Supreme Court Judgement in the Niyamgiri Bauxite Mining Case

The Godavarman Hearing took place today in Supreme Court today on 23rd November 2007. It began with Justice Kapadia reading out from the judgement of the matter related to mining of bauxite on Niyamgiri Hills by Vedanta Alumina.

The judgement highlighted the need for sustainable development and intergenerational equity. This was contextualized in the case of Niyamgiri Hills. It also laid out the facts related to the case and that the requisite permissions for the Refinery have been granted.

It further went on to describe the linkage between Vedanta Alumina Limited (VAL) and Sterlite Industries Ltd, and stated that it was in the knowledge of the court that VAL is a subsidiary of Sterlite. However, in reality these are associate companies. Information related to the profits of VAL from their website was also highlighted.

The judgement referred to the CEC reports and the facts highlighted therein. Also the linkage between the company and Orissa Mining Corporation (OMC) was mentioned. It then referred to the report of the Norwegian Council of Ethics which has withdrawn funding from Vedanta. Given these circumstances and facts, the Supreme Court cannot grant approval for mining to Vedanta in Niyamgiri Hills.

However the judgement listed certain circumstances under which the approval can be considered. To begin with the permission will have to be sought of Sterlite Industries, independent of VAL or Vedanta Resources. A Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) would need to be set up in the State of Orissa to oversee the implementation of mining operations wherein OMC and Sterlite could get into an agreement. Sterlite would also need to pay 5% of its profits of the Lanjigarh project for the Local Area Development. In addition to this they would need to pay Rs.55 crores for Wildlife Management and Rs.12.20 crores for tribal development.

If the above conditions are agreeable to Sterlite they could approach the court and approval could be considered.

The above facts are based on what was presented in the court, and would need a final verification once the copy of the judgement is available. We will send out more details on it in the next issue of Forest Case Update.