September 08, 2008	Monday	Ramazan 07, 1429

KARACHI, Sept 7: In a strange move the Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (Sepa), not keeping to its earlier standpoint, has given the go-ahead to the Defence Housing Authority for the development of a multi-billion rupee waterfront project, disregarding the concerns of urban planners who wanted a thorough environmental and social evaluation of the project in line with the environmental laws.

Sources in the environmental watchdog said that the big-wigs could not resist the external pressures and had finally ordered the subordinates to keep a low-profile in the matter.

Now the authority has decided not to pursue the submission of another DHA report under Section 12 of the Pakistan Environmental Protection Act, 1997, and the IEE/EIA Regulations, 2000, in the case of a commercial district being developed by a Gulf-based firm on reclaimed land in Defence Phase VIII, said a source privy to the relevant exercise. The environmental laws require that every new development project in the country has to be preceded by an initial environmental examination (IEE) or environmental impact assessment (EIA) depending on the size and severity of the impact anticipated at the commissioning of the project.

The IEE/EIA mandates the proponent to comply with the government regulations and minimise the negative impact on the environment as far as possible. There is a rule of thumb under the environmental laws that proponents of a project costing not more than Rs50 million can be issued an NOC on the submission of an IEE report, while the project beyond these parameters is required to be examined for environmental impact assessment.

After receiving the detailed reports prepared from the scientific, micro and macro-environmental, social and economic points of view, the environmental protection agency concerned holds public hearings and frames a set of environmental management plans and guidelines on mitigation measures for the proponent if the government agency clears the project submitted to it.

The project was opened to public for reservation of residential apartments numbering over 4,000 in December 2007, said a source, adding that till the end of last year the DHA had not reported to Sepa for the environmental impact assessment of the project featuring towers of residential and commercial use. However, in the wake of concerns of the stakeholders it had to submit an IEE report to Sepa for clearance in the middle of January 2008.

Only a few days before the last general election, Sepa issued an NOC against the IEE report to the DHA waterfront development planned over coastal land stretching from Sindbad (old casino) to the Golf Course.

A source in the agency said that the then caretaker environment minister and environment secretary visited the DHA offices for a briefing from the administrative high-ups. Minutes of the meeting were prepared by the DHA, which is considered as the basis for the grant of NOC, the source said. The caretaker minister and the secretary asked the then director-general to issue NOC against the IEE report, which was done. The move left room for stakeholders to say that Sepa should have asked the DHA to submit an EIA report and not rest with the mere submission of IEE report. Besides, Sepa should also have invited comments from experts and members of civil society by holding a public hearing.

Seven zones

According to the DHA plan, “Zone E”, one of the seven zones conceptualised under the WFD located along the south-west coastline, will have a cluster of high-rise buildings, including a five-star hotel, tourist resort, residential complex, vocational dwellings, mosques, clubhouse, retail outlets and green areas and desalination plant.

After the general election and posting of a new director-general, Sepa, in view of stakeholders’ concerns, told the DHA in the first week of May that certain activities undertaken by the private developers as part of the waterfront development project violated the government rules and should, therefore, be stopped immediately.

Sepa served a show-cause notice upon the DHA asking it to explain its position within 15 days as to why a condition given in the IEE report on a concept plan of the project had been violated by engaging private builders to develop huge physical structure for commercial purposes and why the approval of an EIA had not been obtained.

In May, the DHA was told to submit a comprehensive EIA report on development of a few west-facing complexes in one of its zones for review and approval of Sepa after holding public hearing, otherwise the previously granted approval to the plan would stand cancelled. The DHA responded to the notice, which Sepa found unconvincing and asked the DHA to put the construction activity on hold and undertake a comprehensive EIA.

Following Sepa’s letter, it was learnt that the DHA again called the minister and secretary and justified the WDP activities.

According to the source, Sepa sent another letter to DHA’s project director on Aug 4, a day before Dr Mohammad Ali Shaikh took over as DG. In the letter, a Sepa director, referring to a letter (dated June 19) received from the DHA said that its standpoint on the development activities in parts of its WDP was examined and it was found that the related details and environmental impact, including mitigation steps of a bay complex and two other projects, were covered in the IEE approved by Sepa on Feb 15.

In view of the clarifications by the DHA, Sepa excluded the bay commercial district for any EIA proceedings but suggested the DHA engage an environmental consulting firm to implement the mitigation steps provided in the IEE and to submit the monitoring reports to it on a quarterly basis.

Dr Mohammad Ali Shaikh, when contacted, said that he had studied the case and talked to the quarters concerned and as such he understood that the existing legal provisions pertaining to the IEE and EIA called for a re-examination of the DHA’s WDP and its subsequent components. “I am approaching the federal government for a clear-cut policy on the projects and to seek guidance about whether the issuance of an IEE report, submission and approval was enough for undertaking multi-billion dollar projects like the WDP without holding any public hearing or scientific and technical deliberations,” he said.