at the expense of the people as a whole,” it says.

“The economic, ecological and human rights crises we face are intertwined and reinforcing. The influence of the one percent has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished,” the group warns.

“Faced with this challenge, we need to go beyond tinkering, and address the structural causes of inequality: we cannot rely on technological fixes – there is no app for this; we cannot rely on the market – unchecked it will worsen inequality and climate change; and we cannot rely on the global elites – left alone they will continue to reinforce the structures and approaches that have led to where we are”.

People’s mobilisation and active citizenship are crucial to change the power inequalities that are leading to worsening rights violations and inequality, the group says.

However, in all regions of the world, the more people mobilise to defend their rights, the more the civic and political space is being curtailed by repressive action defending the privileged.

“We therefore pledge to work together locally, nationally and internationally, alongside others, to uphold and defend universal human rights and protect civil society space. A more equal society that values everyone depends on citizens holding the powerful to account.”

Phillips told IPS even the U.N.’s proposed Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), to be approved at a summit meeting of world leaders in September, will not be achievable if economic inequalities continue.

As leading economist Andy Sumner has demonstrated, “we find in our number-crunching that poverty can only be ended if inequality falls.” Additionally, healthy, liveable societies depend on government action to limit inequality.

It is also a question of voice, and power. In the words of Harry Belafonte, a Hollywood celebrity and political activist: “The concentration of money in the hands of a small group is the most dangerous thing that happened to civilization.”

Or as Jeff Sachs, a widely respected development expert and professor at Columbia University, has noted: “Corporations write the rules, pay the politicians, sometimes illegally and sometimes, via what is called legal, which is financing their campaigns or massive lobbying. This has got completely out of control and is leading to the breakdown of modern democracy.”

Phillips said tackling inequality is core to progress on tackling poverty – both because extreme and growing economic inequality will undermine poverty reduction and because the warping of power towards the one percent is shifting the focus of governments away from their citizens and towards corporations.

“Inequality is about more than economics and growth – it is now at such high levels that we risk a return to the oligarchy of the gilded age. We need to shift power away from the one percent and towards the rest of society, to prevent all decisions being made in the narrow interests of a privileged few,” he declared.

KNOW US

GET INVOLVED

PROMOTE

Archives