Objections to holding of Public Hearing for setting up AHOY Marina in Zuari River at Nauxim waterfront

Date: 17^th October 2019

To,

The Collector (North Goa),

Panjim, Goa

Subject: Objections to holding of Public Hearing for setting up AHOY Marina in Zuari River at Nauxim waterfront.

Dear Madam/Sir,

We had submitted letter to your office on 01/03/2019 objecting proposed public hearing on marinas in Zuari river. In this letter we re-iterate our opposition to fresh notice from Goa State Pollution Control Board declaring Public Hearing for setting up of “AHOY Marina” at Nauxim on 02/11/2019 at 10.30 am at Shyama Prasad Mukherjee indoor Stadium near Goa University as per advertisement from Goa State Pollution Control Board dated 25/09/2019 signed by Member secretary Sanjeev S. Joglekar. As per this advertisement in media District Magistrate or her/his representative is to supervise the entire Public Hearing Process. Hence we address this letter to you.

We object the holding of above mentioned Public hearing on the following grounds:

1.     Coastal Zone Management Plan (CZMP) preparation end only on November 05, 2019 and it is inappropriate to install project of Marina in Nauxim before the completion of CZMP.

2.     Location of the Marina is fish breeding/spawning site as well fishing site for several fishers on Zuari river bank specially in villages of Nauxim, Bambolim, Siridao, Odxel, and Cacra. Location of AHOY Marina is in violation of international law governing fisheries world wide. From July 2014 India is a signatory to Voluntary Guidelines for Securing Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries in the context of Food Security and Poverty Eradication. These are known as SSF Guidelines and are made enforceable in India via Article 54 of the National Policy on Marine Fisheries, 2017. SSF Guidelines are applicable in scope to both marine as well as inland waters as per its para 2.2. And so they are applicable to Zuari river as well. According to para 1.1.c SSF Guidelines are to function in consistent with Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, 1995 for which India is a signatory too. AHOY Marina location is in violation of this Code. Article 6.8 of this Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries states “All critical fisheries habitats in marine and fresh water ecosystems, such as wetlands, mangroves, reefs, lagoons, nursery and spawning areas, should be protected and rehabilitated as far as possible and where necessary. Particular effort should be made to protect such habitats from destruction, degradation, pollution and other significant impacts resulting from human activities that threaten the health and viability of the fishery resources.” Destruction of Nauxim famous fish spawning area itself is site for AHOY Marina that will be subjected to heavy drilling and blasting of the purpose of dredging as per the draft EIA report leading to major long term negative irreversible impact on fisheries in Zuari river. Hence this constitutes violation of Article 6.8 of the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries.

3.     The Jurisdictions of MPT over Zuari waters is disputed as Central government circular of 24^th May 2000 was issued without consulting fishing communities of Zuari river as well without consulting Goa Government.

4.     The representative of Goa Government Dr. Modassir (PA to Secretary – Ports) was absent for the 8^th September 2010 meeting MPT 24^th Board of Trustees when it decided to rent out Zuari river for two marinas at Sancoale and Nauxim. Dr. Modassir had sent note top postpone this matter as it is important as per records in the minutes of this meeting.

5.     Lease deed of 12^th October 2010 between MPT and Kargwal constructions does not acknowledge the existence of fishing communities depend upon fishing in Zuari river and need to safeguard their rights.

6.     Port Land Policy -under which Zuari river has been leased out - was never discussed with fishing communities of Zuari river before its formulation nor shared after formulating. So there was complete non-transparency in this matter and leasing our of water fronts at Nauxim admeasuring more than 1,50,000 square meters of river bed amounts to land grab and Blue grab and contrary to claims of Blue-Green enterprise in Chapter III of the Draft EIA.

7.     In-Principle approval dated 29/04/2015 granted by Goa Investment Promotion Board to Kargwal Construction Pvt Ltd to set up Marina near Nauxim village –annexed with draft EIA report - is a fraud in several respects. First there is no ecologist who is a member of Goa Investment Promotion Board. Second there is no fisher community member who is engaged in fishing on Goa Investment Promotion Board. Thirdly, local people from Nauxim were not consulted at all by Investment Promotion Board before granting in-principle approval. Fourthly, after granting in-principle approval for Marina the decision was not communicated to Nauxim people or to Curca-Bambolim Panchayat under whose Jurisdiction Nauxim village comes.  Fifthly, In-principle approval decision was conveyed to the Village Panchayat of Cortalim that has no Jurisdiction over Nauxim village. Chief Minister of Goa who is chairman of this Board should call for immediate meeting and revoke the in-principle approval granted. Sixthly as per draft EIA report (Chapter III) “A marina is a harbour for yachts and other luxury boats and it is becoming a necessity of luxury tourism.” Such large scale projects destroying fishing practices cannot be imposed in a fishing village. According to para 6.8 of SSF Guidelines only community based tourism is allowed.

8.     Draft EIA on AHOY Marina admits significant fishing activity at the site of proposed AHOY Marina. Careful reading of Tables 5.2 (Coefficient values for impact assessment) and 5.3 (Impact quantifications) on pages 5.9 and 5.10 indicate with certainty that Fisheries in Zuari River will have Major permanent long term irreversible negative impact of coefficient of double (-2).

9.     Fisheries are entry 21 in the State List of Schedule 7 under Article 246 of the Constitution of India. Union Government through its Surface Transport Ministry, Shipping Department though MPT has no Jurisdiction to interfere and destroy Fisheries in the State of Goa within 12 nautical miles territorial limits. Any interference amounts to violation of Article 246 of the Constitution of India.

10.                        Draft EIA report on AHOY Marina commits to follow PIANC/IAPH guidelines for construction of Marina facility. Guidelines of World Organization of Dredging Organizations (WODA). At the same time ignores SSF Guidelines on small scale fisheries to which India is a signatory from July 2014 and pledged its enforcement through Article 54 of the National Policy on Marine Fisheries, 2017. According to SSF Guidelines that stands for “Voluntary Guidelines for securing sustainable small-scale fisheries in the context of food security and poverty eradication” has a provision to hold accountable to those who are responsible for destruction of fisheries as AHOY Marina is a disaster for fishing in Zuari river. According to para 9.5 of SSF Guidelines “in case of disasters caused by humans,impacting small-scale fisheries, the responsibleparty should be held accountable.” In the case of Nauxim AHOY Marina it is Union Surface Transport Ministry and its subsidiary MPT together with Kargwal Constructions pvt Ltd is a responsible party that will be held accountable for willful destruction of Zuari river fisheries. It is willful destruction as it is indicated in draft EIA itself.

11.                        According to the draft EIA report (page 4.78)villagers of Nauxim, Odxel and Kakra are primarily Shudra. This word Shudra means slaves. This word does not exists in the Constitution of India but found in Manushmriti that rates Shudra communities to the lowest in the hierarchy of graded inequality without any right to education and social interactions restricted within caste boundaries subjected to untouchability as Shudra is held unworthy even to lift body of a dead brahmin. Only duty of Shudra is to be servants of Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vyashas. System of graded inequality as well as untouchability is made redundant by Constitution of India though Articles 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 21 which are the Fundamental Rights that cannot be suspended. Use of the word Shudra suspends these Fundamental Rights. If classification of section of people as Shudra is allowed in official documents like this draft EIA then every one will have to clarify whether he or she belongs to Shudra Varna or Brahmin Varna or Vyashya Varna or Kshatriya Varna. This is ridiculous practice and can snowball into unpredictable consequences of social disorder.

12.                        Location of AHOY Marina in Nauxi water is direct contradiction of SSF Guidelines para 5.9 which states that “States should ensure that small-scale fishing communities are not arbitrarily evicted and that their legitimate tenure rights are not otherwise extinguished or infringed. States should recognize that competition from other users is increasing within small-scale fisheries areas and that small-scale fishing communities, in particular vulnerable and marginalized groups, are often the weaker party in conflicts with other sectors and may require special support if their livelihoods are threatened by the development and activities of other sectors.” Tenure rights of small scale fishers are going to be extinguished and that’s reason why package is included in the draft EIA report in Chapter II.

13.                        AHOY Marina location is also in violation of para 5.13 of the SSF Guidelines that states “States and all those engaged in fisheries management should adoptmeasures for the long-term conservation and sustainable use of fisheries resources and to secure the ecological foundation for food production. They should promote and implement appropriate  Management systems, consistent with their existing obligations under national and international law and voluntary commitments, including the Code, that give due recognition to the requirements and opportunities of small-scale fisheries”. Goa’s Fisheries department has refrained from enforcing SSF Guidelines, the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, Voluntary Guidelines on Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security and other international legal instruments applicable to Fisheries. If these were enforced then Goa Fisheries department would have quickly objected the Marina project at Nauxim at the planning stage itself rather than compel public to enter into the phase of public protests and agitations on this issue. Equitable access to fisheries guaranteed under para 5.13 would have never been allowed to be blocked though plans of installing Marina in Nauxim bay.

14.                        Nauxim AHOY Marina, the way it has planned is in complete violation of para 5.17 of SSF Guidelines that states “All endeavours should be made so that small-scale fisheries are represented in relevant local and national professional associations and fisheries bodies and actively take part in relevant decision-making and fisheries policymaking processes.” All the impact of the AHOY Marina will be directly felt by small scale fisheries in Nauxim, Siridao, Agassaim, Goa Velha, Bambolim, Cacra, Odxel and other villages on the northern bank of Zuari river as well as villages and towns in Southern banks of Zuari river. Yet in none of the decision making bodies connected Nauxim AHOY Marina small scale fisheries were represented at MoEF Expert committee, Board of Trustees at MPT, Goa Investment Promotion Board, Union Ministry of Surface Transport and Goa Fisheries department. Goa Fisheries department is so archaic in functioning that it does not have information as to who is at the receiving end of the water sports in Zuari river after fishermen repeatedly filed complains complaining about water sports boats tearing their fishing nets, creating oil spills and prompting fish migration due to non-stop engine sound in the river near Nauxim-Bambolim. It has taken no steps to form strategy group to enforce SSF guidelines as per requirement under para 13.5 for the Development and application of implementation strategies for the Guidelines.

15.                        Nauxim AHOY Marina is in violation of para 10.5 of SSF Guidelines that requires implementation of holistic and inclusive ecosystem approaches in the fisheries sector. Approach in locating Marina is not holistic, its not inclusive and it is hostile to ecosystem. A.K. Whitfield from South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity, South Africa and A. Becker from School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia has jointly published their study titled “Impact of recreational motor boats on fishes : A Review” in Marine Pollution Bulletin Vol. 83 pages 24-31 in 2014. Sharing abstract their study to harm Marina boats and water sports boats could cause to biology and ecology of fish: “A considerable amount of research has been conducted on the impacts of recreational boating activities on fishes but little or no synthesis of the information has been undertaken. This review shows that motor boats impact on the biology and ecology of fishes but the effects vary according to the species and even particular size classes. Direct hits on fishes by propellers are an obvious impact but this aspect has been poorly documented. Alterations in the wave climate and water turbidity may also influence fishes and their habitats, especially submerged and emergent plant beds. Sound generated by boat motors can also influence the communication and behaviour of certain species. Pollution arising from fuel spillages, exhaust emissions and antifouling paints all have detrimental effects on fishes. Finally, the use of recreational boats as vectors of aquatic invasive organisms is very real and has created major problems to the ecology of aquatic systems.”Further Sofia Jain-Schlaepfer, Eric Fakan, Jodie L. Rummer, Mark I. McCormick from ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, and College of Science and Engineering, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland 4811, Australia together with Stephen D. Simpson from Biosciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Geoffrey Pope, Stocker Road, Exeter EX4 4QD, UK has published their joint study titled “Impact of motorboats on fish embryos depends on engine type” in a Journal named Conservation Physiology Volume 6, 2018. Abstract of their study is reproduced and worth noting as to what could be the impact of motorboats that Marina likely to attract in Zuari and resultant impact on marine ecology. “Human generated noise is changing the natural underwater soundscapes worldwide. The most pervasive sources of  underwater anthropogenic noise are motorboats, which have been found to negatively affect several aspects of fish biology. However, few studies have examined the effects of noise on early life stages, especially the embryonic stage, despite embryo health being critical to larval survival and recruitment. Here, we used a novel setup to monitor heart rates of embryos from the staghorn damselfish (Amblyglyphidodon curacao) in shallow reef conditions, allowing us to examine the effects of in situ boat noise in context with real-world exposure. We found that the heart rate of embryos increased in the presence of boat noise, which can be associated with the stress response. Additionally, we found 2-stroke outboard-powered boats had more than twice the effect on embryo heart rates than did 4-stroke powered boats, showing an increase in mean individual heart rate of 1.9% and 4.6%, respectively. To our knowledge this is the first evidence suggesting boat noise elicits a stress response in fish embryo and highlights the need to explore the ecological ramifications of boat noise stress during the embryo stage. Also, knowing the response of marine organisms caused by the sound emissions of particular engine types provides an important tool for reef managers to mitigate noise pollution.” In this context Marina installation in Zuari river is going to be major set back to ecosystem approach advocated for fisheries. Goa Government through Fisheries department has commissioned study in Zuari river to find out impact of water sports boats on marine ecology and on fishing activities but study is delayed by one year due to lack of finance and file is pending in the Goa Finance Ministry for so long. It is safe to conclude from the way state of affairs are that Goa Government is sabotaging prosperity of small scale fishing activities in a planed manner and we strongly condemn this attitude of Goa Government.

Bharat Mukti Morcha, Goa Unit strongly condemns this draft EIA report and call for immediate cancellation of Public Hearing.

Thanking you in anticipation,

Yours sincerely,

       Sd/-

Maggie Silveira

President, Goa Unit

Member of National Council, National Platform for Small Scale Fish Worker (Inland)

Copy to:

Director of Fisheries, Panjim, Goa with a request to follow up and object Nauxim AHOY Marina as well as its Public Hearing

Call to overhaul Goa Fisheries Department to meet twenty first century challenges

Bharat Mukti Morcha, Goa Unit calls for the complete overhauling of the Department of Fisheries to successfully respond to the enormous challenges faced by fishing community in Goa in this 21^st Century. Currently State Fisheries department is in terrible mess as evident from the way fishing communities has been put under pressure and harassment on the Zuari river coast.

Department of Fisheries has been terrible failure to stop daily illegal fishing – including night fishing - by dozens of trawlers in Zuari river within 5 kms from the coast. Department of Fisheries is in paralyzed state to deal with illegal purse seine fishing in Zuari river with zero enforcement. Result of all this has been complete breakdown of law and order situation in Zuari river leading to tensions and fights. Till date, no full time patrol vessel is introduced in Zuari river for the purpose of enforcement in spite of repeated requests no budgetary provisions are made for this purpose.

Department of Fisheries has also been silent in the face of draft Tourism Master Plan and Tourism Policy - 2018 that seeks to promote kind of tourism that will further push fishing communities and marine ecology towards deterioration. Promotion of Marinas and water sports envisaged in the policy are expected to spell disaster for fishing communities. Adamant manner in which Government is pushing  marina at Nauxim - - in spite of public opposition from 2010 - is objectionable particularly the bully role to push Goa State Pollution Control Board to initiate process for Public Hearing for Marina at Nauxim.

Corporate driven water sports that is being carried out from Hotel Grand Hyatt in Bambolim by Bombay based corporate Aqua sail in Zuari river is another disastrous activity from the fishing point of view. Bharat Mukti Morcha calls for immediate cancellation of all the permissions granted for water sports activities in Zuari and all other rivers of Goa as speed boats like Jetski are disrupting fishing activities by cutting of fishing nets and oil spills in water. Declaration of Goa’s six rivers as National Waterways must be revoked as dredging is detrimental for fishing activities.

Cannon Law and Civil Law fraud master Goa Archbishop Ferrao is Peace and Unity Marathon Chief Patron!

Please be informed about serious frauds committed by Goa Archbishop and how Church bodies are manipulated to cover up these frauds. The latest is the abuse of two Catholic Lay organizations engaged in organizing United Goa Marathon: Run for Unity and Peace on November 14, 2015. Two organizations are Catholic Association of Goa (CAG) in collaboration with All India Catholic Union (AICU). Because of the proxy Bamon control exercised over both these organizations has refrained taking decisive steps against Goa Archbishop’s frauds in Vanxim and instead has openly got entrapped into his chain of greed. John the Baptist warned during his time. This is the warning of our time. Both the organizations believe in idiom ‘See no evil at Paço Patriarchal, Hear no evil at Paço Patriarchal, and speak no evil at Paço Patriarchal’. Instead this run has Archbishop Felipe Neri Ferrao as its Chief Patron! 

Bharat Mukti Morcha is not against sports like marathon, nor against ideal of Peace and Unity nor against Goa and Goans but certainly against every evil that flows from Archbishops’s house in Panjim to promote exclusive interest of Bamon Raj. It is this Archbishop Neri that is involved in top level Bamon Raj advocacy and action. It is this Archbishop Neri who is responsible to manipulate public opinion to collaborate with another Bamon Manohar Parrikar and got BJP in power resulting in several attacks on Mulnivasi Christians. And after getting himself promoted as Defense Minister of India continued his friendly collaborative links with Goa Archbishop and now both of them have collaborated to take away huge tract of land in Canaguinim-Naqueri-Betul Panchayat to get it as permanent venue for Air shows. 

We have no doubt that we need a marathon run for Justice targeting Archbishop of Goa to expose all that is hidden including diversion of wealth in Swiss accounts. They are both active votaries of Government the word that has origin in two Latin words ‘Guverno’ that means ‘to control’ and ‘mentis’ that means ‘mind’. So mind control mechanism has a name called Government. And who wants to control minds? Bamons. Whose minds that they want to control ‘Mulnivasis’ or ‘Shudras’ – a Sanskrit word for Slaves as per law of Manusmriti. Currently Goa is packed with large number of mind control mechanisms that projects Bamons on the top of the World to be obeyed by the rest of the people.

Here we bring to your kind attention and graceful reflection the way Archbishop Ferrao  effected the sale deed through then Attorney of Patriarch of East indies Fr. Arlino de Mello on February 11, 2006. Sale deed is recorded at sub-registrar’s office, located in Panjim that heralds new era of bold frauds by Goa Archbishop now Patron of CAG organized and AICU collaborated Marathon for Peace and Unity.

Civil law fraud

What the Archbishop of Goa Felipe Neri Ferrao held all along namely that his Sale of Vanxim island is legally correct but morally wrong(even though Archbishop is supposed to uphold morals he admits his own moral failures) has found to be a bluff. Evidence surfaced from section 13A of the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964 points towards Vanxim sale being not only morally wrong but also legally wrong. This section was inserted in the law by the Goa, Daman & Diu Agricultural Tenancy (Amendment) Act, 1966. Section 13A has seven clauses and we reproduce it here in public interest so that Goa Archbishop is asked by CAG members, AICU members, parishioners from various parishes in the world, Catholic Bishops Conference of India (CBCI), Federation of Asian Bishops (FABC) and the Vatican city officials headed by Pope Francis. Fr.Francisco Caldeira too has given ill conceived, ill informed public statements in a bid to confuse public.

Vanxim paddy fields belonged legally to Santa Monica convent. Archbishop Ferrao  effected the sale deed through then Attorney of Patriarch of East indies Fr. Arlino de Mello on February 11, 2006. Sale deed is recorded at sub-registrar’s office, located in Panjim.

It is worth noting that both parties: sellers - the Archbishop Ferrao as well as the buyer Mahendra Gaunekar – are bamons and this is not by co-incidence. This is where the seeds of injustice are sown by Archbishop Neri and now sought to be covered up through marathon run for Peace and Unity. It is here that Archbishop stood united for Bamons and caused body blow to the Peace of munlivasi people who are Catholics and who are not.

The paddy fields are tenanted land with nearly 60 tenants on it. We have already published as to how this sale deed has violated Canon Law but will do it here again to refresh memory. Now in this posting we are please to share text of section 13A of the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964 to expose how Goa Archbishop has indulged in legal violations besides self admitted moral wrongs which should have prompted him to exit but has not allowed him to do so.

Section 13A: Tenant’s right of first purchase: - (1) When a landlord intends to sell any land cultivated by a tenant he shall give notice of his intention to the tenant in the prescribed manner and shall specify the price at which the sale is to take place and call upon him to state within 90 days of receipt of the notice whether he is willing to buy the land at the price specified.

(2) The tenant may within 90 days of receipt of the notice signify in the prescribed manner his readiness to purchase the land at the price specified in the notice and there upon a contract to purchase the land at the said price shall be deemed to have been concluded between the landlord and the tenant.

(3) If the tenant is willing to purchase the land but contends that the price specified in the notice is excessive he may apply to the Collector in prescribed manner within 30 days of receipt of notice under sub-section (1) for determining the price whereupon the Collector shall determine the same in prescribed manner in accordance with the principles laid down in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the price so determined by  the Collector shall be deemed to be the price specific in the notice under sub-section (1). But the tenant shall in such an event exercise the option conferred by sub-section (2) within 60 days the receipt of notice of the price fixed by the Collector.

(4) If the tenant fails within the period specified in sub-section (1) to signify his acceptance as provided in sub-section (2), the landlord shall be free to sell the land in question to any person at a price not lower than that set out in the notice or the price determined by the Collector under sub-section (3) as the case may be.

(5) Any sale by a landlord to a person other than a tenant without giving the notice required by sub-section (1), or before the expiry of the period of the said notice or at price lower than, that set out in the notice or the price determined by the Collector under sub-section (3) as t he case may be, shall be void.

(6) Notwithstanding anything in this section, tenant who fails to avail himself of the offer of first purchase made under sub-section (1) shall not, by reason thereof, cease to be a tenant, but shall continue as tenant under the new owner on the same terms and conditions as before.

(7) Government may, subject to due appropriation being made in this behalf, grant on such terms as may be prescribed, a loan to a tenant for the purchase of any land in respect of which a notice ha been served upon him under sub-section (1).

While the above is a complete section 13A that has been violated by Goa Archbishop lets now take closer look at clauses (1) and (5) that bear brazen violations. Santa Monica was legally bound to serve the notice of sale stating the price. Lets look at the Clause (1) again here:

“(1) When a landlord intends to sell any land cultivated by a tenant he shall give notice of his intention to the tenant in the prescribed manner and shall specify the price at which the sale is to take place and call upon him to state within 90 days of receipt of the notice whether he is willing to buy the land at the price specified.”

This clause was violated as Archbishop sold Vanxim island in secrecy.

Then clause 5 of this section invalidates such sales. It states “(5) Any sale by a landlord to a person other than a tenant without giving the notice required by sub-section (1), or before the expiry of the period of the said notice or at price lower than, that set out in the notice or the price determined by the Collector under sub-section (3) as the case may be, shall be void.”

Now because Archbishop sold Vanxim in secrecy it is a legal fraud. He sold Vanxim and kept it without informing any one for three years so that time bar for challenge in the court of law expires. This led to around 60 cases in mamlatdar’s court, Deputy Collector’s Court, Administrative Tribunal, Sessions Court, High Court resulting in people being forced to spend on lawyers.

Goa Archbishop has violated this clause by selling Vanxim paddy fields amounting to 4,85,275 square meters. On record Archbishop has received total of Rs. 55,04,150/-. Records of sale claims land sold at the rate of Rs.20/- per square meter. The actual amount at this rate works out to be Rs. 97,05,500/-. In addition there are huge financial underhand transactions in this deal between Bamons leading to eviction of the local people living on island for past many centuries.

Mahendra Gaunekar then sold this land to corporate – Ozone group from Chennai for Rs. 30 crores on record. Ozone group plans to set up Golf course, Casinos, Gambling, Spa, Private marina, Luxury villas etc after evicting all the local residents. Then the name of Vanxim island is proposed to be changed into Ozone island. Prostitution is synonymous with golf as in Philippines and Thailand. It is called ‘Sex tourism’. The entire village is objecting and by no means will allow Ozone project to materialize.

Canon Law fraud

In addition to violation of civil law relating to tenancy Archbishop has also violated Canon Law.  Vita consecrata 82 urges members of institutes of consecrated life “to denounce the injustices committed against so many sons and daughters of God and commit themselves to the promotion of justice.” Who will denounce Archbishop bamon Felipe Neri Ferrao when he himself is involved in such as massive scandal of Vanxim sale?   

Today’s whisper will grow into roar of tomorrow. It is just a matter of time that Bamon raj is torn asunder and mulnivasis attain their liberation from bamon tyranny. Now is the time for mulnivasi catholic priests to rise up against all the Bamani evils taking place all over Goa and rest of India.

Now lets put Vanxim sale to the test of provisions of Canon Law that governs the affairs of the Church.  According to Canon law 1291 “the permission of the authority competent according to the norm of law is required for the valid alienation of goods which constitute by legitimate designation the stable patrimony of a public juridic person and whose value exceeds the sum defined by law.” 

Alienation means transfer of ownership through any of the three means sale, gift, or exchange. In case of Vanxim sale as a method that is used to transfer ownership to Bamon Mahendra Gaunekar by Archbishop Bamon Felipe Felipe Neri Ferrao. He has not declared in public as to whose permission has he taken before effecting sale deed in February 2006 neither has he disclosed the value of the sold land in Vanxim. Was it 20 rupees or 6 rupees per square meter?

Next canon 1292 dealing with alienation has four parts: “(1) Without prejudice to the prescript of can. 638 (3), when the value of the goods whose alienation is proposed falls within the minimum and maximum amounts to be defined by the conference of bishops for its own region, the competent authority is determined by the statutes of juridic persons if they are not subject to the diocesan bishop; otherwise, the competent authority is the diocesan bishop with the consent of the financial council, the college of consultors, and those concerned. The diocesan bishop himself also needs their consent to alienate the goods of the diocese.

(2) The permission of the Holy See is also required for the valid alienation of goods whose value exceeds the maximum amount, goods given to the Church by vow, or goods precious for artistic or historical reasons.

(3) If the assets to be alienated is divisible, the parts already alienated must be mentioned when seeking permission for the alienation; otherwise the permission is invalid.

(4) Those who by advice or consent must take part in alienating goods are not to offer advice or consent unless they have first been thoroughly informed both of the economic state of the juridic person whose goods are proposed for alienation and of previous alienations.”

It is crystal clear from the Canon Law 1924 (4) that the prior advice, thorough information and consent of Vanxim people were necessary before affecting the sale deed of Vanxim land in February 2006. Archbishop is guilty of violating Canon law in this case.

Another fact comes to the fore that the crucial and most vital decision of minimum and maximum amount of land to be sold is taken by Catholic Bishop’s Conference of India (CBCI). What are the limits set? Who has this information? Why Archbishop has not made this information public?

Who are members of financial council and college of consultors that gave consent to Archbishop to sell  Vanxim land? Why as per Canon 1292 (1) Vanxim people were not consulted before the sale deed even though their rights are to be affected in the circumstances after this sale deed. This violation of Canon law points towards direct involvement of Archbishop Felipe Neri Ferrao in Bamani conspiracy against mulnivasis.

“Canon 1293 (1) The alienation of goods whose value exceeds the defined minimum amount also requires the following:

1.       A just cause, such as urgent necessity, evident advantage, piety, charity, or some other grave pastoral reason;

2.       A written appraisal by experts of the asset to be alienated.

(2) Other precautions prescribed by legitimate authority are also to be observed to avoid harm to the church.

Canon 1294 (1) An asset ordinarily must not be alienated for a price less than that indicated in the appraisal.

(2) The money received from the alienation is either to be invested carefully for the advantage of the Church or to be expended prudently according to the purposes of alienation.”

 What was a just cause that warranted sale of Vanxim? What was the urgent necessity that led to sale of Vanxim? What was the evident advantage that prompted sale of Vanxim? What was the consideration of piety that led to selling of Vanxim? What was charity that prompted sale of Vanxim? What was the other grave pastoral reason that led to sale of Vanxim? The official statement by Fr. Fransisco Caldeira reasons that the Vanxim was sold to provide for maintenance of Santa Monica convent does not fit the criteria of canon law 1293. It is not a just cause because sale of Vanxim caused injustice on people of Vanxim. There was no evident advantage, not even financial advantage when it was sold for Rs.6/- to Rs. 20/- per square meters when market rate at that time was 1000 times more. So Vanxim was sold with evident disadvantage to the diocese. Why CAG and AICU silent on this issue? Is it because they are not interested in solving this?

Who were the experts of Bishop that gave written appraisal advocating sale of Vanxim? How many experts were appointed on this task? Why their reports are not made public? Why their names are not made public? What was the role of Fr.Consecao D’silva, the current Taleigao Parish Priest in all this? Why Archbishop is operating in secrecy about Vanxim on violations of Canon law? Did these experts write a grossly underestimated report?

What was the amount arrived rent at in appraisal report of experts? When these written reports of experts are going to be made public?

As per canon 1294 (1) land cannot be ordinarily sold. It is the duty of the Church to make sure that it is not going to be used for unethical purposes such as golf tourism, casinos, sex tourism, etc. In Vanxim case entire process of sale itself is case of fraudulency in total violation of canon law.

Vanxim sale of church land by Archbishop bamon Felipe Neri Ferrao to another Bamon Mahendra Gaunekar is completely unethical, marred with corruption and part of wider bamani conspiracy to make mulnivasi people of Goa captives of bamon raj. There is no ground left to be turned in where puss of corruption and Bamanism does not flow smoothly in the case of Vanxim sale. Considering Vanxim experience none of other projects undertaken by Archbishop Bamon Felipe Neri Ferrao cannot be ruled out for being done in the interest of Bamanism and against the interest of mulnivasis.

Now the question arises as to whether Pontiff is aware of Bamanism in Goa and India. It is not certain as to what information he has. But it is certain that Apostolic Nuncio to India, His Excellency, the most reverend Archbishop Salvatore Pennacchio who visited Goa on 3^rd December 2011 to celebrate feast mass in Old Goa and then few months ago for the exposition of St.Francis Xavier relics, is very well aware of caste discriminations in India. He was present at the South Asian Symposium on Church’s Social Doctrine in Honour of Blessed Pope John Paul II organized jointly by FABC’ office of Human Development and CBCI’ Commission for Theology and Doctrine that took place at St. Pius College, Goregaon, Mumbai on 14 to 16 October 2011. At this symposium Research Scholar (Law) B.M.Leela Kumari from Aacharya Nagarjuna University made a written submission on caste discriminations in India titled ‘the question of Dalit women today and church’s response.’ The paper includes reference of bamani doctrine of manusmriti as well as to the speeches of Dr. B.R.Ambedkar. This is included in a published report of this symposium edited by Bishop Agnelo Gracias and Fr. Stephan Fernandes. It is for him (Apostolic Nuncio, His Excellency, the Most Reverend Archbishop Salvatore Pennacchio) who was a main celebrant of both the morning prayers as well Holy Mass at Goregaon symposium to take the message of Bamanism practices by Goa Archbishop to the Pontiff for greater common good of mulnivasi Christians in India. And it is our duty to bring this message to you for discussion on the table. Suppressing will not longer help.

Biblical call to drive out evil doers.

Now let us deal with the issue of what is to be done with this Archbishop Bamon Felipe Neri Ferrao in Goa. The solution lies in 1 Corinthians 5:9-13 “In my last letter I instructed you not to associate with immoral people. I did not mean, of course, those who do not belong to the Church and who are immoral, greedy, embezzlers or worshippers of idols. Otherwise you would have to leave this world. What I really meant was to avoid and not to mingle with those who, calling themselves brothers, become immoral, greedy, or idolators, gossipers, drunkards, or embezzlers. In which case you should not even eat with them. It is no concern of mine to judge outsiders. But you, are you not to judge those who are inside? Let God judge those outside, but as for you, drive out the evil-doer from among you.”

Archbishop Bamon Felipe Neri Ferrao has not only violated Canon Law but also civil law by selling Vanxim without giving thorough information prior to the sale deed, and seeking their advice and consent for sale but sold this island with underestimated written appraisals that he has kept secret till date. Vanxim island was sold for a song and there is not an iota of doubt in the air that Archbishop is involved in massive embezzlement and black money. Otherwise Vanxim sale at the rate of Rs.6/- to Rs.20/- is unexplainable. All these acts of Archbishop are evil acts and through his hard work he has qualified himself as evil-doer. Now it is for all the mulnivasi Christians in Goa and other parts of India to reward him as per 1corinthians 5:9-13; do not mingle with him, do not eat with him and drive him away. 

This flows from the writings of St. Paul himself. It is therefore becomes duty of Christians to make sure that they do not mingle with Archbishop Bamon Felipe Neri Ferrao, Share any food at lunch, dinner and breakfast with him, and if he is around drive him away, for this is a well deserved reward that he has earned through sale of Vanxim in violation of Canon Law as well as Civil law.

Bharat Mukti Morcha will continue its Vanxim marathon for Justice started in 2010. You are welcomed to join. Start with sharing of this posting. And keep posting to your contacts. For currently Archbishop’s house is an important centre of flow of injustice, strife and divisiveness, faster we run in the Marathon sooner Goa will b free from Bamon Raj. This is a marathon for Justice we must run.

Jai Bharat!                     Jai Mulnivasi!                       Jai Goa!

Bharat Mukti Morcha decry Indian Shipping Minister Gadkari's Marina comments

Maggie Silveira, President, Bharat Mukti Morcha,Goa Unit addressing Press Conference on 28th August 2015 in Panjim. She is accompanied on her left by Janardan Tamhankar, Convenor of Bharat Mukti Morcha, Siolim Constituency and to right by Syed Iftiyaz of Pupolar Front of India, Sanjay Pereira, Member of Santa Cruz Panchayat and Milind Palkar, Bharat Mukti Mrocha Convenor of Bharat Mukti Morcha, Nauxi village.

 Public and Press attending the Public meeting and Press Conference of Bharat Mukti Morcha

 Anthony Veronica Fernandes, founder of Kuwait Goans Solidarity Centre addressing the public meeting. He shared his experience as to how Philippine women were made to bear illegitimate children at a time when it was R-N-R destination to US soldiers.

Janardan Tamhankar addressing public meeting expressed complete opposition to Casinos in Chapora river

Bharat Mukti Morcha strongly objects to the recent statements of Union Minister of Shipping Nitin Gadkari about installing Marinas in Zuari river. Mr.Gadkari’s statements has been completely irresponsible considering that there has been wide opposition to marina projects in Zuari river ever since they were conceived through two Lease deeds of 12 October 2010 with Kargwal Constructions pvt Ltd and 14 October 2010 with Yatch Heaven Pvt Ltd. There have been consorted efforts made by Union Government to deprive local communities of fishing spaces in Zuari river. In both the Lease deeds there is special provision that favors zero obstruction of mining barge transport by Marinas. It states “The LESSEE shall take all precautions to ensure that barge movements are not affected during the construction as well as operation period of the Marina”. What is noteworthy is that such a provision does not exist for fishermen in Lease deed documents. Why this discrimination? The statements made by Mr.Gadkari does not have basis and he has made no estimates as to what it might mean if fishing spaces in Zuari River is lost. What is most insulting is that in face of overwhelming opposition from public of Chicalim, Nauxim, Cacra, Odxel and Goa Velha, Ministers like Alina Saldanha legislators like Vishnu S. N. Wagh, Panchayats of Sancoale, Cortalim, Agacaim, Siridao, Bambolim, Zilla Parishad of South Goa, Fishermen’s organisations like  Goenchea Raponkarancho Ekvott (GRE) and Bharat Mutki Morcha; Mr.Gadkari went on insisting on Marinas in Zuari River.

Bharat Mukti Morcha calls for revocation of notification issued by Central Government on 24^th May 2000 extending jurisdiction of MPT over Zuari river. There are already number of problems in Vasco where MPT has jurisdiction and protests from fisher people opposing use of Vasco Bay for MPT projects and expansion plans. In this background Mr.Gadkari has announced that number of MPT berths is to be increased from 14 to 18. This means further displacement of local people. MPT has already caused social danger by announcing their plans of developing Goa into Rest and Recreation (R-n-R) destination. This involves accepting of foreign ships of soldiers fighting in different countries like Americans in Philipines in the past. This will only institutionalize Prostitution in Goa.

Bharat Mukti Morcha foresee that announced 50% subsidy for floating jetties will facilitate projects opposed by public specially at Divar of Champions group that is already carrying Gadkari’s photograph on their website, and Ozone group’s floating Jetty at Old Goa to ferry tourists to Vanxim island in Mandovi. Vanxim Island has faced strong public protests for past half a decade. Bharat Mukti Morcha extends support to all the people, groups, etc who are opposing irrational development policies sought to be developed by Goa Government as well as by Government of India.