Hon’ble Union Minister Ambika Soni makes ASI Director a scapegoat to save herself
Sethu affidavit: ASI officer files case against Soni
Amitav RanjanPosted online: Dec 15, 2008 at 0010 hrs
New Delhi : An Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) officer, suspended last year for not carrying out changes in a counter reply to the Supreme Court on the Ram Sethu project, has filed a case against Culture Minister Ambika Soni and her senior officials for making him a “convenient scapegoat” to save herself from the public furore that ensued.
Seeking to quash the chargesheet against him, Chander Shekhar, Director (Administration) in the ASI, has told the Central Administrative Tribunal that the “purpose and motive of issuance of chargesheet is oblique and aimed solely at providing cover to the respondents in respect to the situation, which are their own creation, resulting in political fallout causing serious consequential repercussion to them”.
Shekhar, along with Assistant Director (Monuments) V Bakshi, was suspended in September 2007 for not incorporating corrections in the counter affidavit that set off a political storm, with the BJP accusing the UPA Government of hurting religious sentiments of Hindus in stating that there was no historical or scientific proof about the existence of Lord Ram.
Soni had then said her officers had made corrections, including deleting paragraph 20, which argued that mythological texts Ramayana and Ramcharitmanas could not be called historical records that “incontrovertibly prove(d) the existence of the characters or the occurrence of the events, depicted therein”.
According to Shekhar, the ministry’s Chief Public Information Officer Roopa Srinivasan, while replying to an RTI appeal for information on who carried out the changes, wrote: “No such information is available”.
“Thus, after one year of carrying out the claimed corrections in paragraph 20 of the draft affidavit, the ministry has now accepted that there is nothing on record to establish as to who carried out these claimed corrections in paragraph 20,” says Shekhar’s petition, which also names former culture secretary Badal K Das and ASI Director General Anshu Vaish as respondents.
Five days after the political outburst, the ministry had informed the Prime Minister’s Office saying that Joint Secretary RC Mishra, Das and Vaish, discussed and approved the changes in paragraphs 20 and 29 on September 6. Shekhar has said that only Mishra critically examined the draft affidavit, noting that “Paras 19 and 20 of the CA categorically state the stand of the ASI. This may please be seen. Source for the phrase ‘army of monkeys’ used in para 29 may also be ascertained”.
“It may not be out of place to mention that in the counter reply filed before the Supreme Court the words ‘army of monkeys’ pointed out by Joint Secretary stood deleted,” Shekhar says.
But, claims Shekhar in his petition, Mishra made no mention of the September 6 meeting on the file while he did so in an identical situation on the same issue less than two months before the controversial event. There was also no mention of the alleged changes by the Additional Solicitor General to the Court while seeking withdrawal of the affidavit, says his petition.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story_print.php?storyid=398460
MONDAY, MARCH 17, 2008
ASI’s reply to my RTI application: Speaking Order & the right to non-comply with directions
V. Venkatesan
My continuing Right to Information battle with the Archaeological Survey of India on why the Government suspended two officials of the ASI following the controversy over the Sethusamudram affidavit has elicited one more reply. This time, the then Appellate Authority who had earlier agreed with me and directed the Central Public Information Officer of the ASI to provide the information I requested, has been overruled by his successor, Mr.D.S.Gehlot, who appears to have recently taken over as the Appellate Authority in the ASI. Mr.Gehlot’s order dated March 14, 2008 is interesting because it says he found the order of his predecessor not a speaking order, not mentioning either the fact, or reasons and silent about how the said information would not qualify for exemption under section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act.
The new order further says: “The Ministry of Culture has ordered an investigation in the matter and providing copy of the report submitted by DG,ASI at this stage is likely to affect the course of inquiry, which has been initiated under the CCS (CCA) Rules. Since the inquiry is still on, all the original papers related to the case are with the Ministry of Culture. The Nodal Officer of the Ministry of Culture was requested to take a decision about providing the information and take appropriate action. The CPIO Ministry of Culture concurred that the information related to the matter may be exempted under Section 8(1)(h).”
It adds: “The said exemption does not deny the information completely/forever but only till the matter is under investigation. The information sought by the applicant may be supplied as soon as the process of investigation is over.”
I agree that any order should stand the test of legality, fairness and reason. But I find the new Appellate Authority’s order difficult to comprehend. First, the RTI Act does not provide for amendment of order by one Appellate Authority by his successor Authority. Secondly, the failure of the Appellate Authority to provide a speaking order does not give freedom to the CPIO to non-comply with the AA’s order. If the CPIO is dissatisfied, then he should, one would expect, approach the CIC with a complaint or an appeal. But the Act does not contemplate that option to the CPIO. The Act is silent on this.
The Appellate Authority does not adjudicate between two disputing parties, in terms of hearing them. The AA simply goes through the RTI’s applicant’s appeal against the CPIO’s decision, and examines whether the CPIO’s decision was in conformity with the Act. In case the AA rejected my appeal without a speaking order, then how would I exercise my right of non-compliance with the AA’s Order? I have the option only appealing against the AA’s order, if I am dissatisfied. Therefore, to permit the CPIO to non-comply with the AA’s order, because it is not a speaking order, is likely to defeat the very objectives of the RTI Act, and its appeal mechanism.
Secondly, the new AA agrees with the Government that the matter is still under investigation, whereas one would assume that with the suspension order being issued against the two officials, and the Government having already submitted a revised affidavit in the Supreme Court in the Sethusamudram case, the so-called investigation must be already over. What sort of investigation is currently on? I am sorry to say the new AA’s order suffers from the same absence of “speaking order” which was cited to overrule the previous AA’s order. Once the report is submitted by the DG, ASI, it marks the completion of investigation, and the basis for the disciplinary action against the two officials. If the investigation is incomplete, then the suspension order must have clearly said, they were being suspended pending investigation. That was not the case.
Posted by V.Venkatesan at 6:46 PM
http://lawandotherthings.blogspot.com/2008/03/asis-reply-to-my-rti-application.html
Monday, December 15, 2008
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Sethusamudram Project could damage marine eco system: Experts
Sethusamudram Project could damage marine eco system: Experts
London, Dec 11: Asking India to shelve the controversial Sethusamudram Project as it could damage the productive marine eco-system, an international group of environmentalists has suggested the Gulf of Mannar region should be declared a Cultural and Natural World Heritage Site.
Requesting President of India Pratibha Patil to cancel the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project, the Ecologists and Environmentalists group claimed that the government's decision to go ahead with the project was based on legal flaws and would have inevitable and disastrous ecological and social impact.
The project could disrupt and damage the productive marine eco-system through a massive increase in the burden of silting and sedimentation, the group said adding, it will also affect coral reefs, sea grass beds, oyster beds and food fisheries.
They further said that the salinisation of the shallow aquifers on both sides of the channel could endanger and even lead to the extinction of the important local species, including dugong, green turtle and at least 25 different species of sea snake, resulting in collapse of the entire ecosystem.
It also asked India and Sri Lanka to write an application to the UNESCO to declare the Gulf of Mannar region a mixed Cultural and Natural World Heritage Site.
Earlier, a resolution in this regard was adopted on the issue at a two-day meeting here attended by an international consortium of ecologists, academics, scientists and religious leaders.
Bureau Report
http://www.zeenews.com/nation/2008-12-11/490117news.html
London, Dec 11: Asking India to shelve the controversial Sethusamudram Project as it could damage the productive marine eco-system, an international group of environmentalists has suggested the Gulf of Mannar region should be declared a Cultural and Natural World Heritage Site.
Requesting President of India Pratibha Patil to cancel the Sethusamudram Shipping Canal Project, the Ecologists and Environmentalists group claimed that the government's decision to go ahead with the project was based on legal flaws and would have inevitable and disastrous ecological and social impact.
The project could disrupt and damage the productive marine eco-system through a massive increase in the burden of silting and sedimentation, the group said adding, it will also affect coral reefs, sea grass beds, oyster beds and food fisheries.
They further said that the salinisation of the shallow aquifers on both sides of the channel could endanger and even lead to the extinction of the important local species, including dugong, green turtle and at least 25 different species of sea snake, resulting in collapse of the entire ecosystem.
It also asked India and Sri Lanka to write an application to the UNESCO to declare the Gulf of Mannar region a mixed Cultural and Natural World Heritage Site.
Earlier, a resolution in this regard was adopted on the issue at a two-day meeting here attended by an international consortium of ecologists, academics, scientists and religious leaders.
Bureau Report
http://www.zeenews.com/nation/2008-12-11/490117news.html
Monday, December 8, 2008
Ram Setu case-- Varying sets of misleading affidavits by Union of India
Ram Sethu case-- Varying sets of misleading affidavits by Union of India
By Dr S Kalyanaraman December 14, 2008 News Analysis
Written submission of the advocate for Union of India made in October 2008 to the Supreme Court says: The Petitioners have not alleged much less proved that Ram Sethu forms an integral and essential part of the Hindu religion. Union of India also claims that belief of the community has to be proved like any other fact.
It is clear that Union of India holds the justice system in utter contempt. It holds the responsibility of the state under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India in utter contempt. It holds that the millions of people the world over who revere Ram, Ramayana and Ram Sethu which are central to the nation’s traditions to be treated with disdain and hence holds those who venerate Ram and Ram Sethu as a place of worship in utter contempt.
What does Union of India have to say about Ram Sethu?
This is an amazing set of hypocritical, misleading statements of Union of India (Respondents) containing varying shades of misleading statements.
Step 1: The existence of Ram Sethu is denied. Next it is said that Ramayana cannot be linked with the bridge. In another breath, a pledge is made that a viewing gallery will be constructed to enable pilgrims to pay homage to Ram Sethu.
Step 2: In a withdrawn affidavit, Ministry of Culture claims Ram Sethu to be a myth, adding that the Sethu is not man-made.
Step 3: In a withdrawn affidavit, Ministry of Shipping claims that there is no scientific evidence to justify declaration of Sethu as an ancient monument.
Step 4: On September 14, 2008, Union of India claimed total respect for all religions and Hinduism in particular… The Central Government is alive and conscious of religious sensibilities including the unique ancient and holy text of Ramayana…Having regard to public sentiments, the Central Government withdrew the prevailing affidavit to re-examine the entire matter.
Union of India also clarified that the affidavit did not intend to touch upon the freedom/ articles of faith or belief of any section of society.
Step 5: In a final counter affidavit, Union of India defined the role of the state and stated that the state cannot and should not be called upon to determine issues of faith. Union of India also added: “It is now for the Hon’ble Court to resolve the contentious issues raised by the petitioners in the context of evidence available.”
Step 6: Written submission of the advocate for Union of India made in October 2008 to the Supreme Court says: “The Petitioners have not alleged much less proved that Ram Sethu forms an integral and essential part of the Hindu religion. Union of India also claims that belief of the community has to be proved like any other fact. The further submission of Union of India is that it has not been proved undoubtedly to be the belief of the Hindu community that Lord Ram did not himself break the bridge. Nor has it been established that whatever remains of the Ram Sethu as a place of worship is an essential and integral part of the Hindu religion.”
So, what is the stand of Union of India as seen from these six sets of waffling averments?
It is clear that Union of India holds the justice system in utter contempt. It holds the responsibility of the state under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India in utter contempt. It holds that the millions of people the world over who revere Ram, Ramayana and Ram Sethu which are central to the nation’s traditions to be treated with disdain and hence holds those who venerate Ram and Ram Sethu as a place of worship in utter contempt.
This contemptuous behavior of Union of India is reprehensible. UPA has proved its incompetence to hold the reins of the state and to has failed to uphold the rule of law as supreme.
I wish the Supreme Court comes down heavily on the utterly irresponsible behaviour shown by the respondents’ misleading statements and calls them to order. The Court should also direct the Government of India to declare Ram Sethu an ancient monument under the 1958 Act and to direct Union of India to approach UNESCO to declare it a world heritage. The Court should also direct that Sethu project which is an ecological disaster should be declared a project disaster and scrapped forthwith.
I also hope the Pachauri Committee takes note of the waffling stances of the Union of India and does not succumb to any pressures from any functionary of the Union of India.
The arguments for the Ram Sethu being central to Hindu identity and nation’s identity are many and have been stated earlier which the Court will take note of and render justice.
Dr. Subramanian Swamy has filed on November 3, 2008 in the Supreme Court, fresh written submissions on whether Ram Sethu is an integral part of Hindu religion. This includes an annexure to page 31 comparing the six statements demonstrating progressively varying stances of the Union of India, the respondent in the transfer petition pending in the Supreme Court.
Here is an annexure demonstrating six varying stances:
Progressively varying stances of the respondents as reflected in that affidavit
There is nothing called ‘Ramar Palam’ excepting that the petitioners have chosen to name the ‘Adams Bridge’ as Ramar Palam. There is no question of sand sholes- - - being declared monuments of national importance.
Having failed in all their attempts now the forces probably thought easier to play with religious sentiments which they thought the Indians might fall to their prey, started instigating the religious sentiments of the Hindus….
3)70(14)(iv) several Indians experts…. have also declared that there is no evidence linking the mythical Lanka bridge built by Hanuman to the chain of sand banks …….. To link that with Ram or Ramayana is ridiculous.
4)P.76(17) It will also cut off Land’s End in Dhanushkodi island which is visited by hundreds of pilgrims every day.
….It will also cut off Kodandaramasamy Temple visited by thousands of pilgrims every day
5)P.77(17) The creation of the channel will also afford an opportunity to pilgrims to visit Adams Bridge, not possible today, and offer obeissance as the SCL is contemplating provision of a viewing galary along the channel alignment.
Step 2
Withdrawal of centre's affidavit by Ministry of Culture
1) P.3(4) The petitioners have attempted to reply upon mythological material such as the Ramayana.
2) P.9(19) the ASI, has reasonably concluded that the formation known as Ram Sethu/Adams Bridge is not a man made structure.
3) P.11(25) the aforesaid conclusions renders the entire theory proposed by the petitioners (by placing reliance on entirely mythological texts) wholly implausible
4) P.15(32-33) The same is merely a sand and coral formation which cannot be said to be of historical archeological or artistic interest or importance.
5) P.15(33) “The Adams Bridge site cannot therefore be said to be of any archeological interest.”
6) P.9(20)”The contents of the Valmiki Ramayana, the Ramcharitmanas and other mythological texts… which cannot be said to be historical record, incontrovertibly prove the existence of the characters, or the occurrence of the events depicted therein.”
Step 3
Withdrawal of centre's affidavit by Ministry of Shipping
1) P.11(10) “The absence of any cohesive scientific evidence which can support the formation of a legally tenable opinion, - - - of Section 4 of the Ancient Monuments Act, it is submitted that the instant writ petitions must fail.”
Step 4
ASG’s Gopal’s statement dated 14.9.2008
1) P2(2) “The Central Government has total respect for all religions and Hinduism in particular… The Central Government is alive and conscious of religious sensibilities including the unique ancient and holy text of Ramayana… Having regard to public sentiments, the Central Government withdraws the present affidavit to re-examine the entire matter.”
2) 2(3) It is clarified that the affidavit did not intend to touch upon the freedom/ articles of faith or belief of any section of society.
Step 5
Counter affidavit final
PP59-6
1) The state cannot and should not be called upon to determine issues of faith.
2) It is now for the Hon’ble Court to resolve the contentious issues raised by the petitioners in the context of evidence available..”
Step 6
Present written submissions
Submitted October 2008
P73II. The petitioners have not alleged much less proved that Ram Sethu forms an integral and essential part of the Hindu religion.
P.76. Belief of the community has to be proved like any other fact.
P.84 The submission is that it has not been proved undoubtedly to be the belief of the Hindu community that Lord Ram did not himself break the bridge. Nor has it been established that whatever remains of the Ram Sethu as a place of worship is an essential and integral part of the Hindu religion.
http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=267&page=26
By Dr S Kalyanaraman December 14, 2008 News Analysis
Written submission of the advocate for Union of India made in October 2008 to the Supreme Court says: The Petitioners have not alleged much less proved that Ram Sethu forms an integral and essential part of the Hindu religion. Union of India also claims that belief of the community has to be proved like any other fact.
It is clear that Union of India holds the justice system in utter contempt. It holds the responsibility of the state under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India in utter contempt. It holds that the millions of people the world over who revere Ram, Ramayana and Ram Sethu which are central to the nation’s traditions to be treated with disdain and hence holds those who venerate Ram and Ram Sethu as a place of worship in utter contempt.
What does Union of India have to say about Ram Sethu?
This is an amazing set of hypocritical, misleading statements of Union of India (Respondents) containing varying shades of misleading statements.
Step 1: The existence of Ram Sethu is denied. Next it is said that Ramayana cannot be linked with the bridge. In another breath, a pledge is made that a viewing gallery will be constructed to enable pilgrims to pay homage to Ram Sethu.
Step 2: In a withdrawn affidavit, Ministry of Culture claims Ram Sethu to be a myth, adding that the Sethu is not man-made.
Step 3: In a withdrawn affidavit, Ministry of Shipping claims that there is no scientific evidence to justify declaration of Sethu as an ancient monument.
Step 4: On September 14, 2008, Union of India claimed total respect for all religions and Hinduism in particular… The Central Government is alive and conscious of religious sensibilities including the unique ancient and holy text of Ramayana…Having regard to public sentiments, the Central Government withdrew the prevailing affidavit to re-examine the entire matter.
Union of India also clarified that the affidavit did not intend to touch upon the freedom/ articles of faith or belief of any section of society.
Step 5: In a final counter affidavit, Union of India defined the role of the state and stated that the state cannot and should not be called upon to determine issues of faith. Union of India also added: “It is now for the Hon’ble Court to resolve the contentious issues raised by the petitioners in the context of evidence available.”
Step 6: Written submission of the advocate for Union of India made in October 2008 to the Supreme Court says: “The Petitioners have not alleged much less proved that Ram Sethu forms an integral and essential part of the Hindu religion. Union of India also claims that belief of the community has to be proved like any other fact. The further submission of Union of India is that it has not been proved undoubtedly to be the belief of the Hindu community that Lord Ram did not himself break the bridge. Nor has it been established that whatever remains of the Ram Sethu as a place of worship is an essential and integral part of the Hindu religion.”
So, what is the stand of Union of India as seen from these six sets of waffling averments?
It is clear that Union of India holds the justice system in utter contempt. It holds the responsibility of the state under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India in utter contempt. It holds that the millions of people the world over who revere Ram, Ramayana and Ram Sethu which are central to the nation’s traditions to be treated with disdain and hence holds those who venerate Ram and Ram Sethu as a place of worship in utter contempt.
This contemptuous behavior of Union of India is reprehensible. UPA has proved its incompetence to hold the reins of the state and to has failed to uphold the rule of law as supreme.
I wish the Supreme Court comes down heavily on the utterly irresponsible behaviour shown by the respondents’ misleading statements and calls them to order. The Court should also direct the Government of India to declare Ram Sethu an ancient monument under the 1958 Act and to direct Union of India to approach UNESCO to declare it a world heritage. The Court should also direct that Sethu project which is an ecological disaster should be declared a project disaster and scrapped forthwith.
I also hope the Pachauri Committee takes note of the waffling stances of the Union of India and does not succumb to any pressures from any functionary of the Union of India.
The arguments for the Ram Sethu being central to Hindu identity and nation’s identity are many and have been stated earlier which the Court will take note of and render justice.
Dr. Subramanian Swamy has filed on November 3, 2008 in the Supreme Court, fresh written submissions on whether Ram Sethu is an integral part of Hindu religion. This includes an annexure to page 31 comparing the six statements demonstrating progressively varying stances of the Union of India, the respondent in the transfer petition pending in the Supreme Court.
Here is an annexure demonstrating six varying stances:
Progressively varying stances of the respondents as reflected in that affidavit
There is nothing called ‘Ramar Palam’ excepting that the petitioners have chosen to name the ‘Adams Bridge’ as Ramar Palam. There is no question of sand sholes- - - being declared monuments of national importance.
Having failed in all their attempts now the forces probably thought easier to play with religious sentiments which they thought the Indians might fall to their prey, started instigating the religious sentiments of the Hindus….
3)70(14)(iv) several Indians experts…. have also declared that there is no evidence linking the mythical Lanka bridge built by Hanuman to the chain of sand banks …….. To link that with Ram or Ramayana is ridiculous.
4)P.76(17) It will also cut off Land’s End in Dhanushkodi island which is visited by hundreds of pilgrims every day.
….It will also cut off Kodandaramasamy Temple visited by thousands of pilgrims every day
5)P.77(17) The creation of the channel will also afford an opportunity to pilgrims to visit Adams Bridge, not possible today, and offer obeissance as the SCL is contemplating provision of a viewing galary along the channel alignment.
Step 2
Withdrawal of centre's affidavit by Ministry of Culture
1) P.3(4) The petitioners have attempted to reply upon mythological material such as the Ramayana.
2) P.9(19) the ASI, has reasonably concluded that the formation known as Ram Sethu/Adams Bridge is not a man made structure.
3) P.11(25) the aforesaid conclusions renders the entire theory proposed by the petitioners (by placing reliance on entirely mythological texts) wholly implausible
4) P.15(32-33) The same is merely a sand and coral formation which cannot be said to be of historical archeological or artistic interest or importance.
5) P.15(33) “The Adams Bridge site cannot therefore be said to be of any archeological interest.”
6) P.9(20)”The contents of the Valmiki Ramayana, the Ramcharitmanas and other mythological texts… which cannot be said to be historical record, incontrovertibly prove the existence of the characters, or the occurrence of the events depicted therein.”
Step 3
Withdrawal of centre's affidavit by Ministry of Shipping
1) P.11(10) “The absence of any cohesive scientific evidence which can support the formation of a legally tenable opinion, - - - of Section 4 of the Ancient Monuments Act, it is submitted that the instant writ petitions must fail.”
Step 4
ASG’s Gopal’s statement dated 14.9.2008
1) P2(2) “The Central Government has total respect for all religions and Hinduism in particular… The Central Government is alive and conscious of religious sensibilities including the unique ancient and holy text of Ramayana… Having regard to public sentiments, the Central Government withdraws the present affidavit to re-examine the entire matter.”
2) 2(3) It is clarified that the affidavit did not intend to touch upon the freedom/ articles of faith or belief of any section of society.
Step 5
Counter affidavit final
PP59-6
1) The state cannot and should not be called upon to determine issues of faith.
2) It is now for the Hon’ble Court to resolve the contentious issues raised by the petitioners in the context of evidence available..”
Step 6
Present written submissions
Submitted October 2008
P73II. The petitioners have not alleged much less proved that Ram Sethu forms an integral and essential part of the Hindu religion.
P.76. Belief of the community has to be proved like any other fact.
P.84 The submission is that it has not been proved undoubtedly to be the belief of the Hindu community that Lord Ram did not himself break the bridge. Nor has it been established that whatever remains of the Ram Sethu as a place of worship is an essential and integral part of the Hindu religion.
http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=267&page=26
Friday, December 5, 2008
Setusamudram: sacred site. Scrap channel project.
Setusamudram: sacred site. Scrap channel project.
Sacred Site nomination boosts campaign to save Gulf of Mannar
Friday, 12.05.2008, 07:31am (GMT-7)
NEW YORK: At the first international meeting of the campaign to protect the Gulf of Mannar, held at the Linnean Society in London recently, the Alliance of Religions and Conservation (ARC) made the dramatic announcement that it would be seeking to have the Gulf of Mannar designated as one of the world's first internationally recognized 'Sacred Sites.' Following agreements reached at the IUCN World Conservation Congress in Barcelona last month, 'Sacred Site' is a now an international term of protection for sites that are spiritually, religiously, culturally and ecologically important.
In the fight to save the Gulf of Mannar from destruction by the creation of a deep shipping channel, the move could prove to be a strategically important one. Flowing between South-East India and Sri Lanka, the Gulf of Mannar is home to Ram Sethu, or Adam's Bridge, a site of immense spiritual significance to both Hindus and Muslims worldwide.
Situated in South-Asia's largest biosphere reserve, it is also one of the last remaining biological hotspots on the planet, offering sanctuary to numerous endangered plant and animal species such as the dugong and the green turtle. However, despite the clear cultural, natural and spiritual importance of the area, and in the face of an on-going challenge in the Supreme Court of India, the Indian government is pressing ahead with dredging for the planned Sethusamudram Ship Channel, risking destruction of the sacred bridge and the fragile eco-system of the area.
The announcement of nomination for Sacred Site status was made by Martin Palmer, Secretary General of ARC, and religion and ecology advisor to His Royal Highness the Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. "The Gulf of Mannar has enormous spiritual significance within both Hinduism and Islam," he said during his announcement.
"Narratives in the Hindu Ramayana, which feature Ram Sethu, and the Muslim story of Adam being thrown out of Paradise and falling into what we now know as Sri Lanka, then walking across Adam's Bridge to become the vice-regent of God ruling the world, make the Gulf of Mannar the one place in the world - other than the Garden of Eden - where we could actually say 'this is a sacred site about our relationship with and our responsibility for the rest of creation.'
Cosmologically and ecologically the Gulf of Mannar is about as sacred a site as you could get. Our suggestion is that it should be nominated as one of the very first internationally significant sacred sites, along with places such as the sacred mountains of China and other such hugely holy and ecologically significant places. I have every confidence the nomination will succeed." Organizers of the campaign to protect the Gulf of Mannar have been quick to welcome the news. "Mr Palmer's announcement was dramatic and unexpected," says Kusum Vyas, founder of The Living Planet Foundation, based in Houston, Texas, which organized the London meeting.
"The meeting erupted into applause when he made the announcement - it was so thrilling. To get the Gulf of Mannar recognised on the international conservation stage will be a huge step forward in preserving its sanctity and ecology for future generations. We can't thank ARC enough." Asked to reflect on the current battle to preserve the Gulf of Mannar, Palmer said: "It is a classic struggle - to use Christian terminology - between God and Mammon, between those who see the world as a stage upon which a drama of cosmological significance is played out in which every aspect of creation has significance and meaning because it is created from love, and those who simply see this planet as a rather large supermarket to be raided."
ARC is a secular foundation designed to work both with the major religions, encouraging them to look into their own traditions in order to increase their environmental activities, as well as with major environmental organizations to get them to take the role of religions seriously.
IUCN, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, is world's oldest and largest global environmental network - a democratic membership union with more than 1,000 government and NGO member organizations, and almost 11,000 volunteer scientists in more than 160 countries - it helps find pragmatic solutions to pressing environment and development challenges. The first international meeting of the campaign to protect the Gulf of Mannar was held at the Linnean Society in London last week and was organized by The Living Planet Foundation USA.
India Post News Service
http://indiapost.com/article/usnews/4722/
Sacred Site nomination boosts campaign to save Gulf of Mannar
Friday, 12.05.2008, 07:31am (GMT-7)
NEW YORK: At the first international meeting of the campaign to protect the Gulf of Mannar, held at the Linnean Society in London recently, the Alliance of Religions and Conservation (ARC) made the dramatic announcement that it would be seeking to have the Gulf of Mannar designated as one of the world's first internationally recognized 'Sacred Sites.' Following agreements reached at the IUCN World Conservation Congress in Barcelona last month, 'Sacred Site' is a now an international term of protection for sites that are spiritually, religiously, culturally and ecologically important.
In the fight to save the Gulf of Mannar from destruction by the creation of a deep shipping channel, the move could prove to be a strategically important one. Flowing between South-East India and Sri Lanka, the Gulf of Mannar is home to Ram Sethu, or Adam's Bridge, a site of immense spiritual significance to both Hindus and Muslims worldwide.
Situated in South-Asia's largest biosphere reserve, it is also one of the last remaining biological hotspots on the planet, offering sanctuary to numerous endangered plant and animal species such as the dugong and the green turtle. However, despite the clear cultural, natural and spiritual importance of the area, and in the face of an on-going challenge in the Supreme Court of India, the Indian government is pressing ahead with dredging for the planned Sethusamudram Ship Channel, risking destruction of the sacred bridge and the fragile eco-system of the area.
The announcement of nomination for Sacred Site status was made by Martin Palmer, Secretary General of ARC, and religion and ecology advisor to His Royal Highness the Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. "The Gulf of Mannar has enormous spiritual significance within both Hinduism and Islam," he said during his announcement.
"Narratives in the Hindu Ramayana, which feature Ram Sethu, and the Muslim story of Adam being thrown out of Paradise and falling into what we now know as Sri Lanka, then walking across Adam's Bridge to become the vice-regent of God ruling the world, make the Gulf of Mannar the one place in the world - other than the Garden of Eden - where we could actually say 'this is a sacred site about our relationship with and our responsibility for the rest of creation.'
Cosmologically and ecologically the Gulf of Mannar is about as sacred a site as you could get. Our suggestion is that it should be nominated as one of the very first internationally significant sacred sites, along with places such as the sacred mountains of China and other such hugely holy and ecologically significant places. I have every confidence the nomination will succeed." Organizers of the campaign to protect the Gulf of Mannar have been quick to welcome the news. "Mr Palmer's announcement was dramatic and unexpected," says Kusum Vyas, founder of The Living Planet Foundation, based in Houston, Texas, which organized the London meeting.
"The meeting erupted into applause when he made the announcement - it was so thrilling. To get the Gulf of Mannar recognised on the international conservation stage will be a huge step forward in preserving its sanctity and ecology for future generations. We can't thank ARC enough." Asked to reflect on the current battle to preserve the Gulf of Mannar, Palmer said: "It is a classic struggle - to use Christian terminology - between God and Mammon, between those who see the world as a stage upon which a drama of cosmological significance is played out in which every aspect of creation has significance and meaning because it is created from love, and those who simply see this planet as a rather large supermarket to be raided."
ARC is a secular foundation designed to work both with the major religions, encouraging them to look into their own traditions in order to increase their environmental activities, as well as with major environmental organizations to get them to take the role of religions seriously.
IUCN, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, is world's oldest and largest global environmental network - a democratic membership union with more than 1,000 government and NGO member organizations, and almost 11,000 volunteer scientists in more than 160 countries - it helps find pragmatic solutions to pressing environment and development challenges. The first international meeting of the campaign to protect the Gulf of Mannar was held at the Linnean Society in London last week and was organized by The Living Planet Foundation USA.
India Post News Service
http://indiapost.com/article/usnews/4722/
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Demand for 'sacred site' status for Setu
Demand for 'Sacred Site' status for Sethu
PTI
Tuesday, December 02, 2008 15:02 IST
LONDON: Campaigners protesting against the dredging of the Sethusamudram Ship Channel have demanded that Gulf of Mannar, which is home to the Ram Sethu, be designated as 'Sacred Site'.
The announcement for seeking a 'Sacred Site' status was made by Martin Palmer, Secretary General of Alliance of Religions and Conservation (ARC) and religion and ecology advisor to Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, at a two-day meeting here.
"The Gulf of Mannar has enormous spiritual significance within both Hinduism and Islam," he said during his announcement.
"The meeting erupted into applause when he made the announcement. To get the Gulf of Mannar recognised on the international conservation stage will be a huge step forward in preserving its sanctity and ecology for future generations," Kusum Vyas, founder of The Living Planet Foundation, which organised the London meeting, said.
'Sacred Site' is now an international term of protection for sites that are spiritually, religiously, culturally and ecologically important.
Flowing between South-East India and Sri Lanka, the Gulf of Mannar is home to Ram Sethu or Adam's Bridge, a site of immense spiritual significance for both Hindus and Muslims worldwide.
Situated in South-Asia's largest biosphere reserve, it is also one of the last remaining biological hot-spots on the planet, offering sanctuary to numerous endangered plant and animal species such as the dugong and the green turtle.
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1210895
PTI
Tuesday, December 02, 2008 15:02 IST
LONDON: Campaigners protesting against the dredging of the Sethusamudram Ship Channel have demanded that Gulf of Mannar, which is home to the Ram Sethu, be designated as 'Sacred Site'.
The announcement for seeking a 'Sacred Site' status was made by Martin Palmer, Secretary General of Alliance of Religions and Conservation (ARC) and religion and ecology advisor to Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, at a two-day meeting here.
"The Gulf of Mannar has enormous spiritual significance within both Hinduism and Islam," he said during his announcement.
"The meeting erupted into applause when he made the announcement. To get the Gulf of Mannar recognised on the international conservation stage will be a huge step forward in preserving its sanctity and ecology for future generations," Kusum Vyas, founder of The Living Planet Foundation, which organised the London meeting, said.
'Sacred Site' is now an international term of protection for sites that are spiritually, religiously, culturally and ecologically important.
Flowing between South-East India and Sri Lanka, the Gulf of Mannar is home to Ram Sethu or Adam's Bridge, a site of immense spiritual significance for both Hindus and Muslims worldwide.
Situated in South-Asia's largest biosphere reserve, it is also one of the last remaining biological hot-spots on the planet, offering sanctuary to numerous endangered plant and animal species such as the dugong and the green turtle.
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1210895
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)