The
Hindu: Mumbai: Monday, 07 December 2015.
Right to
Information activist and former Chief Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi
tells Satish Nandgaonkar what is wrong with the Brihanmumbai Municipal
Corporation’s open spaces policy, and why citizens should support the Save Our
Spaces (SOS) campaign in their neighbourhood.
What are
your concerns about the recreation/playground policy?
The policy
talks about adoption of open spaces and creating third party rights. Adoption
is for orphans; so, I wonder who is orphaned here.
By creating a
third party right, the BMC is effectively creating a third party interest in a
property, and to give a legal right to a third party translates into defacto
ownership.
Given our
judicial system, it could mean a lifetime ownership.
Do you
feel corporates will misuse the policy under corporate social responsibility?
They have
specified that associations and business houses adopting open spaces should
have a turnover of over Rs 5 crore. They said corporates should be given
preference. The idea of possession of a third party right is wrong. If you have
a property, would you give it to someone else with a legal right? I don’t think
money is an issue here. They have a budget of over Rs 400 crore for gardens and
playgrounds, and they don’t even spend Rs 200 crore of it.
But, open
spaces have been adopted by associations earlier and they have worked well.
There are
some places like the Bandra promenade where social organisations are doing
sterling work. But, you cannot guarantee against vested interests getting into
such associations, and misusing the policy. So, why do you create a third party
right? If BMC is keen on getting public participation, it could encourage
citizen’s groups to do ‘social audit’ and take their help in designing the
facilities. Activists like Bhaskar Prabhu have been doing social audits in
Dadar.
Can you
cite an example of open spaces misused in the caretaker policy in the past?
The papers I
obtained under the RTI in 2005 showed that the first agreement with Matoshri
Club in March 1996 was given for five years for a five-acre plot at CTS 190B.
The agreement allowed nothing, except two boards no more than 2.5 feet by 10
inches to be put up on the ground. It stated no structure of permanent nature
will be put up. On December 13, 1996, an agreement was signed permitting
construction of a gymkhana and a swimming pool on 50 per cent of the plot. Now
it is a full-scale private club.
How do you
plan to oppose the policy?
I had called
a meeting of citizens who would like to participate in a campaign. Nearly 50
people, including Gerson Da Cunha, Anandini Thakur and Bhaskar Prabhu, attended
the meeting. We decided to call the campaign, Save Our Spaces. Each of us has
decided to contact at least three corporators and question them why they
support a policy to alienate our open spaces and creating private party rights
on those. We decided that each of us would contact at least 30 citizens to
explain them the issue, and persuade them to join the campaign. If they still
pass the policy and start implementing it, citizens should warn their elected
representatives that they would not vote for them in the 2017 BMC elections if
they supported giving away public spaces.
They don’t
even spend Rs 200 crore for gardens out of the Rs 400 crore budgetShailesh
Gandhi,RTI activist.
.JPG)
.JPG)
