Odisha
,
Niyamgiri, Kalahandi
,
Rayagada
Published :
Oct 2016
|
Updated :
Dongria Kondhs in Odisha Win against Vedanta as Supreme Court Bans Mining in Niyamgiri
Reported by
Ankur Paliwal
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
8000
People affected
2003
Year started
731
Land area affected
Households affected
8000
People Affected
2003
Year started
731
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Mining
Reason/Cause of conflict
Bauxite Mining
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
Sector
Mining
Reason/Cause of conflict
Bauxite Mining
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

The peaceful existence of the Dongria Gondh tribe and their practice of sustainable agriculture based on the forest produce was brought under threat when on June 7, 2003, Vedanta Aluminum Limited signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Government of Odisha for the construction of a 1 MTPA (one million ton per annum) alumina refinery, along with a 75megawatt coalbased power plant in the Lanjigarh region of Kalahandi district. For the purpose of obtaining bauxite for this alumina refinery, Vedantaowned Sterlite Industries also entered the picture, with plans to construct an openpit, 3 MTPA bauxite mining plant at the top of the sacred Niyam Dongar mountain. In March 2004, Sterlite applied for environmental clearance to the refinery, arguing that the plant is independent of the proposed mine and falsely claiming that the construction of the refinery will not involve diversion of forestland. Despite several inconsistencies in the application, the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change (MoEFCC) granted clearance to the refinery. While Vedantas dubious methods were being ignored by the MoEFCC, three petitioners subsequently filed applications with the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) of the Supreme Court to investigate the environmental clearances granted. In 2005, in a scathing report to the Supreme Court, the CEC noted that the MoEFCC had wrongfully given clearance to Vedanta and that it had ignored the various environmental threats that would arise from the proposed project, pointing out how the project violated the Forest Rights Act, the Forest (Conservation) Act and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. It recommended that the environmental clearance granted to Vedanta be revoked, the company be directed to stop further work on the project and mining on Niyamgiri Hills be banned. On August 8, 2008 the Supreme Court completely disregarded the CECs recommendations and approved the clearance of forestland for mining in the Niyamgiri Hills. Despite the vociferous protests, environmental clearance was granted to Sterlite Industries in April 2009 for mining operations a decision which spelled doom for the Dongria Kondh tribe. In the aftermath of the Supreme Courts decision, the movement against Vedanta, which had so far been marked by a steady stream of protests, gained momentum. It soon became a transnational movement. Organisations like Survival International and Amnesty International visited the protest site in India regularly and also organised mass rallies outside Vedanta's London office. Witnessing the companys treatment towards the Dongria Kondh tribe and its involvement in the blatant violation of human rights, many international investors like the Norwegian Government Pension Fund, Martin Currie, the Church of England and Marlborough Ethical Fund sold their stocks in the company. Fueled by the continuous protests and mass support for the tribe, the Government of India sent a team of experts to the Niyamgiri Hills in 2010. The Dongria Kondhs emerged victorious on August 21, 2010, when a review of the mining project carried out by the MoEFCC exposed the violation of a number of environmental regulations by the company. After denying the company forest clearance in 2010, then Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh delivered a final blow by revoking Vedantas environmental clearance in July 2011. The Odisha government – through the stateowned company Orissa Mining Corporation petitioned the Supreme Court to reverse the mining ban on Vedanta and to allow the sixfold expansion of the alumina refinery. In a landmark decision for tribes rights in India, the Supreme Court on April 18, 2013, rejected the appeal on the mining ban and decreed that the Dongria Kondh tribe would have a decisive say in giving the goahead to Vedantas mining project. Twelve gram sabhas were chosen by the state government to make the crucial decision. In the three months after the Supreme Court ruling, amidst heavy police presence and persistent threats from Vedanta, 11 gram sabhas voted against the mining project, and on August 19, 2013, the 12th and final gram sabha delivered a resounding No. In January 2014, the MoEFCC, which had earlier aided Vedantas invasion of Niyamgiri, crushed the companys mining ambitions by completely rejecting the project. However, the community and their land continue to be under threat. On February 25, 2016, the OMC filed an application with the Supreme Court, challenging its previous judgement, alleging that the gram sabha resolutions had technical errors; the apex court upheld its earlier judgement by rejecting the OMC's petition. There have been reports of clashes between the tribespeople and the authorities/security forces, with several members of the Niyamgiri Surakhsha Samiti being arrested and paraded as maoists, in what they claim is an attempt by the government to weaken the movement against the refinery's planned expansion and its repeated attempts to review the mining ban. From 2018 onwards, Vedanta has made official announcements regarding its plan to expand its refinery in Langigarh, which has been operational since 2005. Local residents, meanwhile, continue to fight as the refinery has caused ecological degradation in the area. In February 2021, the Board of Directors of Vedanta approved the expansion of the Langigarh plant from 2MTPA to 5MTPA at the cost of INR 3,779 crore seeking for it to be one of the world's largest single location alumni refinery complex.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Opposition against environmental degradation

Refusal to give up land for the project

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to declare the Niyamgiri hills as Dongria Kondh habitat as per the Forest Rights Act

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Forest

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

4000

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Odisha Mining Corporation

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

No

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Vedanta Aluminium Limited

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Odisha Lok Sangram Manch, Survival International, Amnesty International, Action Aid, Green Kalahandi, Niyamgiri Suraksa Samiti

5
Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Legal Supporting Documents

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Author
Reported by
Ankur Paliwal

Ankur is an independent journalist who mostly writes stories at the intersection of science, society, and social justice. He has reported from India, Ethiopia, Kenya, Ghana, Tanzania, Germany, and the United States for Scientific American, Undark, Nautilus, GQ, PBS, and several Indian news publications. He gravitates toward the stories of the neglected and marginalised. Ankur won the Next Generation of Science Journalists Award 2016 at World Health Summit in Berlin. He currently lives in New Delhi.


Show more work
Latest updates
East Jaintia Hills
Meghalaya

Violent protest during public hearing for cement plant expansion in Meghalaya's East Jaintia Hills

Narela
Delhi

Residents of Narela's Bajitpur Thakran oppose demolition of temples for defence institute, demand sports complex

Surguja
Chhattisgarh

Adivasis in Chhattisgarh's Hasdeo protest relentlessly against mining project in forest

Kamrup Metropolitan
Assam

Lawyer bodies protest against Assam government’s decision to relocate Gauhati High Court

Faizabad
Uttar Pradesh

Demands for Ram Temple, Babri Mosque at same site divides Ayodhya

Mumbai
Maharashtra

Supreme Court Allows Land Reclamation for Mumbai Coastal Road Project

Pune
Maharashtra

Farmers Refuse Land for Pune Outer Ring Road Project in Maharashtra

Surat
Gujarat

Slum Dwellers in Gujarat's Surat Stage Protest against Demolition, Forced Eviction

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Opposition against environmental degradation

Refusal to give up land for the project

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us