Dear Editor,
This is with reference to your article published on April 25th, 2016 titled “Art of trifling.” To begin with, we should like to say perhaps the Art of Living doth not protest too much but forsooth it doth protest too late!
We take great umbrage at the erroneous reporting in this article. First and foremost, the Art of Living did not stand in the way of the expert panel or their inspection. It would have been better if you had checked the facts before making it appear as though we deliberately stood in their way or had something to hide. The fact is that the expert panel arrived unannounced at the venue two days before the Art of Living handed over the land to the DDA. In a letter dated April 1, 2016, which the panel had written to the NGT court, they clearly state that they would begin their work only once the Art of Living vacates the land and hands it back to the DDA.
However, they arrived with big JCB machines without informing anybody and especially before the land had been handed over by us to the DDA. Once we informed of the court proceedings and their own letter pertaining to it, they decided that they would postpone their inspection till we had vacated the land.
To suggest the ongoing case as walkover is presumptuous on your part, to say the least. The Art of Living is challenging decisions taken by the expert panel because it believes that an initial visual inspection done by the expert panel of the floodplains to assess the 'damage' was insufficient to arrive at an off the cuff figure of Rs.100120 crore and then 5 crore. This is random because it is not based on any sampling or scientific assessment.
However, you criticizing the court for allowing us to pay Rs.25 lakhs instead of Rs.5 crore without explaining the circumstances, is again allowing for misinterpretation. As a notforprofit trust, The Art of Living could not immediately furnish that amount and the Court kindly accepted what we could. Besides all of this, please remember that the DDA gave us full permission to conduct our event with certain conditions that we strictly adhered to, so to suggest a fait accompli is not true.
We strongly disagree with your statements that "the incident has set several unfortunate precedents", that "it has left behind the impression that it is legitimate to do environmental damage if compensation follows" and, "it can be bargained with, as if it were a market entity. Indeed, it can be trifled with." This is simply hogwash and is in fact an insult to the court's integrity by suggesting that they can be bargained with.
If you had any information about The Art of Living, you would have twice about referring to us in this manner. We are an organization respected for our environment and humanitarian projects worldwide. To talk irresponsibly about an environmentally sensitive organization like ours without checking facts certainly does not reflect well on the ethics of your paper.
It is also interesting to note that your first assumption is that the event 'caused damage' which is still being argued in Court. It appears that the Indian Express is more interested in a media trial than the truth. It seems that you are already building a case wherein if the NGT rules in our favor it will be a mockery of justice but if it doesn't it will be congratulated. We think by virtue of putting out your views which are not based on the truth, you in fact are the ones setting a bad precedent. The matter is in Court as you well know. It is strange that you assume as you have done, that we have all but succeeded. If indeed we win the case, it will be on merit alone.
The case is still subjudice and we will follow the law to the letter.
What is shocking is that this event drew the kind of attention from media houses such as yourselves when on these very floodplains, for years together and even as we speak, massive structures have been built without as much as a squeak let alone a roar from you. The Delhi Metro, the Delhi Secretariat, the Millennium Bus Depot, the Commonwealth Games Village, Batla House and Sonia Vihar have what you accuse us of, permanently denuded hundreds of hectares to make way for their colossal, concretized buildings.
The World Culture Festival was a mere three day event, for four hours a day. A gigantic floating stage was constructed and dismantled, an impermanent structure in keeping with the DDA's rules. Yes, farmers were asked to loan their lands and were compensated for it. The land has subsequently been returned and they have resumed their farming. Far from being damaged, the land has been returned to the DDA cleaner and greener than when it was handed to us.
Have you missed your target? It seems so. As we write this, a hospital is coming up on these floodplains, and it has not found a mention in your paper. The Art of Living event is long over.
