The high costs of the SEZ in Chandpur tea estate
The government's decision to set up a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) in Chandpur tea estate in Chunarughat, Habiganj, will have negative repercussions on several counts. It will deprive 6,000 tea workers of a major part of their livelihood as they will lose their farmlands. It will replace precious agricultural land where paddy is being grown. And lastly, it threatens to cause major environmental damage in terms of loss of wildlife and pollution of rivers. We are therefore baffled at why the government should persist with locating the SEZ at such a high cost.
The tea estate land, the lease of which was cancelled by the government in 2015 with Bangladesh Economic Zones Authority (Beza) acquiring it, was the land where tea workers of Chandpur have been farming since 1890. Thus, it is easy to see why this move would be devastating to so many families who are heavily dependent on farming in order to survive. Tea workers are marginalised people and are grossly underpaid for their hard labour. To take away their only means to somehow make ends meet would be inhuman and goes against the ILO convention that Bangladesh has ratified—which asks governments to recognise the right of ownership of land traditionally occupied by underprivileged tribal groups.
It has, moreover, been established through investigation that the land in question is not "barren" as falsely established by the local government. The prime minister has categorically said that she will not allow industries to be established on arable land. Thus, the move to set up an SEC in this land is in direct contravention of the PM's directive.
The environmental impact of an SEZ in this land is also convincing enough to deem this decision unwise. The forest department has confirmed that the area is only four kilometres from a national forest and only 19 kilometres from a wildlife sanctuary. Bangladesh Poribesh Andolon (Bapa) has warned that the increase in traffic to connect the SEZ through the Satchhari National Forest may lead to its death which will impact the streams and rivers downstream.
It is shocking that the Beza, as reported in this paper, has not done any Environmental Impact assessment (EIA) in the area before deciding to make it an economic zone, something that would be considered a prerequisite when acquiring any government land. All these factors point out to one thing: the government must revise this decision and find an alternative site for this economic zone. While we understand the need for SEZs for our economic development, there is no logic in establishing an SEZ at the cost of such large-scale human suffering and environmental degradation.
Comments