Saturday 21 January 2017

Response to Fr. Noel D'costa on Vanxim land deal

Fr. Noel D'Costa, Convenor of the Apostolate of Inter-Religious Dialogue, Archdiocese of Goa has sent group email to around 48 emails on Vanxim and Bharat Mukti Morcha discourse on the sell out affairs suspecting secrecy, fraud and other unethical practices. This mail having serious public importance as they are being circulated to much broader audience and has raised many voices and messages to us asking for our response. Fr. Noel we know is not involved in Vanxim deal in any way on record. BMM places on record our appreciation and gratitude for Fr. Noel for speaking out at least this much and giving us opportunity to respond. After perusing the said email text here is our brief response:

False information

Email claims that part of Vanxim is tenanted property and as per law it cannot be sold. Archbishop's office has not sold the same but only transferred rights to Mahendra Gaunekar. This is wrong. Besides the sale deed there is clear letter from the then Procurator of the Archdiocese of Goa Fr. Victor Rodrigues about the sale of tenanted land in Vanxim. Letter was written by Fr. Victor Rodrigues and sent to Mahendra Gaunekar. Mahendra Gaunekar then sent this letter to various people in Vanxim and it is this very letter that served as major document against People of Vanxim in the Court of deputy collector, Panjim. Fr. Noel's further arguments does not hold ground as the base argument itself falls flat with this evidence. Here is a scanned copy of the letter : 

Manipulating Past

Fr. Noel D'costa has claimed that Paddy fields in Vanxim were cultivated only till 1970 and after that they were left fallow and used for fishing purposes by letting Mandovi water into paddy fields. This is not true either. The exact nature of this anomaly is placed on record by former President of Tenant Association of Vanxim late Ligorio F. Silveira. He filed written complaint against Tenant Association of Vanxim with the Mamlatdar of Tiswadi in 1995. With the hindsight it is possible to deduct that there was long term plan to destroy Vanxim Paddy fields. The cultivation continued well in late 1980s and in few cases even in early 1990s. To claim that Vanxim Paddy fields were not cultivated from 1970 is wrong and amounts to manipulation of past in order to control the present and future. You may know the content of this letter. In addition there are complaints from Tenants Association of Vanxim office bearers against Narayan Bhosle who did not hand over charge to new committee and State Administration did nothing about the same. The date of cited N.O.C matches these times of scandal. Scanned copy of those letters is as follows:

Continued secrecy

Fr. Noel has not disclosed (1) Who gave Vanxim to Santa Monica Fund, and under what Obligations and which year. (2) What is the reason as to why so-called N.O.C from Tenant Association of Vanxim dated 26.02.1996 kept secret till date? Why the signatories of this N.O.C are covered up by the office of the Goa Archbishop?

Comments on Fr. Bismarck

Fr. Noel commented "Fr. Bismarck was wrongly informed by someone that the residential houses were sold." This sound like Fr. Bismarck was living in an illusion from 2010 till his murder in 2015 and was working only on hearsay. This is not the case. Joint Development Agreement between Ozone and Mahendra Gaunekar of 2009 very clearly states that it will take over entire island including the residential houses and Goa Archbishop is going to facilitate this process. Here we share link for your ready reference:

Accusations on secrecy on Eight other sale deeds

BMM never hidden eight other sale deeds on Vanxim. Their details are made known again and again. One of the sale deeds is carried on by close kin of late Dr. Jack Sequeira who was the leader of the Opposition in First Legislative Assembly after Goa was annexed to India. Here is the links:

Who is the valuer?

Fr. Noel informs that Valuer valued Vanxim land at certain cheap rates. What is the name and address of this valuer? Why name is kept secret?

Secret Agreement

Agreement to sell Vanxim signed in 1999, according to Fr. Noel. Yet the question remain as to why People of Vanxim were not informed? Announcement in Church not made? Why in this agreement clause included for selling Capao directly to corporate included if nexus with corporate was not prevalent? Here is the link to the Agreement to Sale:

Gaunekar's conditional benefits

Fr. Noel contemplates on prospects of Gaunekar's benefits. He observes that Gaunekar stands to benefit in case Ozone project takes shape or he stands to loose. Whose side you are fighting Fr. Noel? This question is important since Fr. Noel takes up case for Mahendra Gaunekar directly he ask "People are not told how much Mr. Gaunekar must have spent on lawyers while fighting the various cases pending with regard to the land at Vanxim?" More important matter is how much office of the Archbishop stands to loose on Vanxim deal after unanticipated opposition since 2010.

Suspected bribes to amend or change laws

Fr. Noel makes very important remark "And who knows about possible inner costs involved to pay bribes at different levels in order to amend or change the laws to convert the said areas to development zone?" This is very good question and CBI investigation is needed to ascertain the actual status.

Defend the super rich

Fr. Noel's shares the theme of his last November inter-religious meet "Together we protect the nature and defend the poor". The theme is good and BMM has no issues with the same. However praxis followed by the office of the Archbishop in case of Vanxim is opposite. It is only defense of the super rich and kick on the residents of Vanxim by branding them "unauthorized settlers" and use of the term "so-called tenants". Fr. Noel too uses this very word. Fr. Noel is grossly wrong informed on facts about Vanxim.

Diocesan Finance Committee

Who are members of Diocesan Finance Committee and College of Diocesan Consultors that took decision on Vanxim that Fr. Noel discussed in his email. The minutes and names of people involved must be made public immediately.

Press dispute

BMM takes no responsibility for the Sunday Herald Review report dated 07/02/2016 criticized by Fr. Noel for its article on Vanxim. Certainly there are few errors in it. However to attribute intention that article was published to tarnish the good name of the Archbishop and the Church while encouraging Catholics to leave the Church and join fundamentalist sects is wrong. 

Why Catholics leave Church?

The reason Catholics are living the Church and joining the sects are different and well known to the hierarchy of the Church. If Fr. Noel or anyone else seriously wants to address this then beginning has to be made. The best way to begin is along with prayer is study and publicly discuss encyclicals of various Popes on this matter beginning with Pascendi, here is the link :

Explanation and elucidation is in this book:

Beating around the bush and accusing few individuals who raise their voice will not help nor any short cuts would be useful.

Objectionable Eloquence
We have to face the Truth and Truth shall set us free, Bible has taught us. Fr. Noel has observed that BMM is very eloquent on social media and see red in Vanxim deal. Eloquence in this case is problematic. This can best be dealt by recourse to Jacques Rancière's book Disagreement: Politics and Philosophy(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1998) Pp 99-100. Rancière notes "When speech is acquired by those whose right to speak is not recognized they can produce spatiality and temporality that disturbs hegemonic representations of time-space constallation, namely 'who are we?' and 'where are we?'" Office of the Archbishop is certainly Hegemonic in nature that believes in asserting its moral and intellectual superiority over dissenting voices even if it is on wrong side of the Truth, hence feel disturbed.

We can now very well explain the roots cause of use of terms like "disgruntled elements", "conspiracy theory specialists" and "fundamentalists sects" by Fr. Noel D'costa. Alternative voice is intolerable as status quo founded on falsehood stands disturbs. So be it.

"Goenchi Mati" versus "Goencho Chikol"

BMM is not opposed to the idea of "Goenchi Mati" idea that Fr. Noel speaks in his email. BMM has opposed mining and supported active combat of affected people across the state of Goa. This does not mean BMM will conform and get seduced to "Goencho Chikol" getting grafted and crafted in the Office of Goa Archbishop over Vanxim deal. BMM will continue to speak up in forthright manner with malice towards none.

Caste Role 

Fr. Noel asks another question: "Does Caste of a person decide the goodness or badness of a land deal?" Fr. Noel must ask the question in reverse : What role does caste played historically in Society and particularly the office of Archbishop? Last Portuguese Governador had twenty advisors. All of them Catholics, all of them Bamons according to information given by Anthony Veronica Fernandes from Candolim. Catholic Bamons were so bad in treating their tenants that entire Goa's Bhahujan Samaj hated them. They treated badly catholic tenants too. This gave rise to hatred of Catholics by non-catholic bhahujans equating Catholic Bamons with Catholic tenants. Goa's first Chief Minister of post-annexation Goa Dayanand Bandodkar brought in Tenancy Act in order to break the hegemony of Bamon Raj. We leave this to your reflection. How caste influences land deals and history of nations can be best understood by reading Dr. Ambedkar's book "Revolution and counter revolution". Or must consult Archbishop in charge of Dalits at CBCI as listed on CBCI directory. How did Bamons became Bhatkars asserting control and authority over land?

Satanic Capture

What has happened in case of Vanxim deal in the office of Goa Archbishop is much more than Caste. Its complete satanic hold that has held office of the Archbishop captive in order to make People of Goa captive. Vanxim is not beginning with several cases before that. Current Archbishop Ferrao executed the Vanxim sale through Fr. Arlino D'mello in 2006 while former Archbishop Gonsalves authorized Fr. Victor Rodrigues to execute Agreement to sell Vanxim in 1999. One is Bamon, the other is not yet both implemented agenda of bamanism that is agenda of satanism.

Morally wrong, Legally right?

Fr. Noel denies that Archbishop has ever made statement that he is morally wrong but legally right in selling Vanxim. Archbishop has not made written statement through any of the Pastoral letters that he is morally wrong and legally right, he should now do. But Fr. Noel cannot deny his oral statement either. This has been widely discussed in press and Fr. Victor Ferrao has even spoken about it in public like at his talk "Beings a Goan Christian" at Pedro Arope Institute in Raia two years ago. 

Inter-religious dialogue

Fr. Noel must move ahead and organize inter-caste dialogue. Solutions would flow. Also there is need for Priests to retain their identity all the time: Cassock. Priest without cassock suffer from identity crisis. Unfortunately we see so many priests in Goa going though this malady. Fr. Victor Rodrigues is seen for so many years without Cassok in civil clothes in Courts. Some lawyers has observed that in the morning he is in Courts in Panjim and in Afternoon in Courts in Margao in civil clothes. Priest without Cassock not only makes Priest vulnerable to temptations of sins but also closes any scope for inter-religious dialogue. For priest his cassock is his living sermon. Anyone understand preached Jesus from the Cassock Priest wear. Cassock is like uniform of a military soldier. Priest in cassock is full fledged soldier of Christ. Fr. Noel and other priests may well do to keep this mind before next inter-religious meet on January 29, 2017. This will do lots to make sure not only retain Catholics within Church but also attract those outside faith to the calling of Jesus. This is what Inter-religious dialogue is. For a Priest inter-religious dialogue in civil clothes is no dialogue at all. It is an abject surrender to modernism that we stand to resist.

One question we leave : Why did Fr. Noel D'Costa did not directly initiate dialogue with those who continually raising Public objections on the way Vanxim sale is executed by Archbishop's office? Is method of dialogue not applicable to People in Vanxim? 

1 comment:

  1. Whining about financial corruption to the Archbishop's Office and on the Internet is never going to work. If the Catholic Goans of Vanxim are serious about getting justice, then they need to complain against the Archbishop to the relevant Vatican tribunal. Contact canon lawyer Dr. Edward Peters (, he may be able to help you.