MELAMCHI WATER SUPLY PROJECT
(MWSP)
Shankar Limbu
Secretary
Lawyers’ Association for Human Rights of
Nepalese Indigenous Peoples
LAHURNIP
A brief Introduction on MWSP
• MWSP is much-debated mega project
• Started in 1973
• It is an alternative to address acute water problems of
Capital Kathmandu
• The Project is located in Sindhupalchok Dirstrict, but
covers Kavrepalanchok, Kathmandu, Lalitpur, Bhaktapur
• Per day 5100 Million Litters water will be diverted from
snow fed Melamchi, Larke and Yangri rivers to KTM
• Per day 180 Million Liters water is necessary in KTM
• The estimated project cost is
US$ 465 million
• Donors ( ADB, JBIC, NORAD,
SIDA, JG and NG)
• ADB is key donor and funding
on following components
– Construction
– Social and Environment
– Consultant
C o s t E s t im a t io n
25%
G o ve rn m e n t o f N e p a l
M ix e d C re d it
60%
5%
G ra n t
Loan
10%
Five Project Components
•
•
•
•
•
•
Melamchi Diversion Scheme (MDS)
Water Treatment Plant (WTP)
Bulk Distribution system
Distribution Network
Waste Water Improvements (WWI)
Government of Nepal implemented the project
through its line ministry MHPP
• Melamchi water supply development committee
was established in 1998
Project Objectives
• Improve the water-supply in Kathmandu (KTM) Valley
• Provide access to clean and safe water supply ensuring
good health sanitation
• Establish efficient water supply networking system on a
sustainable basis
• Reduce water pollution through establishment of sewer
and waste water treatment plants
• To improve river ecology, religious sites, and cultural
Ghats located at river banks by augmenting water flow at
Bagmatis and its tributaries
• To augment the depleting ground water sources of KTM
Studies
• Bannie and partners UK Identified Melamchy valley the
best option technically in 1988
• Stanley and Associates, Canada , carried out
preliminary environment assessment 1992
• Snowy Mountains Engneering Corporation of Australia
carried out full feasibility study in 1992 concluded
Melamchy Valley is the best alternative – technically,
environmentally, socially and economically.
• EIA based upon earlier studies and investigations funded
by NORAD and ADB
IPs status in MWSP area
• Total population of the nation 27 million
• 37.9 percent are IPs (Adivasi Janajati)
• Distinct from dominant group (Hindu) who comprise 28
percent of the total population
• 14 VDC are identified as affected VDC by MWSP
• The project site is traditional homeland of IPs and there
population is 56.2 percent out of 58457
• Hyolmo, Tamang, Majhi, Danuwar, Gurung, Newar etc.
• Mother tongue users group in project site ( Hyolmo
89.55%, Tamang 59.62, Gurung 6.97)
Caste/ Ethnicity Composition
Figure 1: Caste/Ethnic Composition of the Study Area
Caste/Ethnic group
Total
Others
Dalit
Adivasi Janajati
caste Group
0
20
40
60
Percentage
80
100
120
IP status in MWSP site
• No separate study on IPs
• No consultation even though officially shows 14 times it
was done
• No representation of IPs in Project’s decision making
and execution bodies
• No consultation, involvement and representation in SUP
Planning implementation and monitoring (Local group
and
• Target group is Local people and Backward People that
include IPs
• No information provided in the language which they use
and no access to information.
Impacts (Physical, Social, Economical, Environmental,
Cultural, rights
Positive impacts
• Construction of Access Roads to the sites( Sundarijal,
Gyalthum, Sindhu and Abatham 23.6 K.M.)
Transportation facility
• Spill over employment and daily wages work
• EMDP under SUP
• Small business increase/ Market
• Support to schools, health post etc.
• Electrification
Negative Impacts
• De- recognition of IPs and disregarding exiting ADB
Policy and National law
• No recognition of IPs’ rights over lands and natural
resources
• No representation and consultation with IPs
• Displace from lands, Sacred site and houses (232 Ha)
• Discrimination and arbitrary on compensation of lost
lands
– Voiceless
– Absent of land owners
– No land title
• Displacement from traditional Occupation (Fishing/ Water
mills) due to less residual flow in river
• Slope stability endangered
– Involuntary displacement
– Disposal of spoil from tunnel endangered human and
ecological life
• No access on employment
• Shortage of drinking water and water for irrigation
• Promote social conflict and racial haltered (Denial of IPs
recognition by other dominant local groups/ preference to Hindu culture,
sacred site and religion )
• No information available in local language
Public Grievances
• No complaint or communication filed from IPs
• Water & Energy Users’ Federation –Nepal (NGO)
submitted a complaint to the Special Project Facilitator
on non-compliance of Policy ( May 1 2004)
• Para 4 “There has been a gross denial of the rights and
interests of the indigenous peoples who are and will be
affected by the project- both directly and Indirectly. The
Include the Majhis (Traditional Fishermen /women) and
Tamang Communities in Melamchi Valley.
• Demand for separate study of the effects on the
traditional livelhoods …. Followed by FPIC about their
displacement and action plans
Special Project Facilitator Response and
Recommendation
• Extensive discussion with all parties, speed or resolution
disputes, implementation of SUP and Capacity building
of MWSDB
• Secondary Complainants ( Locus Standi)
• No evidence of serious or systematic non-compliance of
ADB Policies. On contrary, there is substantial evidence
of additional effort and dedication being applied by ADB,
other donors and MWSDB to ensure not only
compliance, but fairness and equity in very difficult and
often dangerous working condition.
Recommendation
• Identity of indigenous peoples must be recognized
according to existing national laws and policies
• The rights guaranteed under international laws that
ratified by Nepal should be duly complied
• Separate and independent study on Project impacts to
IPs with their involvement
• Indigenous peoples/ IPOs representation in MWSPB and
its every decision making and executing structure with
Identity
• Regular consultation with IPs every periodic consultation
• Ensure equal access on service and benefit sharing
including
• Independent experts and IPs study team should be
commissioned to mitigate adverse impacts on IPs
• Policy of FPIC must be applied and complied
• IPS Empowerment program should be launched to
mitigate indirect adverse impact and uplift their social,
economical, educational, health etc.
• Redesign of the SUP with the involvement of IPs
• Independent complain mechanism with the representation
of IPOs