top of page

Search Results

85 items found

  • AIIB Campaign FAQ | NGO Forum on ADB | Lungsod Quezon

    CASES COMMUNICATION WITH AIIB EVENTS SUGGESTED READINGS FAQ Frequently Asked Questions

  • NGO Forum on ADB | Lungsod Quezon

    ACEF 2024: Where Corporate Giants Peddle Technofixes to the Climate Crisis From Mongolia to Georgia, this past year has been marked by ever-constrained spaces for civil society movements to organize, most particularly in response to questions surrounding resource, development, energy, climate, and environmental justice as well as rising geopolitical tensions, militarization, and securitization of border zones. This year has also been one of extreme heatwaves, unprecedented flooding, and torrential downpours, with knock-on impacts on peoples’ social, economic, and cultural well-being. Amid these realities, community alliances, local respected leaders, as well as climate, environmental, gender, labor rights, and development justice advocates are increasingly coming together to question and oppose the build-out of fossil gas infrastructure, the damming of the last free-flowing stretches of rivers, destructive drilling for geothermal heat from the bowels of the earth, the incineration of wastes or biomass, territories and ancestral lands signed away single-handedly by states to mining companies, as well as techno-fixes, all of which delay rather than hasten a shift to decentralized and utility-scale power systems dependent on the power of the wind and sun. Read Collective Civil Society Statement on ESF Draft: Calling for an Overhaul and immediate redrafting After two years of engaging in the formal ADB review consultation process, during which we collectively sought to consistently raise critical concerns and provide formal inputs to the ADB's Office of Safeguards in good faith, we would have expected to see these recommendations meaningfully reflected in the outcome document. Indeed, this was the reason why we attended online and in-person meetings with ADB’s safeguard staff, calling for a forward-looking policy rewrite that would require all financing flows to adhere to a binding framework underpinned by an unequivocal commitment to uphold international human and environmental rights. Read AIIB OBSERVER As the 2023 Annual Meeting of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) commences, the Forum Network recognizes this moment as a crucial opportunity to shed light on the critical issues of AIIB's transparency, accountability, and meaningful engagement. These concerns have been consistently at the forefront of our agenda in previous years. ​ In our unwavering commitment to advancing our mission, we introduce the 'AIIB Observer,' a newspaper tabloid designed to highlight the stories of communities directly impacted by AIIB-funded projects. Our central aim with this tabloid is to provide a platform for the voices that often remain unheard – the voices of community members who have shouldered the burdens imposed by AIIB's development vision. Through the 'AIIB Observer,' we endeavor to convey these communities' struggles, challenges, and unfortunate experiences to AIIB's leadership, the media, and the broader public. ​ Within the 'AIIB Observer pages,' you will discover a compelling collection of stories, each shedding light on a specific project. These stories encompass diverse regions and projects, including the Bhola IPP in Bangladesh, the Bangalore Metro Rail Project, the Cambodia PRASAC COVID-19 Crisis Recovery Facility, the Cambodia Emergency and Crisis Response Facility, the Everbright Infrastructure Investment Fund II, and the Unique Meghnaghat 584MW Combined Cycle Power Plant. ​ We firmly believe that the narratives showcased in the 'AIIB Observer' will serve as a potent instrument in furthering our advocacy efforts against the adverse consequences wrought by AIIB-funded initiatives. Download NEW PUBLICATION OUT! The Asian Development Bank (ADB) is a major financial institution in the Asia-Pacific region headquartered in the Philippines, with Japan and the USA as its main shareholders. The bank recognizes the severity of climate change consequences in Asia and advocates for transitioning to clean energy to combat it. ​ ADB is set to present itself as a regional climate bank at its 2024 annual meeting, showcasing the Energy Transition Mechanism (ETM), aimed at phasing out coal-fired power plants in Asia. However, criticism arises, suggesting that the ETM might actually benefit fossil fuel companies and fail to address the root issues. ​ Several coal phase-out mechanisms, including ADB's ETM, are in draft stages, with Southeast Asia being a key focus. However, civil society organizations express concerns about the lack of preventive measures in the ETM and its potential to reward environmentally harmful companies. Criticism extends to ADB's past investments in coal-fired power plants, despite claims of transitioning away from fossil fuels. The bank's revised energy policy still allows support for fossil fuel-related projects, creating inconsistency and undermining its stated goals. ​ The paper calls for ADB to exclude financing for the coal industry, prioritize renewable energy, and adhere to the "polluters pay" principle by covering the damage caused. Download Read Read Read

  • ADB Safeguards Archive | NGO Forum on ADB | Lungsod Quezon

    БОНКИ ОСИЁИ РУШДИ (БОР) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030 МОНИТОРИНГИ ЛОИҲА 2010 Forum’s Comments on the Operations Manual of the new Safeguard Policy Statement (February 2010) 2009 OM Language Recommendations of the Forum (31 July 2009) Comments on the Forum on R-Paper of the Safeguard Policy Statement (14 July 2009) Detailed recommendations for the improvement of the SPS R-paper (15 July 2009) Safeguard Policy Statement: updated Safeguards (June 2009) Comments on the 2nd draft Safeguard Policy Statement United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 8 January 200 2008 Comments on the 2nd draft Safeguard Policy Statement US Department of Treasury, 17 December 2008 US Department of Treasury, 7 December 2008 Gender Action, 5 December 2008 Public Services International, 4 December 2008 International Accountability Project, 4 December 2008 Consolidated IP-SPU workshop participants, 4 December 2008 Forest Peoples Programme, 4 December 2008 NADI, 4 December 2008 World Resources Institute, 4 December 2008 Bank Information Centre, 4 December 2008 NGO Forum on ADB, 4 December 2008 NGO Forum on ADB’s initial comments on the draft Safeguards operations manual, 4 December 2008 Centre for Environmental Justice, 4 December 2008 Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (E-Law), 3 December 2008 Environmental Defense Fund, 2 December 2008 Central Asia and Caucasus NGOs, 27 November 2008 International Network on Displacement and Resettlement, 20 November 2008 Japan Center for Sustainable Environment and Society (JACSES), 13 November 2008 ADB’s response to Forum’s proposed agenda for the second round SPU consultation, 22 August 2008 Forum’s proposed agenda for the second round SPU consultation, 25 July 2008 Forum’s response to ADB’s consultation plan, 4 July 2008 Safeguards Down the Drain, Hemantha Withanage ADB Environmental Safeguards in Reverse Gear!, Avilash Raoul Country Safeguard Systems approach at the ADB, Jennifer Kalafut Involuntary Resettlement & the Asian Development Bank, Joanna Levitt Safeguarding Indigenous Peoples’ Rights, Rowena Soriaga Forum’s comments on the Draft SPS, 28 April 2008 BIC’s Comments on the Draft SPS, 30 March 2008 E-Law’s Comments on Draft SPS, 21 March 2008 Downing and Scudder Expert Opinion on ADB SPU, 20 March 2008 ADB’s response to Forum’s Call for Revision of SPS, 7 March 2008 Burmese Civil Society Groups’ Letter to the ADB on SPU, 4 March 2008 Vietnam NGOs’ letter on SPU consultation, 25 February 2008 IAITPTF’s Letter to the ADB on the Draft Safeguard Policy Statement, 22 February 2008 IAP’s Comments on the Draft Safeguard Policy Statement, 19 February 2008 German Economic Minister Letter on the ongoing SPU, 11 February 2008 Forum’s letter to ADB President calling for the revision of the SPS draft, 7 February 2008 Forum’s letter to SPU Team calling for the revision of the SPS draft, 7 February 2008 2007 Act Now! Demand for Greater Safeguards, 23 November 2007 ADB’s Country Safeguards System, November 2007 ADB’s response to Forum’s letters on SPU process, 6 November 2007 Forum’s letter to ADB regarding the SPU Process, 25 October 2007 Forum’s letter to ADB regarding the SPU Process, 24 October 2007 Consultation Draft of the Safeguard Policy Statement, October 2007 Forest People’s Programme’s comments on the OED Special Evaluation Study on the Indigenous Peoples Policy In Search of Middle Ground: Indigenous Peoples, Collective Representation and the Right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent, Annex to FPP’s comment to the OED Special Evaluation Study on IP Policy, by Marcus Colchester and Fergus MacKay, Forest Peoples Programme, August 2004 A Call to Safeguard Equitable and Sustainable Development in Asia: Collective statement by NGO Forum on ADB regarding the ADB Safeguard Policy Update, March 2007 2006 Comparative Matrix – Environment Policy Weekend Standards Yes to Accountability, 20 April 2006 Open Letter to the ADB president on the Safeguard Policy Update, 16 March 2006 Comparative Matrix – Indigenous Peoples Policy Comparative Matrix – Involuntary Resettlement Policy ADB Resettlement Policy Comparative Matrix, International Accountability Project, November 2006 Snapshots of ADB Disasters Development Debacles Civil Society Says, “No to 2005 ADB Discussion Note- October 2005 ADB Response by Mr. Albab Akanda, Team Leader- 28 September 2005 Civil Society Organization’s letter to ADB President Haruhiko Kuroda – 22 July 2005 Board Approval for the Consolidated Review of the ADB Safeguards Policies – July 2005 Window Dressing for Business? The Asian Development Bank Safeguard Policy Implementation Review by Grace Mang ADB and the Environment (NGO FORUM ON ADB Publication) Indigenous people and the ADB (NGO FORUM ON ADB Publication ) ADB Documents ADB Response by SPU Team on discussion note (28 September 2005) Discussion Note: Safeguard Policy Statement (October 2005) Consultation Draft of the Safeguard Policy Statement (October 2007) ADB’s response to Forum’s Call for Revision of SPS (7 March 2008) ADB’s response to Forum’s proposed agenda for the second round SPU consultation (22 August 2008) Preliminary Draft Operations Manual Section, Draft Safeguards Review Procedures (3 October 2008) ADB SPU: Report on Stakeholder Consultations (Comments-response matrix) (8 October 2008) 2nd Draft Safeguard Policy Statement (October 2008) Working Paper: Safeguard Policy Statement (January 2009) Safeguard Policy Statement (June 2009) Statement (October 2007) Safeguards Operations Manual (January 2010)

  • Cases | NGO Forum on ADB | Lungsod Quezon

    CASES COMMUNICATION WITH AIIB EVENTS SUGGESTED READINGS FAQ CASES RECENTLY APPROVED Bangladesh Bhola IPP Bhola is the only island district of Bangladesh under Barishal in Bangladesh. Mumbai-based Shapoorji Pallonji Infrastructure Capital Company Private Limited (SP Infra), a subsidiary of Shapoorji Pallonji Group constructed a 220/225 MW Gas and Diesel based power plant through its new company Nutan Bidyut Bangladesh Limited (NBBL) at Kutba village under Burhanuddin Upazila in Bhola. ​ NBBL has received USD 60.00 million from Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and another USD 60.00 million from the Islamic Development Bank (IsDB). Bangladesh Working Group on External Debt (BWGED) and CLEAN (Coastal Livelihood and Environmental Action Network) in collaboration with NGO Forum on ADB conducted studies on the socio-environmental impacts of the power plant along with potential violation of national and international standards.​ In April 2022, CLEAN and NGO Forum on ADB filed 6 complaints regarding the destructive impacts of the Bangladesh Bhola IPP. Key concerns include the following – 1. Lack of Information Disclosure and Meaningful Consultation An overall lack of timely information disclosure by both AIIB and NBBL on project information Poor and misleading translation of key documents, especially the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), E&S Summary, Environmental Management Plan (EMP), and Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) have been classified by CLEAN. The translated documents are in some instances incomprehensible and do not make sense. Lender has not provided any documentation or output from the consultation reports and has misrepresented accounts of consultations that could not be validated. 2. Coercion, Fraud, and Intimidation on Land Acquisition Coercion and intimidation faced by local communities especially Hindu from ‘middlemen’ appointed by NBBL to forcibly acquire land at the lowest rates. Hindu communities fearing retaliation in case they are identified as stakeholders raising concern. No records of sale or transaction on first phase land acquisition by NBBL Land acquisition practice was in violation of the “Bangladesh Acquisition and Requisition of Immovable Property Ordinance, 1982 and the amended ordinance of 2017”, which stipulates land owners be entitled to thrice the market price from private companies (in this case NBBL) Ineffective and non-functional local grievance redress mechanisms GRM. 3. Environmental Impact and Livelihood Loss Construction and Sand waste deposited by NBBL has led to Mandartoli Shakha Khal/River Channel river bed over siltation. Further, the NBBL embanked its northern part with sand sacks and has taken over half of the canal. The sand from the sacks has spilled out into the canal bed causing siltation and the canal to gradually dry up. Now the canal is only 1-2 feet deep and has lost its water-carrying capacity. Destruction of Betel Leaf farms: Due to Mandartoli Shakha Khal clogging, monsoon water overflows during high tide and directly floods the Dakshin Kutba village. Estimated 400 Betel leaf farms have been destroyed; displacing over 2000 families dependent on agriculture. Over 100 households are approximated to be directly waterlogged and left completely disconnected from public services, communication, health care, and other necessary services. Project site has taken over half of all grazing land in the area, leading to a direct impact on goat herders who are mainly women. Labor Colony has discharged large amounts of effluent, sewage, and waste to surrounding villages, leading to uninhabitable living conditions. ​ ​ ​ ​ Surkhandarya 1,560MW CCGT Power Plant [PROPOSED] The AIIB is proposing to provide a loan of 225million EUR to support the design, construction, and operation of a new 1560MW Combined Cycle Gas Turbine Power Plant in the Surkhandarya region of Uzbekistan. According to the Bank's own ranking, the project is identified as a safeguards Category A project (highest risk). The project consortium is made up of the Dutch conglomerate, Stone City Energy, France's EDF, Germany's Siemens Energy, and Qatar's Nebras Power. ​ Dubious GHG Accounting Although CO2 emissions have been estimated in AIIB project documents, there is no reference for how the calculations were derived and what scopes of emission are being considered. No estimated calculations of other emissions, including most critically, methane, are evident. Climate and Biodiversity Concerns The project site will occupy 70 hectares of land beside the Uchkizil irrigation reservoir, which it will use for water intake and for discharging treated wastewater. The reservoir is also relied on for irrigating agricultural fields in the area. No specific measures are listed for avoiding and responding to incidences of contamination from the effluent discharges or accidental leaks on-site during project construction or operation. ​ Community Concerns Undisclosed Details on community consultations, specifically on how those living and working around the reservoir have been informed, what project concerns they raised, and how/if these issues are being addressed remain absent from AIIB's documentation. Although plans for future consultations are mentioned, it's not clear how these discussions will be carried out and what - if any - precautions would be taken to avoid risks of reprisals to local people raising questions. ​ Mis-Aligned with the Imperatives of Climate Science Although the AIIB suggests the design of the project is "climate resilient" there is no published information to explain what this means. The reality is that in fact the project, which is expected to only become operational in 2026, would undermine the AIIB’s own stated pursuit of Paris alignment and joint MDB climate commitments. The climate science is clear: ramping up construction for new fossil gas infrastructure is unequivocally incompatible with the action required to meet the Paris Agreement goals of limiting global heating to 1.5C (IPCC Assessment Report 6; “Net Zero by 2050 Roadmap”) As outlined by the IEA, to have a chance to keep global heating below catastrophic levels, large scale gas‐fired generation to peak globally by 2030, and the electricity sector would need to be completely decarbonized by 2040 worldwide. ​ Project Location: Surkhandarya region, Uzbekistan ​ Watch Video

  • ADB Accountability Mechanism | NGO Forum on ADB | Lungsod Quezon

    МОНИТОРИНГИ ЛОИҲА Latest News Sign the 1M Petition ADB Project Tracker Media Pillars for the Future of Development Finance in Asia ​ After much anticipation, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) recently released Strategy 2030 , its long-term corporate strategy to respond effectively to Asia’s changing needs. As the ADB looks to the future of development finance in Asia, it must keep community engagement, including access to effective remedy, at the forefront. Strategy 2030, then in draft form, was heavily showcased during May’s ADB annual meeting in Manila, Philippines. The strategy includes plans to increase private sector lending as well as the use of country systems in lieu of ADB safeguard policies for public sector operations. Strategy 2030 also cites the bank’s commitment to the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals as the overarching objectives of the strategy document. However according to the joint submission of NGO Forum on ADB , a close partner of Accountability Counsel, Strategy 2030 still lacks adequate guidance on how will ADB concretely contribute in achieving the targets set forth in these key global agreements. Importantly, although Strategy 2030 does contain some commitments to work with civil society organizations (CSOs) in the design and implementation of projects, little mentioned in the strategy is how the ADB plans to ensure that local communities direct the course of development in Asia and have access to accountability and remedy in the event of any negative impacts from financing. Of course, the ADB is not the only actor in the region, and questions about the future of development in Asia span various institutions. China’s “One Belt, One Road ” initiative will pour over $1 trillion dollars into the region and beyond. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, a China-led multilateral bank that opened in 2016, is ramping up operations. How can the ADB and other financial institutions ensure that communities’ rights are respected in the course of undertaking projects in the region? When rights are violated or communities have concerns about projects, how can these institutions ensure that communities have effective venues to raise and address these concerns? Not focusing sufficiently on community input can be disastrous. As Rayyan Hassan from NGO Forum on ADB raised during a session in Manila hosted by the ADB’s independent accountability office , communities often lack information about projects that may negatively impact them, owing to ineffective consultation and information disclosure processes. Fear, insecurity, and anger then build into grievances. Accountability Counsel has seen this scenario play out time and again through our casework, both in Asia and across the world. For example, the World Bank ’s accountability office confirmed that the communities in Sindhuli, Nepal affected by the 220 kV Khimti-Dhalkebar Transmission Line had not received proper information and consultation about the health, safety, and economic impacts of the bank’s project, leading to misunderstanding, violence against peaceful protesters, and significant project delays. Similar concerns are being raised by communities in Lamjung, Nepal who are affected by the European Investment Bank (EIB)-funded Nepal Power System Expansion Project , which is integrated with the ADB’s S outh Asia Subregional Economic Cooperation Power System Expansion Project . Given the local communities’ recent advocacy with the EIB, it appears here again that international financiers have to do more to ensure that their development projects maintain a high standard of information disclosure, consultation, and participation in order to “do no harm” and truly improve lives in Asia. As the ADB and others look to the future of development in Asia, they must put measures in place to ensure that communities’ voices are fully respected in the course of projects. This includes strong environmental and social safeguard policies surrounding project design and implementation. As CSOs highlighted during the ADB annual meeting, strong environmental and social protections are particularly important as these institutions increase the focus on private sector investment, which has historically received less oversight. This also includes comprehensive and accessible project information for communities and ongoing inclusive consultations, right from the project design phase. Crucially, respecting community voices also entails ensuring that communities have access to an effective accountability office to address any project-related harm, including the denial of information and consultation around the project. To be effective, these offices must operate according to principles including legitimacy, transparency, and fairness. The ADB’s accountability office, comprised of the Compliance Review Panel and the Office of the Special Project Facilitator, is well established but could be improved, particularly in the area of structural independence from the ADB. As the ADB rolls out Strategy 2030, the bank should place particular attention on strengthening the accountability office to ensure that it is an effective, legitimate avenue for community engagement and provides a meaningful remedy for the harms communities have suffered or will potentially suffer. Through Strategy 2030, the ADB seeks to achieve a prosperous, inclusive, resilient, and sustainable Asia and the Pacific. This is only possible if the ADB, and other financial institutions and actors in the region, put communities first. Community engagement, including access to an effective accountability office, is vital for ensuring that future development in Asia reflects the needs and priorities of its people. БОНКИ ОСИЁИ РУШДИ (БОР) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030

  • Energy Events/Activites | NGO Forum on ADB | Lungsod Quezon

    БОНКИ ОСИЁИ РУШДИ (БОР) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030 МОНИТОРИНГИ ЛОИҲА Latest News Latest Publication ADB Project Tracker Latest Events/Activities Media CSOs from across the Asian Region urge the ADB to Stop Financing False Climate & Energy NGO Forum on ADB is hosting a virtual press conference in the midst of the Asian Development Bank (ADB)’s Asia Clean Energy Forum (ACEF) 2022. ​ We invite you to join us as civil society groups from across the Asian region collectively urge the ADB to stop financing false climate and energy solutions that undermine inclusive and sustainable community-centered just transitions Read Press Release

  • Strat Plan | NGO Forum on ADB

    Нақшаи Стратегӣ 2020 Форуми созмонҳои ғайридавлатӣ оид ба БОР тасмим гирифтааст, ки “Харитаи роҳ ба маъракаи стратегӣ барои солҳои 2014-2020: сӯи тағйироти пойдор ва системавӣ”-и худро амалӣ кунад. ​ Дар шаш соли оянда Форум хоҳад дид, ки дар доираи БОР тағйироти системавӣ ба амал оварад ва бо тавсеаи муштариёни худ, то онҳо бо масъулияти бештар ба эҳтиёҷоти рушд ва заминаҳои маҳаллии ҷомеаҳои Осиё посух диҳанд. аз номи одамони зарардида, ки осебпазирии онҳо аз ҷониби барномаи каҷшудаи рушди БОР зиёд шудааст. Нуқтаи марказии Гурӯҳҳои корӣ ва созмонҳои узв таҳкими овоз ва тавонмандии камбизоатҳо, занон, гурӯҳҳои этникӣ ва бахшҳои маҳдудшуда мебошад. Раванди банақшагирӣ Форум стратегияи чаҳорчӯба, нақшаи маърака ва тарҳи ташкилии худро моҳи декабри соли 2012 тавассути ҷаласаи омодагӣ дар Бангкоки Таиланд оғоз кард. Пас аз баргузории вохӯриҳои кишвар ва минтақавӣ ин раванд моҳи ноябри соли 2013 тавассути семинари амалӣ дар Силанг, Кавити Филиппин ба анҷом расид. Кумитаи Байналмиллалии (IC) / Шӯрои сарпарастон ва директори иҷроия раванди банақшагирии стратегии дарозмуддатро роҳнамоӣ карданд. Гурӯҳи стратегӣ, ки аз як стратеги пешбар, даъваткунандаи IC ва кормандони Котиботи иборат аст, рафтор ва анҷоми банақшагирии солонаро назорат мекард. Натиҷаи ниҳоии ин раванди пуршиддат, иштирокӣ ва динамикӣ “Харитаи роҳ” мебошад, ки ба таври муассир нақшаи Стратегияи дарозмуддати соли 2006-ро иваз мекунад. МАШВАРАТЙ ДАР МАМЛАКАТ Дар Арманистон, Бангладеш, Ҳиндустон, Индонезия, Муғулистон, Филиппин ва Шри-Ланка ҷаласаҳои стратегӣ баргузор шуданд. Дар шимолу шарки Хиндустон машварати суб-миллй барпо гардид. Дар ҷаласаи солонаи Форуми соли 2013 гузориши як вазъ дар кишвар дар бораи Камбоҷа, Мянма ва Непал мавҷуд буд. Гурўњњои кории кишварї њангоми банаќшагирии чорабинињои маъракаи пешазинтихоботї оид ба масъалањои марбут ба БОР, дурнамои миллї ба эътибор гирифтаанд. Аъзоён дар бораи чӣ гуна ба даст овардани тавсеа ва дубора фаъолсозии шабака, афзоиши фишори ҷамъиятӣ ба Бонк ва устувории маъракаҳо дар кишварҳои худ стратегияи муайян карданд. МАШВАРАТХОИ МИНТАКАВЙ Банақшагирии стратегия дар минтақаҳои Осиёи Марказӣ ва Қафқоз (Бишкек, Қирғизистон), Осиёи Ҷанубу Шарқӣ (Бангкок, Таиланд) ва Осиёи Ҷанубӣ (Дакка, Бангладеш) сурат гирифт. Дар Бангкок ҷаласаи гурӯҳи зерминтақавии Меконг, ки дар он вакилони Камбоҷа, Ветнам ва созмонҳои INGO дар ин минтақа қарор доштанд, ширкат карданд. Гурӯҳҳои кории минтақавӣ ба самтҳои калидии мавзӯӣ, аз ҷумла робитаҳои фаромарзӣ, ки дар он ҷо ҳамоҳангӣ ва мукаммалӣ дар адвокатура муқаррар карда мешавад, афзалият доданд. Ин ба онхо имконият дод, ки плани кон-солидацияи кор ва тадбирхои панчсоларо тартиб диханд. СТРАТЕГИЯИ ШАШСОЛА "Харитаи роҳ" Форумро дар амалисозии маъракаҳои мавзӯии минтақавии ҷорӣ ва оянда роҳнамоӣ мекунад. Он механизми мониторинг ва идоракунии таъсироти таблиғоти худро таъмин мекунад. Ба ҳамин монанд, он барои омӯзиши минбаъдаи Форум нисбат ба натиҷаҳои таъсири амали он хидмат мекунад. Форум дар панҷ мавзӯи корӣ: об, энержӣ, тағирёбии иқлим, урбанизатсия ва ҳуқуқи инсон дар Осиёи Марказӣ, Осиёи Ҷанубу Шарқӣ ва Осиёи Ҷанубӣ ба таблиғот такя мекунад ва арзиши илова мекунад. Кафолатҳо (муҳит, кӯчонидани иҷборӣ, мардуми бумӣ) ва ҷинсиятро масъалаҳои байниҳамдигар муайян кардаанд. Интизор меравад, ки то соли 2020 овоз ва агентии мардуми Осиё, ба хусус камбизоатон ва ҳошиямондагон, дар як иқтидори устувор барои ҷалби БОР ба сӯи тағйироти пойдор ва системавӣ баланд бардошта шавад. Ин дар он аст, ки Форум ба таври муассир БОР ва қарзгирандагони онро водор кардааст, ки дар муколамаҳои созандаи худ бо ҷомеаи шаҳрвандӣ ва дигар ҷонибҳои манфиатдор воқеан ҳисоботдиҳанда, шаффоф, кушода ва омода бошанд.

  • ADB Accountability Mechanism | NGO Forum on ADB | Lungsod Quezon

    МОНИТОРИНГИ ЛОИҲА Latest News Sign the 1M Petition ADB Project Tracker Media 2009 after the approval of the new ADB’s Accountability Mechanism (AM) was approved in December 2003, replacing the 1995 Inspection Function. Although a review of the policy was scheduled in 2006, it was postponed until 2008 and later rescheduled. The ADB officially started its policy review when ADB President Haruhiko Kuroda made an announcement during its Annual Meeting in Tashkent in May 2010. ​ The ADB conducted a series of multi-stakeholder consultations in Asia, Europe, and the United States from September to November 2010. It also held consultations with affected people in selected countries. In April 2011, Forum submitted its comments on the consultation draft policy paper. Civil society organizations, however, criticized the ADB for coming up with a draft Working Paper–a draft policy version submitted to the ADB Board of Directors for review–two days after the deadline for submission of public comments on the consultation draft policy paper. ​ In May 2011, after Forum’s continuous pushing and lobbying, the bank decided to put the review process on the right track by inviting public comments on the draft Working Paper. ​ In June 2011, Forum submitted its comments on the first Working-Paper. In July, ADB released its second Working-Paper which is currently open for public comments. ​ Forum members have been using the AM to register local communities’ complaints on the Bank’s lapses in terms of its policies, programs, and projects. While there was not a single complaint filed in 2008, out of the 13 cases in 2009, four of which were filed by Forum members. Accountability mechanism related documents -​ 21 Oct 2019 | NGO Forum on ADB Comments: Safeguard Compliance and Accountability Mechanism Framework 17 Mar 2019 | ADB’s 10 years of Accountability Mechanism is not worth celebrating 17 Jan 2019 | Does ADB's Accountability mechanism work? 14 Nov 2010 | Review on Accountability Greater Mekong Subregion: Mekong Tourism Development Project 14 Nov 2010 | Holding ADB Accountable: A look at the Present Accountability Mechanism 14 Nov 2010 | Review on Accountability Mechanism Sixth Road Project: Not Eligible 12 Nov 2010 | Accountability Counsel Comments on the Asian Development Bank Accountability Mechanism Policy Review 14 Sep 2010 | Submission to the Accountability Mechanism Review 09 Sep 2010 | Effectiveness of the Accountability Mechanism in Central Asia and the Caucasus БОНКИ ОСИЁИ РУШДИ (БОР) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030

  • Forum Application Portal | ngoforumonadb

    FORUM NETWORK APPLICATION PORTAL Last name(Required) First name(Required) Email(Required) What is your perspective regarding fossil fuels and international financial institution (IFI)?(Required) How do you envision a campaign to stop gas projects supported by the ADB and AIIB?(Required) Upload your Resume(Required) Upload Resume Submit

  • Ripple Effects | ngoforumonadb

    RippleFX Map Read more about the exhibition | See the artwork up close | Read the Press Release RIPPLE EFFECT The 'Ripple Effect' Watercolor Exhibition seeks to illuminate the intricate connections between environmental degradation, social injustice, and human rights violations stemming from the Asian Development Bank's (ADB) projects. This significant exhibition, scheduled from May 1-5, 2024, in Tbilisi, Georgia, serves as a platform for impacted communities to voice their concerns and convey a potent message using the evocative medium of watercolor. ​ The exhibition's core theme delves into the far-reaching consequences of ADB-funded destructive projects on global social and ecosystems. Artists will utilize watercolor as a poignant medium, capturing the innate beauty of water juxtaposed with the challenges and destruction wrought by ADB initiatives. Furthermore, these watercolor paintings will undergo digital reproduction to extend their reach via social media platforms. Unveiling ADB's Ecological & Human Rights Violations through Watercolor Narratives This exhibition is presented by the NGO Forum on ADB in collaboration with the Coalition for Human Rights in Development, CEE Bankwatch, and Green Alternative, with support from the Heinrich Böll Stiftung Southeast Asia. - ABOUT THE ARTISTS - MORSALINA ANIKA A young visual artist from Bangladesh is currently pursuing her studies in the Fine Arts with a specialization in painting. Alongside her academic pursuits, she has passionately engaged in various social movements over the past seven years, advocating for causes such as anti-corruption, road safety, anti-rape, abolition of the Digital Security Act, and the protection of trees on Satmasjid Road, among others. Presently she holds a role as a member in the film and fine arts department of Bangladesh Udichi Shilpogosthi (central parliament). LABANI JANGI A 2020 PARI Fellow and self-taught painter from West Bengal's Nadia district, explores the intersection of art and social issues. Currently pursuing a PhD on labor migrations at the Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, Kolkata, her work reflects a deep engagement with human experiences and societal dynamics. ​ * Art pieces are digitized by Karl Isaac Santos from the Philippines. Back to Top Promises Unfulfilled Song Bung 4 Hydropower Project | Vietnam This painting tells the tragic story of a 156-megawatt hydropower project in Vietnam funded by the ADB. It depicts the impending devastation for the Ka Tu ethnic minority, underscoring the ADB's negative role in disregarding safeguards and public communication policies. The artwork vividly shows the ADB's failure to consult stakeholders transparently, expressive strokes unveil the struggles of affected families, emphasizing issues like housing, livelihood, and compensation inadequacies. In the Flow of Opposition Tanahu Hydropower Project | Nepal This piece captures the essence of the Tanahu Hydropower Project in Nepal, funded by the ADB, amidst a backdrop of serene landscapes. However, within the gentle strokes lie shadows of contention and struggle. The artwork portrays the obstacles faced by the project, including issues of inadequate compensation, insufficient consultation, and incomplete impact assessments. Indigenous communities are depicted expressing their concerns about representation and the potential harm to their ancestral lands. Allegations of violating ADB policies linger in the background, adding layers of complexity to the unfolding narrative. Silent Desolation Mundra Ultra Mega Power Project | India This piece portrays the silent struggles of fish workers, farmers, herders, and communities on the verge of poverty. Funded by the ADB, the flawed implementation of the massive power station has left a mark of environmental and social devastation. Tragadi bandar, Kothadi bander, and Navinal, once vibrant, now echo stories of debt cycles, diminished fish catch, and shattered dreams. This artwork serves as a poignant reminder that affected communities seek justice, amplifying the voices silenced by coal dust, salinity, and economic exploitation. Nature's Last Stand Railway Sector Investment Program | India This piece captures the delicate balance between nature's beauty and the looming threat of railway expansion in the Western Ghats. Funded by the ADB, the proposed project cuts through biodiversity hotspots, endangering ecosystems and disrupting the lives of indigenous communities. The artwork stands as a powerful reminder of the vulnerability at hand and the pressing requirement for sustainable policies. It represents the enduring global battle for environmental conservation amidst unbridled development. Phulbari's Fight Against Corporate Greed Phulbari Coal Project | Bangladesh Capturing the resilient spirit of Phulbari, this evocative watercolor painting stands as a testament to the community's fierce resistance against the proposed coal mining project. As the ADB withdrew its support, echoing the global call to halt the Phulbari coal project, the canvas reflects the tragic 2006 protests, the unwavering determination of the Forum network and allies, and the alarming environmental impact, emphasizing the displacement of 130,000 people and the absence of a viable plan to prevent acid mine contamination. Shadows of Progress Visayas Base-load Power Project | Philippines In this watercolor painting, the Visayas Base-load Power Project funded by the ADB is portrayed amidst a landscape of vibrant hues. Yet, within the serene scenery lie contours of contention. Environmental concerns ripple through the canvas, as the looming presence of coal-fired power plants raises questions about sustainability and ecological balance. Social displacement casts shadows on the landscape, as communities grapple with the implications of land acquisition and resettlement. Amidst these challenges, the delicate dance between energy security and environmental stewardship unfolds. Journey Through the CAREC Corridor CAREC Transport Corridor 1 | Kyrgyz Republic This painting depicts the intricate pathways of the CAREC Transport Corridor, connecting Central Asian nations for trade and cooperation. Vibrant hues illustrate the promise of connectivity and economic growth. However, looming in the background are the shadows of challenges. Security risks in conflict zones and the environmental impact of infrastructure development cast uncertainties on the corridor's future. Through delicate brushstrokes, it serves as a poignant reminder of the complexities inherent in progress and the necessity for mindful navigation through interconnected landscapes. Ripples of Concern Mahaweli Water Security Investment Program | Sri lanka This artwork captures the story of the Mahaweli Water Security Investment Program in Sri Lanka, funded by the ADB. Serene hues depict the tranquil waters of the Mahaweli River, yet beneath the surface, concerns emerge. Environmental impact shadows the landscape as the infrastructure alters the river's flow, impacting the habitat of native elephants. Social displacement adds complexity as communities confront land acquisition and resettlement. Technical challenges illustrate the complexities of water management. Financial sustainability and governance issues further complicate the picture. Teesta's Troubled Waters Teesta Irrigation Project | Bangladesh This art piece delves into the complexities surrounding the Teesta Irrigation Project, funded by the ADB. Amidst serene landscapes, turbulent currents of controversy and challenge swirl. Disputes over water-sharing agreements cast shadows, echoing the struggles of communities along the riverbanks. Environmental concerns paint the canvas with hues of habitat destruction and biodiversity loss, while the displacement of local communities adds layers of social upheaval. Shadows of Steam Geothermal Power Generation Project | Indonesia In this watercolor, the story of the ADB-funded Geothermal Power Generation Project in Indonesia unfolds. Vibrant hues capture Indonesia's lush landscapes, yet uncertainty clouds its geothermal potential. Environmental concerns arise as land subsidence and habitat disruptions threaten project sustainability. Social displacement complicates matters as communities face land acquisition and resettlement. Technical challenges illustrate the complexities of geothermal development. Financial hurdles and regulatory landscapes add further complexity. The Indorama Puzzle Indorama Climate-Resilient Farmer Livelihood and COVID-19 Recovery Project | Uzbekistan This watercolor painting encapsulates the intricate challenges encountered within the Indorama Agro project. Initially hailed for its promises of agricultural revitalization and employment opportunities, the reality depicted here is one of uncertainty and hardship for farmers and workers alike. Vibrant strokes portray the lush fields of promise contrasted with the shadows of delayed payments and job insecurity. The journey through this project is riddled with complexities, as depicted by the subtle nuances and layers of emotion within the artwork. A Brushstroke of Injustice Rehabilitation of the Railway in Cambodia Project | Cambodia Within the gentle strokes, the painting unfolds the narrative of 4,000 families forsaken by a misguided railway upgrade, backed by the ADB. The watercolor articulates the tales of inadequate compensation, unfulfilled pledges, and shattered aspirations of Cambodia's impoverished. A visual elegy to the repercussions of policy failures, urging a transformative shift in accountability. Back to Top Ripple Effect Exhibition RippleFX Art

  • Special Publication Archive | NGO Forum on ADB

    Нашрияҳои махсус ЗАХИРАХО Соатҳои бонкӣ | Ҳисоботи солона | Лоиҳа мухтасар | Китобҳои роҳнамо Парешонҳои хатарнок Зарар нарасонед Дар торикй Regional Overview of Country Safeguard Systems to Mitigate Trans boundary Infrastructure Mega Project Impacts : Mongolia Regional Overview of Country Safeguard Systems to Mitigate Trans boundary Infrastructure Mega Project Impacts : Indonesia Regional Overview of Country Safeguard Systems to Mitigate Trans boundary Infrastructure Mega Project Impacts : Myanmar Regional Overview of Country Safeguard Systems to Mitigate Trans boundary Infrastructure Mega Project Impacts : South Asia and Sri Lanka Assessment of the ADB’s Energy Policy: Undermining International Climate Commitments Voices from the Ground : Bhola IPP and its Impact on Local Communities A Visual Testimony of ADB's 50 Years of Destruction Missing the Mark : ADB@50 Gender Impact Research : India Gender Impact Research : Bangladesh Gender Impact Research : Cambodia Fast Facts on ADB Energy Policy Supplemental Notes to the CHM Submission CSO Concerns on AIIB Accountability Mechanism Analysis ADB Investment in the GMS Case Study on Tanahu Hydropower Project AIIB ESF Critique Ensuring ADBs Compliance to the Core Labor Standards Integrated Water Resource Management and the People Desk Review on the Proposed Business Model of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) 2nd AIIB ESS Critique ◄ 1 / 1 ► Please reload 2nd AIIB ESS Critique AIIB Energy Strategy Critique RISK AND RESILIENCE: Mainstreaming Climate Change Into the Environmental Impact Assessment Process The ADB in Burma: Behind the Scenes Roads to Destruction ADB’s Contradictory Roads, Biodiversity and Plantations Activities in Lao PDR or How Did You Know We Wanted Ecocide? Effective Accountability and Transparency IS ADB ACCOUNTABLE? Evaluating the Accountability Mechanism India: Borrowing False Solutions? God's Own Abode in Peril Chatyr-kul freshwater lake in Kyrgyzstan under threat Problems of the ADB Accountbility Mechanism (Indonesia) ADB"s Involvement in Dam building ADB in Central Asia Sipat Super Thermal Power Project Tempering Nature; the ADB Way Development Debacles THE CORAL TRIANGLE INITIATIVE: A View of a People by the Sea The Masalli-Astara Highway Climate Error Running Dry Compilation of ADB IWRM Supported Project ADB's Footprint in South Asia ADB in Burma ◄ 1 / 1 ► Please reload

  • ADB Public Information Policy News | NGO Forum on ADB | Lungsod Quezon

    БОНКИ ОСИЁИ РУШДИ (БОР) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030 МОНИТОРИНГИ ЛОИҲА Latest News ADB Project Tracker Media Sign the 1M Petition Civil Society Input and Recommendations on the Stakeholder Engagement Plan Transparent and meaningful consultation guided by international practice is a cornerstone of good governance and informed decision-making. It also embeds a sense of ownership into the development process. International Financial Institutions (IFIs) such as the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the World Bank, the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) have developed frameworks to strengthen their stakeholder engagement in the recent years. Moreover, the World Bank and EBRD have developed standalone policies and requirements for what constitutes a meaningful stakeholder consultation and engagement. It is imperative that the Asian Development Bank (ADB) strengthens its overall approach to ensure stakeholder engagement is inclusive, transparent and robust. Colleagues who had attended the virtual information sharing session on April 12 and 13 of 2021 organized by the SDCC Department of the ADB and the Consultation Team argued that the webinar formatting chosen had felt disempowering and disengaging. This is because the online format did not allow for full transparency on the participant list of the meeting and the relevant questions asked during the various sessions. This inaccessibility to the participant list is of major concern to stakeholder groups such as civil society organizations (CSOs) and human rights defenders who face a significant risk of retaliation under oppressive regimes. We, as representatives of CSOs, trade unions, and communities around the world hold this review process with utmost importance and attentiveness. While the Bank’s Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP) presents promising reforms, we are disconcerted that the current approach outlined in the present draft has not reflected international good practice and remains amiss on a number of salient issues. Collectively, we raise these points before the process leads to an SPS with tremendous substantial and procedural problems when the current demand is to reform toward international laws, standards, and norms. In pursuit of the shared objective of reforming the safeguard system, we forward our key recommendations: Include a definition of Meaningful Consultation underpinned by duly established policy and practice. The SEP outlines that it is based on “firm principles of meaningful consultation…”(pg.3). Meaningful Consultation should not be organized in a pro forma manner to ‘check a box or to meet an internal requirement. It should be underpinned by a clear matrix that upholds the utmost importance of the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) prerequisite criterion recognised in the United Nations (UN) Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and supported by genuine consideration for stakeholders’ views and concerns. We are requesting that the term ‘Meaningful Consultation’ in the SEP be asserted by a clear definition and matrix which draws on duly established policy and practice. A clear definition of Meaningful Consultation can be found in the Safeguards Policy Statement Glossary and states that it is “A process that (i) begins early in the project preparation stage and is carried out on an ongoing basis throughout the project cycle; (ii) provides timely disclosure of relevant and adequate information that is understandable and readily accessible to affected people; (iii) is undertaken in an atmosphere free of intimidation or coercion; (iv) is gender-inclusive and responsive, and tailored to the needs of disadvantaged and vulnerable groups; and (v) enables the incorporation of all relevant views of affected people and other stakeholders into decision makings, such as project design, mitigation measures, the sharing of development benefits and opportunities, and implementation issues.” This definition should underpin the Safeguards Policy Review and Update (SPRU) and the Stakeholder Engagement Plan (SEP). Outline a clear, unambiguous plan on offline mechanisms for consultation. The current SEP Draft recognizes inaccessibility to online means of communication for many stakeholders and makes an effort to mention offline mechanisms for consultation. This is not supported by a clear plan of how these stakeholders groups will be reached for consultation, nor does the SEP make clear the schedule for the offline consultations, or the countries it would take place. Good practices of meaningful consultation warrant having an inclusive space for multi-stakeholder engagement. This includes ensuring that prior information is given to the stakeholder group (community or CSOs) in a clear, time-bound manner, and in a language that is easily understandable. To modernize the policy and make sure it upholds the highest social and environmental standards, efforts must be made to consult with Project Affected Persons (PAPs) through offline mechanisms. We urge the Bank to take this into consideration and clearly outline the list of countries it aims to hold offline consultation. Due diligence must be given specifically to projects which have gone into compliance review. Avoid reliance on demand-driven consultation. Demand-driven consultation plans will prove to be problematic as various key thematic dialogues may not be held unless civil society groups themselves proactively reach out to the ADB SDCC and the Consultation Team. The first question which arises is whether the ADB SDCC will be able to conduct a comprehensive outreach on the SEP at the national and global level to ensure that thematic and remote groups across various cultures, languages, and political contexts are aware of the ‘demand driven’ stipulations? In the current context of the pandemic, this seems very unlikely. Without a prescribed list of thematic consultations announced for each country and region, the chances of getting specialized groups to organize dialogue with ADB SDCC on their own volition without compromising their exposure to risk and scrutiny will also be a deterrent for them stepping forward. We strongly recommend the removal of the ‘demand driven’ approach as it potentially passes the burden of convening the consultation solely on the stakeholder and not on the ADB SDCC, the department responsible for convening and managing this update process. There is also a need for wider outreach on direct engagements via different communication formats, including traditional media in case of offline events. Heavy reliance on online means of communication such as social media and websites to advertise for consultation risks losing the critical voices of PAPs and communities living in remote areas. We urge the Bank to make active and reasonable efforts to include traditional means of media such as newspapers and national television advertisements in their communication plan. Meaningfully engage with young people in the consultation process. Consultations with children and young people are important about their experiences, and therefore need to be set up in a child-friendly manner that promotes the rights and respect of the child in a sensitive manner. There should be age-appropriate targeting in terms of setup, information, and messaging as well as promoting participation and inclusivity. For best practices see the Save the Children Child Consultation Toolkit . Include the Private Sector Operations Department in its internal consultation process. The ADB has announced, in its Strategy 2030, an expansion of its private sector portfolio to reach one-third of total Bank operations by 2024. Private sector operations are riddled with noncompliance, transparency, and lack of information disclosure. We have witnessed the death of 6 workers in the PSOD-led project, Nam Ngiep 1, in Laos due to failures in labor safeguarding. Similarly, the Tata Mundra Coal Project led by PSOD had critically endangered marine ecosystems and displaced thousands of local fishermen in 2014. It is imperative that ADB SDCC takes a critical look at ensuring consultations between CSOs and PSOD staff and their respective borrowing clients and subcontractors in the course of this SEP and SPRU. The OHCHR Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights should lie at the heart of this dialogue between the Bank, private sector, and CSOs. Publicize ALL consultation comments and extend the timeline for commenting to 60 days. The SEP mentions that a summary of consultation comments will be disclosed on the SPRU webpage for two weeks. In the absence of a clear matrix on how summaries are prepared, We as CSOs are concerned that this will obscure some of the salient comments and recommendations received during the consultation process. Access to full consultation comments should be made available in addition to the summary of consultation comments to ensure full transparency. We are also requesting that the timeline for commenting is extended to 60 days to make sure that relevant stakeholders groups with minimal comprehension of the English language are able to translate the documents and submit their comments. Extend the timeline for commenting on the draft W-paper and the R-paper and subsequent revisions to a period of two months/ 60 days respectively. Good practices on meaningful consultation stipulate that stakeholders should be given sufficient time to review the information across regions and countries before being asked to express their views. Meaningful inclusion of more urgent safeguards issues supported by coherent analytical studies. We welcome the broadening of the themes to include labor, climate change, and sexual abuse and harassment in the list of analytical studies as a response to the progressing international laws, standards and norms. We urge the Bank to avoid the reliance on the blanket term of ‘vulnerability’ and misuse of terminologies such as ‘crosscutting’ to assess the varying risks affecting different groups such as peoples with disabilities, sexual and gender diverse groups, and children. Due diligence must be given to: Risk of reprisals. The silencing of critical voices through reprisals and retaliations - or the fear thereof - seriously calls into question the possibilities for a consultation to be meaningful: when these critical voices are coming from the ground and would be communicating operational risks, a climate of fear puts operations at risk, too. Similar to the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the ADB needs to have a clear zero tolerance position against reprisals, either as part of the SEP or as a more general statement that the SEP is bound by. In order to operationalise this zero tolerance position, the SEP needs to go beyond just alluding to it in reference to PAPs. It needs to commit to (1) carrying out contextual risks assessments, for all the different contexts in which consultations will be taking place with people deemed to potentially be at risk, looking particularly at reprisal risks, (2) devising measures to mitigate risks identified and finally it needs to include a (3) reprisal response protocol that seeks to use the leverage the bank has to address any reprisal that may occur. Human rights. Despite the IED evaluation recommendation that “the modernized SPS should also clarify the safeguard components of other key ADB objectives, which have increased in importance since the SPS, such as climate risk mitigation and adaptation, disaster risk management, the needs of disabled people, human rights, and supply chains” as well as the increasing human rights challenges and risks in the region, the SEP makes no mention of addressing anything related to human rights. We recommend a dedicated analytical study as well as consultations on the safeguard components of human rights. In 2011, the UN Human Rights Council endorsed the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights as a set of guidelines for States and companies to prevent, address and remedy human rights abuses committed in business operations. In 2020, the United Nations Global Compact announced support for mandatory human rights due diligence. The same year, the IGWG developed the second draft of an international legally binding instrument to regulate, in international human rights law, the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises. Currently, hundreds of large businesses, associations & investors in the EU have supported mandatory human rights due diligence legislation. It demonstrates an increasing demand to address human rights in development projects, which the ADB can not ignore. Risk Categorization. The current SEP list of thematic issues for analytical studies should include an evaluation on ADBs Risk Categorization decision making and implementation practice. As per the IEDs findings the ADBs current categorization process lacks a comprehensive risk-based approach. This leads to arbitrary risk assignment. Unless Quality at Entry documentation of a project such as EIA,IEE, SIA, IPSA have gone through layers of independent checks, arbitrary risk assessment and consequent categorization will remain a structural flaw. We urge the Bank to review the Effectiveness of the 2009 Safeguard Policy Statement for an understanding of the historic and systemic flaws plaguing Risk categorisation at the project level. A need for clear distinction between financing modalities and special issues. As outlined before, MDBs such as the ADB have cited their increased focus on promoting transparency in development financing. However, decades of CSO monitoring of private sector & FI Operations by CSOs have shown a lack of transparency. The current scope and objectives of the ‘Financing modalities and special issues’ study does not clearly define what aspects of financing modalities are being assessed adequately. Project implementation in fragile and conflict affected situations (FCAS) and small island developing states (SIDS) is an important issue which should be given due consideration and therefore we urge the Bank to make a clear distinction in its engagement and analytical approach. 11. Maintain resolute consistency with Human Rights Principles. Meaningful stakeholder consultation is enshrined in the international human rights architecture and elucidated across various conventions, resolutions, and declarations. ILO Convention 169 (1989) which deals exclusively with Indigenuous Peoples states that “they shall participate in the formulation, implementation and evaluation of plans and programs… which may affect them directly.” These principles were affirmed in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP 2007) which upholds and emphasizes on the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) prerequisite criterion. Similar principles were also outlined for other groups including The 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child which elucidates that “The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds”. ADB should ensure that the financed projects don’t contribute to human rights abuses violations, assaults on local communities and human rights defenders, and shrinking civil society space. The Bank should incorporate in their SEP a clear strategy on Human Rights to protect communities, Indigenous Peoples, and human rights defenders, and enhance public participation. This strategy should detail how human rights risks and impacts are considered, prevented and mitigated at all stages of the project-cycle, with special attention given to fragile and conflict-affected settings. The strategy should clearly spell out how the Bank will promote and implement a human rights-based approach among its stakeholders, clients and counterparts. In order to achieve that, ADB should employ sound human rights due diligence at project level, undertake Human Rights assessments, quick response mechanisms and numerous already available Human Rights tools. The Bank should consult with relevant stakeholders on best approaches to make the requirements for HR protection part of the client’s obligation under the new Safeguards Policy. 12. Ensure safe and free from retaliation space for the stakeholders to raise their concerns under the consultations process. Comprehensive risk assessment and mitigation plan should be developed for every online and offline event of stakeholder engagement, considering the national and/or group-specific context. The participants, in particular, the affected persons and communities should be properly informed about any potential risks and mitigation measures developed by the ADB to ensure their security.

bottom of page