The press release below was issued by the Central Asia and Caucasus Network in response to the ADB's refusal to make publicly available information on the Bishkek Heating Plant project. For more information on Forum's operations in the Central Asia and Caucasus region, click here.
PRESS RELEASE
CSOs hit ADB communication policy on Bishkek Heating Plant
Bishkek, June 19 – One of the largest civil society networks in the Central Asia and Caucasus region questioned today the relevance of the touted public communication policy of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in relation to issues surrounding a controversial Bishkek heating project. The groups were incensed at the recent refusal by the ADB to make public information linked to the Power and District Heating Rehabilitation Project (PDHR) in order to avoid straining or severing ties with the Kyrgyz government.
The decision by the ADB has created a wide fissure of distrust between the ADB and civil society groups who have decided in response to expose the hypocrisy and duplicity of ADB policies. Organized as the Central Asia and Caucasus Working Group on the ADB, the network of non-government organizations denounced the move by the ADB and reminded the multilateral institution of the importance of genuinely fostering civil society participation in matters of public interest. “Civil society has a central role to play in monitoring and stopping possible wrongdoing masquerading as development.” said Zulfia Marat of the Bureau on Human Rights and Rule of Law, a member of the regional network monitoring ADB activities.
The long gestation period of the ADB co-financed PDHR project took eleven years before it was completed. It has created an eerie silence among ADB officials according to the regional network. Civil society groups sensed irregularities in the implementation of the project after initial investigation on the PDHR. Digging deeper to determine the source of possible anomalies, the groups requested certain information from the Public Information and Disclosure Unit (InfoUnit) of the ADB in Manila in April. The InfoUnit responded on April 10, however, by refusing to disseminate the requested information, in accordance, officials said, with the ADB’s Public Communications Policy of 2005. The InfoUnit, being the secretariat for the Public Disclosure Advisory Committee (PDAC) as well as the ADB’s information sharing and disclosure program, advised the NGOs to submit instead a request for review on the denial of information to the PDAC.
While the NGOs filed the request as advised on April 28 to the PDAC, the latter inexplicably received the letter only on May 15, 2008 via the ADB Board of Directors. Asked to explain the irregularity, the InfoUnit said “We are still investigating why your letter didn’t reach the PDAC email box on the 28 of April. According to our Office of Information Systems and Technology, a possible reason could be a problem on network connection at the time the email was sent”. Riled NGOs described the explanation given for the delay as “not only strange but a complete joke in this technologically advanced age.”
On June 13, the NGOs received the final response from PDAC: “[A]fter carefully considering the request the PDAC has concluded that the reason given for denying your request (that is, the exception specified in paragraph 126.3 of the policy) was valid. In addition, PDAC has concluded that the documents requested also fall within the scope of paragraphs 126.1 and 126.2 of the policy (concerning internal and other information relating to ADB’s deliberative and decision-making processes)…”.
The regional NGO network reacted saying the PDAC, “had no justification for its existence in the end, despite all its long procedures.”
The PDAC, which reports directly to the President of ADB, has created an oversight body to interpret, monitor, and review the disclosure requirements of its communication policy. ADB policy says “if a requester believes that a request has been unreasonably denied, or that the Policy has been interpreted improperly, a request for review may be submitted to PDAC." Marat disagreed and said “PDAC is just an additional filter and it’s role is to protect ADB’s interest.”
The implementation of the project of PDHR began in 1996 under the auspices of the state energy company Kyrgyz National Energy Holding Company. It was undertaken with the help of co-financing provided by international donors such as the World Bank and the ADB, which put around $27.48 million in the project’s co-financing fund. The project completion period was originally slated for four years, from December 1996 to October 2000. However, completion of the project was delayed till December 31, 2007.
According to the project design, at the end of the implementation, the capital of Kyrgyz Republic should have been equipped with a modern, fully functional heating plant. Instead by the end of June 2007, the government adopted a law that allowed the privatization of the Bishkek Heating Power Plant (HPP). The government has also failed to provide any project-related documents, including the final outcome of the project, to public. “Even just on this simple matter,” said Marat, “the ADB has failed to adhere to its public communication policy.” #
For further information, you may contact Zulfia Marat of the Bureau of Human Rights and Rule of Law, Kyrgyz Republic