SWCC, Sea Turtle Documentary

Ada Derana News 2012 10 24

Case Closed

Case Closed

Two Fisher Leaders who faced to a court case filled by Negombo police, accusing that they are conspiring  against the state by distributing falls information and making people unrest. two fisher leaders were freed by Negombo magistrate after hearing the case near two years and case was closed on 21st Monday 2012.

Marcus Fernando, Chairman of United Negombo Lagoon Fisher People Organisation and, Aruna Nishantha, Chairman of all Ceylon Fisher Falk Trade Union were arrested on November 2010 and release on bail after producing them to Magistrate court.

court case was closed due to accuser, Negombo police have not appeared in court after the 2010 December, the first hearing.

These fisher leaders actively work against project on use the lagoon for landing sea planes.

Farmers protest over GM seeds

Source: 

Critics say seeds threaten health and agriculture

ucanews.com reporter, Colombo
Sri Lanka
October 16, 2012

Farmers protest over government plans for GM seeds

More than 2,000 demonstrators marched in Colombo yesterday in protest at government approval of genetically modified crop seeds which they said are set to undermine those produced locally using natural methods.
Religious leaders joined farmers and civil society leaders in the protests after the government recently reversed approval for nearly 3,000 local seed varieties in favor of GM alternatives produced by multinationals.
Farmers have since rejected GM varieties, claiming they would contaminate the farm land and cause losses for farmers who have invested in local seeds.
“Companies are trying to sabotage and eliminate native production which has been historically developed by rural farmers,” said Kankanam Pathirange Somawathi, president of the Savithri women’s movement in Monaragala.
GM seeds lead to dependence on monopolistic multinational firms, she added, with potentially devastating results for Sri Lanka’s farming sector.
Protesters said they plan to send a petition to President Mahinda Rajapaksa, calling on the government to protect farmers’ rights to continue using their own seeds and fertilizers.
Doctor Channa Sudath Jayasumana, a lecturer of pharmacology at Rajarata University in Anuradhapura, said GM seeds and associated products were rising in price, increased environmental degradation and posed health concerns for farmers and the general public.
“Millions of people across the world – especially in Latin American and African countries – are badly suffering today due to GM-seed produced foods,” he said.
A new seed act proposed by the government would also limit the rights of farmers to operate small-scale seed banks, said environmentalist and lawyer Jagath Gunawardane.
But Robin Abegunawardene, a spokesman for the Ministry of Agriculture, said the government was aiming to maintain the quality of seeds through the proposed act.
“The Ministry drafted this bill after consulting many people, including farmers,” he said.
Nearly 900,000 families – about 20 percent of the population – are involved in paddy production in Sri Lanka with the farming sector responsible for employing about a third of all working people.

The Protest Against of  Destruction in Negombo Lagoon, Sri Lanka.

The Protest on 09/10/2012 in Negombo Sri Lanka for Stop  Pollution, lagoon embankment destruction of Negombo Lagoon. it is voice of women's around the Negombo Lagoon.

WhyHunger: Food Sovereignty Prize Event

2012 Food Sovereignty Prize Ceremony

National Fisheries Solidarity Movement (NAFSO) 

Food sovereignty includes rights and self-determination for all producers, not just those on land. Fishing is an essential way of life for many communities around the world—one which is threatened by increasing corporate control, shrinking fishing rights and environmental crises. The 2012 Food Sovereignty Prize recognizes the National Fisheries Solidarity Movement (NAFSO), a 12,000-member organization founded in 1997, for its work to promote food sovereignty and food security in the island nation of Sri Lanka as the country emerges from a 26-year civil war.

Small-scale Sri Lankan fishers are finding their existence threatened by a post-war government intent on developing all coastal regions for tourism and have been left out of discussions for the new development, despite their reliance on the coast for their food and livelihood. NAFSO began its work in Negombo, Sri Lanka, home to both fishing communities and the booming tourist industry, conducting political seminars and trainings for affected fishing communities on their rights and how to retain and reclaim them. With its network of small-scale fishers, the organization has had success around the country in persuading the government and private developers to delay or suspend tourist development in order to protect fishers’ livelihoods.

NAFSO now also collaborates with many national and regional networks on food sovereignty, land rights and rights of fishers. NAFSO is active in numerous international networks, promoting food sovereignty and human rights and equality for all fishing communities. Its accomplishments have included working towards the adoption of the International Convention on Safety and Security of the Fisheries at the 2008 International Labor Organization, ongoing participation in the International Planning Committee on Food Sovereignty and being part of the development process of a mechanism to protect sustainable small-scale fisheries to be adopted by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization in 2013.

Building Houses On Tsunami Buffer

By Nirmala Kannangara
In Negombo
Pictures by Thusitha Kumara

The letter to DS Gampaha to find an alternate land for the project and The mangrove forest which is to be destroyed

The District Secretary of Gampaha and Divisional Secretary of Negombo have been accused of earmarking eight acres of mangrove forestland for a housing project under the direction of State Resources and Enterprise Development Deputy Minister Sarath Kumara Gunaratne and Western Province Minister of Road Development, Tourism, Housing, Animal Production and Fisheries Nimal Lansa.
Kadol kele is a mangrove forest belt spanning on a 36-acre strip along the Negombo lagoon. This has been identified as one of the marshy lands in the country that is rich in bio diversity. This land has been vested under the Department of Forest Conservation (DFC) on August 10, 2001 by the Secretary to the Environment Ministry through a ministry circular No: 05/ 2001.
However disregarding the value of this mangrove that saved thousands of lives during the tsunami by acting as a buffer, the District Secretary and the Divisional Secretary have drawn plans to distribute this eight acres among those who are ‘said’ to be amongst tsunami affected people without the approval of the land owner – the DFC.
“The reason behind this move is very clear. Not more than ten families were affected from tsunami but why have they depicted 133 plots of land in the survey plan. Although they claim that this is for tsunami affected people, they have already been re-settled .This would be the third housing project claimed to be for the tsunami affected people. Already more than 300 houses were built at Eththukala, Wella Weediya and Bosco Pura and those affected have already been re-settled while other houses were given for Gunaratne’s and Lanza’s supports,” alleged the Convener, Protect the Negombo Lagoon Movement, W. Ramesh Fernando.
According to Ramesh, all attempts to prevent this destruction have fallen on deaf ears and queried as to why the District Secretary Gampaha had failed to find an alternative land for the project as suggested by an 11-member committee comprising the Assistant Divisional Secretary Negombo and higher officials representing the Board of Investment, DFC, Department of Wildlife Conservation (DWC), Surveys Department, Urban Development Authority, Coast Conservation Department (CCD) and Central Environmental Authority (CEA).
“After a site inspection, the above officials in a letter dated February 14, 2005 to the District Secretary Gampaha had clearly suggested to find an alternative land for the housing project as the land in question has not only acted as a buffer during the tsunami but also rich in bio diversity and a breeding ground for verities of fish mainly crabs and prawns,” said Ramesh.
Although the Divisional Secretary Negombo A. K. R. Alawatte confirmed that he together with the District Secretary Gampaha J. J. Ratnasiri are now working on how the lands should be distributed, the District Secretary contradicting Alawatte said he knew nothing about it.
“It is two years since I took over office in Gampaha. I am not aware of it. Have to find out about this,” said the District Secretary.
Meanwhile Divisional Secretary Alawatte said that he had received all the necessary approvals from the Central Environmental Authority (CEA), DFC, Department of Wildlife Conservation (DWLC) and the Coast Conservation Department (CCD) in 2009 for the project.
“The cabinet has granted its approval for this project in 2006. These lands are to be given for all the tsunami affected families and the rest for low income people in Negombo. We earmarked eight acres and 133 people would get six perches of land each. Although the environmentalists claim that this is a mangrove, it is not. There are small patches of mangrove within this land but the rest of the land is high land,” said Alawatte.
According to Alawatte the delay in distributing this land was because of some restrictions imposed by the Land Ministry Secretary.
“The 2006 cabinet approval clearly states that these lands have to be given free of charge. But the Land Ministry Secretary Asoka Peiris says that the lands cannot be given free of charge as the land in question is within the Negombo Municipal Council area. According to Peiris any land within the municipal area cannot be given free of charge and wanted us to get the lands valued and to impose 4% of the value amount per year and to distribute them on a 33-year lease agreement,” said Alawatte.
Disclaiming that mangroves have already been destroyed in certain areas to initiate the housing project, Alawatte said that there were no mangroves in this land as claimed by the villagers and environmentalists.
“I took over office as the Divisional Secretary Negombo one year ago and I do not agree with the accusations. Other than few patches of mangrove the rest of the land is a bare highland, not a marshy land,” he added.
Meanwhile Director Environmental Conservation Trust Sajeewa Chamikara queries as to who has given authority for the government high ranking officers to make arrangements to give away lands that belong to another department.
“This land belongs to the DFC. Who has given permission to get this land surveyed during February and March 2010? District Secretary and the Divisional Secretary have got the land surveyed by Government Surveyor N.W.M.D.N. Weerasuriya (Survey plan No; 3243). It is up to the DFC to act immediately against these two government officials for trespassing this mangrove area and getting surveyed without their approval,” claimed Chamikara.
According to section 20 of the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance (amended) No: 65 of 2009, it is strictly prohibited to remove mangroves, forbid to put up any permanent or temporary structures, construct roads or fill lands inside a mangrove forest.
Chamikara further leveled accusation against Deputy Minister Sarath Gunaratne and Provincial Minister Nimal Lanza for their involvement in mangrove destruction in their constituency- Negombo.
“Why cannot the DFC take legal action against this Deputy Minister who is breaking environmental laws? Earlier it was Nimal Lanza that led this project together with Deputy Minister Gunaratne. When the environmental organizations protested against the mangrove destruction in 2006, Lanza took a back seat although he is still very much involved. It is the Deputy Minister Gunaratne that ‘runs the show’. Although the District and Divisional Secretaries and other government officials in Negombo claim that this land will be given to all the tsunami affected families and the rest to low income families it is to mislead the people. How many people in Negombo were affected for tsunami? Only a handful was affected and they have been given houses in many parts in Negombo. This land is solely to distribute amongst Gunaratne’s and Lanza’s party supporter,” alleged Chamikara.
According to Chamikara if not for this mangrove belt along the lagoon, many families would have affected during tsunami.
“It was this mangrove belt that acted as a buffer during tsunami. When government officials from Colombo came on a field visit to Negombo to look for a good land for a housing project, they were taken to this mangrove forest. They immediately wanted these officials not to destroy the mangrove but to find an alternate place but to no avail,” said Chamikara.
Chamikara further said that according to National Environmental Act No: 772/ 22 of June 24, 1993 any development in more than one hectare is subjected to an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report. Once this is done it has to be open for public comments for 30 working days.
“None of these procedures have been followed before the land was surveyed. As a result of this destruction, breeding sites of prawns, crabs and other varieties of fish will be affected and the fish harvest will reduce dramatically affecting the fishing industry in the days to come,” claimed Chamikara.
Meanwhile Ramesh Fernando accused the District and Divisional Secretaries for violating environmental laws.
“Although Deputy Minister Gunaratne and Provincial Minister Lanza are behind this move, we have to first point the finger towards the government officials. It is these government officials that are accountable for any destruction. The politicians will come and go tomorrow. These two officers should not favour politicians but stand for the right,” said Ramesh.
Meanwhile Assistant Director CCD, W. A. N. S. Rajaratne said that his department had not given any permission to District Secretary Gampaha or Divisional Secretary Negombo to destruct mangroves.
“This department has not given any approvals for any project closer to the Negombo lagoon. Neither have we received any application for our approvals. The lagoon has to be protected. It is these mangroves that protect and nurture the lagoon. If not for these mangroves where could the fish, mainly the crab and prawns, breed?” asked Rajaratne.
According to him, any person who develops any land without the Coast Conservation Act, strict legal action could be taken irrespective of their posts.
“The Coast Conservation and Costal Resources Management Act (amended) 57 of 1981, clearly states that development work within the coastal area cannot be carried out without the CCD approval. This applies not only to private parties who own lands along the coastal belt but also the state institutions to get our clearance before developing the land,” said Rajaratne.
He further said that CCD received foreign donations through the Post Tsunami Coastal Rehabilitation and Resources Management Programme to safeguard the coastal area by re-planting mangroves to protect the coast and the people live within this area.
“After the tsunami catastrophe we understood the importance of having mangroves along the beach. Most of the places where mangroves were in abundance, the tsunami affect could be minimized. That is why we have to re think about planting mangroves and we have already started planting mangroves along the coastal areas,” added Rajaratne.
Meanwhile Deputy Director Conservator Forest (Environment Management) Mahinda Seneviratne said that approvals had not been given to any project in Negombo to remove mangroves. “Mangroves are not allowed to be destroyed anywhere,” he said.
The Chairman, Central Environmental Authority Charitha Herath meanwhile said that the area belonged to the CCD but not to the CEA.
“Since this is a coastal area, approvals have to taken from the CCD. IT is up to the CCD that has to decide whether an EIA or IEE test has to be done before giving approvals,” said Herath.
Refuting allegations leveled, Deputy Minister Sarath Kumara Gunarathna said that he was not involved in any illegal dealings.
“As all know I engage in clean politics and does not engage in any illegal affairs. All these allegations are to discredit me. My political opponents in Negombo whether from the same party or from opposition trying hard to sling mud at me. My hands are clear,” he said.
All attempts to contact Provincial Minister Nimal Lanza for comments failed.

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON FISHERIES AND GLOBALIZATION

  

Resist Corporate Capture of Fisheries, Build Sustainable Fisheries for the People 21 September 2012 Iloilo, Philippines 

 1. We, representatives of 32 organizations of traditional small-scale fishermen and fisherwomen [definition] (from marine and inland fisheries) and their advocates, from 15 countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America met from 19 – 21 September 2012 in Iloilo, Philippines to discuss the destructive impacts of globalization (and to bring back traditional knowledge systems and practices) for sustainable fisheries that uphold the rights and welfare of small-scale fisherfolk and all other oppressed and marginalized sectors of society, and strengthen international solidarity.

 2. Small-scale fisherfolk (supplies X% of animal protein?) feed the world. We are the backbone of the fisheries sector. We contribute to local, national (and international?) food security using traditional fishing practices that take into account the sustainability of the environment for the present and future generations. Half of us are women who take on the burden of raising our families and providing food on the table.

 3. But the globalization of the fisheries sector has further marginalized small-scale fisherfolk, pushing us into deeper levels of poverty and sub-human conditions. Our communities suffer from the onslaught of neoliberal interests seeking to maximize economic returns through profit and export (and import)-oriented production.

4. Large-scale industrialized fishing fleets with their high technology to catch and process vast quantities of fish for profits have polluted and destroyed our seas and ecosystems. We suffer from poor working and safety conditions – on fishing vessels, in aquaculture farms and fish processing factories. We struggle to fight for our rights as we are displaced from our fishing grounds and our land in the name of the environment and development. These problems are compounded by the effects of climate change as mitigation and adaptation policies fail to take on an ecosystem-based fisheries that principally support small-scale fisherfolk.

 5. International institutions such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), along with governments and multilateral institutions have promoted the corporatization and privatization of fisheries and community resources. The World Bank-led Global Partnership for Oceans, by proposing measures such as rights-based fisheries that includes individual transferable quotas (ITQs) and similar systems, is another mechanism for more systematic and intensified wholesale plunder of our (inland, freshwater sources and )seas and resources in the name of blue and green economy (and sustainable development).. The globalization of fisheries sector has led to the disregard of our inalienable rights to life, land, seas and other resources.

We stand for our inalienable human rights and community rights to access fisheries resources, manage our own resources through our traditional wisdom and to benefit from our resources.

OUR CALLS: 

1.We urge our national governments to strive towards achieving national food sovereignty by abandoning profit and export (and import)-oriented laws and policies. We also call on our governments to put a halt on destructive development projects and to protect the interests of the poor and vulnerable people.

2.We strongly reject structures of globalization including the World Bank and its Global Partnership for Oceans, and the World Trade Organization (WTO) which has facilitated intensified plunder of our seas in the last decades. We want fisheries out of WTO which has promoted the privatization of our common resources through onerous trade agreements and policies.

3. International institutions must (be stopped from developing programmes and policies that undermine small-scale fisherfolks) recognize the important contribution of small-scale fisherfolk to food security and more importantly food sovereignty (and poverty alleviation). While we recognize that the draft International Guidelines on Securing Sustainable Small-scale Fisheries is a step in the right direction, we maintain that the guidelines will not be sufficient to promote the interests of small-scale fisherfolk unless they address the structural challenges posed by neoliberalism and large-scale fisheries.

4. We call on our fellow small-scale fishermen and fisherwomen, fishworkers and vendors to organize ourselves as we collectively struggle for our inalienable rights and promotion of a genuinely sustainable, people-centered development framework at the community, national and international levels.(add mention solidarity with indigenous peoples, artisans and peasants and unorganized workers).

 OUR RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. National and local governments should adopt a people-centered approach to fisheries management which recognizes and protects the rights of local communities to control natural resources and determine their own environmentally and ecologically sustainable fisheries harvesting and farming systems. The processes must be transparent and participative to ensure the representation of the people.

2. Frameworks to achieve sustainable fisheries must be in place which includes the promotion of traditional and indigenous fishing practices and management of resources, the dismantling of commercial fishing fleets and an overhaul of the unfair current systems of fisheries production and trade that favor profits over people.

3. National governments must take steps to fulfill their obligations in international instruments to recognize, protect and uphold our human rights, including our social, economic and cultural rights. (Mechanisms to make governments accountable should be in place.) Also recognize native customary rights.

 4. Man-made and natural disasters contributing to Climate change adaptation and mitigation policies must be hinged on the promotion and protection of small-scale fisherfolk, and based on their proposals. We oppose the market based mechanisms in climate change discussions and we push the international community to protect the fisherfolks. (To protect and safeguard our ecological system especially the mountains; and giant factories of corporations must not be allowed in coastal areas) (Ask national governments to ensure the safety and protection of SSF from Climate Change) (national governments must Support SSF in the event of disasters).

5. Small-scale low-input (sustainable) aquaculture of local and indigenous species must be promoted and large-scale unsustainable, industrial aquaculture rejected. There must be improved regulation and support for aquaculture farms to reduce their environmental impacts and reorient aquaculture from export (and import)-based policies to local market needs. National Governments must take adequate actions to provide financial support for SSF. Promote SSF organsiations through which they can maintain they livelihoods.

6. Society and national governments in particular should recognize, protect and realize women’s rights in the fisheries sector. Women should receive equal wages, have equal rights to land and resources. They must have greater participation and representation in various levels of decision-making processes and their representative fisherfolk organizations should be supported in their advocacies.

 7. Social movements, civil society and networks among fisherfolk and their advocates must be strengthened at the community, national and international levels. Effective strategies for communication to strengthen our collective advocacies for fisherfolk communities must be developed. Build the capacity of social movements to operate freely, autonomously in a democratic system.

8. Environmentally friendly techniques t and research which builds the people’s capacity and improves their participation and Ownership in fisheries must be promoted. We reaffirm our commitment to protect and defend the rights to life and livelihood of fishing communities, promote sustainable and indigenous fishing practices and strengthen fisherfolk organizations and networks at various levels as we reject structures that trample on our inalienable rights.

Resist corporatization of fisheries! 
Uphold fisherfolk’s rights! 
Long live international solidarity!