Search Results

Since 1966, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) peddles on the illusion that it is an institution that is committed in making the region free from poverty. According to the bank, it has mobilized more than $250 billion worth of investments in infrastructure, research and knowledge sharing in its half a century of operations in Asia and the Pacific. The ADB continues to shell out illegitimate debts to its member countries even if it had disastrous project and policy outcomes. Moreover, the bank has been enjoying immunity from countries, including the Philippines where it had put its investments. This year as ADB celebrates its 50 years of operation highlighting its vision to alleviate poverty in Asia, affected communities, people’s organizations, and civil society organizations is holding an international gathering dubbed as “Asian People’s Call in Challenging ADB’s Immunity.” The event aims to expose the bank’s role in penetrating into the national fibers of its member countries that is worrisome. This is evident in the members’ Country Strategy and Programs (CSP), technical assistance on policy reforms such as privatization of public utilities, alienation of customary lands and the push for the narrative to create an enabling environment where private sectors could thrive. ADB continues to contribute to providing false solutions to its so called clean energy investments, mega-infrastructure projects on health, education, and agriculture, and ramp up more private sector development and regional integration projects across its lending portfolio. The recent review of ADB’s Public Communications Policy (PCP) has also fallen short of the necessary transparent measures expected of it. It is in these contexts that ADB had failed miserably in its overall mandate of alleviating poverty, contributing even more in the proliferation of inequality and climate crisis in Asia. Affected communities from the Naga Coal Plant from the Philippines, Railway Rehabilitation Project in Cambodia, Tata Mundra Mega Power Structure in India, Kali Gandaki “A” in Nepal and the historic Marcopper Mining Disaster from the Philippines gather in one roof to ask the most important question of all, after half a century, ‘is ADB’s immunity worth it?”

Since 1966, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) peddles on the illusion that it is an institution that is committed in making the region free from poverty. According to the bank, it has mobilized more than USD 250 billion worth of investments in infrastructure, research and knowledge sharing in its half a century of operations in Asia and the Pacific. The ADB shamelessly continues to shell out illegitimate debts to its member countries even if it had disastrous project and policy outcomes. Moreover, the bank has been enjoying immunity from countries, including the Philippines where it had put its investments. This year as ADB celebrates its 50 years of operation highlightin its vision to alleviate poverty in Asia, affected communities, people’s organizations, and civil society organizations is holding an international gathering dubbed as ‘ASIAN PEOPLE’s CALL IN CHALLENGING ADB’s IMMUNITY’. The event aims to expose the bank’s role in penetrating into the national fibers of its member countries that is worrisome. This is evident in the members’ Country Strategy and Programmes (CSP), technical assistance on policy reforms such as privatization of public utilities, alienation of customary lands and the push for the narrative to create an enabling environment where private sectors could thrive. ADB continues to contribute to providing false solutions to its so called clean energy investments, mega-infrastructure projects on health, education, and agriculture, and ramp up more private sector development and regional integration projects across its lending portfolio. The recent review of ADB’s Public Communications Policy (PCP) has also fallen short of the necessary transparent measures expected of it. It is in these contexts that ADB had failed miserably in its overall mandate of alleviating poverty, contributing even more in the proliferation of inequality and climate crisis in Asia. Affected communities from the Naga Coal Plant from the Philippines, Railway Rehabilitation Project in Cambodia, Tata Mundra Mega Power Structure in India, Kali Gandaki “A” in Nepal and the historic Marcopper Mining Disaster from the Philippines gather in one roof to ask the most important question of all, after half a century, ‘is ADB’s immunity worth it?” ASIAN PEOPLE’s CALL in CHALLENGING ADB’s IMMUNITY will take place on APRIL 19-20, 2017, at UP SOLAIR, Diliman Quezon City, from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM.

On Dec. 22, 2016, President Duterte signed the General Appropriations Act (GAA) of 2017 with a special provision calling on Congress’ oversight committee on overseas development assistance “to conduct a debt audit to determine the legitimacy” of 20 government-contracted foreign loans. The audit is to be completed within the 2017 fiscal year. Earlier, on Dec. 13, 2016, a more far-reaching Senate Resolution (SR) No. 253 was filed jointly by Sen. Risa Hontiveros and Senate President Aquilino Pimentel III “directing the appropriate Senate committee to inquire, in aid of legislation, into the foreign loans contracted by the Philippine government within the last 15 years through the conduct of a debt audit.” These two initiatives are historically significant as previous attempts by civil society groups, notably the Freedom from Debt Coalition (FDC), to compel the government to critically examine foreign-funded projects have all come to naught. In 2008, then President Gloria Arroyo vetoed a GAA special provision that would have suspended the debt service of 13 foreign loans that the FDC called “fraudulent, wasteful, and/or useless.” The 2017 debt audit provision covers 20 loans from the Asian Development Bank, IBRD-World Bank, Japan International Cooperation Agency, Japan Bank for International Cooperation, Japan Eximbank, Opec Fund for International Development, French Protocol, and Raiffeisen Zentralbank Austria. But as SR 253 implies, these are but the tip of the iceberg with 481 outstanding foreign loans up for scrutiny under the Hontiveros-Pimentel initiative. International debt campaigners regard a debt as “illegitimate” if it violates common principles of “human rights and sustainable human development, justice and fairness, accountability and responsibility, sovereignty of peoples and nations, and democratic rights.” SR 253 also invokes the Unctad (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development) “principles on promoting responsible sovereign lending and borrowing.” The reasons for declaring a particular debt illegitimate are: violation of procedures mandated by law such as bribery, fraud, coercion, or misrepresentation; onerous provisions such as public guarantees of private profits; negative impact on the environment, communities and people’s wellbeing, and on basic social services, human welfare, and safety; waste of funds through corruption, mismanagement, and project failures; conversion of private loans into public debts due to sovereign guarantees; subjecting the economy to shocks, unreasonable creditor demands, and financial market instabilities; and imposing conditionalities that violate national sovereignty and democratic principles. Thus, a debt audit is “both a political tool and a process to disentangle the web of debt … so as to reconstruct … the series of events” that cause many nations to fall into economic and fiscal quagmires. The FDC outlines what a debt audit should look into: the context and circumstances surrounding the transactions; the process of finalizing debt contracts; the content of the contracts; the purpose of the debts; how the funds were actually used; the impacts of debt-funded policies and projects; and the impacts of the conditionalities accompanying the debts and the debt contracts.The projected audit of 20 illegitimate loans is a preliminary but significant step toward the cancellation of all fraudulent loans and the repeal of the law on automatic appropriations for debt servicing imposed by the dictator Ferdinand Marcos in 1977 through Presidential Decree No. 1177 and reiterated by then President Corazon Aquino through the 1987 Revised Administrative Code. As it stands, debt servicing is prioritized over any other government expenditure. The Philippines is reportedly the only country in the world with such an onerous law.Our foreign debt now stands at P2.144 trillion. In the 2017 budget the automatic allocation for debt servicing of P335 billion (up from the 2016 total of P214.5 billion) is the second highest among all categories. The debt service for the 20 questionable loans amounts to P7.6 billion.Such huge outlays of public funds are better used for projects that directly benefit the Filipino people, not those tainted by odious practices that bleed the country’s meager resources dry. First published via the Inquirer - http://opinion.inquirer.net/101506/historic-audit-illegitimate-debts #ADB #NGOForumonADB #Debts

Dear President Nakao, We are writing you because we learned that the ADB board will discuss for approval the Shah Deniz gas expansion project in Azerbaijan, at its next board meeting scheduled on December 7th. We urgently ask you to postpone such a decision and align the ADB to the practice of other IFIs involved in financing of the same and related gas projects. As independent and civil organizations have been subject to the Azerbaijani government’s repression, financing of the Shah Deniz expansion would undermine the credibility of Asian Development Bank’s shareholders, as well as forefeiting the principles accountability, transparency and public participation – that your Bank promotes as essential for achieving its laudable goal of eradicating poverty in Asia. We have been opposing the financing of the Shah Deniz gas project and its connection to the Southern Caucasus Pipeline (Azerbaijan-Georgia) which is part of the mega-gas pipeline known as “Southern Gas Corridor” (SGC) and consisting of the TANAP project in Turkey and the TAP pipeline in Greece, Albania and Italy. Contrary to what often stated by project proponents and biased media, the Azeri gas set to be exported through this corridor to Europe is not actually needed according to the EU gas consumption scenario and will not easy EU energy dependance from Russia – actually TAP and TANAP are keen to transport Russian gas too. Furthermore, gas reserve of Azerbaijan are not sufficient to feed this pipeline for its timelife and more gas has to be imported either from Russia or Turkmenistan. In all affected countries local communities are concerned about project implementation and its environmental, social and human rights impacts and tens of complaints have already been filed to the EIB, the EBRD and the World Bank who are also assessing different parts of the SGC. By agreeing to finance the project, it will set a risky precedence that undermines the ongoing investigations of other IFIs. Even more concerns exist about the current status of Azerbaijan within the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative and the overall human rights situation in the country. We understand that these concerns have already been raised by some shareholders of your bank and think that due attention should be given to them. In particular, we welcomed the decision of last October by the Board of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) not to restore Azerbaijan’s status in the Initiative. The Board set Azerbaijan a four-month deadline to reform restrictive legislation that paralyses the operations of civil society in the country. Failure to comply with the corrective actions set out by the EITI Board will lead to the country's suspension from the organisation. Several IFIs, such as the EIB, the EBRD and the World Bank Group have de facto made approval of financing for Azerbaijan gas projects and related pipelines conditional to the implementation by the Azeri government of these corrective measures. We are still concerned that the EITI decision not to suspend Azerbaijan outright fails to recognise the severity of the crackdown against civil society in the country, enabling Azerbaijan to continue its harassment of all government critics while whitewashing its image to secure lucrative foreign investment. In this regard, stringent legislation governing the operation of non-governmental organisations, criminal proceedings against numerous NGOs, and intimidation tactics targeting critical voices, make it excessively difficult for civil society to operate in the country. The four-month deadline given by the EITI Board to remedy issues afflicting civil society is unlikely to compel Azerbaijan to renounce its repressive practices and instead rewards the government for superficial reforms made during the past few months. Last October Azerbaijan narrowly avoided suspension through a series of a last moment improvements aimed at appeasing the EITI Board, including unfreezing bank accounts, lifting travel restrictions and dropping criminal proceedings against members of the Azerbaijan EITI Coalition. However, these changes should not be regarded as a meaningful sign of progress with respect to the overall situation for civil society in Azerbaijan. Numerous other NGOs and their leaders continue to face criminal charges and restrictions on their ability to operate, and several civil society representatives remain in jail on trumped up charges. Indeed, on the day of the EITI decision, a Baku court sentenced a 22-year-old prodemocracy activist Giyas Ibrahimov to 10 years in jail on false narcotics charges, further to his involvement in an act of political graffiti. In addition, a recent Presidential decree allegedly aimed at facilitating grants by foreign donors has been dismissed by experts1 as a mere cosmetic reform. Azerbaijan has received multiple recommendations from international human rights and transparency bodies, including the EITI on the need to reform legislation and practices governing civil society, to bring these in line with international human rights standards. In April 2015, during the height of governmental persecution of civil society in Azerbaijan, the EITI downgraded Azerbaijan's status, outlining a corrective action plan that Azerbaijan was meant to implement in order to reinstate its position within the Initiative. Over the 18 months since the last EITI Board decision on Azerbaijan, the government has had ample opportunities to amend restrictive legislation and create an enabling environment for civil society in the country. The Azerbaijani government's total disregard of the recommendations and its failure to undertake the required reforms in due time is a clear sign that it perceives a free and independent civil society as a threat to its interests. We take this opportunity also to share our deep concerns for the human rights and democracy situation in Turkey after the faild coup of last July. As widely reported on international press, tens of thousans of public officials, journalists and activists have been laid off, detained or arrested in an arbitrary manner and under questionable and often ungrounded charges. Leading economies in the world expressed their serious concerns about the situation in Turkey. Our partner organisations in the country have been reporting us a climate of fear and intimidation which obstruct their work. The future of Turkey’s democracy is at stake. We do believe that this regrettable situation should be taken into account as well when the ADB considers financing a project whose ultimate aim is to export gas through a major pipeline crossing the Turkish territory for more than one thousand kilometers. Furthemore SOCAR, the Azeri State-owned energy company, has a significant share in the TANAP pipeline project. To conclude, given the current economic downturn in Azerbaijan and Turkey it is evident that without IFIs’ public support the Shah Deniz project and the SGC as a whole will not move ahead. Private investors see very high risks in getting exposed through the financing of these deals. Political and technical uncertainty further reduce private finance interest in them. Subsidising a mega-gas infrastructure which would lock-in the entire region in a fossil fuel dependant and climate-harming future is the wrong choice to do. Public resources could and should be used for better and more sustainable purposes, once a climate of restored democracy and human rights respect is in force in the two countries. We hope that you and the board will share our concerns and as a minimum post-pone your decision on the project. We look forward to hearing from you and trust that the ADB will raise the flag of democracy and human rights promotion through its acts. Sincerely, Rayyan Hasan, NGO Forum on ADB (rayyan@forum-adb.org) Antonio Tricarico, Re: Common (atricarico@recommon.org ) Petr Hlobil, CEE Bankwatch Network (petr@bankwatch.org ) Xavier Sol, Counter Balance (xavier.sol@counter-balance.org) Dr. Tek Vannara, The NGO Forum on Cambodia (vannara@ngoforum.org.kh ) Hasan Mehedi, Coastal Livelihood and Environmental Action Network (clean.khulna@gmail.com )

Khulna, 22 October 2016: The earth cannot be saved by emission cut as per Paris Agreement. The commitment of developed and advanced developing countries are quite insufficient to reduce global warming. Besides, they are not fulfilling their commitment of providing 100 billion US dollar per year for reducing vulnerability. It is a totally betrayal to the most vulnerable communities. The speakers said it in the inaugural press conference of Climate Justice Week today (22 October 2016, Saturday) at Humayun Kabir Balu Auditorium of Khulna Press Club. Coastal Livelihood and Environmental Action Network (CLEAN), Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) and Committee of Concerned Citizen (CCC) jointly organized the workshop. CLEAN-TIB-CCC Working group convener Advocate Kudrat-E-Khuda moderated the press conference while CLEAN chief executive Hasan Mehedi read out the written speech. In the written speech Hasan Mehedi said, as per the voluntary commitment of Annex-1 countries and advanced developing countries like China and India the global temperature may touch 4 degree Celsius by 2050 which is far more than the targeted 2 degree Celsius of Paris Agreement. Bangladesh and low-lying countries will be at risk of sinking at that level of emission. Besides, the developed countries pledged to provide 100 billion dollars for reducing the vulnerability to climate change per year, but only 1 billion dollars has been provided from Green Climate Fund so far. Contrarily World Bank and other Multilateral Banks are making loan business by using the vulnerability of the climate affected people. The green groups declared 11-point demand to the world leaders including immediate deep cut of emission, sufficient compensation to the climate victims, ensuring transparency, accountability and people's participation in climate finance, ensuring domestic and international safe migration of climate forced migrants, prioritize adaptation over mitigation in the least developed countries and formation of national climate authority for effective negotiation and implementation. The organizers declared a "Climate Justice Week" from 22-28 October 2016 all over Bangladesh to raise voices of climate victims. The week will be observed in Dhaka, Khulna, Satkhira, Bagerhat, Jessore, Jhenaidah, Pirojpur, Jhalakathi, Barisal, Barguna, Bhola, Patuakhali, Noakhali and Cox's Bazar with Climate Victims Procession, Forced Migrants Rally, Shadow Climate Justice Tribunal, Hoax on G-8 Meeting on Climate Change, Coffin Rally, Craft Rally etc. Deputy Director of Information Department M. Javed Iqbal, CCC member Shahida Akhter Putul, Advocate Ashok Kumar Saha, Bangladesh Human Rights Enforcement Committee coordinator Advocate Mominul Islam, civic leader Sheikh Abdul Halim, SPACE coordinator Salah Uddin Titol, TIB area manager Firoz Uddin, Ashraful Alam, YES member Mahmudun Nabi Sujan, SM Mamunur Rashid, Shusmit Sarkar, Foyezun Nahar Pinky, Uttam Tarafder, CLEAN campaign officer Nashim Rahman Kiron, Shubarna Islam Disa was present in the press conference among others. Hasan Mehedi Chief Executive, CLEAN Phone: +88 017 1670 2006 Click here to see schedule of events.

Nearly 10 years after the Cambodian Railway Rehabilitation project was approved, affected communities are still in the same dire situation that they were in since 2007. The project was funded by OPEC (Fund for International Development), Government of Malaysia and a large chunk of the budget coming from the Asian Development Bank (ADB), amounting to US$ 42.00 million. As of the moment the railway is already operational offering several services including passengers going to different destinations of the country. In fact, large numbers of people who ride the train are tourist going to Sihanoukville, because of the beaches, tropical islands and the mangrove jungles of Ream National Park. The train is air-conditioned, with Wi-Fi and flat screen television. In case you get hungry you may order food and drinks inside the train. Truly efficient if you do not know the background of the project. In the ADB Compliance Review and Recommendations, Second Annual Monitoring Report to the Board of Directors on the Implementation of Remedial Actions for the Greater Mekong Subregion: Rehabilitation of the Railway Project in the Kingdom of Cambodia released last June 20, 2016, the bank claimed that “…they have made good progress on re-assessing and paying out deficit compensation for lost assets and additional payments for income support”, but that is not what the affected families are saying. A resident of Trapaing Anhchanh, a resettlement site 5 to 6 hours away from Phnom Penh stated angrily that ADB and its fellow funders as well as the Cambodian Government lied to them by saying that the relocation site would be better than their current place; and that they will be given a compensation package that will help them get back on their feet as soon as they move to the designated relocation site. To their dismay, none of the promises ever came true. A TEN-YEAR PROBLEM THAT CAN’T BE SOLVED BY A 50-YEAR OLD INSTITUTION. ADB is celebrating its 50-year anniversary next year but it appears that wisdom doesn’t come with age in terms of banks. A resident from Sihanoukville recalled the day they went and saw the relocation site. What they saw was a piece of land measuring 7x15 meters, with a small, narrow toilet with a blue door bearing the number of the house where a family would be settling. The relocation site is 221.7 km away from Phnom Penh and with absolutely no means of earning money. When asked how they make their ends meet, the people in the area wearily said that they grow their own crops and raise farm animals, but this is not enough they say, what about our children? How will they go to school if one Tuktuk ride would cost them $2 dollars (8,093.62 KHR)? Most youths in the area no longer go to school and opted to help their families by doing odd jobs ranging from sewing rags to carrying heavy loads to the market just to bring food to the table. In Battambang province, another relocation site approximately 293.9 km far northwest of Phnom Penh, a resident is hopelessly narrating how they go about every day with unclean rainwater using a catch basin that ADB digged for them. The same catch basin where 2 children died while fetching water for their families in 2010, just four days after they moved to the resettlement site. As a result of the accident, the basin is now being locked to avoid accidents. In the CRP report, it was stated “In Battambang, the resettlement site gets its water from an artificial rainwater pond. The water is pumped to an overhead tank and then filtered before being delivered to the houses of the AHs. When the CRP inspected the water in homes on this monitoring mission, it appeared to be clearer than what the CRP observed last year, but it is only used for washing and cooking. However, the water in the pond is very low and given the current drought conditions, this water supply is likely to become dry soon.” Not only that, the report did not mention that the electricity being used for the pump to "filter" the water is coming from the community, which they collectively pay for every month; another unnecessary expense on the part of the relocated families. An elder in the relocation site said that the ADB installed a solar panel to power the pump in 2013 but after a few months it broke down leaving the residents with muddy water to drink, they have reported it but nothing has been done until today. With their distance from the nearest market and the cost of potable water at $7-8 per gallon, it is another problem that they have to deal with especially for people who do not have a regular income coming in. A mother of three from the community showed us the water filter that was given to them so that they can drink the water from the catch basin. It was a white plastic jug, with a hard plastic layer that serves as the filter hat, which hopefully cleanses the water coming from the rainwater catch basin. But if one looks at the water inside, it still has some soil or fine sand residue and not totally clear. LICADHO, a national Cambodian human rights organization with advocacy on health and have been helping families in the five resettlement sites for nearly 10 years stated that the water that is being consumed by the people in the Battambang relocation site is way below the World Health Organizations “framework” for safe drinking-water. In fact, even if the people in the area boil it before drinking, there are still bacteria and pathogens that might cause illnesses like typhoid, E. coli, Hepatitis A and rotaviruses. The group also added that perhaps the people in the community are already sick and they do not know it yet due to the location of the nearest hospital, which is 7km away. A person with disability (immobile) from the same relocation site said that the ADB lied to her by saying that she will be much better once she transfers to the designated resettlement sites, that not only will she have her ‘own’ land with title, but will also be given compensation to begin her life anew, seeing her situation, she gladly agreed, but like the rest it was not what she expected. She sadly narrated that she is now relying on hand me downs of the community for she cannot do anything, from food, water, hygiene and medicine. Before she can still earn a little by selling vegetables in the market since moving around is not difficult. When asked about her health, she laughed dryly saying that the nearest hospital in the area is 7 km away. If an emergency occurs it will not make much of a difference because she does not have money to be admitted to the hospital anyway. With the ill fate of all the relocation sites just to give way to the Royal Cambodian Railway, the most appalling are the Poipet resettlement households. Located in Banteay Meanchey Province, 411.3 km from Phnom Penh, this is also where the Meanchey Dump Site is situated. The largest trash dump in Cambodia, and it is just a few meters away from the relocated community, worsts it is behind the Kilometer 2 Elementary School. When asked how they cope with the smell and the smoke of the dumpsite, the elementary students collectively answered that they just ignore it or cover their noses. The school was actually where the original dumpsite was located and when the affected households came in, they moved it a few meters to give way to the families. But the smell, the smoke, the water seepage that affects the drainage system of the community is inescapable and needs to be addressed properly. One resident narrated that during the rainy season, the entire community is flooded with waters mixed with the garbage’s in the dumpsite and when it's summer, the streets, and the roads are dusty making it difficult for people to breathe. In the CRP Report under the Resettlement Site Infrastructure Status, it was clearly indicated that solid waste management problem has been introduced but part of the access road to the site still functions as a garbage dump and that there is no action nor change since 2007. THE WHITE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM. The people from the resettlement areas are now asking the government as well as the ADB and its fellow investors regarding the land title that they promised 6-7 years ago. People are now alarmed that there is no news about the land titles despite their constant follow-up to the concern government offices. A cab driver from Sihanoukville fears that if they don’t have any land title, anytime the government thinks of a development project that will be situated in their area, they can be easily displaced again. He also added that in his old age with eleven family members he couldn’t endure another displacement again. Just last August 8 he joined the protest outside the Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction asking for the agency to address their grievances regarding the land title and their insurmountable debts brought about by the lack of livelihood in the resettlement sites. This problem has long been recognized by the ADB, in fact, VisionFund Cambodia – supported by the Government of Australia – has implemented a program to help ease the loan problems of the families in the relocation sites. But VisionFund will no longer continue its program and will end it this year (2016). In the CRP Report, VisionFund Cambodia stated that most affected households do not meet the requirements or eligibility criteria for them to participate in the program. The eligibility criteria include adequate income earnings to be able to repay the monthly installments; continuous residence in the resettlement site; indebtedness level which should not be too high so that debt workout can be achieved within the financial envelope and the willingness of informal lenders to sign off the agreement. Another problem identified by VisionFund Cambodia is the presence of informal lenders, who let the affected families borrow money using the resettlement plot as collateral. This problem has been in every monitoring report of the ADB and several actions and follow-ups have been made by the affected communities, ten years is a long time; a long time to that could have been used to sort out and provide solutions to the 4847 affected families. #cambodia #EquitableCambodia #CAMGMSRehabilitationoftheRailwayinCambodia #CoFinancing #Cambodia #Safeguards #NGO #AsianDevelopmentBank #Rail #SimPov #Mekong #Displacement Written by Jen Derillo-Santos, NGO Forum on ADB's Communications Coordinator.

(Apia, 6 September 2016) - The Asian Development Bank’s internal watchdog has found there is evidence that ADB violated its operational policies in advising the Government of Samoa to adopt controversial land and financial sector reforms. The decision from the ADB Compliance Review Panel came after a preliminary investigation into a complaint submitted by a group of Matai (chiefs of villages in Samoa) regarding a series of ADB projects called Promoting Economic Use of Customary Land.  The chiefs are concerned that the ADB-driven reforms, which were carried out without meaningful consultation of the Samoan people, risk dismantling the customary land tenure system that has been the foundation of Samoan civilization for thousands of years. Approximately 80 percent of land in Samoa is governed under the customary tenure system, which disallows the individual ownership of land in favor of collective ownership. The system promotes equitable allocation of family lands to all its members, in keeping with customs and rules applicable to that family. The ADB-driven reforms make it easier to lease customary land and to use those leases as collateral for loans. The ADB advised the Samoan government to adopt a system through which an individual can unilaterally lease out customary land, without getting the consent of other members of the family. The lease agreement could then be used by the leaseholder to access credit from a bank. But if the leaseholder is unable to repay the loan, the bank can repossess the lease, and take control of the customary land for decades. The Panel criticized ADB for failing to consult customary landowners and consider their views and concerns in the advice provided to the Samoan government: “Well thought out advice given after wide, accountable and meaningful public consultations might have highlighted the concerns and fears expressed by the complainants and other customary landowners…There is prima facie evidence that suggests that inadequate consultations under the [projects] have deprived the customary landowners in Samoa of the opportunity to surface these concerns in a timely fashion and to have them properly addressed in the advice, consultant reports, draft legislation, and draft papers developed under the…projects.” The Panel found that ADB “recommended piecemeal changes to customary land laws leading to uncertainty and an abridgment of some customary land rights.” The diminution of the bundle of rights associated with customary land ownership, which resulted from ADB’s advice, the Panel found, was “likely to cause direct and material harm to the complainants and project affected people.” Despite the panel’s conclusion and recommendation that the prima facie evidence of noncompliance is serious enough to warrant a full compliance investigation, the ADB Board of Directors decided not to authorize such a review at this time. Fiu Mata’ese Elisara, matai of Sili and Savaii and Executive Director of Ole Siosiomaga Society Incorporated, said: “We are happy that the Compliance Review Panel has validated our complaint, and we particularly welcome the panel’s finding that ADB violated its policies by failing to engage communities in meaningful consultations before advising our government on matters of such fundamental importance to our identity and way of life.” “We are, however, disappointed and puzzled as to why the panel’s recommendation was overruled by the Board, which failed to authorize a full investigation,” he added. “This decision reeks of conflicts of interest,” said David Pred, Managing Director of Inclusive Development International, which has been advising the complainants. “Firstly, the director who represents Samoa on the ADB Executive Board sits on the committee that recommended overruling the Compliance Review Panel’s decision and there's no indication that he recused himself." The Board Compliance Review Committee, which made the recommendation not to authorize the full review, cited conflicting opinions that it had received from the independent Compliance Review Panel and the bank’s Office of General Counsel about whether ADB’s actions caused or is likely to cause harm. The committee also recommended deferring a full investigation due to “indications that the Government of Samoa will propose legislative changes that would substantially remove material harm to the complainants.” “The question one must ask is why does the ADB Board have an independent accountability mechanism to investigate complaints if it is just going to ignore its findings and instead take its cues from the very lawyers whose job it is to defend ADB Management against such complaints,” said Pred.  “That is the very definition of a conflict of interest.” Leuluaialii Tasi Malifa, lawyer and matai of Afega village, said: “If the Government of Samoa is preparing legislation that truly addresses our concerns, and ensures that the Constitutional prohibition on alienation of customary land is fully safeguarded, then this will be a positive outcome of our complaint.  But if this legislation does not materialize or is inadequate, we will continue to demand a full accounting from ADB." The Compliance Review Panel’s Report on Eligibility is available at this link: https://compliance.adb.org/dir0035p.nsf/attachments/SAM-EligibilityReport-18Aug_Web.pdf/$FILE/SAM-EligibilityReport-18Aug_Web.pdf The Chair’s Summary of the Board Compliance Review Committee proceedings is available at this link: http://www.adb.org/documents/chairs-summary-bcrc-crp-request-n20162 For more information and press inquiries, please contact: In Apia: Fiu Mata’ese Elisara, Executive Director, Ole Siosiomaga Society Inc. and matai of Sili, Tel: +685 7791999 Email: fiuelisara51@yahoo.com; and Leuluaialii Tasi Malifa, lawyer and matai of Afega village, Tel: +685 7284452 Email: vaoga@yahoo.com. In New York David Pred, Managing Director, Inclusive Development International (IDI), Tel: +1 917-280-2705 Email: david@inclusivedevelopment.net

Manila –For many communities facing uncertainty and harm caused by investments of development financial institutions (DFIs) including displacements, loss of livelihood, loss of social and cultural lifeways, harassment, intentional misinformation and degradation of the environment –- accountability mechanisms (AMs) provide hope for powerless communities seeking information, dialogue, redress, compensation and project cancellation especially when local authorities and private developer fail to respond. International norms guide the formulation of AM policies that influence its decisions – but that is not always the case. Deriving a satisfying outcome from a complaint process is filled with complex challenges including compromised independence of AMs to management, high eligibility criteria for complaints, lack of information on development projects, weak linkages of independent CSO watchdogs to affected communities, among others. For many documented cases, engaging these AMs is never a walk in the cloud for affected communities and watchdogs despite the existence of MDB policies on safeguards, public disclosure, and transparency. The underlying reason for the conduct of the 13thAnnual Meeting of the Independent Accountability Mechanisms with Civil Society Organizations is to understand the problems in engaging the AMs of DFIs. Representatives and top leaders of around national and international DFIs participated in the event. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) known to be one of the leading DFI in Asia have been under fire for several years regarding how they take on responsibilities of the projects that they are financing using public money but recent cases showed a dissonance between its policies and actual implementation of AM recommendations to make projects comply with DFIs own social and environmental safeguard policies. In a welcome speech, ADB President Takehiko Nakao emphasized the effectiveness of the AM, citing specifically the successful response to the complaint of project-affected communities in the Cambodian Railway Rehabilitation Project. Sim Pov, a public school teacher forcibly displaced from the said project claimed differently. He narrated that it has been 10 years and there are still families who have not been relocated. There is still no potable water in some relocation sites, no source of livelihood, and no available public transport. Poipet, a relocation site a few meters away from the dumpsite and families are neck deep in debt.  The teacher, himself, was resettled in Battambang, one of the five uninhabitable resettlement sites. Pov also said that there are still families who have not been paid in full. Land titles in the resettlement sites promised to them some 5-7 years ago have not yet been handed to them which makes them feel insecure about their land rights should another ‘development’ project need their land. ‘Why is ADB making these policies when they themselves cannot follow them?’ and added, “The ADB’s Mechanism gave us hope. We engaged again and again, but nothing happened”. Pov ended his statement by saying that the affected families from Cambodia is disappointed and has a big cynicism towards ADB. Anirudha Nagar from Accountability Counsel said ‘everything looks on good on paper, but in reality, it is another story’ referring to the experience of the Sindhuli Community of Nepal on how the World Bank misled them to implement an energy project, much like what had happened to Cambodia. An ADB official recognizes the truthfulness of what Mr. Pov’s statement and said that ‘the right people to address the problems are the ADB Board’.  He then asked how can the NGO’s target and influence the board. As the session ended, Rayyan Hassan, Executive Director of NGO Forum on ADB said that ‘the NGO’s cannot do it alone, the international AMs cannot do it alone, the community cannot do it alone. It is an uphill battle that we have to take altogether’. For complainants, earning the stamp of eligibility provides hope that the wheels of justice could work in their favor. A  groundbreaking study of AMs by SOMO, CIEL, Both ENDs, IAC, IAP and many other independent watchdogs engaging DFIs with communities worldwide adversely affected by development projects, the attrition rate of filed cases is high. The section on ADB showed that nine complaints filed were deemed ineligible for the AM’s Special Project Facilitator problem-solving function or were otherwise closed without reaching a substantive phase of the complaint process between July 2014 to June 2015. Complaints that have successfully passed the test of eligibility face a variety of hurdles. Complainants are required to first raise their concerns with ADB’s Operations Department before filing a complaint to the Mechanism there appears to be no standardized procedure for receiving and responding to those concerns or similar tracking system. For complaints that have been reviewed due to lack of compliance with ADBs own policies, Management is required to consult with the Compliance Review Panel on remedial actions, however, it is not required to consult with the complainant, “which is a major flaw in the remedial process”, the study reveals. Such is the case of complainants of the Cambodian Railway Rehabilitation project who are still in a bitter battle with Management due to incomplete implementation and unresolved issues despite glaring CRP findings and recommendations in favor of the complainants. One of the recommendations of the study is to lift the privilege of immunity given to DFIs that enables them to act with impunity.

*ADB-AIIB-DFID PROJECT IN PAKISTAN Methodology - Literature review ADB Institutional and Project Documents AIIB website Published researches on indigenous peoples and women’s land right Country briefers News coverage– online and video uploads - Email correspondence with CSOs in Pakistan Financing Corridor of Impact Entire M4 highway is a 240 km road which will construct: 15 interchanges, 23 flyovers/underpasses, 11 bridges, 19 underpasses, 191 pipe culverts , 55 WCC boxes and gas culverts . M4 Shorkot-Khanewal (Section 3 of M4) Two bridges will be constructed across 2 main surface water bodies which irrigates agri lands: River Ravi and Sadhnai Canal Displacement of 3,429 households from the use of 1,616.7 acres of land of which 86 % is privately-owned agricultural land Will require the cutting of 91,661 trees Demographic profile and “missing people” Covers 35 villages , no roads 31 villages completed acquisi.ons / 4 villages are being processed under Land Acquisi.on Act of 1894 Displacing 3,429 households Shorkot: Average household size is 6.9 Khanewal: Average household size is 7 Nuclear family (49%) , Joint (51%) Women: men popula.on ratio is at 108:100 70.2 percent uses wood, agri wastes for fuel source Presence of castes (Sayyed, Naul, Supra, Sheikh, Haraj, Gill, Sanghara, Bandash, Mughal, Jai, Arain, Malik, Rajput, Sheikh ) Presence of ethnic minori.es such as Sialkot, Amratsar, Gurdaspur, Gujranwala, Gujra which should have triggered IP SP No children counted under vulnerable groups Demographic profile and “missing people” Displaced person – any person whose land, asset/infrastructure , source of income or access to resources/workplace is likely to be affected is likely to be affected by the project’s opera.ons.In the COI, these are mostly land owners, business operators and owners of assets However, there is huge gap in head count. ADB says 3,429 households or 6,036 displaced persons losing part of their land as a result of M4-highway. Section 3. How many families in each household? Survey says 51% are living jointly with brothers etc Survey also says average size is 6.7 in Shorkot and 7 in Khanewal AIIB in its website says 3,429 households or 23, 186 displaced persons Resettlement Plan vs IR requirements Screening of the project Accomplished but with data gaps on displaced households vis a vis vs displaced persons & # of families in a displaced household No adequate discussion on women’s access to water and forest resources property rights, and views on resettlement functions No recogni.on of the existence of nomadic and ethnic minori.es. Absence of legal definition of IPs in Pakistan could have paved the way for violations on IP rights No recogni.on of children in vulnerable groups Carry out meaningful consultations. Low participation of women in consultations , 80 women vs 500 men No documentation if vulnerable groups were consulted those who were accessing agri lands Grievance mechanism station is inaccessible: Faisalabad , 3.5 hours from Khanewal and 2.5 hours from Shorkot Improve, or at least restore, the livelihoods of all displaced persons and provide adequate assistance DP will be given market value of land, and livelihood allowance for 3 months only. No other proposed interventions on other than potential priority for employment in nearby factories Transitionary allowance was only given for 3 months, not enough to restore income and given the length of interruption period. Business owners were not provided with the costs of reestablishing commercial activities elsewhere; the costs of reinstalling plant, machinery, or other equipment at full replacement cost only a transi.onary allowance for 6 months Vulnerability allowance beneficiaries includes employees, female-headed household, disabled and residents but no children and ethnic minorities Develop grievance mechanism Inappropriate disbursement method. Team announces a day before the actual disbursement which may leave AH unavailable in such a short period of .me. Only 39% of payments in Khanewal district Make a rese]lement plan Self-relocation was the option chosen by DPs. (see pages 72-79, Rese]lement Plan PAK: National Motorway M-4 Gojra–Shorkot– Khanewal Section Project – Additional Financing ADB Project Document. December 2015) Policy Environment Caveats on country systems for vulnerable populations Women have rights to land granted to them by cons.tu.onal, statutory, and religious law but are under pressure of customary law and traditional prac.ce (Sharia law). In tribal areas local Jirgas decide on land disputes and often discriminate against women and their right to land ownership. Absence of law on IP. Constitution speaks only of ethnic groups in reference to religion Land Administration Act 1894 is old, institutions on land disputes are marred with corruption and feudal relations. Both at local government (tehsil) level and federal level, courts dealing with land disputes suffer from a back-log of cases, are poorly trained, and subject to corruption. Information and Grievance • Heaviily militarized, freedom of speech is limited with shrinking space for CSOs • In other M4 sec.ons, due diligence report on resettlement says grievance mechnaism were present but not documented for follow through or further negotiation. Country system vis a vis SPS on IR Other caveats in safeguard processes: M4 Highway (Shorkot- Khanewal, Sec 3) EIA report Environment was seen as separate components and not having interrelated impacts in the ecosystem ex soil pollu.on on agricultural produc.vity,, road debris and its impacts on surface and ground water, aquatic life, irriga.on etc. No evalua.on on the impacts of cufng down of 91,000 trees on agricultural produc.vity, climate health, flaura and fauna No adequate assessment of con.nuous or intergenerational impacts on ecosystems and agricultural produc.vity, health, and is basically limited to the impacts on the construc.on phase itself No evalua.on on the impact of urbanization with the introduc.on of roads, tourists, business etc. The continuous impacts on fauna has not been evaluated properly Roads are number one killer in animals especially of migratory species like amphibians Pollution from road debris can also alter the lifecycle of animals nearby, noise pollu.on can affect the behavior of birds Caveats in safeguard processes: experiences in other M4 sections Weak gender lens: Lack of study on ow the project will affect economic ac.vi.es, water and forest access and so forth. Gender par.cipa.on is weak especially on low income groups Public consultaDons and Grievance mechanisms Most of the documented consulta.ons were with government officials and some affected establishments, low women’s par.cipa.on, no men.on of par.cipa.on from castes, lower income groups. Mechanisms exist but documenta.on of grievances are very poor. - Final arbiter are lodged in problema.c institutions Sources: Country Technical Notes on Indigenous Peoples Issues. Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Wasim Wagha. Interna.onal Fund for Agricultural Development November 2012. China’s New Silk Road, Boom or Dust for Pakistan? AFP. Nov. 15, 2015. Gender Checklist Reseilement. ADB. February 2003. M4 Highway Khanewal-Multan https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVzg2e_Owi One Belt One Road? China Pakistan Economic Corridor in Perpec.ve. Ins.tute of South Asian Studies, Na.onal University of Singapore. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3znMThX67s PM orders provinces to fix sugarcane price at Rs180/40kg. The Na.on. Nov. 22, 2015 http://na.on.com.pk/na.onal/22-Nov-2015/pm-orders-provinces-to-fix-sugarcane-price-at-rs180-40kg National Motorway M-4 Gojra–Shorkot– Khanewal Sec.on Project - Additional Financing: Environmental Impact Assessment, March 2015 National Motorway M-4 Gojra-Shorkot Sec.on Project - Additional Financing: Sec.on III Shorkot-Khanewal Reseilement Plan, ADB. December 2015 National Motorway M-4 Gojra–Shorkot Sec.on Project: Due Diligence Report on Resettlement. ADB. Mar 2016 National Motorway M-4 Gojra-Shorkot Sec.on Project: Faisalabad- Khanewal Motorway - Updated Environmental Impact Assessment. ADB. August 2015 Land Rights for Muslim Women: Review of Law and Policy. Women’s Land Rights. sustainable Development Policy Institute. ADB. July 2008. DOWNLOAD THE PRESENTATION HERE #M4 #AIIB #AsianDevelopmentBank #AsianInfrastructureInvestmentBank #Pakista #Transport #Corridor #Shorkot

(Apia, 6 September 2016) - The Asian Development Bank’s internal watchdog has found there is evidence that ADB violated its operational policies in advising the Government of Samoa to adopt controversial land and financial sector reforms. The decision from the ADB Compliance Review Panel came after a preliminary investigation into a complaint submitted by a group of Matai (chiefs of villages in Samoa) regarding a series of ADB projects called Promoting Economic Use of Customary Land. The chiefs are concerned that the ADB-driven reforms, which were carried out without meaningful consultation of the Samoan people, risk dismantling the customary land tenure system that has been the foundation of Samoan civilization for thousands of years. Approximately 80 percent of land in Samoa is governed under the customary tenure system, which disallows the individual ownership of land in favor of collective ownership. The system promotes equitable allocation of family lands to all its members, in keeping with customs and rules applicable to that family. The ADB-driven reforms make it easier to lease customary land and to use those leases as collateral for loans. The ADB advised the Samoan government to adopt a system through which an individual can unilaterally lease out customary land, without getting the consent of other members of the family. The lease agreement could then be used by the leaseholder to access credit from a bank. But if the leaseholder is unable to repay the loan, the bank can repossess the lease, and take control of the customary land for decades. The Panel criticized ADB for failing to consult customary landowners and consider their views and concerns in the advice provided to the Samoan government: “Well thought outadvice given after wide, accountable and meaningful public consultations might have highlighted the concerns and fears expressed by the complainants and other customary landowners…There is prima facie evidence that suggests that inadequate consultations under the [projects] have deprived the customary landowners in Samoa of the opportunity to surface these concerns in a timely fashion and to have them properly addressed in the advice, consultant reports, draft legislation, and draft papers developed under the…projects.” The Panel found that ADB “recommended piecemeal changes to customary land laws leading to uncertainty and an abridgment of some customary land rights.” The diminution of the bundle of rights associated with customary land ownership, which resulted from ADB’s advice, the Panel found, was “likely to cause direct and material harm to the complainants and project affected people.” Despite the panel’s conclusion and recommendation that the prima facie evidence of noncompliance is serious enough to warrant a full compliance investigation, the ADB Board of Directors decided not to authorize such a review at this time. Fiu Mata’ese Elisara, matai of Sili and Savaii and Executive Director of Ole Siosiomaga Society Incorporated, said: “We are happy that the Compliance Review Panel has validated our complaint, and we particularly welcome the panel’s finding that ADB violated its policies by failing to engage communities in meaningful consultations before advising our government on matters of such fundamental importance to our identity and way of life.” “We are, however, disappointed and puzzled as to why the panel’s recommendation was overruled by the Board, which failed to authorize a full investigation,” he added. “This decision reeks of conflicts of interest,” said David Pred, Managing Director of Inclusive Development International, which has been advising the complainants. “Firstly, the director who represents Samoa on the ADB Executive Board sits on the committee that recommended overruling the Compliance Review Panel’s decision and there's no indication that he recused himself." The Board Compliance Review Committee, which made the recommendation not to authorize the full review, cited conflicting opinions that it had received from the independent Compliance Review Panel and the bank’s Office of General Counsel about whether ADB’s actions caused or is likely to cause harm. The committee also recommended deferring a full investigation due to “indications that the Government of Samoa will propose legislative changes that would substantially remove material harm to the complainants.” “The question one must ask is why does the ADB Board have an independent accountability mechanism to investigate complaints if it is just going to ignore its findings and instead take its cues from the very lawyers whose job it is to defend ADB Management against such complaints,” said Pred. “That is the very definition of a conflict of interest.” Leuluaialii Tasi Malifa, lawyer and matai of Afega village, said: “If the Government of Samoa is preparing legislation that truly addresses our concerns, and ensures that the Constitutional prohibition on alienation of customary land is fully safeguarded, then this will be a positive outcome of our complaint. But if this legislation does not materialize or is inadequate, we will continue to demand a full accounting from ADB." The Compliance Review Panel’s Report on Eligibility is available at this link: https://compliance.adb.org/dir0035p.nsf/attachments/SAM-EligibilityReport-18Aug_Web.pdf/$FILE/SAM-EligibilityReport-18Aug_Web.pdf The Chair’s Summary of the Board Compliance Review Committee proceedings is available at this link: http://www.adb.org/documents/chairs-summary-bcrc-crp-request-n20162 For more information and press inquiries, please contact: In Apia: Fiu Mata’ese Elisara, Executive Director, Ole Siosiomaga Society Inc. and matai of Sili, Tel: +685 7791999 Email: fiuelisara51@yahoo.com; and Leuluaialii Tasi Malifa, lawyer and matai of Afega village, Tel: +685 7284452 Email: vaoga@yahoo.com. In New York: David Pred, Managing Director, Inclusive Development International (IDI), Tel: +1 917-280-2705, Email: david@inclusivedevelopment.net #Samoa #CustomaryLandRights #IndigenousPeople #ADB #AsianDevelopmentBank #Pacific #NGOForumonADB #InclusiveDevelopmentInternational #IDI

Manila –For many communities facing uncertainty and harm caused by investments of development financial institutions (DFIs) including displacements, loss of livelihood, loss of social and cultural lifeways, harassment, intentional misinformation and degradation of the environment –- accountability mechanisms (AMs) provide hope for powerless communities seeking information, dialogue, redress, compensation and project cancellation especially when local authorities and private developer fail to respond. International norms guide the formulation of AM policies that influence its decisions – but that is not always the case. Deriving a satisfying outcome from a complaint process is filled with complex challenges including compromised independence of AMs to management, high eligibility criteria for complaints, lack of information on development projects, weak linkages of independent CSO watchdogs to affected communities, among others. For many documented cases, engaging these AMs is never a walk in the cloud for affected communities and watchdogs despite the existence of MDB policies on safeguards, public disclosure, and transparency. The underlying reason for the conduct of the 13thAnnual Meeting of the Independent Accountability Mechanisms with Civil Society Organizations is to understand the problems in engaging the AMs of DFIs. Representatives and top leaders of around national and international DFIs participated in the event. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) known to be one of the leading DFI in Asia have been under fire for several years regarding how they take on responsibilities of the projects that they are financing using public money but recent cases showed a dissonance between its policies and actual implementation of AM recommendations to make projects comply with DFIs own social and environmental safeguard policies. In a welcome speech, ADB President Takehiko Nakao emphasized the effectiveness of the AM, citing specifically the successful response to the complaint of project-affected communities in the Cambodian Railway Rehabilitation Project. Sim Pov, a public school teacher forcibly displaced from the said project claimed differently. He narrated that it has been 10 years and there are still families who have not been relocated. There is still no potable water in some relocation sites, no source of livelihood, and no available public transport. Poipet, a relocation site a few meters away from the dumpsite and families are neck deep in debt. The teacher, himself, was resettled in Battambang, one of the five uninhabitable resettlement sites. Pov also said that there are still families who have not been paid in full. Land titles in the resettlement sites promised to them some 5-7 years ago have not yet been handed to them which makes them feel insecure about their land rights should another ‘development’ project need their land. ‘Why is ADB making these policies when they themselves cannot follow them?’ and added, “The ADB’s Mechanism gave us hope. We engaged again and again, but nothing happened”. Pov ended his statement by saying that the affected families from Cambodia is disappointed and has a big cynicism towards ADB. Anirudha Nagar from Accountability Counsel said ‘everything looks on good on paper, but in reality, it is another story’ referring to the experience of the Sindhuli Community of Nepal on how the World Bank misled them to implement an energy project, much like what had happened to Cambodia. An ADB official recognizes the truthfulness of what Mr. Pov’s statement and said that ‘the right people to address the problems are the ADB Board’. He then asked how can the NGO’s target and influence the board. As the session ended, Rayyan Hassan, Executive Director of NGO Forum on ADB said that ‘the NGO’s cannot do it alone, the international AMs cannot do it alone, the community cannot do it alone. It is an uphill battle that we have to take altogether’. For complainants, earning the stamp of eligibility provides hope that the wheels of justice could work in their favor. A groundbreaking study of AMs by SOMO, CIEL, Both ENDs, IAC, IAP and many other independent watchdogs engaging DFIs with communities worldwide adversely affected by development projects, the attrition rate of filed cases is high. The section on ADB showed that nine complaints filed were deemed ineligible for the AM’s Special Project Facilitator problem-solving function or were otherwise closed without reaching a substantive phase of the complaint process between July 2014 to June 2015. Complaints that have successfully passed the test of eligibility face a variety of hurdles. Complainants are required to first raise their concerns with ADB’s Operations Department before filing a complaint to the Mechanism there appears to be no standardized procedure for receiving and responding to those concerns or similar tracking system. For complaints that have been reviewed due to lack of compliance with ADBs own policies, Management is required to consult with the Compliance Review Panel on remedial actions, however, it is not required to consult with the complainant, “which is a major flaw in the remedial process”, the study reveals. Such is the case of complainants of the Cambodian Railway Rehabilitation project who are still in a bitter battle with Management due to incomplete implementation and unresolved issues despite glaring CRP findings and recommendations in favor of the complainants. One of the recommendations of the study is to lift the privilege of immunity given to DFIs that enables them to act with impunity. #Cambodia #EquitableCambodia #SoutheastAsia #Displacement #NGOForumonADB #CAMGMSRehabilitationoftheRailwayinCambodia #Railway #EangVuthy #ADB #AsianDevelopmentBank Written by Jen Derillo. Jen is NGO Forum on ADB's Program Coordinator for Communications.

The Royal Cambodian Railway is already operational offering several services including passenger accommodation going to different destinations of Cambodia. In fact, large numbers of people who ride the train are tourist going to Sihanoukville, 221.7 km away from Phnom Penh. The place known as Krong Preah Sihanouk and is popular for its beaches, tropical islands and the mangrove jungles of Ream National Park. However, more than 4000 families are still in dire condition due to the lack of compensation that was given to them by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the government. A large number of families are now in so much debt that they have resulted to mortgage their relocation homes even without the presence of the land title. An immobile resident from Poipet, a relocation site 411.3 km from Phnom Penh, near the borders of Cambodia and Thailand depressingly narrated how she is now asking/waiting for scraps of food from her neighbors because she can no longer support herself. Invalid from the waist down, alone and without any support from her family she compared her situation before she went to the relocation site, according to her “at least when I was in my old place, I can grow vegetable, corn, root crops and that would be enough for me to survive. The next day I do the same because I get by…”. This is not a new story for most people in the relocation site, aside from problems that go with the territory of being relocated like access to transportation, job availability or another source of income and livelihood, electricity and clean drinking water, what makes the Cambodian affected families “unique” is that they are indebted to different lending agencies and even persons. Some families even took a second mortgage to pay off the first mortgage, until it has become a vicious cycle. Also, the presence of informal lenders, who let the affected families borrow money using the resettlement plot as collateral makes the situation even more complicated. This resulted in the call of the people regarding the government promise of granting the ‘land title’ after 5 years of living in the resettlement site. A community leader from one of the resettlement site said that it has been due since 2013 because they have been living there since 2007, but four years have passed there is still no word on the land title. He even claimed that on their part they have followed up diligently to the Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction (MLMUPC) regarding the matter but they were not addressed properly, worst they feel that their grievance is being ignored. A father of three who’s only source of income is driving a cab around the city barely makes 100,823 KHR (about 25$) a day, and he has to pay 100,823 KHR (250$) a month for his 24,197,500 KHR (roughly 6000$), the same story goes with the woman who has roughly 4000$ and has to pay the 200$ a month, her source of income is making rags, that sells 2,016.45 KHR (50¢) a piece. In a day they can make between 50 to 60 pieces that are if they will work none stop for 12 hours. The loan situation is so alarming that VisionFund Cambodia – supported by the Government of Australia – has implemented a program to help ease the loan problems of the families in the 5-resettlement sites. But VisionFund has terminated its program and will end it this year (2016). VisionFund Cambodia found out that the most affected households do not meet the requirements or eligibility criteria to participate in the program. The eligibility criteria include-​ Adequate income earnings to be able to repay the monthly installments Continuous residence in the resettlement site Indebtedness level which should not be too high so that debt workout can be achieved within the financial envelope and the The willingness of informal lenders to sign off the agreement. When the affected families were asked on how to address or solve their dreadful situation, they humbly asked the government of Cambodia and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) to help them in any way they can. A community leader and a mother of 4 added that they “comply with the recommendation of the government, the ADB, and the Australian Aid to relocate because they were promised that their lives would be better” and these are agencies which they trust initially, but after years of struggle and making ends meet they are too tired in doing the same thing over and over again. And they are even more afraid that their children, grandchildren would encounter the same. As a matter of fact, most youths in the relocation sites has stopped their education taking on the responsibilities of putting food on the table. #CAMGMSRehabilitationoftheRailwayinCambodia #Safeguards #Loan #ADB #AsianDevelopmentBank #PhnomPenh #NGOForumonADB #Poipet #Sihanoukville #cambodia #SimPov Written by Jen Derillo. Jen is NGO Forum on ADB's Program Coordinator for Communications.