Study 3: Ecodestruction and the Right to Food: The Cases of Water ...

Starving the Future Study 3
Four years later, little appears to have changed in terms of government oversight or industry practice
and another cyanide disaster has struck. This adds to the legacy of environmental disasters by mining
companies. "
2. Other human activities polluting or alterating freshwater systems
Gold mining and mining activities in general have a severe impact on water supplies in terms of
pollution. However, there are numerous other industrial projects and other activities which lead to
serious and long term pollution of the surface and groundwater sources preventing affected people from
feeding themselves. Hereafter, two cases drawn from the FIAN interventions databank provide some
illustration of violations of the right to feed oneself associated to industrial and chemical pollution of
freshwater systems. It is on the one hand the case of paper industry in Tamil Nadu (South India) and, on
the other hand, the fumigation process taking place in South America against illegal crops.
Case 3 (Tamil Nadu, India, 1994)
Cauvery river under attack by paper industry
The Tamilnadu Newsprint and Paper Ltd (TNPL) is a state owned public sector company situated in
Kagithapuram, Pugalur, Karur Taluk in the Trichy District of Tamilnadu State.
TNPL was set up in 1985 on a 200 acres site. In 1994, TNPL was planning a 100% expansion with
substantial funding from the World Bank.
The planned expansion was opposed by the local population and environmentalists who were already
struggling against the ecodestructive effects of the plant. Peasants had been directly affected by the heavy
pollution of water and prevented to continue producing enough food for themselves and their families.
The irrigated area polluted by TNPL amounted to around 13,000 acres of arable land, feeding about 50,000
people. The local agricultural yield was said to have been reduced by 50% through the pollution. The
ground water was made useless for the human and cattle consumption, and even for secondary use.
Moreover, the pollution decimated the aquatic life of the region.
Human Rights Impact
• Access to food and resources
Already in 1992, smallholders and support groups had started to raise awareness on their case. They had
various pieces of evidences for the pollution: The water pipes showed cracks. The water was thick, smelly
and dark through the paper and other material residues in it. Once dried up, it left a layer obstructing the
crop, rendering it unable to grow. Small farmers, who represent a large majority of the local population,
directly depend on subsistance agriculture to feed themselves and their families.
• Violation of the right to food - States´obligations
TNPL is a public company. Public authorities failed to meet their obligation to abstain from destroying the
existing access of the affected population to food and food producing resources. Facing this inacceptable
situation, victim groups tried to get the state respect their right to food but they were unable to reach any
positive response towards a more appropriate industrial exploitation. No one from the administration even
visited the affected site and some villages must now buy their water elsewhere to meet their domestic and
livestock consumption requirements. Instead of a satisfactory response, an expansion of the plant by 100%
was planned.
FIAN International 125
June 2002