Search Results

Bali, Indonesia – NGO Forum on ADB’s Seminar on Environmental and Social Issues was disrupted when 7 men in civilian clothing showed up and demanded their passports last 11 October 2018. They later introduced themselves as immigration officers but only when they were asked. At 3:30 PM, the 20 participants were demanded to surrender their passports under the guise of “surveillance and monitoring”, most of the passports were held for at least 4 hours. Rayyan Hassan Executive Director of NGO Forum on ADB stated that, “The Forum strongly condemns this show of threat and intimidation by the Indonesian authorities. We are here as registered participants of the WB-IMF Annual Meeting and we have followed all necessary protocols indicated by the Bank to be able to come here”. Yesterday the supposed Peoples' Global Conference has also been canceled due to pressure from national police. In an article by the Jakarta Post, it has been stated that after the cancellation of the event the Indonesian national police could not immediately be reached for comment. “The WB - IMF cannot even ensure the safety of those who are attending their event,” says Titi Soentoro of AKSI - for Gender Social and Ecological Justice. “We are doing this in a peaceful assembly and this is a clear threat in the continuing clampdown of CSOs”, she added. The meeting which took place in Plagoo Hotel coincides with the 2018 International Monetary and World Bank Annual Meetings. #worldbank #Bali #Indonesia #IMF #WB

After two big announcements made by the World Bank (WB) this week during their Annual Meeting in Bali, Indonesia, NGO Forum on ADB, an Asian led network of over 250 civil society organizations (CSO) around the world will still not put their guards down in monitoring the issue of coal and other fossil fuel projects financed by the Bank, especially those made in partnership with the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). NGO Forum expressed its concerns on the deepening relationship between the WBG and AIIB after the two banks signed a memorandum of understanding “to strengthen cooperation and knowledge sharing between the institutions” last year, at the closing ceremony of the WBG Spring Meeting in Washington DC. The network sees that the cooperation between the two banks will lead to a race to the bottom in terms of environmental and social protections because of the leniency of the multilateral development banks (MDB) towards infrastructure projects despite the announcement made by the WB that it will “ban new direct funding to coal plants except in rare circumstances” THE PROMISE OF BEING CLEAN AND GREEN During the 3rd AIIB Annual Meeting in Mumbai, India, NGO Forum demanded that the Chinese led bank fulfill its promise of being clean and green, this is after finding out that the Bank together with the WBG has funded several fossil fuel projects, including the Trans-Anatolian gas pipeline, Myingyan gas power project in Myanmar, and most recently through Public-Private Partnerships, the Bhola IPP gas power plant in Bangladesh. Hassan Mehedi, chief executive director of Coastal Livelihood and Environmental Action Network (CLEAN), a grassroots organization based in Khulna, Bangladesh stated that the Bhola IPP gas project endangers vulnerable variety of animals in the area, including several species of fish at a nearby body of water, the Meghna Estuary, fanning out towards the Bay of Bengal. He also added that apart from environmental problems “there are serious human rights violations particularly with religious minorities who are now victims of land grabbing”. The WBG on the other hand announced that it will “ban new direct funding to coal plants except in rare circumstances”. The policy however does not cover the Bank’s indirect lending, Rayyan Hassan, executive director of NGO Forum on ADB stated that “this could be a loophole for the WBG to support fossil fuel projects, just like how the AIIB used the International Financing Corporation (IFC) Emerging Asia Fund to indirectly finance the coal-mine expansion of Shwe Taung Cement plant in Myanmar”. Hassan stated that the two Banks explicitly express their support towards the Paris Climate Agreement and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals but its lending portfolios tells a different story, “MDBs should take concrete steps to address the climate crisis, by shifting investments from harmful fossil fuels towards sustainable renewable energy and to support energy access for poor communities” he added. #worldbank #AIIB #AsianInfrastructureInvestmentBank #ADB #coal

As the 9th Asian Development Bank (ADB) Roundtable on Labor Migration in Asia: Innovative Approaches for the Effective Management of Labor Migration in Asia closes in Tokyo, Japan, NGO Forum on ADB calls out the ADB on it’s non-compliance to the International Labour Organization (ILO) Core Labour Standards (CLS), resulting in major violation of several ADB funded projects. The ADB has an MOU signed with the ILO since 2001 and has yet to incorporate the said standards into its policies and core operations till date. In 2008, the Madhya Pradesh Power Sector Reform Project in India funded by the ADB for US$ 620.00 million, had incidences of many workers being denied their collective bargaining rights. By not being able to form their own unions the workers were denied their basic right as per ILO CLS. In addition, health and safety issues were neglected, and social security benefits were withdrawn. The same thing happened to the Melamchi Drinking Water Project in Nepal in 2008, funded by the ADB for US$ 120.00 million, workers were once again not provided with written and formal employment contracts. Without formal contracts workers were exploited through compulsory overtime work. Consequently the work environment did not allocate any provisions for safe drinking water access to majority of the workers. In India, the Rajasthan Renewable Energy Transmission Investment Program, funded by the ADB for US$ 300.00 million, further violates the CLS as there were no separate toilets for women workers, and there were no specified child care centers considering most women workers were mothers. The ADB in 2001 committed that their design and the formulation of its loans, and implementation of its projects will comply with the internationally recognized core labor standards, but for the last eighteen years, the Bank has not been able to integrate and include the full extent of the CLS into its Safeguard Policy Statement of 2010. Violations of the rights of workers and trade unions in ADB funded projects persist. Written by Jen Derillo. Jen is NGO Forum on ADB's Program Coordinator for Communications.

International organizations enjoy broad immunity from suit and other judicial processes in domestic courts. Simply put it is a “functional necessity” designed to protect the autonomy and independence of international organizations including the Asian Development Bank (ADB) against interference in discharging its entrusted functions effectively. In Liang vs. People in the Philippines, G.R. No. 125865, it is contended that the immunity under the ADB Charter and the Headquarters Agreement is absolute. The jurisprudence further argued that only when there is an implied, express waiver or when a statute expressly limits the said immunity can be considered as an exception. However, the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights describes how international financial institutions (IFIs) veer away from their human rights due diligence and provide access to remedy. Needless to say, there are increasing number of literatures on recent trends articulating the immunity of international organizations before domestic courts. In the case of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), it has allowed many domestic courts in Europe to refrain from the functional necessity argument, which is heavily in favor of the organization but rather espoused a human rights approach. In quite a few cases against international organizations before domestic courts, the aggrieved party can argue that granting immunity to the organization violates the right to an effective remedy before a court as guaranteed by relevant international or regional human rights provisions.[i] In a commentary by ADB’s General Counsel[ii], accordingly immunity does not mean that project affected persons adversely affected by the Bank’s projects are left without recourse or that their rights are ignored. ADB’s Accountability Mechanism serves as the only institutional platform through which project – affected households can elevate their grievances on any breach in the Bank’s own policies and procedures. While this is the intent of the Policy, does ADB’s Accountability Mechanism work? What is the Accountability Mechanism? The Accountability Mechanism (AM) has two primary functions: the problem – solving function led by the Special Project Facilitator (SPF) and the compliance review function spearheaded by the Compliance Review Panel (CRP). Project – affected communities can either opt to proceed with the problem – solving or the compliance review function to address their concerns. The problem – solving function is responsible in addressing the problems of local people affected by ADB – assisted projects. Accordingly, it assists people who are directly, materially and adversely affected by problems caused by the ADB – assisted projects. On the other hand, the compliance review function investigates alleged non – compliance by ADB on its own operational policies and procedures including violations on the safeguard policy. The Board of Directors considers and approves the recommendations of the CRP Final Report and allows the ADB Management to propose remedial actions in order to bring the project back into compliance. However the Accountability Mechanism significantly poses restraints and limitations on its complex and highly bureaucratic processes that prevent communities from filing a complaint: 1. The legitimacy of the AM is also compromised whenever a potential conflict of interest arises at the ADB Board Compliance Review Committee (BCRC) level. As per the policy, the “CRP will investigate alleged non – compliance by ADB with its operational policies and procedures in any ADB – assisted project”. Furthermore, it will “not investigate the borrowing country, the executing agency or the private sector client” (emphasis supplied). The Accountability Mechanism also outlines nine functions of the BCRC (para. 134) with respect to the investigation on the alleged non – compliance by the Bank. However, complaints in the past e.g. Samoa: Promoting Economic Use of Customary Land and Samoa Agribusiness Support Project (2016); Mundra Ultra Mega Power Project (2013) and the Integrated Citarum Water Resources Management Investment Program (2012) posted risks of conflict of interest when a BCRC member is also representing the constituency of where the project is located. While in principle the BCRC is sitting in that capacity and the focus of the investigation is on the ADB (and not the borrower), this kind of structure poses undue influence and may affect the outcome of the investigation as well as the corresponding monitoring of the CRP. 2. The role of the Office of the General Counsel (OGC) is another pitfall in the current structure of the AM that can also give rise to potential conflict of interest and question the independence of the mechanism. While the OGC is part of the Management, it can also provide legal advice to CRP and SPF. The provision for separate legal counsels to the Management, ADB Board of Directors and to the AM should be explicitly stipulated either in the policy or in the Operations Manual in order to avoid any potential conflict of interest and to retain the independence of the AM. 3. In addition, the filing of a complaint to the AM will not suspend or otherwise affect the formulation, processing or implementation of the project unless agreed to by the borrower concerned and the Bank.[iii] The functions of what the mechanism can and cannot do should be fully conveyed to the complainants and project affected households. 4. Limited awareness on how the Policy works particularly among the local communities largely contribute for the low turnout of complaints received. While some cases filed are deemed eligible, the long process dampens the principles of accountability and transparency, which the Bank is strongly asserting. 5. The notion that the complainants should exercise “good faith efforts” in attempting to solve the problems and issues beforehand at the Operations Department (OD) including at the Resident Missions is also concerning. First, the burden of proof for the complainants to provide evidence on likely, direct and material harm should not be as rigid on its face – value. Once determined eligible in the case of compliance review, the full investigation would be able to ascertain the extent and evidence of the harm caused or will be caused due to non – compliance on ADB’s policies and procedures. Secondly, the rationale for the complainants to reach out first to solve the problems and issues with the OD can at one point be considered reasonable. However better clarity and guidance should also be provided, as this language on the policy appears to be confusing if not contradictory to some provisions in the AM. Accordingly, the complainant should indicate “a description of the complaints’ good faith efforts to address the problems first with the OD concerned and the results of these efforts” [para. 151 (vii)]. Having the clause that requires complainants to address the problems first with the OD presupposes a sequential approach when there should be none. This also adds an unnecessary burden for the complainants to prove that they should have done “good faith efforts” to resolve the issues being raised. 6. Lastly, the Compliance Review Panel to propose remedial actions is now with the Management. Taking away this function that the Panel previously had before the current 2012 Accountability Mechanism policy poses limitations on what the panel should be able to act upon after taking into account the outcome of its investigation and findings. What do the figures show? From 2004 – 2018, there has only been 19 complaints filed in ADB’s Accountability Mechanism through the Compliance Review Panel whereas 80 were filed through the Office of the Special Project Facilitator (OSPF). Out of the bulk of complaints filed, there were only 23 or 28.75% of eligible complaints filed under the OSPF. On the other hand, the number of eligible complaints filed under the CRP was higher at 15 or 78.95%. Using the same period, the ADB on average approves roughly 343 projects in a year. The number of complaints filed to the Accountability Mechanism may either mean that ADB is doing a “decent” job in ensuring due diligence in all phases of the project implementation or when project affected communities are adversely affected they are not aware that such a redress mechanism is available. Arguably, to put it in either of these two interpretations does not reflect the complexities of each project and the realities of the potentially affected persons who will benefit or unfortunately suffer harm from these ADB – funded projects. Be as it may violations on the safeguard and other operational policies of the ADB have been raised to the Accountability Mechanism. At the center of these complaints tackle issues on inadequate compensation, loss of livelihood, cost of economic and physical displacement; health risks and project affected families left to further state of poverty. ADB Financed Projects of Destruction In the last 50 years of ADB’s operations, it had financed projects that caused massive destruction of the environment and loss of livelihood to the affected households. To name a few, these include the loss of indigenous variety of fish and crop biodiversity in the Khulna – Jessore Drainage Rehabilitation Project (KJDRP) in Bangladesh; more than 10,000 people affected by the downstream impact of the Nam Theun 2 Hydropower Project in Laos; Marcopper mining disaster in Marinduque, Philippines as a result of mine tailings that contaminated the river system; displacement of affected households and inadequate compensation in the Cambodia Railway Rehabilitation Project; and loss of livelihood opportunities including access to fishing and agriculture in the Tata Mundra Coal Power Plant Project in India. These cases mirror hundreds if not thousands of ADB projects if left unmonitored that may have potential adverse and irreparable damage particularly to the vulnerable and marginalized sectors at the local level. Is ADB’s Accountability Mechanism Enough? “I was evicted in my own home,” Srey Van recounted. He is a public school teacher forcibly displaced in the Cambodia Railway Rehabilitation Project. Upon visiting the resettlement site in Battambang a few years back, he narrated that it has been eight years since the project has been implemented yet there are still families who have not received additional compensation. There is still shortage in potable water in some of the relocation sites and communities are still experiencing difficulty of going to the city for lack of public transportation. “There are still families who have not been paid in full,” he added. Some of the families are still reeling off from indebtedness and the difficulty of transferring land titles to the evicted families continues. Despite the complaint filed, the issues faced by the communities are not yet resolved. In 2009, the ADB supported the Project through a USD 84 million loan. There were 4,000 affected families displaced to relocation sites with no basic services including adequate housing, health facilities and without access to livelihood. Contrary to ADB’s policy that displacement of communities should be avoided whenever possible and to even improve the standards of living of the displaced poor and other vulnerable groups, the families affected are left to further impoverishment and with no adequate compensation. “I fear for my children’s health in the future,” according to Maribeth Garcia, a mother of five who raised reservations in the then construction of Visayas Baseload Development Project in the Philippines. In 2009, the ADB approved USD 100 million loan for the construction of the 200 MW Visayas Baseload Power Development Project with the use of clean coal technology (CCT). Notwithstanding this rhetoric from the Bank, CCT is still tainted with social acceptability, health and environmental concerns. As early as 2003, CSOs in Cebu, Philippines have put up resistance to the construction of new coal - fired power plants that would add to the existing coal plants in the province. While ADB promotes these so – called clean coal technology, the complaint filed against ADB argues that it is worse than conventional coal plants as it will employ four times more coal combustion wastes or coal ash. Despite the findings on the gross negligence on ADB’s own policies, the Bank in effect still supports the operation of the plant. In 2013, the CRP held a consultation with the affected people and disclosed that ADB does not have the power to shut down the power plant nor impose sanction on the project implementer. Continuing to Challenge ADB’s Immunity There have been attempts of filing cases on domestic courts and form a narrative of challenging immunity of international financial institutions. Environmental and human rights group EarthRights International (ERI) on behalf of the affected fishing communities sued the International Finance Corporation (IFC) in a federal court in D.C. over the IFC – funded Tata Mundra Coal Power Plant. ERI also filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Honduran farmers on the IFC investment on Corporación Dinant S.A. de C.V. In a statement by Rayyan Hassan, Executive Director of NGO Forum on ADB, lashed out that the ADB should be stripped off its immunity. The ADB continues to peddle on the illusion that it is an institution committed in the principles of transparency, accountability and responsible development financing. However time and again it has contributed in the perilous situation Asia is facing in the midst of the rising inequality, illegitimate debts, environmental degradation, displacement and increasing vulnerability of the poor. The ADB has hidden behind the cloak of immunity and the perceived notions that its accountability mechanism is working. This however needs to be challenged and hold the ADB responsible before national and international laws. Disclaimer: Due to the sensitivities of the complaints and in order to protect the identities of the project - affected persons, their real names were not used in this article. [i]Ryngaert, C. The Immunity of International Organizations before Domestic Courts: Recent Trends. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Faculty of Law. Institute for International Law. December 2009. [ii] Stephens, C. Balancing Immunity with Accountability. 8 July 2017. Retrieved from https://opinion.inquirer.net/105420/balancing-immunity-accountability [iii]Glass Half Full Report: The State of Accountability in Development Finance. 2016. Annabel Perreras is the Policy Coordinator on AIIB of NGO Forum on ADB, you may reach her via her email ann.perreras@forum-adb.org.

In 2005 the Asian Development Bank (ADB) began negotiations with the Cambodian Government to restore the nearly unusable railway line, the project CAM: GMS Rehabilitation of the Railway Cambodia sounded promising, BUT there is a catch, it will be and has to be privatized. ​​This is a little confusing since the primary goal of the project is to be an economic driver for Cambodia where the poor will benefit. Sharing this supposed ‘humanitarian’ objective is the Australian Government, through AusAID, but just like many foreign-funded projects it did not break the endless cycle of poverty, or aid the poor. Instead, it created additional difficulty into an already problematic situation. How? For starters, the railway rehabilitation project has impacted approximately 18,000 people along 642 kilometers of tracks, this is according to Sim Virak, a representative of the Phnom Penh families during his interview with Hello VOA. At least 1,200 families, or about 5,160 people, were required to resettle while others lost portions of their land, homes and shops that was affected by the tracks. The land that was taken from the families to give way to the railway rehabilitation projects was used to grow produce and put food on the table of Cambodian families. The Cambodian Food Security Atlas stated that an average Cambodian plot is 1.5 Ha but 40% of households subsist on less than 0.5Ha whilst landlessness continues to increase due to displacement, to which the railway rehabilitation has contributed. There was a clear violation of the human rights. According to Eang Vuthy, Executive Director of Equitable Cambodia, families have not been fairly compensated under ADB policies. The choice of relocation sites for the affected family was at the Trapeang Anhchanh,​​ in Dangkao district, near the border of Kompong Speu, and just like most relocation site it is labeled as a ‘dead spot’, facilities and services remain rudimentary, livelihood options are limited, and transport links to the city are infrequent and expensive. And this area is 20 kilometers away from the city! In May 2010 it went ugly, Hut Holub, aged 9, and his older sister, Hut Heap, aged 13, went looking for water and drowned in a deep pond in one of the relocation sites. Their family was relocated from Battambang along with 52 other families. The site was without running water and electricity, Sok Choeun, the father of the two stated bitterly that this could have been avoided if they had enough food and clean water. The use of coercive arms of the state, such as the police, the army and the gendarme towards its citizens to execute a foreign project is also a clear violation of the citizens right. Lastly, ADB acknowledged its own shortcomings about the project particularly the displacement of local residents affected by forced resettlements, insufficient compensations, and neglect of their human rights. In fact, the ADB’s internal watchdog, the Compliance Review Panel (CRP) wrote that most of the families affected by resettlement are worse off now than before the move. It is an unadulterated disclosure that one of the country’s largest development partners failed to uphold its own safeguards. #isadbgoodorbad? Sources: http://www.opendevelopmentcambodia.net/tag/trapeang-anhchanh/ http://www.adb.org/projects/37269-013/main#project-pds http://www.aidwatch.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/CambodiaReport-WEB.pdf http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-10/an-report-finds-cambodian-rail-repairs-have-left-thousands-of-f/5249094 http://www.voacambodia.com/content/families-file-new-complaint-under-adb-railway-project/2966131.html https://www.devex.com/news/adb-admits-mistakes-over-controversial-railway-project-in-cambodia-82809 Photo Credits to: http://www.inclusivedevelopment.net/advancing-extra-territorial-human-rights-obligations/railway/ #ADB #CAMGMSRehabilitationoftheRailwayinCambodia #Safeguards #EangVuthy #Cambodia #AsianDevelopmentBank Written by Jen Derillo. Jen is NGO Forum on ADB's Program Coordinator for Communications.

When the Melamchi Water Supply Project (MWSP), a project co-funded by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) was proposed it was meant to “…alleviate the chronic water shortage in Kathmandu Valley on a sustainable, long-term basis”, but as of the moment what the project did was to promote social injustice, involuntary replacement and environmental problems. The MWSP was supposed to be an inter-basin river project that will divert 170 million liters of water per day from Melamchi River to Kathmandu through a 26.5-kilometer tunnel. Prior to the conception of the project, various studies showed that the MWSP is not necessarily the best option since there are several other options within Kathmandu Valley. The ADB and other donors have ignored these possibilities. According to Water expert Dipak Gyawali of the Nepal Water Conservation Foundation with Kathmandu’s population growth rate, no river would be able to meet the water supply demand of its people. So why proceed with the project? 70% of the water in the mains is lost due to leakage from ageing pipes or pilferage. Gyawali stated that the problem is not so much the scarcity of water, but poor water management and wasteful distribution. The people of Kathmandu are now faced with the possibility of potable water that is very costly, the minute a foreign private operator or private management handles the water supply system. There is also the question of the public participation and consultation provision of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). The lack of transparency and democratic process involved in the implementation of the road survey, land acquisition, compensation, resettlement, and the Social Upliftment Programme (SUP) was voiced out by the locals particularly the ethnic Tamang communities, who expressed their desire to participate in the SUP, and wishes it to be thoroughly discussed, designed and implemented with their FULL consent. The Indigenous tribe of Hyolmo also cried foul when the idea of relocation was discussed. The EIA of ADB and other concern financing agencies failed to study and incorporate all the environmental/ecological impacts of MWSP on the local ecology and people’s livelihoods. It is not environmentally sound. The construction of the tunnel in between the mountain will cause irreparable loss to the surrounding environment, disrupting its natural state. There is also the lack of adequate arrangement for the continuing access and management of affected forestland. MWSP also affects Melamchi’s agricultural system due to the construction of access roads through the most fertile land. Three problems arose from this part of the project: There is a loss of small and large-scale irrigation canals after the diversion of the river. A large portion of the farmlands has been affected by road construction and this impacted adversely food security, as well as the local ecology and biodiversity. Involuntary resettlements of the locals that has been grossly arbitrary. The project failed to provide adequate compensation and relocation. The program has failed to address the local needs, their priorities and the democratic process. Two of the most affected communities is the Tamang, that suffers from worsening social and economic conditions and cultural exploitation and the Majhi ethnic community whose primary livelihood is fishing. The MWSP has promoted social injustice; the project will benefit only 10 percent of country’s population, but all Nepalese will shoulder the burden of debt. #isADBgoodorbad? Sources: http://www.adb.org/projects/31624-023/main http://hyolmo.blogspot.com/2011/01/melamchi-water-supply-project-what-do.html http://www.bioline.org.br/request?er08012 http://kathmandupost.ekantipur.com/news/2014-12-23/melamchis-tunnel-vision.html#commentWrapper http://www.waterworld.com/articles/wwi/print/volume-31/issue-1/regional-spotlight/nepal-moving-mountains-in-melamchi.html http://developmentdebacles.blogspot.com/2008/02/controversies-continue-to-plague.html Photos Credits to: http://kalikagroup.com/sites/default/files/gallery/kukl%20(2).jpg http://www.nepalmountainnews.com/cms/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/road-digging-for-melamchi-p.jpg #Nepal #Melamchi #Water #Loan #Kathmandu #CoFinancing Written by Jen Derillo. Jen is NGO Forum on ADB's Program Coordinator for Communications.

Frankfurt, Germany –Deafening silence rose when leader of project-affected communities,Sim Pov raised his community’s issues on the US $ 42 million loan to the Asian Development Bank (ADB) for the Cambodia Railway Rehabilitation Project. The project aims to restore Cambodia’s railway infrastructure by rehabilitating existing railway tracks and associated structures, reconstructing the destroyed railway line to Thailand. Sim Pov brought a sample of the murky water from the Battambang resettlement site and handed it to President Nakao during a dialogue with civil society organizations on the 49th Annual Governors Meeting being held in Frankfurt. The community leader and high school teacher asked the President to help the 4,000 displaced families living in dire conditions due to poor compliance on safeguards measures on involuntary resettlement issues. In November 2011, ADB received a complaint on failure to comply with adequate compensation and restoration of livelihood. Displaced families waited for years to be receive compensation for lost properties that were heavily undervalued forcing them to take debts in order to survive. They were placed in inhabitable resettlement areas far from employment opportunities, access to clean water and near dump sites exposing them to health risks. “What do you think if your family has to live with this kind of water?” Sim Pov raises the bottled water containing dirty water during the CSO dialogue with Nakao. He and his family would drink the water he took from the resettlement site. He closed his query by saying that “I strongly believe that Mr. President with your leadership you will take immediate action to address our urgent situation”. The complaint filed by the communities triggered a safeguards review to which a Compliance Review Panel, after a 17-month investigation, admitted that ADB committed errors in its due diligence processes. The Panel found that families affected by the Railway project “suffered loss of property, livelihoods, and incomes, and as a result have borne a disproportionate cost and burden of the development efforts funded by ADB.” According to the Panel, ADB’s “inadequate attention to addressing the resettlement, public communications and disclosure requirements of its own policies…has led to significant yet avoidable adverse social impact on mostly poor and vulnerable people.”. The Panel issued clear recommendations to the ADB Management to comply with safeguard policies and address the issue. After six years, however, displaced families have found themselves unable to recover their way of life. The livelihood restoration project based on a debt refinancing scheme managed by Vision Fund failed to restore the economic status of affected communities as it only covered 35 families. Families, however, were unable to pay due to many factors that were compounded by poor compensation schemes. A displaced family merely receives US$25 a month as compensation. The Safeguard Policy Statement requires compensation for lost assets and loss of income and livelihood, decent relocation, restoration of livelihood such that displaced families’ economic and social future will generally be at least as favorable with the project as without it, provided with appropriate land, housing, infrastructure, and other compensation, comparable to the without-project situation and full disclosure to resettlement and compensation options. The complaint and the current economic and social status of project-affected families tell a glaring picture of gross implementation of ADB projects without careful planning and disregard to safeguard measures. In the same dialogue, the NGO Forum on ADB, a network of 250 civil society organizations raised the possible rise in displacements, human rights violations especially of vulnerable sectors brought by a strong focus on large scale infrastructure projects in ADB and in other multilateral development banks (MDBs). ADB has just signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the new Chinese-led multilateral development bank, Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank whose draft safeguard policy was deemed to be inadequate and dangerous by many CSOs. #CAMGMSRehabilitationoftheRailwayinCambodia #EquitableCambodia #Cambodia #cambodia #Sim #Rai #AsianDevelopmentBank #SimPov #PhnomPenh #Sihanoukville #Poipet Written by Jen Derillo. Jen is NGO Forum on ADB's Program Coordinator for Communications.

In the 49th Asian Development Bank (ADB) Annual Governors Meeting (AGM) Civil Society Panel 2 entitled Grassroots Perspective on Integrating Core Labor Standards in ADB. Mr. Souparna Lahiri, International Committee Member of NGO Forum on ADB discussion was anchored to the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. His discussion gave emphasis on- Freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining (Convention No. 87 & No. 98) The elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory labour (Convention No. 29 & No. 105) The effective abolition of child labour (Convention No. 138 & No. 182) The elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation (Convention No. 100 & No. 111) Mr. Lahiri also emphasised that ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work are universal and that they apply to all people in all States - regardless of the level of economic development. It particularly mentions groups with special needs, including the unemployed and migrant workers. It recognises that economic growth alone is not enough to ensure equity, social progress and to eradicate poverty. ADB AND FORCED LABOR: A BACKGROUNDER In 1998 ILO Declaration on Core Labour Standards specifically poses to international organisations, such as development banks, to promote an atmosphere conducive to the achievement of CLS. An assessment of compliance with CLS helps refine the development banks’ agenda and poverty reduction strategies. In light of this, it was the Asian Development Bank (ADB) which recognised the observance of the CLS in bank operations. The ADB’s board of directors in 2001 adopted a Social Protection Strategy. “In the design and formulation of its loans, ADB will comply with the internationally recognised core labour standards”. By 2002 the ADB signed a memorandum of understanding with the ILO for operational collaboration in taking forward ADB’s commitment to CLS. While, the Social Protection Strategy of ADB includes safeguards related to the environment, involuntary resettlement and indigenous and tribals, it does not include any labour safeguards or operational manual to promote CLS in ADB operations. In the same panel Claude Akpokavie, Senior ILO Adviser explained that this declaration is not an 'option’ that can be implemented only if ‘wanted’. This is a right for every worker, all over the world. UZBEKISTAN’S WHITE GOLD Cotton in Uzbekistan is referred to as ‘white gold’ because it generates an estimated US$1 billion annually through the export of around 850,000 tonnes of cotton every year, but despite these profits, those ordered to pick the cotton remain impoverished as workers are paid little, if anything. The situation was aggravated when the Amu Bukhara Irrigation System (ABIS) was proposed and approved with the goal to ensure sustainable and reliable water supply for irrigated agriculture in the main command area of 250,000 ha and drinking water for 725,000 population. That is at least what the Asian Development Bank (ADB) together with the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) “intended” to accomplish when they gave out the US$146.00 Million loan to the Uzbekistan government in 2013. Two years after, October 2015, two boys ages 2 and 17, died in circumstances related to Uzbekistan’s fall cotton harvest. For decades despite the welcoming notions from countries around the world regarding the need to refine labour standards to protect the workers, the government of Uzbekistan has forced adults and initially children as young as 10 to pick cotton under harsh conditions during harvest season. Although the younger children are no longer mobilised in large numbers, local administrations routinely send secondary students (15-17-year-olds) to the fields in some districts. Matthew Fischer-Daly, Cotton Campaign Coordinator explained that Uzbekistan primarily uses forced labour during the harvest season, around September to October. After much external pressure, the Cabinet of Ministers of Uzbekistan declared its intent to ensure that no one under the age of 18 would participate in the cotton harvest. But this only put adult forced labour into high gear. The 2-year old boy died while his mother picked cotton under threat of losing her job as a kindergarten teacher. Health care workers and students are among 1 million workers forced to toil long hours in the cotton fields, often without access to clean drinking water and typically work without crucial safety and health gear, exposed to toxic pesticides and dangerous equipment. The working condition is dangerous, people can be left exhausted, suffer from ill-health and malnutrition after weeks of hard labour. Those assigned to work on far-flung cotton farms are forced to stay in makeshift residences in poor conditions with insufficient food and clean drinking water. How is this even possible when there is already an international law about the rights of workers? Moreover, how can ADB allow this despite its commitment with the ILO for operational collaboration in taking forward ADB’s commitment to CLS? Daly explained that forced labour system is deeply rooted in the economy of Uzbekistan. The state owns most of the land, leases it to the farmers and imposes cotton production quota. Prime Minister Shavkat Mirziyoyev ordered the penalization of farmers that had not fulfilled their state-assigned cotton production quotas, including confiscating property and imprisonment. Failure to meet the annual quota results to penalty for farmers like loss of lands, destruction of non-cotton crops, and/or confiscation of property. The government controls everything, from income to setting the procurement price of the harvested cotton, which is way lower than the cost of production. The government maintains monopolies, buy and sell all the cotton, making enormous profits not for the benefit of the citizens but for the profit of corrupt private elites. ANOTHER PROMISE UNFULFILLED. This is not only a matter of forced labour or coercion. This is also a matter of compliance to the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work to which the ADB in 2006 commits itself. The bank promised to work towards the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour in designing and implementing all its projects, it is even stated in its own Core Labor Standard Hand Book, page 39. The bank also claimed that they will not finance production or activities involving harmful or exploitative forms of forced labour or child labour. Mr. Lahiri in his discussion stated that the Report and Recommendation of the President to the Board (RRP) admits that there are concerns about core labour standards, particularly during the harvest. ADB is committed to supporting adherence to the core labour standards. Suitable loan covenants have been included to ensure such adherence in relation to project activities, and will be monitored during project implementation. ADB will also closely interact with the government, including through policy dialogue, the ILO, and other institutions on this matter. However, the Assurances and Conditions part of the RRP only indicated that The government, the Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources (MAWR), and the Ministry of Finance have assured ADB that implementation of the project shall conform to all applicable ADB policies including those concerning anticorruption measures, safeguards, gender, procurement, consulting services, and disbursement, as described in detail in the project administration manual and loan documents”, and that the government, the MAWR, and Ministry of Finance have agreed with ADB on certain covenants for the project, which are set forth in the loan agreements. This statement prompted Human Rights Watch to write a letter to ADB President, Takehiko Nakao, dated September 3, 2013, where in they express their serious concerns regarding the system of employing forced labour in the Uzbek cotton fields and urged the ADB President and Board of Directors to refrain from approving the Irrigation System Rehabilitation Project. But it pushed through the same month of the same year. With all the CLS violation of the ABIS project, why is it still an ongoing project? SIDE NOTE. Panel 2 in the 49th ADB AGM also faced the hard truth that the space for CSO’s is shrinking day by day. What is happening to Uzbekistan is an example, citizens are not allowed to organize themselves, express their opinions and demand for their rights, journalists and media persons are going missing as they cover the cotton story of the country, the space for civic engagement is closing—not just in countries that have struggled under repressive or autocratic governments like Uzbekistan, but also in democracies with longstanding traditions of supporting freedom of expression. There is a need to do something. To watch the video watch here: SOURCES: http://www.adb.org/projects/44458-013/main#project-pds http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/institutional-document/33480/files/cls-handbook.pdf http://www.solidaritycenter.org/children-among-six-dead-in-uzbek-cotton-harvest-so-far/#sthash.5n290wTV.dpuf http://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/02/opinions/uzbekistan-turkmenistan-cotton/ http://www.solidaritycenter.org/children-among-six-dead-in-uzbek-cotton-harvest-so-far/ http://www.cottoncampaign.org/what-the-world-bank-and-asian-development-bank-can-do.html PHOTO CREDITS: https://www.hrw.org/news/2013/03/10/letter-adb-president-nakao-regarding-modernization-and-improved-performance-amu #Uzbekistan #Cotton #ForceLabor #Labor #ChildLabor #ForcedLabor #CentralAsia Written by Jen Derillo. Jen is NGO Forum on ADB's Program Coordinator for Communications.

​​They say it’s a small price to pay for a new era of cheap energy to drive India’s growing economy. They say that it will fulfill the call 'Power for all' in India. They say that Tata Mundra would be the pioneer of low-cost energy for the country. Most of all it was supposed to be an energy-efficient, coal-based thermal power plant, so they say. Let us put a face to this small price to pay claim, which includes: Displacement of villagers, loss farmland & access to communal grazing land, and families from the 3 communities who have to give up their homes to give way to the location to where the mega plant was built. But the people behind the mega plant described these losses, as “marginal” considering the benefits that power plant will give the country. This is human rights violation. Forcibly evicting people from their homes in lieu of ‘something better’? Though the villagers were not ‘forcibly’ evicted, it is as if they were given any other choice. The displacement of Waghers (a Muslim minority whose history on the coastline where the power plant was built dates back 200 years). Though they only live in makeshift houses, the area where they lived in is also where they conduct their means of living; traditional fishing. The warm water discharged by the mega plant has driven fish away from the intertidal zone. It also destroys mangroves that act as a breeding ground for fish and a natural barrier against cyclones. This affects the economic state of the people from the villages around the mega plant. Before the mega plant came to be, in one day, the fisher folks used to catch three times as much fish, as soon as the mega plant operated the catch has lowered incredibly that they have to have the same catch for 7 days. Ashes falling from the sky that settles on fish left out to dry, rendering them inedible. There was a definite increase in the respiratory problems of people living in the area, the elderly are the worst affected. Children are also not exempted there is a 20% rise in severe respiratory diseases in the villages near Tata Mundra mega power plant. The coal dust and fly ash are putting the lives of people, animals and horticulture at risk. Based on Ernst and Young, the estimated baseline CO2 emissions and reductions for the Project would be 30.796 million tons per year (baseline value) and 29.293 million tons per year, which would make it India’s third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases. The people around the area are stating that they are forced to adapt to the change in climate (no pun intended), in the morning and at night, steam coming from the outfall channel, the area around the mega plant is described as ‘always warm’, which is of course, not natural. Lastly, Tata Mundra Power Plant has failed the assessment of the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO), various assessments had failed to adequately consider the Wagher people or the plant’s potential impact. Then we ask, is it really a small price to pay? The struggle with Tata Mundra Mega Power Plant is not exclusively happening in Gujarat, India alone, this is a struggle experienced by almost all poor countries who see's the intervention of international financial institutions like ADB as a way towards development. #isadbgoodorbad? Sources: http://www.adb.org/projects/41946-014/main#project-pds http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2015/apr/16/why-the-mundra-power-plant-has-given-tata-a-mega-headache http://www.tatapower.com/cgpl-mundra/home.aspx http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=16026 http://www.bankinformationcenter.org/feature/tata-mundra-power-plant/ http://projects.huffingtonpost.com/worldbank-evicted-abandoned/india-uncounted http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/23/world-bank-lawsuit_n_7130130.html Photo credits to http://www.sierraclub.org/international/tata-mundra (Photo courtesy of Joe Athialy #TataMundra #Gujarat #India #ADB #AsianDevelopmentBank #Safeguards Written by Jen Derillo. Jen is NGO Forum on ADB's Program Coordinator for Communications.

A month after the 49th Asian Development Bank (ADB) Annual Governors Meeting (AGM) in Frankfurt, the project-affected communities of the Cambodian Railway Rehabilitation Project still awaits action regarding the response given by President Takehiko Nakao in the query that was posted by one of the complainants. Sim Pov, a high school teacher and a representative from Battambang, a Cambodian Railway Rehabilitation Project affected community gave out his statement and humbly asked President Nakao to respond and aid their situation. Mr. Sim Pov, flew 9,229 km to ask President Nakao for his help on the following: Displacement and the need for livelihood for the people who were relocated. People in resettlement areas are now in dire condition because the sites where they were placed have no livelihood opportunities, poor water and and road infrastructure, and has very little job opportunity. As a result, project-affected families fell into heavy indebtedness because of the poorly implemented resettlement process. A 2013 independent review of the resettlement commissioned by ADB( put the hyperlink on CRP recommendations on the project), found out that many relocated families incurred huge debts. The review suggested that the families were at a great risk of losing their home by selling their new plots of land to settle the debts that they acquire in the process of resettling. For six years the relocation sites have no access to clean drinking water. Sim Pov then showed President Nakao a bottle containing murky water from Battambang and sincerely asked ‘what if your family Mr. President would be drinking this water?’ (insert video hyperlink) THE NIGHTMARE OF RESETTLEMENT An article published by Cambodian Daily (insert hyperlink of article so they can check) describe the plight of families being plucked out of their homes to be placed somewhere else to give way to development, in this case, the rehabilitation of the Cambodian Railway. It indicated that aside from losing their properties, livelihoods and income, families are also put into resettlement sites that are far from the families’ jobs. In addition, the promise to help them earn more money were late in coming. Imagine the ordeal of having your transportation fare eating up most of your daily budget. (will put how much it cost to go to work and back from Battambang) The compensation scheme drawn up in 2006 was not changed when relocation sites were set up farther away than originally planned, nor adjusted for inflation when being paid out five or more years later, this resulted to evictees being forced to take on even more debt, often at exorbitant interest rates leading to a cycle of debts for most families. Most resettlement site does not provide clean water, and workers either have to buy their own clean water for bathing and drinking (another expense which the families should incorporate in their budget), or use the unsanitary water sources available to them. This practice exposes them to diseases and makes the people get sick very quickly especially the children. Mr. Sim Pov with high hopes asked President Nakao to hasten the implementation of the CRP recommendations. He then went, bowed down to pay his respect and gave the bottle to President Nakao. President Nakao accepted the bottled water and set it aside. ADB’s ANSWER. President Nakao admitted that the problems surrounding the Cambodian Railway Rehabilitation Project have been an “issue for quite a while”, but the independent complaints review panel have already studied it and have made recommendations. He also emphasized that ADB “is working together with the government of Cambodia with the focus on the problem of unjust compensations.: but did was careful to mention of any deadlines. He also stated that there are still grievances particularly in the city of Phnom Penh and they are trying to address it as well. The project-affected community have exhausted the ADB’s complaints mechanisms and hope that the situation will be addressed very soon – and will not be like the bottled water; something that was set aside. Sources: http://www.phnompenhpost.com/business/railway-project-suffers-blow http://www.opendevelopmentcambodia.net/briefing/cambodias-railway-system/ https://www.cambodiadaily.com/archives/adb-railway-project-made-major-mistakes-51738/ For the full video please watch it here #CAMGMSRehabilitationoftheRailwayinCambodia #cambodia #Displacement #Railway #Poipet #SimPov #EquitableCambodia #AsianDevelopmentBank #ADB #NGOForumonADB #PhnomPenh Written by Jen Derillo. Jen is NGO Forum on ADB's Program Coordinator for Communications.

​​The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has been a major funder of coal power plants – funding over $1.69 billion since 2007. Last 2013, they have given out a loan amounting to US$30.00 M that aims to provide cheap, reliable power to a region that has struggled with power outages. The new 1,200-megawatt Jamshoro power plant came without the support of the U.S. government citing “significant, grave and lasting negative impacts that coal [has] on the environment.” But despite the absence of the US vote, ADB still pushed through the project because of the acute power shortages of up to 20 hours a day that have crippled the economic growth of the country. It was said to be a contributing factor to the unemployment and social unrest across the country Pakistan. According to the project brief, the coal-fired generation unit is the first in the country to use supercritical boiler technology. It was built at an existing power plant in the town of Jamshoro in Sindh province, about 150 kilometres east of the provincial capital, Karachi. ADB also claimed that it is employing state of the art emission control equipment resulting in “cleaner emissions than the existing heavy fuel oil-fired generators and subcritical boiler technology which is more commonly used.” However, a lot of people think that this project is not a good idea since the country has already begun to feel the effects of climate change. One of them is Khawar Mumtaz, the chairperson of the National Commission on the Status of Women, “Women in the region serve not only as workers but as primary caregivers to their families. Because they must walk farther distances to fetch water and collect wood, they have less time for their families and friends, and more often end up with health issues because of it”. In a report by Emily Atkin of Thinkprogress.org, the women in Sindh –the south-east part of the country have been “socialising less, walking further, and encountering health issues due to shortages in fuelwood and fresh water”. These changes were attributed to climate change since weather patterns and intensity of heat and cold have changed working patterns of people, especially female farmers. There are around 42 million women farmers in Pakistan, most of them have replaced substantive cropping with cash crops. This also made them replace natural fertilisers to chemicals, pesticides and hybrid seeds. Forests were replaced with banana cultivation, and dams resulted in the decrease of fish. Though the coal plant seems to be a sign of hope for most people since ADB under its Energy Policy 2009 have been selectively supporting new coal-based power plants in its developing member countries after a careful consideration of alternate scenarios, but it is still an omen of climate issues that will come after because the process is still burning coal. SOURCES: http://www.adb.org/projects/47094-001/main#project-pds http://www.climatechangenews.com/2013/12/12/adb-approves-900m-loan-for-pakistan-coal-plant-but-will-it-be-the-last/ http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/12/10/3042521/adb-pakistan-coal-plant/ http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/11/29/3005311/climate-change-hurting-pakistans-women/ PHOTO CREDITS: http://dailytimes.com.pk/static/uploads/original/three-year-lapse-jamshoro-coal-power-project-seeks-government-attention-007befdfa5cbf3895817fe6f08ce1a18.jpg #CoalPlant #ADB #Pakistan Written by Jen Derillo. Jen is NGO Forum on ADB's Program Coordinator for Communications.

Even before the 49th Asian Development Bank (ADB) Annual Governors Meeting (AGM) ended, Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and ADB already announced that they would jointly finance a major new highway in Pakistan. The project would be a 64-kilometre-long stretch of the M4 highway that will connect Shorkot to Khanewal in Pakistan's Punjab province. In an article by Reuters, AIIB President Jin Liqun stated that he is delighted to take a step forward in their partnership with ADB through this project. He also added that the AIIB is looking forward into deepening the already strong relationship with the bank and expand the collaboration as they seek to address the significant infrastructure financing needs of the Asia region. The M4 highway will begin at the termination of the M3 (Connects the M-2 Motorway (near Pindi Bhattian) to Faisalabad and the M-4 Motorway) at the Sargodha Road Interchange on the northern outskirts of Faisalabad. It will continue on a southwest course connecting the cities of Faisalabad, Gojra, Toba Tek Singh, Shorkot, Abdul Hakeem, Khanewal, and Multan. Once at Khanewal, it will merge onto the N5 temporarily until the M5 is complete. The M4 Highway will have three sections: Faisalabad-Gojra 58 km Gojra-Shorkot 62 km Shorkot-Din Pur-Khanewal 64 km The project cost is around $273 million and is expected to connect other highways, which will connect the cities of Faisalabad and Multan. Whereas two large bridges will be constructed on the River Ravi and Sadhnai Canal. *Sources: http://www.reuters.com/article/pakistan-aiib-idUSL5N17N0Z2 http://conpaper.tistory.com/4027 #Pakistan #Highway #M4 #AsianDevelopmentBank #ADB #AsianInfrastructureInvestmentBank #AIIB #SouthAsia Written by Jen Derillo. Jen is NGO Forum on ADB's Program Coordinator for Communications.