The Goan: Your 68 page letter to the CEC, which we first reportedin detail, virtually rejecting CEC’s intervention in restructuring Goa’smining, may be seen as an act of defiance by the court since the CEC is an APEXcourt appointed body
Manohar Parrikar: I don’t consider it as defiance. I’ve notquestioned the courts right to look into any legal aspect. But it’s my duty tocourse correct and if I fail, please punish me. Just because the last regimemessed up, I don’t have to take the blame for it. Allow me to clean up, becausethat is the job of the government. I’m accountable to the people and that’s whatI’m asserting.
TG: But the court intervened because of a Goa Foundationpetition. Till then were you in control?
MP: (pauses) It’s not as simple. I’m convinced that foreignfunds are flowing in from vested international business interests who want toshut down Goa’s mining. It must also be examined who pays for all the costs oftravel, stay court and lawyer fees of these NGOs. In the interest oftransparency, they have to come clear.
TG: Can you elaborate, because this is a very serious charge?
MP: In due course of time I will, but this is not as simpleas it seems. When the Goa mining business shuts down, somebody or anorganisation is the beneficiary.
TG: On page 6 of the letter, you have sought to make a cleardistinction between the CEC and the court by saying that the state governmentis “committed” and “capable” to handle environment friendly mining without“intervention” but wiling to submit its acts for scrutiny by any “other” agencythe court appoints.
MP: What the CEC is trying to prove is that there is a mess.But that is something I know. The CEC or even the courts are not accountable tothe people of the state. Do you think a three member committee is capable andunderstands every issue of mining or forests in the country. I don’t think so.There has to be a clear local intervention in the issue, by people whounderstand Goan minds well, the Goan scenario well and the Goan situation well.They should work things out. If the Supreme Court wants we will brief them ofour actions before we implement them. That’s fine with us, but a third agency(meaning the CEC) doing this for us, without us being a part of it, can’t bethe case. I don’t accept it.
TG: You are forced to. Your officers are at the CEC’s beck andcall?
MP: The CEC has virtually paralysed the department. I’m notin a position to monitor even minor minerals. Where is the mines department?There is a limit to everything. I read in a newspaper that the Shah Commissionindicated that its findings were based on the Goa government’s data. But for fiveto seven years the data is in shambles. How can I provide details when I’m notsure of the data available? That’s the reason why I appointed a committee ofCAs for analysing all data. The Justice Khandeparker committee has anenvironment expert, a chemical engineer, a retired judge of the high court anda chartered accountant of repute. That committee can go into each case andensure that the data which is jumbled up is co related. The CEC cannot do allthis. If they are willing to, I will appoint one of them mines minister. Let themtake decisions on paper and be accountable for them. I’m serious.
TG: But the CEC is duly appointed the court. Aren’t you challengingthe Court?
MP: I am providing information to the court. That can’t meanthat I can’t express what is right or wrong. We need to streamline thedocuments. There are issues that date back to 1972. We have referred to adecision of the government, where the mining policy was worked out in 1972.Based on that policy if something has been carried out, you cannot term it astotally illegal. There was no environment law in 1972.
Mining concessions were not under mining act totally. Therewas a fight in the courts. To streamline is my job. Where is the question ofneeding anyone’s help? If the court wants we will file an affidavit on what weare intending to do.
TG: So the CEC is not needed?
MP: I keep repeating. It’s the job of the government. Wewill take the help of our expert committee. What’s the point in stirring up theissue? I am ready to take the bitter decision of not allowing resumption untilI’m satisfied.
TG: Your letter to CEC the state government declared itsintentions of filing an affidavit in the court to explain its stand. Why hasn’tit been done?
MP: Many intervention petitions have been filed by miningassociations and others. Let us see the outcome. We will file when we feel thatwe are totally ready to. I don’t want the government’s petition to be linked.Some issues may overlap but we are not here to defend mine owners but toprotect the people of the state.
