ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846

Narmada Bachao AndolanSubscribe to Narmada Bachao Andolan

Sardar Sarovar Project: Braving the Rising Waters

With continuing work on the project more than 20 villages have been submerged this year and acres of standing crops lost while the new reservoir is filling up. The years of protest by the local people who have yet to be adequately rehabilitated remains unheard.

Banning NBA?

The Gujarat High Court has asked the central government to consider banning the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) based on a suit filed by an NGO (that ironically champions civil liberties) that alleges that NBA is indulging in anti-national activities with the help of foreign agencies, by preventing...

NBA Contempt of Court Case

The Narmada Bachao Andolan contempt of court case, involving advocate Prashant Bhushan, Medha Patkar and Arundhati Roy, is analysed here from three perspectives: the frivolous nature of the complaint; the scope of the fundamental right to freedom of speech as against the power to punish for contempt of court; and the need for restraint on the part of social activists in their criticism of the judiciary.

Ground Realities in Narmada Valley

The communities on the banks of the Narmada soon to be submerged continue to plough their fields which have always provided enough for themselves and their families, knowing full well that the bajra and the dal may never be harvested.

Interpreting Narmada Judgment

In judging the Narmada Bachao Andolan case, the Supreme Court, using the 'separation of powers' doctrine, side-stepped the issues of entitlement and suffering, and chose to concern itself only with the issues of relief and rehabilitation. It was only on the latter issue that the court was willing to hear the representation of the NBA. The weak interrogation of the doctrine of separation of powers allowed the court to abdicate much of its responsibility to those affected by the Narmada dam project.
Back to Top