The statement by the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) that it lacks the powers to review past decisions or re-evaluate permissions granted earlier raises critical questions about the integrity and efficacy of coastal environmental governance in the State. The question which came forth during a decision to drop a show-cause notice and stop work order against a resort at Bambolim appears to undermine the very purpose of a regulatory authority entrusted with safeguarding the State's fragile coastal ecosystems.
GCZMA plays a critical role along the coastline, in regulating activities within the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ), and ensuring sustainable development while protecting sensitive ecosystems. It has a role in controlling pollution in coastal waters and protecting the surrounding environment, including sensitive ecosystems like mangroves and sand dunes. It enforces environmental laws and regulations within the coastal zone and hence monitors activities in the zone and inspects sites for violations. More importantly, it handles complaints related to coastal environment issues and may even conduct hearings to resolve disputes.
With so many responsibilities, stakeholders and common citizenry look upon the GCZMA to intervene in times of crisis, especially when the coastline is endangered, not to turn its back in times of challenges.
Over the years, the coastline has gone through a metamorphosis with rampant development threatening the identity of our beaches and the livelihoods of fishermen. People find themselves in a helpless situation because real estate lobbies and "outside corporates" are pushing their way through. The existing safeguards have failed to act as deterrents, and hence the GCZMA's role becomes so crucial.
However, when the authority states that it cannot revisit permissions once granted, it calls into question its core mandate and brings down the confidence level in this authority. An understanding emerges that the clause "that permissions can be revoked in cases of illegality or fraud" appears to be misleading and meaningless if it cannot be executed. This translates into GCZMA remaining a helpless entity even if illegalities in project approvals come to light subsequently.
This comes as a surprise, because most authorities, including the Town and Country Planning Department and Panchayats who are also dealing in granting permissions hold an unequivocal right to recall or revisit their decisions depending on the circumstances. In the case of GCZMA, aggrieved parties will have to solely rely on the judiciary or the green tribunal to get respite, and that is unfair to the many Goans who are fighting against illegalities. The authority’s admission of its inability to review permissions opens doors for future violations because the system is at its weakest point here.
The incident serves as an eye-opener and the comment needs to be tested in the court of law immediately because it sets a horrible precedent, one that can open the floodgates of illegalities and destruction. The GCZMA must involve in its team personnel with a legal-technical background, officials with a judicial mind to understand the nuanced aspects of this beat. Moreover, the government must step in to ensure that fairness is maintained. Otherwise, the entire regulatory framework collapses, leaving environmental concerns at the mercy of vested interests.
Coastal protection cannot be reduced to a bureaucratic formality. Authorities who grant permission must hold the power and willingness to revoke permissions. Otherwise, the coast will remain vulnerable and the fight against forces that threaten our biodiversity, climate resilience, and local livelihoods will be futile. Protecting Goa’s coastline demands a proactive, empowered authority committed to safeguarding our coastal environment, not one constrained by legal ambiguities or bureaucratic inertia.
