Speaking Beyond Languages and Borders:
People to People Dialogueon the Cauvery Water CrisisBackground:
On December 13, 1991 a state wide bandh ( a form of public protest where shops and establishments are closed, public transport comes to a halt and people do not come out on to the streets) was called to protest the Supreme Court judgement directing Karnataka to share the Cauvery river waters with the neighbouring State of Tamil Nadu. Coming as this order did, following the whipping up of linguistic jingoism on both sides of the border, encouraged by the respective Chief Ministers, the Order gave rise to a wave of unprecedented violence against the Tamils- particularly in the slums and poorer areas where a large part of the migrant population live. Physical violence, threatened rapes of women and destruction to property led to large numbers of people fleeing Bangalore and other adjoining towns for safety. In the days following this, the border taluk areas of Mysore district erupted with violence resulting in the large scale destruction of houses of Tamilians and their eviction. In retaliation, Tamilians attacked Kannadigas in other areas on the border. Responding to the violence, concerned groups of people came together and decided to visit the affected areas to gauge the situation for themselves. Apart from CIEDS and Vimochana the groups included PUCL (Karnataka), PUCL (HD Kote), Women’s Voice Bangalore, , Karnataka Construction Workers’ Union, Karnataka Griha Karmikara Sangha and KKNSS Bangalore. We visited the affected areas and gathered testimonies from people who had been affected. Shocked at the scale of violence we approached the Indian People’s Human Rights Commission and asked them to set up a People’s Human Rights Tribunal, which would conduct an enquiry. Justice V.R Krishna Iyer, the Chairman of the People’s Human Rights Tribunal then requested the groups that had visited the affected areas to serve as members of the tribunal that was led by two eminent retired jurists committed to the cause of peace and justice. The tribunal conducted a full enquiry into “the causes and the aspects of the incidents of violence, tension, destruction, other injurious consequences and the role played by political elements, goondas, linguistic chauvinists and other anti-social elements.”
The members of various organisations that formed a part of the Tribunal also filed a Public Interest Litigation, which questioned the validity of the bandh that had been called for by the Government and also to demand that relief be provided to those who had been affected. Our PIL strengthened another one that had been already filed and subsequently almost after ten years the State was directed to pay compensation to all the affected people.
At the end of 2002, there was a scarcity of water in Tamil Nadu, after a bad monsoon. This saw the agitation come to the fore again; there was an outbreak of violence and an exchange of accusations between the two Governments. The groups that had worked in 1991-92 came together again out of concern at the goings on to make a concerted effort at finding a solution to the problem. The initiative this time was different in that, instead of responding to the violence after it occurred, it sought to find a permanent solution to the crisis that would help the suffering farmers through involving organisations of farmers from both sides of the border.
Eight such dialogues have been held on both sides of the border which have been quiet successful in atleast identifying the problem areas and putting together some possible ways to resolve it taking into consideration the conflicting needs and realities of farmers in both the
States. This dialogue has sought to look at the inter-state water crisis in the larger perspective of the development paradigm. For all those affected have also realised that water scarcity arises not just from failure of the monsoon or over use of water by farmers of one state. Water is being diverted in large quantities to urban areas to be indiscriminately consumed by the corporate sector as well as to maintain the lifestyle of the elite. For instance even while farmers do not receive water in time for their crops, water is being diverted to golf courses and swimming pools.Bureaucrats and policy makers have also been sought to be included in this dialogue- particularly by MIDS (Madras Institute of Development Studies) that has now taken some initiative in taking the dialogue ahead. In this context this initiative seeks to have the following impact:
- Bring organisations of farmers and other concerned organisations from both sides of the border to sit together to work out a mutually acceptable solution taking into consideration their respective needs and realities
- Through a process of reflection and analyses bring in the wider perspective of the development paradigm to understand the issue of water scarcity that would help in finding a long term and more sustainable solution
- With the results of this dialogue initiate a wider and more informed public debate on the wider dimensions of this problem so that it is not so easily exploited by the chauvinists or those political forces who would want to mobilise existing social biases and prejudices
- The long term impact we envision in terms of a permanent solution to the sharing of the river waters such that it would never be a source of tension between two linguistic communities who coexist in both the States.
The primary purpose of this dialogue is to arrive at a crisis resolution formula between the farmers of both sides that then will be used to lobby with the Governments to accept.
Our role in this initiative is quite central for the reasons explained above. Both members of CIEDS and Vimochana have been involved in this campaign in terms of taking the initiative to organise the meeting, arrange the logistics, mobilise the media and coordinate the follow up.
more back home