Barely months after Union Minister Sarbananda Sonowal inaugurated the `48.87-crore, ship-shaped Captain of Ports (CoP) terminal in Panaji as a symbol of Goa’s modern maritime infrastructure, the State has floated a Request for Proposal to hand over its operation and management, along with a network of riverfront jetties, to a private entity for 30 years.
Amid stiff opposition to the move, the Captain of Ports has quickly pointed out that the proposed Public-Private Partnership is neither “privatisation” nor a transfer of ownership. It said that the asset will remain government property, statutory powers will stay with the State and casino operators have been expressly kept out of the bidding process. All of that sounds technically correct, but it does not address the larger question troubling citizens.
When a private concessionaire is given control over operational management, access, passenger charges and commercial spaces along a prime urban waterfront, there are bound to be areas of concern. There is nothing inherently wrong with bringing private expertise into public infrastructure. But when public money creates the asset and private hands subsequently control much of its revenue-generating potential, the terms of that arrangement must withstand public scrutiny.
Firstly, the proposed concession covers several important public access points, including jetties at Panaji, Old Goa, Betim, Kala Academy, Mahaveer Garden and the Parshuram statue. There is a high chance that the character of these places will change because commercial considerations will be at play. The proposed 200-metre yacht docking facility near Divja Circle is another point of concern. With capacity for 40 vessels and a monthly charge of up to `30,000 per vessel, it is clearly aimed at a more commercial and luxury segment of riverfront activity. This will add to the traffic and land-use pressures.
There is also a broader environmental and urban question. The River Mandovi is not merely a waterway available for commercial use. It is part of Panaji’s identity, supports traditional river activity and sustains a delicate marine ecosystem. Any substantial increase in yacht traffic and waterfront commercialisation deserves careful assessment rather than being treated simply as another revenue opportunity.
The debate, therefore, should not be reduced to whether private companies have a role in running public utilities. They plainly can, and often do. The real question is whether granting a single private operator such extensive and long-term control over important parts of Panaji’s waterfront is the right way forward. The government must consider separating the commercial and civic components of the project. Routine maintenance of public jetties need not be bundled with restaurants, event spaces and other revenue-generating facilities. Core maritime access should remain firmly within public control.
Most importantly, the government should guarantee affordable and unhindered access for the common man. Goa’s waterfront is more than an asset; it is a shared civic space, a transport network, an environmental resource and part of the State’s social and cultural identity. Infrastructure built with public money must ultimately serve the public.
The government should also put the financial feasibility studies, project details and environmental assessments in the public domain and invite consultations with citizens and stakeholders. The government may retain ownership on paper while transferring operational control for decades. That distinction matters legally. But for citizens, what matters just as much is who controls access and on whose terms the waterfront is used. Those questions deserve clear answers before Goa signs away 30 years of its riverfront future.
