Newsroom

The damage is not
quantified yet

India

Dear Editor,

The article dated 23rd April, 2015 "World Culture Festival: AoL tells NGT it can't pay remaining penalty of Rs 4.75 Cr" is replete with misrepresentation and erroneous reporting. Please find our response to the same below.

To report that The Art of Living "cannot' pay the remaining amount is factually erroneous. As the organization’s lawyer has clarified that it has no hesitation in paying the money, but has only asked for change in modalities of payment.

The NGT has not imposed any fine on the organization. The Tribunal in its interim order dated March 11, 2016 has categorically stated, "We make it clear that we have imposed a sum of Rs 5 cr initially as an 'environmental compensation' in exercise of our jurisdiction in terms of section 15 & 17 of the NGT Act and not a penalty (fine) in terms of section 26 of the NGT Act. The least we can expect from a journalist is responsible and factual reporting. Kindly understand the difference and report only facts.

Ample space has been given to the petitioner Manoj Mishra's lawyer Mr. Parikh, whose statements are filled with falsehoods and conjecture. To accuse Art of Living of "lying to the court by saying it did not have the money to pay for the environment destruction their event caused" is another statement that we strongly object to. As a trust, we were unable to immediately furnish the Rs. 5 crore which the court kindly agreed to and allowed for the 25 L deposit.

To say that the event caused environmental destruction as though it was a foregone conclusion is precisely what the Art of Living is challenging in court. Who has quantified the damage to the floodplain and how? The NGT's Principal Committee visually inspected The World Culture Festival's ground for one hour and pronounced a reparation fee of Rs.100­120 crore, then later Rs. 5 crore based merely on VISUAL assessment. No sampling or scientific assessment was undertaken. This raises many questions regarding the credibility of the Principal Committee.

In another assumption made by Parikh, he says "Art of Living knows that the Principal Committee's report will be against them". He obviously knows something we don't which raises more questions about the working ethics of the committee itself.

Regarding creating "hurdles" for inspection of the land, the facts are grossly misrepresented. The inspection team arrived unannounced at the venue two days before the organization handed over the land to the DDA. In a letter dated April 1, 2016, which the inspection team had written to the NGT court, they clearly stated that they would begin their inspection only once The Art of Living vacates the land and hands it back to the DDA. Following which DDA will have to inform them.

However, they arrived with huge JCB machines without informing anybody and before the land had been handed over by us to the DDA. Once we informed them 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.

On 18 April 2015, the grounds were returned to the DDA greener and cleaner than when it was handed to us.

The Art of Living has been subjected to an onslaught of negative publicity thanks to Mr. Mishra's baseless complaint to the NGT. The court itself asked Mr. Mishra why he had woken up just 20 days before the event was scheduled. For someone who runs the "Yamuna Jiye Abhiyan" we echo the same.  We wonder how, under his very watchful gaze, huge, permanent, destructive constructions including the Delhi Secretariat, Delhi Metro, the Commonwealth Games Village, the Delhi Millennium Bus Depot, Sonia Vihar and Batla house which are spread, for all to see on the 3000 sq kms. of these very floodplains,  never drew any protests, let alone media coverage, the likes of which the Art of Living was and continues to be subjected to.