Search Results

2nd ANNUAL GOVERNORS’ MEETING, CSO Dialogue Session GOOD AFTERNOON, President Jin Liqun, Members of the Management, Ladies, and Gentlemen. On behalf of the members of NGO Forum on ADB, we congratulate you on this occasion of AIIB’s 2nd Annual Governors’ Meeting. This dialogue with you is most welcome for it gives us the opportunity to raise some important issues from the communities that we work with across the region. As a strong civil society network from the South engaging with the Banks in Asia, the NGO Forum on ADB and our community partners have been monitoring ADB programs and projects for over twenty years. Our memberships’ long engagement with ADB provides us the experience to support and back up our analysis on AIIB’s current policies and implementation of its projects. As the Bank continues with its operations beyond the 2nd AGM, it would be vital to take a step back and see how things stand and where it is heading to. On Projects AIIB’s current and stated aim to invest in infrastructure projects in the region raises some critical questions on our part as shown in the projects that are now being implemented either as stand-alone or co-financed. AIIB has committed to addressing "legacy issues' of the past projects which left tens of thousands of people displaced. Many are still without justice to this day so a commitment to address past harms is welcome. However, a first step must be to develop baseline data on who were affected and what harms remain, to ensure that any remedy is sufficient and reaches all those who need it. There are issues surrounding displacement and compensation for the construction of both the transmission lines and the grid station required for the Tarbela 5 project. Local farmers have expressed concern about the lack of adequate consultation, availability of information in local languages and accessible forms, confusion on whether adequate compensation will be available for more than one crop cycle for the construction and operation of the transmission line and towers, and lack of access to affordable energy and other utilities. As the Islamabad West grid station is clearly an 'associated facility' of Tarbela 5, the Resettlement Action Plan should be released and consulted upon as part of that project, rather than treated as part of a separate project. On the Myingyan project, communities have raised concerns on their livelihoods, specifically: how the impacts on the river Ayerwaddy will affect the livelihoods of fisherfolks and what the plans for rehabilitation of their livelihoods will be whether the project will provide affordable energy for locally affected populations whether fair compensation will be available for land take required for the water pipeline and the transmission line construction and operation. In addition, there has been inadequate information disclosure and consultation at the local level, resulting in communities facing confusion over their rights, and who they can appeal to if things go wrong. Along with the European Investment Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the Asian Development Bank, the AIIB has considered a loan for the 280 MW greenfield hydropower plant project in Georgia. The Nenskra HPP developed by Korean StateK water represents one of 34 hydropower plants planned in the Upper Svaneti.  The project will impact the Svans, Georgian sub-ethnic group, that preserved a traditional justice and governance system, and religious-cultural practices. They speak Svan language, considered by UNESCO as endangered. However, the renewed ESIA (2017) fails to address how the just and fair compensation for traditionally owned lands and livelihood restoration will take place. Meanwhile, Government already transfers around 160 ha to the project sponsor. It also fails to study properly the cumulative impact of all planned project, not to speak about the absence of Strategic Impact Assessment, at least for the Engure river basin.   Finally, yet importantly, project locates in the potential emerald site, the European system of protected areas. The Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats will address the complaint on violations of a number of its articles in September 2017. On Transparency While it is encouraging to see that the Bank committing to a public consultation on complaints handling mechanism, it is still unclear what defines the Compliance Effectiveness and Integrity Unit (CEIU). The AIIB's CEIU is charged with working in a broad variety of areas, including quality control, evaluation, anti-corruption efforts, training for staff, etc. This accumulation of tasks in a single department carries inherent risks of conflict of interest. A department charged with monitoring and evaluation will hardly be able to function as an independent entity that deals with external complaints which may call its own findings that it can question. A compliance review, an independent investigation into whether the bank has adhered to its own policies, is also of fundamental importance. In cases where investigation results show the poor implementation of policies, it creates the possibility of learning from experience. A learning curve, if you will, for the Bank’s future operations. On Social Responsibility AIIB’s direction to invest more with private capital for infrastructure needs and on the other hand, governments’ enthusiasm to absorb more sectoral and infrastructure loans to fast-track their growth targets is a double-edged sword translating to greater control of private capital on social services, key economic sectors and natural resources. To ensure that loans are expeditiously disbursed at least costs, safeguards are set aside that limit the ability to protect human rights. In our experience, these have become more evident due to disappearances, employment of paramilitary in project management, and lack of public disclosure and means of redress. In summary In this occasion, and under the leadership of President Jin Liqun, we expect the Bank to uphold the values of dignity, justice, and honor by ensuring that the Bank stays true to its purpose of “fostering sustainable economic development in Asia”. We expect AIIB to support countries by mobilizing public funds in relevant social sectors like health, water and sanitation, and education. These sectors must be supported through the provision of more grants to ensure that the most marginalized and vulnerable have free access to public service. Moreover, we strongly urge the Bank to finance member countries to fund their Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) targets and the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement. Further to this, in order to sustainably keep the dialogue and interaction with civil society organizations regarding policies and projects that can best be implemented in the least risks, AIIB should establish specific mechanisms and a department that could handle CSO affairs. And in the member countries that have accepted investments, there should also be established civil society consultation and dialogue mechanism. AIIB dialogue and interaction with Chinese civil society should be more frequent and regular regarding AIIB headquartered in Beijing, China. Lastly, recognizing that space of civil society activities in China is narrowing, the Bank should try its best to maintain existing dialogue with its partners and expand interaction with Chinese civil society. More specifically, we call on you President Jin Liqun with the following questions for this year’s dialogue with CSOs: Can you ensure that the Environmental and Social Framework can prevent any risks that could impact communities? How does AIIB intend to remedy the harm and injustice done by projects prior to the approval AIIB’s Accountability Mechanism? How does AIIB intend to decarbonize Asia recognizing the limited carbon budget available in the region? Consequently, how does AIIB intend to support governments to achieve NDC’s and fulfil the Paris agreement of 1.5 degrees Celsius? ***Delivered during the AIIB Management Dialogue with CSOs, 2nd Annual Governors’ Meeting, June 17, 2017, Saturday, International Convention Center, Jeju, Korea.

We – grassroots movements, non-government organizations and civil society networks from Asian countries and the rest of the world welcome the fact that we were invited to submit our proposals and concerns during the process of drafting the Energy Sector Strategy of the Asian Infrastructure and Investment Bank (AIIB).  We note that a number of these proposals were taken on in the final version. We would like to express, however, our strong disappointment and disagreement with the Energy Sector Strategy paper still allowing for the financing of COAL. While it qualifies the conditions under which coal projects can be financed by the AIIB,  the circumstances described still leaves the door wide open for coal support. The deeply harmful impacts of coal mining and coal power plants on communities and the environment are undeniable and well-documented.  Coal power’s huge contributions to the escalation of the climate crisis is well-established and widely acknowledged.  It is in direct contradiction to AIIB’s avowed commitment to sustainable development and the Paris Agreement which expresses a goal of keeping temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees Celsius. The problem of energy poverty still affects hundreds of millions of people in the region. Governments have used this as justification to expand the coal power industry – referring to coal as the quickest and cheapest solution to the problem of energy access.  This is not an acceptable argument. Neither is it acceptable to present “clean coal technologies” as the alternative to old and obsolete coal technologies.  There is no longer any excuse not to directly shift to renewable energy systems, which have already become more economically and financially feasible alternatives as evidenced by experiences in many countries including China and India. Likewise, we disagree with AIIB supporting large hydro systems. For decades communities in Asia have resisted these projects for their devastating social and environmental impacts. The AIIB, if it is to be true to its claims as a “green bank,” must marshal its resources to support a swift and just transition to renewable and clean energy systems for people and communities of Asia, and put an end to fossil fuels and other harmful energy as soon as possible.  Our people and planet deserve no less. # Signed: Adivasi Mulvasi Astitva Raksha manch – India AKSI - Indonesia Alliance for Tax and Fiscal Justice - Nepal All Nepal Peasant's Federation (ANPFa) - Nepal All Nepal Peasants Federation -Nepal All Nepal Womens Association –Nepal Alyansa Tigil Mina ( ATM) - Philippines Aniban ng Manggagawa sa Agrikultura(AMA)-Philippines ARENA –Asia/Regional Asian People’s Movement on Debt and Development (APMDD) – Asia/Regional Bank Information Center (BIC) – Europe/regional Bangladesh Krishok Federation -Bangladesh Bangladesh Jatiyo Sramik Jote -Bangladesh Bukluran ng Manggagawang Pilipino ( BMP)- Philippines Bulig Visayas – Philippines Campaign for Climate Justice Nepal Central Eastern European Bankwatch – Europe/regional Center for Energy Ecology for Development (CEED) – Philippines Center for Environmental Justice (CEJ)  – Sri Lanka CHANGE – Vietnam Climate Reality Project -Philippines Climate Watch-Thailand CLEAN Bangladesh Community Development Library - Bangladesh Conservation Action Trust -India. Debt Watch – Indonesia EarthRights International EquityBD – Bangladesh FKNJ Jepara - Indonesia Focus on the Global South – Asia/Regional Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC) – Philippines Friends of the Earth (FOE) - USA GEFONT –Nepal Gitib –Philippines Green Alternative, Georgia GreenID –Vietnam Greenpeace Southeast Asia Greenpeace -Indonesia Greenpeace -Philippines Greenpeace -Thailand Himalaya Niti Abhiyan – India Human Rights Alliance – Nepal Inclusive Development International - global Indian Social Action Forum –India Institute for Essential Services and Resources –Indonesia Jagaran Nepal Jatam - Indonesia Kerala Independent Fishworkers Federation – India Koalisi Anti Utang - Indonesia KRUHA - Peoples Right to Water Coaliton – Indonesia LDC Watch – Global Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center/Friends of the Earth -Philippines Leave it in the Ground Initiative (LINGO) - Europe Migrant Forum in Asia (MFA) – Asia/Regional Mines, minerals and People (mmP) – India Monitoring Sustainability of Globalisation - Malaysia Nadi Gati Morcha - India National Federation of Hawkers -Bangladesh National Federation of Hawkers - India National Federation of Women Hawkers- India National Women Peasants Association, Nepal Nepal Youth Peasants Association –Nepal NGO Forum on ADB - global Our Rivers Our Life – Philippines Paguyuban UKPWR Batang -Indonesia Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum- Pakistan Pakistan Kissan Rabita Committee – Pakistan Philippine Movement for Climate Justice (PMCJ) –Philippines RE:Common - Italy River Basin Friends – India Rural Reconstruction Nepal Sanlakas Philippines Sawit Watch - Indonesia SEAFISH for Justice Solidaritas Perempuan (Women) – Indonesia South Asian Alliance for Povery Eradication (SAAPE) South Asia Food Sovereignty Network South Asia Peasants Coalition SUPRO (Campaign for Good Governance) – Bangladesh Task Force Detainees of the Philippines (TFDP) -Philippines Trade Union Policy Institute(TUPI) -Nepal Unnayan Onneshan –Bangladesh Urgewald - Germany VOICE – Bangladesh Vietnam Sustainable Energy Alliance (VSEA) -Vietnam WALHI/Friends of the Earth -Indonesia Youth for Climate Justice ( Y4CJ) - Philippines

Bangkok, Thailand, June 14, 2017 — Representatives from 35 civil society organizations and community groups based in 11 countries in South and Southeast Asia participated in a workshop on how individuals and communities harmed by development projects can seek recourse. The Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact, NGO Forum on ADB, International Rivers, International Accountability Project, and the Center for International Environmental Law organized the workshop, held on 6 June, 2017, in partnership with the independent accountability mechanisms of the World Bank Group — the Inspection Panel and the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman — and the Asian Development Bank. “Communities impacted by development projects can face limited and tenuous options for recourse. Filing a complaint to an accountability mechanism is often one important tactic for communities to seek remedy. It is important these mechanisms remain independent and accessible,” said Anirudha Nagar, South Asia Director of Accountability Counsel. In 1993, the Inspection Panel, the first independent accountability mechanism of its kind, was created to address the grievances of those negatively impacted by World Bank financing. Since then, other development finance institutions have followed suit, creating their own mechanisms to address complaints from people who are harmed by development projects. However, communities harmed by a development project often face substantial obstacles to accessing these mechanisms. Prabindra Shakya of Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact commented: “Unfortunately, people often learn about development projects when the bulldozers have arrived and ground has been broken. It is rare that they are aware of the financing of the project, let alone what recourse mechanisms exist.” A key goal of this workshop was to build awareness of the development financing in the region and to increase communications between the independent accountability mechanisms and civil society and community groups in the region. In recent years, the context in which civil society, community groups, and ultimately potential complainants operate has drastically changed, adding additional obstacles to access to remedy. “Increasingly, communities and the organizations that support them in voicing dissent to a development project face threats to their security,” stated Maureen Harris, Southeast Asia Director for International Rivers. “When complainants come forward with a complaint — to a national body or an independent accountability mechanism — they do so at real risk to their lives.” Civil society and community groups underscored the urgent need for development institutions, like the World Bank Group and the Asian Development Bank, to create a space for meaningful public consultation by project-affected communities and to address and mitigate the growing threat to environmental and human rights defenders, which have included intimidation, harm or violence, and spurious legal actions. “Development finance institutions and the accountability mechanisms that sit within them can no longer ignore the pressing security challenges faced by these communities,” stated Jocelyn Medallo, Director of Policy and Advocacy at International Accountability Project. “It’s high time these institutions publicly commit to investments that create an enabling environment for meaningful public participation and safeguard human rights and environmental defenders — — including those who may face reprisals when filing to the independent accountability mechanisms.” In addition, civil society groups underscored the importance of accountability in Asia’s shifting development landscape. The China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) has rapidly emerged as an important financier of development and infrastructure projects in the region, often co-financing with other development finance institutions in the region. At the same time, the rise of complex lending instruments, such as financial intermediaries, coupled with the push for private sector financing, particularly in fragile governance countries, have raised alarm bells about transparency and the obfuscation of accountability for harmful development projects. “Development of robust safeguards and accountability mechanisms has lagged behind the push for economic development. The AIIB’s practice of co-financing with other institutions reduces clarity on applicable safeguards and may reduce accountability for adverse project impacts,” stated Rayyan Hassan, Executive Director of NGO Forum on ADB. Representatives from independent accountability mechanisms shared information about their roles, responsibilities, and limitations. Importantly, the workshop allowed for participants to critically reflect on the past and potential engagements, while addressing difficult questions — did filing complaints materially improve the lives and living conditions of communities? What barriers exist for communities in Asia to access remedy? What resources are available to communities or individuals facing threats of retaliation?

The 2015 Paris Agreement had 194 countries make a commitment to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees. While most countries have signed and ratified and all multilateral development banks have recognized the Paris Agreement, the emissions continue to increase. This means that regardless of the rhetoric and policy commitments of nation states, the financing of energy operations and projects are still not aligned with the climate goals. This 2017 the ADB in its 50th anniversary is hosting yet another Asia Clean Energy Forum (ACEF) and NGO Forum on ADB is urging the Bank to live up to its rhetoric and help countries deliver their climate goals as per the Paris Agreement. We call on the ADB to ensure that no dirty energy or coal energy project will be proposed in the Bank for future investment. ADB’s track record on energy investment is dirty. From 2007-2014 ADB invested in over $ 3 billion in coal projects. From 1994 - 2012 the Natural Defense Council found that ADB was the third largest financier of coal - fired power plants, investing $ 3.9 billion in 21 projects. Some of these coal projects have led to severe environmental and social damage such as $ 120 million Naga Coal Fired Power Plant, Visayas, Philippines; in 2013 the ADB approved $ 900 million Jamshoro Coal -Fired Power Plant in Sindh, Pakistan; and ADB’s $ 450 million Tata Mundra Ultra Mega Coal Plant in Gujarat, India. All of these projects have led to severe ecological harm, loss of livelihood, displacement, air and water pollution and health hazards. These further exacerbate the impacts of climate change and place marginalized sectors including older persons, children, and people with disabilities in more vulnerable situations. We call on the ADB in its 50th year to recognize the historical harm (legacy harm) which, its projects have done to the environment and continue to do (Naga Coal Plant, Tata Mundra etc.)and immediately take the necessary measures to mitigate the environmental and social damages and stop all project operations. In the name of ‘clean energy,’ the ADB continues to finance retrofitting old coal plants under the guise of ‘clean coal technology’ (CCT). Within the CCT frame the ADB continues to support coal through, liquefaction technologies in Mongolia, integrated gasification in China without affecting a meaningful reduction in emissions. NGO Forum on ADB urgently calls on ADB to not finance any form of Fossil Fuel energy project under the banner of Clean Energy. 50 years is enough! The ADB has to own up to its actions and stops playing around with words in order to push their dirty energy agenda. We further call on the ADB to provide a clear plan of action on transitioning from Fossil Fuel energy to fully renewable energy investments. The transition from Fossil Fuel to RE should have clear indicators and targets which should be in line with countries and their respective NDCs (Nationally Determined Contributions) as per the Paris Agreement. Furthermore, with growing competitiveness and advancement in the Renewable Energy market, we urge ADB to define Renewable energy to only constitute the wind and solar energy sources. Renewable Energy investments should NOT include hydropower dams, as there is scientific proof of their emissions of methane contributing to climate change and adverse social, and environmental impacts. Finally, on the issue of coal financing, the World Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), African Development Bank (AfDB) and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) have all indicated that they will not support coal aside exceptional circumstances, this rhetoric is similar to the ADB, and we know this still leaves the door open for further investment in coal projects. We urge ADB in its 50th year to take leadership from among all MDBs and issue an immediate ban on all forms of coal power projects in this year’s ACEF. Endorsed by - 11.11.11-Belgium All India Forum of Forest Movements, India Armenian Environmental EcoFront Civil Asian Peoples Movement on Debt and Development (APMDD) Center for Energy, Ecology and Development (CEED) Center for Migrant Advocacy Center for Renewable Electricity Strategies (CREST) Centre national de coopération au développement, CNCD-11.11.11 CLEAN (Coastal Livelihood and Environmental Action Network) DIGNIDAD Alliance Environics Trust, India Equitable Cambodia Freedom from Debt Coalition Greenpeace Philippines HARIBON Indigenous Perspectives International Rivers Jal Sarokar Manch Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center,.--Kasama sa Kalikasan/Friends of the Earth Philippines (LRCKSK/FoE Phils) LILAK  (Purple Action for Indigenous Women's Rights) Manipur Cycle Club Nash Vek NGO Forum ADB in Armenia NGO FORUM on Cambodia North East Peoples Alliance Pakistan Fisher Folks (PFF) Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement (PRRM) Philippine Movement for Climate Justice (PMCJ) Social Action Forum - INSAF Sri Lanka Nature Group We Women  Lanka  Network Sri Lanka

The 2015 Paris Agreement had 194 countries make a commitment to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees. While most countries have signed and ratified and all multilateral development banks have recognized the Paris Agreement, the emissions continue to increase. This means that regardless of the rhetoric and policy commitments of nation states, the financing of energy operations and projects are still not aligned with the climate goals. ​ This 2017 the ADB in its 50th anniversary is hosting yet another Asia Clean Energy Forum (ACEF) and NGO Forum on ADB is urging the Bank to live up to its rhetoric and help countries deliver their climate goals as per the Paris Agreement. We call on the ADB to ensure that no dirty energy or coal energy project will be proposed in the Bank for future investment. ADB’s track record on energy investment is dirty. From 2007-2014 ADB invested in over $ 3 billion in coal projects. From 1994 - 2012 the Natural Defense Council found that ADB was the third largest financier of coal - fired power plants, investing $ 3.9 billion in 21 projects. Some of these coal projects have led to severe environmental and social damage such as $ 120 million Naga Coal Fired Power Plant, Visayas, Philippines; in 2013 the ADB approved $ 900 million Jamshoro Coal -Fired Power Plant in Sindh, Pakistan; and ADB’s $ 450 million Tata Mundra Ultra Mega Coal Plant in Gujarat, India. All of these projects have led to severe ecological harm, loss of livelihood, displacement, air and water pollution and health hazards. These further exacerbate the impacts of climate change and place marginalized sectors including older persons, children, and people with disabilities in more vulnerable situations. We call on the ADB in its 50th year to recognize the historical harm (legacy harm) which, its projects have done to the environment and continue to do (Naga Coal Plant, Tata Mundra etc.)and immediately take the necessary measures to mitigate the environmental and social damages and stop all project operations. In the name of ‘clean energy,’ the ADB continues to finance retrofitting old coal plants under the guise of ‘clean coal technology’ (CCT). Within the CCT frame the ADB continues to support coal through, liquefaction technologies in Mongolia, integrated gasification in China without affecting a meaningful reduction in emissions. NGO Forum on ADB urgently calls on ADB to not finance any form of Fossil Fuel energy project under the banner of Clean Energy. 50 years is enough! The ADB has to own up to its actions and stops playing around with words in order to push their dirty energy agenda. We further call on the ADB to provide a clear plan of action on transitioning from Fossil Fuel energy to fully renewable energy investments. The transition from Fossil Fuel to RE should have clear indicators and targets which should be in line with countries and their respective NDCs (Nationally Determined Contributions) as per the Paris Agreement. Furthermore, with growing competitiveness and advancement in the Renewable Energy market, we urge ADB to define Renewable energy to only constitute the wind and solar energy sources. Renewable Energy investments should NOT include hydropower dams, as there is scientific proof of their emissions of methane contributing to climate change and adverse social, and environmental impacts. Finally, on the issue of coal financing, the World Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), African Development Bank (AfDB) and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) have all indicated that they will not support coal aside exceptional circumstances, this rhetoric is similar to the ADB, and we know this still leaves the door open for further investment in coal projects. We urge ADB in its 50th year to take leadership from among all MDBs and issue an immediate ban on all forms of coal power projects in this year’s ACEF. ​ Endorsed by - ​ 11.11.11-Belgium All India Forum of Forest Movements, India Armenian Environmental EcoFront Civil Asian Peoples Movement on Debt and Development (APMDD) Center for Energy, Ecology and Development (CEED) Center for Migrant Advocacy Center for Renewable Electricity Strategies (CREST) Centre national de coopération au développement, CNCD-11.11.11 CLEAN (Coastal Livelihood and Environmental Action Network) DIGNIDAD Alliance Environics Trust, India Equitable Cambodia Freedom from Debt Coalition Greenpeace Philippines HARIBON Indigenous Perspectives International Rivers Legal Rights and Natural Resources Center,.--Kasama sa Kalikasan/Friends of the Earth Philippines (LRCKSK/FoE Phils) LILAK  (Purple Action for Indigenous Women's Rights) Manipur Cycle Club Nash Vek NGO Forum ADB in Armenia NGO FORUM on Cambodia North East Peoples Alliance Pakistan Fisher Folks (PFF) Philippine Rural Reconstruction Movement (PRRM) Philippine Movement for Climate Justice (PMCJ) Social Action Forum - INSAF Sri Lanka Nature Group We Women  Lanka  Network Sri Lanka

by Sushovan Dhar and Hasan Mehedi The Manila based Asian Development Bank (ADB) celebrated its 50th year at Yokohama from May 3-7, 2017 with a great display of extravagance and grandeur. Japan’s Crown Prince, Naruhito while inaugurating the 50th annual meeting emphasised on ADB’s remarkable ‘achievements’ in the last half a century and credited it for lifting one of the poorest regions in the world (Asia-Pacific) towards “significant progress in economic development and poverty reduction.” He remained hopeful that the Bank would play a further role in addressing “a range of challenges, such as developing infrastructure including power supply networks and transportation facilities, as well as addressing natural disasters and climate change.” His fellow Japanese, the ADB President Takehiko Nakao, was equally emphatic about the $ 270 billion loans and grants made by the Bank in the last 50 years. Nakao identified 5 future priorities of the Bank: supporting infrastructure development, social sectors like health and education, gender equality, more effective public-private partnerships (PPP), and continued reforms in the ADB. [1] Riding on the infrastructure highway It is not strange that the Bank’s road towards achieving the goal of “Building Together the Prosperity of Asia”, its poverty eradication programme, including meeting 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs), solely depends on financing infrastructure only with incremental private sector participation and PPPs. In its report entitled ‘Meeting Asia’s Infrastructure Needs’ the Bank has clearly stated “A growing proportion of ADB finance is now going to private sector infrastructure projects.” [2] This aggressive financing of the private sector and privatisation programmes – covertly or overtly – has not only attracted serious criticism, time and again, it has been amply demonstrated that large infrastructure projects have “benefited international financial institutions (IFIs), construction and power transnational corporations (TNCs), and even government bureaucrats.” [3] In Bangladesh “ADB advised energy and power sector reforms since 1980s under the guise of ‘decentralisation’ paving way for the entry of private players in this sector - both in production & distribution - in the financial year 1997-98. The private sector is heavily subsidised by the government since their entry to this sector, while the prices of electricity have steadily increased. Slowly but steadily people’s expenditure on energy and electricity has increased and the private companies have increased their profits and have repatriated overseas a part of it. The ADB has financially assisted the foreign companies to enter into the Bangladesh energy sector and has weakened public policies of the country to facilitate the entry of these companies.” [4] In almost all the countries of the Asia-Pacific region the Bank’s policies have been consistently aimed at impairing the public sector, promoting liberal markets and the private sector and creating markets for the investing countries. There can be no doubt that the ADB’s priorities lie in promoting its investors using popular slogans like “poverty reduction” and “sustainable development”. In another case of infrastructure development, the ADB-funded Tanahu Hydropower project, a storage type hydro-power project with a capacity of 140 MW on the Seti river in Nepal “will submerge land, community forest, communities, public structures and cremation sites etc. The dam will also regulate the river flow downstream.” [5] There are countless instances of devastation, destruction and destitution that the Bank has been promoting for the last 5 decades. The Marcopper Mining Project in Marinduque, Philippines took effect in 1969 but was later closed down due to a fracture in the drainage tunnel of a large pit containing leftover mine tailings that discharged toxic mine waste into the Makulapnit-Boac river system. The disaster also caused heavy floods to communities along its path, displacing over 400 families, and the evacuation of over 20 villages. [6] The Cambodian Railway Rehabilitation project (co-funded by OPEC, Malaysian government & ADB) has left thousands dislocated while the trains equipped with air-conditioning, Wi-Fi and flat screen televisions serve tourists going to Sihanoukville, because of the beaches, tropical islands and the mangrove jungles of Ream National Park. The Gojra-Shorkot-Khanewal 240 kilometres highway project in Pakistan would displace 3,429 households due to the acquisition of 1,616.7 acres of land of which 86% is agricultural land. It would also require the felling of 91,661 trees. This Bank and other IFIs have a sole intention – to promote an indiscriminate transfer of natural resources and public assets to private entities under the guise of “poverty reduction”. The mechanisms of Loans, Grants & Technical Assistance (TA) in the transportation, energy, urban development, agriculture, water and public finance sectors are all geared up towards this process. PPP: public money into private pockets For the last couple of decades, PPP is à la mode for our governments, leaders, policy-makers and others at the helm of affairs. The ADB, like other IFIS is no exception or rather, a protagonist of this cause. It has established “The Office of Public–Private Partnership (OPPP)” in September 2014 with the objective of “Expanding Private Sector Development”. The PPPs are initially projected to meet the investment shortfalls in large infrastructure projects like airports, railways, roads, power plants, etc. It is touted as a great innovation to tap private resources and fill the infrastructure gap that this region needs badly. However contentious it might be, according to the Bank, the public resources fall short by 60% to meet infrastructure needs. Therefore “the private sector to fill the remaining 60% of the gap, or 3% of GDP, it would have to increase investments from about $63 billion today to as high as $250 billion a year over 2016–2020” [7] and to achieve that “Regulatory and institutional reforms are needed to make infrastructure more attractive to private investors and generate a pipeline of bankable projects for public-private partnerships (PPPs). Countries should implement PPP-related reforms such as enacting PPP laws, streamlining PPP procurement and bidding processes, introducing dispute resolution mechanisms, and establishing independent PPP government units. Deepening of capital markets is also needed to help channel the region’s substantial savings into productive infrastructure investment.” [8] What was initially touted as a solution to bridge investment gaps is slowly extended to all sectors including education and health. Earlier health activists from the Indian state of Maharashtra protested against the privatisation of the healthcare system in the State. According to Dr. Abhay Shukla, coordinator - Support for Advocacy and Training to Health Initiatives (SATHI) “Maharashtra State Government is planning to hand over huge sums of public money to insurance companies and large private hospitals through a flawed Private-Public Partnership (PPP). This involves large scale public finances being given to corporate hospitals without any standardisation or regulation of the services, and no protection of patients’ rights. At the same time, government is planning to privatise its most revenue generating units in public hospitals like radiology services and laboratory services”. [9] Stories are abound about such covert privatisation measures across the world. In Philippines it is observed that “the ambitious plan may not usher in a golden age of infrastructure but instead a golden age of oligarchic and foreign interests in infrastructure while the public bears more onerous financial burden arising from greater debts and taxes.” [10] And in Uganda, “Since PPPs were introduced nearly $1 billion in subsidies and compensation for ‘losses’ has been paid out to the private electricity companies and Ugandan consumers have been forced to pay some of the highest charges in Africa.” [11] It is undeniable that PPP has emerged as one of the poster-boys of neo-liberal reforms but it has nothing to do with poverty reduction. While poverty eradication is an incompatible and inconsistent dream within the neoliberal regime, PPPs in fact contribute to increasing poverty, inequalities and deprivation through increased private accumulation of wealth and resources. Neo-liberalism is predicated upon an accumulation process producing extreme inequalities of income where PPPs serve as potent vehicles to sustain this accumulation process. Immunity sans precedence The impact of ADB’s activities has only increased - and would continue in the future - debt, destitution, destruction, disparity, deprivation & displacement. The division of labour among the Bank and peoples of Asia-Pacific region is that the former specialise in winning and the latter in losing. As Peoples Front against IFIs, an umbrella organisation of peoples’ movements, mass organisations, struggle groups, trade unions, community organisations and others from India noted “ADB supported infrastructure projects, Special Economic Zones (SEZs), urban expansion, industrial zones, information technology parks and industrial agriculture are resulting in widespread dispossession of urban poor, farming, pastoral, indigenous and forest communities, and in the capture of farmlands, forests, water and minerals by private corporations.” [12] In spite of such daylight robbery the ADB walks scot-free primarily due to the immunity it enjoys from countries. This is provided by law in all the countries wherever ADB operates. The Bank has been, since its inception, peddling false solutions for half a century and yet remains accountable since it has been able to deviously hide behind the immunity clause. “Sticking strictly to the nature of IFIs, the Charter of ADB has been prepared and accepted in such a manner that its financial terms and conditions, modalities, and its projects - no matter if it’s a success or a failure - its property and its staffs (2,900 employees from 59 countries working in the Headquarters at Manila, with 27 resident missions and 3 representative offices in Tokyo, Frankfurt, and Washington, DC) can’t be questioned in any national or international jurisdiction. The impunity provided to this Institution and its derivatives is more than that accorded to diplomats and their missions.” [13] The ADB, like the World Bank and other IFIs, operates like a new form of monarchy. They are above all laws – both national and international. Its unholy alliance with the governments and corporate powers creates the most powerful aristocracy of our day. One with an overwhelming control of finance and peoples’ lives, with scant regard for democratic values or republican systems. The heads of the states can be questioned in the respective parliaments but none of the ADB bosses. They are above constitutions or national or even, international laws. Its Accountability Mechanisms are more than a mere hogwash since it is not an independent body but, “controlled by the ADB President and the Board of Directors who are appointed by the largest shareholders.” [14] It is a norm above the law, an establishment above the states and a suzerain above any democratic structure. The “legal privilege of IMMUNITY has allowed the ADB, to act with impunity against the environment, human rights and self-determined development. The rule of law must also apply to a multilateral development bank if we are to fulfil the demands of human rights and sustainable development. The Forum’s long years of experience in engaging the ADB show various wins in policy language but had little influence in ADB’s operations on the ground.” [15] It is high time that this immunity is ended. It is true for the ADB and for all IFIs including the World Bank. “These immunities are at the roots of the Bank’s belligerent attitude towards anything that acts as an infringement on its profits. It is nowhere accountable, liable and chargeable for the terrible consequences that its projects, policies and actions inflict on human lives or the environment. It is also not interested in scrutinizing its policies against the international legal covenants, many of which are a result of immense socio-political struggles worldwide. It is only accountable to its shareholders.” [16] No civilised society can tolerate such a supra-sovereign body which uses its privileges and immunities to act with impunity against citizens’ right to seek protection under law and the right to justice. It contradicts various international conventions including The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). It contravenes the legal framework and justice systems of various countries. It sets up a dictatorship against popular will and no wonder that unelected governments or dictatorships have been the biggest beneficiaries of ADB as this data from Bangladesh amply demonstrates “Between 1973-2016, 40% of the ADB loans were contracted during the military regime. According to international laws all these loans granted to unelected governments are odious. The ADB has also co-operated and legitimised military governments.” [17] It is high time that we demand an end to immunity to all IFIS including the ADB, World Bank & the IMF. As the American science fiction writer and editor, John W Campbell puts it “Immunity corrupts; absolute immunity corrupts absolutely”. Footnotes [1] Japan’s Crown Prince opens 50th ADB meeting: Prioritize poverty reduction [2] Meeting Asia’s infrastructure needs. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Asian Development Bank, 2017. [3] Mega Dams: Profiteering in Infrastructure [4] ADB in Bangladesh: More Than Four Decades of Pillage & Devastation, Hasan Mehedi [5] ADB violates its own safeguard policies in Nepal Hydropower Project, Ratan Bhandari [6] https://www.forum-adb.org/50th-adb-agm-statement [7] Meeting Asia’s infrastructure needs. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Asian Development Bank, 2017. [8] Ibid. [9]http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/health/policy-and-issues/strengthen-dont-privatise/article3204134.ece [10] http://ibon.org/2017/04/dutertenomics-golden-age-of-oligarchic-and-foreign-interests-in-infrastructure/ [11] http://www.cadtm.org/Public-private-partnerships-in [12] http://www.cadtm.org/Destructive-Development-the-ADB-s [13] http://www.cadtm.org/Is-the-Asian-Development-Bank-ADB [14] Ibid. [15] https://www.forum-adb.org/open-call [16] http://www.cadtm.org/Tata-Mundra-Project-Time-to-End [17] http://www.cadtm.org/ADB-in-Bangladesh-More-Than-Four

New Delhi: People’s movements and other civil society organisations across India would hold over 100 actions of protest in 21 states of the country between May 1 - 7, 2017 to mark the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), highlighting the gross human rights violations, loss of livelihood, and environmental destructions caused by the ‘development model’ being pushed by ADB and other international financial institutions (IFIs), using public money. Some of the programmes being organized during the occasion range from organizing protests, public talks or lecture series to highlight the serious impacts of ADB’s lending, at a time when ADB is celebrating 50 years of expanding its lending portfolio of just over $3 billion during the first decade, to $123 billion during the last decade. The programs are geographically spread from Bilaspur in Himachal Pradesh to Thiruvananthapuram in Kerala, and to the Mundra in Gujarat to Dibrugarh in Assam. While Peoples’ Forum Against IFIs, a platform of people’s movements and civil society organisations working on the ill effects of international financing, is the one coordinating these 100+ events, the actions are organised by local organisations in a manner which is relevant to them, to highlight their struggles / issues and seek transparency and accountability from IFIs. “ADB needs to seriously review its push for hydro projects in India, particularly in the Himalayas, in the name of clean energy program in the light of the adverse environmental and social fallouts of its projects and the complete failure of its safeguard policies in this context,” Manshi Asher of Himdhara - Environment Research and Action Collective said. “Further, the escalation of costs in these projects has put a question mark on the financial feasibility of hydropower projects,” she added. (Video message: https://youtu.be/iYkVNQFrDgI) ADB’s investments resulting in undermining local governance bodies and other traditional institutions has come to the fore time and again. “The arrogance with which the destruction of cultures and communities by way of bulldozing our rights and the condescending belief that we indigenous peoples of the NorthEast are uninformed enough to be auctioning our rights and our way of living to the highest ‘development’ bidder like the IFIs such as ADB, needs to be done away with. We are not stupid and we will do our best to protect our land and culture!” Ratika Yumnam of Indigenous Perspectives, Manipur said. Highlighting the disproportionate influence IFIs have on the policies and other lending agencies, Leo Saldhana of Environmental Support Group Bangalore said, “ADB has always played the role of influencing a form of development that ensures revenue from loan recipient countries flows out to the coffers of countries that control the bank's stocks.  For instance, ADB pushed for Metro projects in India, and after these super-expensive mega projects were well on their way but without serving the real need - of addressing public transport, the bank backed out. “The way had already been paved of Japan Bank and JICA to step in to finance the Metro project, as is the case in Bangalore. Interestingly, the project has 300% cost over-runs and is yet not functional. Meanwhile, the entire city has been reduced to a mess of what it was before: India's 'garden city', but not anymore!” Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd (Tata Mundra) a $4bn, 4000 MW coal based thermal power plant in Kutch Gujarat is one the projects ADB is co-financing, causing damage to people and environment. As confirmed by its own accountability mechanism, Compliance Review Panel, the project has violated ADB’s policies on consultation with communities, the sanctioning of the project was based on erroneous social impact assessment and due to the project, the fish catch has reduced drastically, threatening the livelihood of thousands of fish workers. “Our plea to ADB to restore the livelihood of the fish workers have fallen on deaf ears. While they are celebrating the 50 years, the fish workers in Mundra are struggling to meet their ends,” Bharat Patel, General Secretary of Machimar Adhikaar Sangharsh Sangathan said. (Video message: https://youtu.be/3OePpbHqKIo) Through these 100+ actions, people’s movements and other CSOs are demanding the ADB to mend their ways of lending, be transparent and accountable to people in whose name they run their business. Failing which, people will be left with no option than to strengthen their struggles, despite repressive laws curbing their right to dissent, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Details of places of actions: https://wgonifis.net/places-of-action/ Video messages to ADB: https://wgonifis.net/videos/ Contact: Priya Dharshini, priya@cenfa.org Cell: +91-96546 80488 Rajesh Kumar, rajesh@cenfa.org Cell: +91-81300 30411 Ankit Agrawal, ankit@cenfa.org Cell: +91-95603 61801 Media Coordinator Website: https://wgonifis.net Twitter: @wgonifis Email: wgonifis@gmail.com

Yokohama, Japan - As the Asian Development Bank (ADB) celebrates it 50 years of operation in Asia, NGO Forum on ADB together with CSOs and affected communities from the ground are asking critical questions on its lending portfolio for the past half decade. During the President’s Dialogue held during the Annual Meeting of ADB, Mr Rayyan Hassan, the Executive Director of Forum has asked President Takehiko Nakao for an assurance if the Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) 2010 will not be diluted and whether ADB would remedy the harm done by projects prior to the approval of its Safeguards and Accountability Mechanism. To highlight the question, a representative of Marinduque Council for Environmental Concern (MACEC), an affected community related her experiences on the past ADB funded project that is still causing harm and misery to them. The Marcopper Mining Project in Marinduque, Philippines took effect in 1969 but was later closed down due to a fracture in the drainage tunnel of a large pit containing leftover mine tailings that discharged of toxic mine waste into the Makulapnit-Boac river system. The disaster also caused heavy floods to communities along its path, displacing over 400 families, and the evacuation of over 20 villages. According to Ms. Adeline Angeles, a resident living in Mogpog, Marinduque “the ADB funded project continuously cause suffering in the province, especially in terms of health and safety”. She reported that just last February 23, 2017, the same communities have expressed their alarm to the local government because of a crack that has developed in one of that dams that are now threatening another spillage. ADB was also asked about its intentions to decarbonize Asia. The Forum is pushing the bank to support the member governments to achieve its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) and fulfill the Paris agreement of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Hassan has reminded the bank to fulfill its promise made last Asia Clean Energy Forum (ACEF) 2016 in Manila where Philippines Country Director Richard Bolt said that it ‘ADB will honor Conference of the Parties (COP 21)’. The Forum also pointed out ADB’s involvement with autocratic regimes whether it would withdraw its lending to these governments that oppress human rights and rights of indigenous people and marginalized groups. Lastly, the Forum conveyed to President Nakao the Asian People’s Call on Challenging ADB’s Immunity, which started in Manila, Philippines last week (April 19-21, 2017) where civil society organizations, academics, affected communities, and youths demanded to Strip ADB’s Immunity. Mr. Hassan finished with the question “despite ADB’s Safeguards and Accountability Mechanisms, we have experienced ADB’s immunity to be an obstacle to achieving meaningful remedy to affected communities and be accountable for its failures. Do you think after 50 years it is time to reconsider ADB’s immunity clause in order to ensure justice, transparency, and accountability of all its operations in Asia?”

Good morning, President Nakao. Firstly, we wish you a happy 50th anniversary on behalf of from NGO Forum on ADB. Thank you for inviting us to this auspicious occasion and giving us the opportunity to have this dialogue with you and raise some important issues from the communities across the region. As a strong civil society network from the South engaging with the Bank since 1989, the NGO Forum on ADB and our community partners have been monitoring ADB programs and projects for over twenty years. As ADB celebrates it’s 50 years of successes we hope that it will also recognize some of its failed projects over the past decades. The Marcopper Mining Project, Philippines from the 80s, KJDRP Bangladesh from the 90’s and the Nam Theum 2 project mid 2000s are all Forum monitored projects which have had severe impacts on people and the environment and continue to bring suffering on the ground. In recent times ADB has increased its lending in the region, mostly in the energy sector. This also meant a decrease in support for important sectors like agriculture and education. There is also a worrisome trend of investing in and mobilizing finances for the private sector, as evidenced by the 15% increase in Private Sector financing from last year. New financial institutions like the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), and the competition for moving finances in the region will also result to the dilution of due diligence and a race to the bottom in terms of the safeguards and governance mechanisms within these banks. In the event of ADB’s 50th anniversary, and under the ambit of your leadership, President Nakao, we expect the Bank to uphold the values of dignity, justice and honor by ensuring that the Bank stays true to its mandate of poverty alleviation across Asia. We expect the ADB to support countries by mobilizing solely public funds in relevant social sectors like health, water and sanitation, and education. These sectors must be supported through the provision of more grants to ensure that the most marginalized and vulnerable have free access to public service. Moreover, we strongly urge the Bank to finance member countries to fund their Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) targets and the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement. More specifically, we call on you Pres. Nakao with the following questions for this years dialogue with AGM Dialogue with CSO: Can you ensure that the SPS 2010 will not be diluted? How does ADB intend to remedy the harm and injustice done by projects prior to the approval of ADB Safeguards and Accountability Mechanism? How does ADB intend to decarbonize Asia recognizing the limited carbon budget available in the region? Consequently, how does ADB intend to support governments to achieve NDC’s and fulfill the Paris agreement of 1.5 degrees Celsius? Will ADB withdraw lending of autocratic regimes which oppress human rights and rights of indigenous people and marginalized groups? Despite the ADB Safeguards and the Accountability Mechanism we have experienced ADBs immunity to be an obstacle to achieve meaningful remedy for affected communities. Do you think after 50 years it is time to reconsider ADBs immunity clause in order to ensure justice, transparency and accountability of all ADB Operations in Asia? Dear President Nakao on the 50th Anniversary of ADB we have with us Mr. Ratan Bahandari Affected Community Representative from West Seti Tanahu Project Nepal, and Ms Adeline Angeles Affected Community Representative Marinduque MarCopper Mining Project, Philippines. They have travelled thousands of miles to be here to share a few words with you… along with NGO Forum on ADBs various members who all come bearing gifts for you on this momentous occasion. ***Delivered during the ADB Presidents Dialogue with CSO, May 4, 2017, Thursday, Pacifico Yokohama, Japan.

Good morning, President Nakao. Firstly, we wish you a happy 50th anniversary on behalf of from NGO Forum on ADB. Thank you for inviting us to this auspicious occasion and giving us the opportunity to have this dialogue with you and raise some important issues from the communities across the region. As a strong civil society network from the South engaging with the Bank since 1989, the NGO Forum on ADB and our community partners have been monitoring ADB programs and projects for over twenty years. As ADB celebrates it’s 50 years of successes we hope that it will also recognize some of its failed projects over the past decades. The Marcopper Mining Project, Philippines from the 80s, KJDRP Bangladesh from the 90’s and the Nam Theum 2 project mid 2000s are all Forum monitored projects which have had severe impacts on people and the environment and continue to bring suffering on the ground. In recent times ADB has increased its lending in the region, mostly in the energy sector. This also meant a decrease in support for important sectors like agriculture and education. There is also a worrisome trend of investing in and mobilizing finances for the private sector, as evidenced by the 15% increase in Private Sector financing from last year. New financial institutions like the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), and the competition for moving finances in the region will also result to the dilution of due diligence and a race to the bottom in terms of the safeguards and governance mechanisms within these banks. In the event of ADB’s 50th anniversary, and under the ambit of your leadership, President Nakao, we expect the Bank to uphold the values of dignity, justice and honor by ensuring that the Bank stays true to its mandate of poverty alleviation across Asia. We expect the ADB to support countries by mobilizing solely public funds in relevant social sectors like health, water and sanitation, and education. These sectors must be supported through the provision of more grants to ensure that the most marginalized and vulnerable have free access to public service. Moreover, we strongly urge the Bank to finance member countries to fund their Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) targets and the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement. More specifically, we call on you Pres. Nakao with the following questions for this years dialogue with AGM Dialogue with CSO: Can you ensure that the SPS 2010 will not be diluted? How does ADB intend to remedy the harm and injustice done by projects prior to the approval of ADB Safeguards and Accountability Mechanism? How does ADB intend to decarbonize Asia recognizing the limited carbon budget available in the region? Consequently, how does ADB intend to support governments to achieve NDC’s and fulfill the Paris agreement of 1.5 degrees Celsius? Will ADB withdraw lending of autocratic regimes which oppress human rights and rights of indigenous people and marginalized groups? Despite the ADB Safeguards and the Accountability Mechanism we have experienced ADBs immunity to be an obstacle to achieve meaningful remedy for affected communities. Do you think after 50 years it is time to reconsider ADBs immunity clause in order to ensure justice, transparency and accountability of all ADB Operations in Asia? ***Delivered during the ADB Presidents Dialogue with CSO, MAy 4, 2017, Thursday, Pacifico Yokohama, Japan

Yokohama - As the Asian Development Bank (ADB) celebrates it 50 years of operation in Asia, NGO Forum on ADB together with CSOs and affected communities from the ground are asking critical questions on its lending portfolio for the past half decade. During the President’s Dialogue held during the Annual Meeting of ADB, Mr Rayyan Hassan, the Executive Director of Forum has asked President Takehiko Nakao for an assurance if the Safeguard Policy Statement (SPS) 2010 will not be diluted and whether ADB would remedy the harm done by projects prior to the approval of its Safeguards and Accountability Mechanism. To highlight the question, a representative of Marinduque Council for Environmental Concern(MACEC), an affected community related her experiences on the past ADB funded project that is still causing harm and misery to them. The Marcopper Mining Project in Marinduque, Philippines took effect in 1969 but was later closed down due to a fracture in the drainage tunnel of a large pit containing leftover mine tailings that discharged of toxic mine waste into the Makulapnit-Boac river system. The disaster also caused heavy floods to communities along its path, displacing over 400 families, and the evacuation of over 20 villages. According to Ms. Adeline Angeles, a resident living in Mogpog, Marinduque “the ADB funded project continuously cause suffering in the province, especially in terms of health and safety”. She reported that just last February 23, 2017, the same communities have expressed their alarm to the local government because of a crack that has developed in one of that dams that are now threatening another spillage. ADB was also asked about its intentions to decarbonize Asia. The Forum is pushing the bank to support the member governments to achieve its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) and fulfill the Paris agreement of 1.5 degrees Celsius. Hassan has reminded the bank to fulfill its promise made last Asia Clean Energy Forum (ACEF) 2016 in Manila where Philippines Country Director Richard Bolt said that it ‘ADB will honor Conference of the Parties (COP 21)’. The Forum also pointed out ADB’s involvement with autocratic regimes whether it would withdraw its lending to these governments that oppress human rights and rights of indigenous people and marginalized groups. Lastly, the Forum conveyed to President Nakao the Asian People’s Call on Challenging ADB’s Immunity, which started in Manila, Philippines last week (April 19-21, 2017) where civil society organizations, academics, affected communities, and youths demanded to Strip ADB’s Immunity. Mr. Hassan finished with the question “despite ADB’s Safeguards and Accountability Mechanisms, we have experienced ADB’s immunity to be an obstacle to achieving meaningful remedy to affected communities and be accountable for its failures. Do you think after 50 years it is time to reconsider ADB’s immunity clause in order to ensure justice, transparency, and accountability of all its operations in Asia?”

New Delhi: People’s movements and other civil society organisations across India would hold over 100 actions of protest in 21 states of the country between May 1 - 7, 2017 to mark the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), highlighting the gross human rights violations, loss of livelihood, and environmental destructions caused by the ‘development model’ being pushed by ADB and other international financial institutions (IFIs), using public money. Some of the programmes being organized during the occasion range from organizing protests, public talks or lecture series to highlight the serious impacts of ADB’s lending, at a time when ADB is celebrating 50 years of expanding its lending portfolio of just over $3 billion during the first decade, to $123 billion during the last decade. The programs are geographically spread from Bilaspur in Himachal Pradesh to Thiruvananthapuram in Kerala, and to the Mundra in Gujarat to Dibrugarh in Assam. While Peoples’ Forum Against IFIs, a platform of people’s movements and civil society organisations working on the ill effects of international financing, is the one coordinating these 100+ events, the actions are organised by local organisations in a manner which is relevant to them, to highlight their struggles / issues and seek transparency and accountability from IFIs. “ADB needs to seriously review its push for hydro projects in India, particularly in the Himalayas, in the name of clean energy program in the light of the adverse environmental and social fallouts of its projects and the complete failure of its safeguard policies in this context,” Manshi Asher of Himdhara - Environment Research and Action Collective said. “Further, the escalation of costs in these projects has put a question mark on the financial feasibility of hydropower projects,” she added. (Video message: https://youtu.be/iYkVNQFrDgI) ADB’s investments resulting in undermining local governance bodies and other traditional institutions has come to the fore time and again. “The arrogance with which the destruction of cultures and communities by way of bulldozing our rights and the condescending belief that we indigenous peoples of the NorthEast are uninformed enough to be auctioning our rights and our way of living to the highest ‘development’ bidder like the IFIs such as ADB, needs to be done away with. We are not stupid and we will do our best to protect our land and culture!” Ratika Yumnam of Indigenous Perspectives, Manipur said. Highlighting the disproportionate influence IFIs have on the policies and other lending agencies, Leo Saldhana of Environmental Support Group Bangalore said, “ADB has always played the role of influencing a form of development that ensures revenue from loan recipient countries flows out to the coffers of countries that control the bank's stocks. For instance, ADB pushed for Metro projects in India, and after these super-expensive mega projects were well on their way but without serving the real need - of addressing public transport, the bank backed out. “The way had already been paved of Japan Bank and JICA to step in to finance the Metro project, as is the case in Bangalore. Interestingly, the project has 300% cost over-runs and is yet not functional. Meanwhile, the entire city has been reduced to a mess of what it was before: India's 'garden city', but not anymore!” Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd (Tata Mundra) a $4bn, 4000 MW coal based thermal power plant in Kutch Gujarat is one the projects ADB is co-financing, causing damage to people and environment. As confirmed by its own accountability mechanism, Compliance Review Panel, the project has violated ADB’s policies on consultation with communities, the sanctioning of the project was based on erroneous social impact assessment and due to the project, the fish catch has reduced drastically, threatening the livelihood of thousands of fish workers. “Our plea to ADB to restore the livelihood of the fish workers have fallen on deaf ears. While they are celebrating the 50 years, the fish workers in Mundra are struggling to meet their ends,” Bharat Patel, General Secretary of Machimar Adhikaar Sangharsh Sangathan said. (Video message: https://youtu.be/3OePpbHqKIo) Through these 100+ actions, people’s movements and other CSOs are demanding the ADB to mend their ways of lending, be transparent and accountable to people in whose name they run their business. Failing which, people will be left with no option than to strengthen their struggles, despite repressive laws curbing their right to dissent, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Details of places of actions: https://wgonifis.net/places-of-action/ Video messages to ADB: https://wgonifis.net/videos/ Contact: Priya Dharshini, priya@cenfa.org Cell: +91-96546 80488 Rajesh Kumar, rajesh@cenfa.org Cell: +91-81300 30411 Ankit Agrawal, ankit@cenfa.org Cell: +91-95603 61801 Media Coordinator Website: https://wgonifis.net Twitter: @wgonifis Email: wgonifis@gmail.com