the Jadugoda Case

The battle between the victims of the Jadugoda uranium mine in Jharkhand, India, the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) and its subsidy the Uranium Corporation of India Ltd. (UCIL) has entered into the realms of law.

Xavier Dias - The Supreme Court (SC) of India, the highest court in the country admitted a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) Petition that had been filed by Advocate Dr. B L Wadhera in 1998. Arguing under the "Right to life", a basic fundamental of the Indian Constitution, Advocate Wadhera quoted an article in Outlook, a periodical of repute, on the plight of the Adivasis (the indigenous or first people of India) of Jadugoda.

A PIL Case in the SC, once seen as hope for the struggling victims of human rights violations, is today under scrutiny. The judgement of the Court, in October last year in the Narmada hydroelectric dam case, is a case in point. The SC permitted the Government to raise the height of the dam unmindful of its affects on the lives of thousands of people, whose livelihood will be submerged. From a "protector of the lives of the people" the SC is being viewed by many today as a protector of the status quo and their unsustainable destructive projects and programmes of the New Economy.

The Adivasis of Jadugoda are thus up against a battle beyond their capacity. Not the David and Goliath kind, but what in local lingo is called "a battle between a mosquito and a heavyweight". It began as soon as the Court asked the respondents i.e. DAE, UCIL, the Government of India etc to respond. They denied all the allegations, and went on to insinuate that the deaths and health conditions of the victims of Jadugoda are a result of their "unhygienic and drinking habits". Such racial stereotyping of Adivasis/Tribals and Dalits communities in India is usual in this high caste ruled society.

For the petition to be "admitted", a PIL at this stage requires the petitioner to prove cause and effect, failing to do so it can be thrown out, jeopardizing the prospects of future petitions on this issue - a frightening prospect. The petitioner, a concerned citizen, had filed the petition with a limited knowledge of the issue and ground realities. Jharkhandi's Organisation Against Radiation (JOAR), the people's organisation of Jadugoda, knew of the petition from the newspaper reports. While their destiny is resting on this case, their role in it to date has been to assist the petitioner with the evidence.

Supported by mines minerals & People (mmP), a National Alliance of Mining Affected Communities, JOAR thought it best to have a multi-discipline fact finding team to visit Jadugoda and come out with a report. Unable to bring the team together under common Terms of Reference, JOAR and mmP requested Prof. Upadhyaya, an environmentalist, to conduct a survey into the health of the people and the impact on the environment.

The logic of the legal procedures at times can be an irony. In December 1998 the Chairman of the Environment Committee of the State Legislative Council had come out with a report after conducting an inquiry in Jadugoda. The Report indicted in strong terms UCIL for the deplorable condition of the people of Jadugoda and asked UCIL to take certain corrective action. By common sense logic this Government Report should be the best basis for the SC to admit the petition. The irony is, it could not. UCIL in their reply had stated that they had taken all the "corrective action", i.e. 30-40 years of disastrous uranium mining was cleared in a few months! Even though common sense could see through UCIL's magical claim as a white lie, the logic of legal procedures required the petitioner to "prove" that even after the "action taken" by UCIL, radiation continued to harm the public. And all this just to get the petition admitted...

The issue of Jadugoda had in the meantime received wide coverage in the national and international media. The film by KRITIKA and BIRSA, "Buddha Weeps in Jadugoda", has been widely screened, informing public opinion. Concerns from all sections of the public came in including doctors and scientists. But the issue of Jadugoda closely connected to India's defense strategies saw some of these concerned doctors and scientist become weak-kneed. When JOAR asked them to be part of the inquiry team they backtracked. A well-known anti-nuclear scientist was angry when an email of his informing us of studies done on Jadugoda was circulated for more information.

India's nuclear test in Pokhran in May 1998 and the public euphoria over it was another damper. While it brought together a sizable number of the anti-nuclear individuals, it also saw many among the fence sitters calculating their odds. JOAR leadership is well aware of the odds against them. When asked at a press conference "How do you think you can fight such a strong Industry?" Ghanshyam Birulee, the Secretary of JOAR, replied "In Jadugoda, when people sick and dying are ready to stand up and fight, we do not lack courage, but what we do lack are the skills and support of scientists, doctors, committed to a radiation free world."

JOAR took another wise step. It decided to conduct a detailed health survey and a radiation mapping of the area. For the first it requested the Anumukti team to do a more detailed health survey in the area. Dr Sangamitra and Dr Surender Gadekar, together with a dozen other doctors, volunteers and the young women and men of JOAR conducted a detailed health survey in September. The survey has covered over 1200 families in the area. The data is being analyzed and the report is awaited shortly.

JOAR also approached Greenpeace to help them out with a radiation mapping of the area. In September, Diederik Samson of Greenpeace Holland and Dilip Baskaran of Greenpeace India did the radiation mapping and collecting of soil and water from different parts of Jadugoda. Their results are also awaited.

On 4 September 2000 the report of the survey of Prof. Upadhyaya and his team was presented in court. The SC accepted his report as sufficient evidence and admitted the petition. As soon as the results of the surveys of Anumukti and Greenpeace are ready they will be presented in court.

On being admitted, a petition goes through a litany of hearings and inquiry commissions before it comes up for judgement. It takes years and sometimes decades. JOAR hopes that they can get some relief from the SC. Relief that may not solve the problems of uranium mining and low dose radiation effects but will go a long way in finding some succor to the victims. When the case rests, it will be the voices and cries of the people that will keep justice awake. For the latest update on the Jadugoda situation see http://www.anawa.org.au/india