Comments on: WHO SHOULD POLICE THE ENVIRONMENT?

By: sanity-in

sanity-in — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 17:06:59 +0000

“where are all eminent engineers and technical people who were so concerned about the planned city hotel in lonuziyaaraiykolhu of male’? why are they staying silent over this issue?”

As one of the authors of the Male hotaa report, the reason I would say is precisely as Shamem has said in his comment:

“This is a private land, not the last remaining public space which was the main concern” with regards to the city hotel in lonuziyaaraiykolhu, Male’.”
Infringing on a private citizens right to develop his/her land as per the existing planning/ development procedures is professionally unethical and everyone operates within their own set of boundaries. If people fail to see the difference, its their perogative.

The developers of Athireege appear to have followed existing regulatory procedures and commenced the project upon receipt of a planning permit. If an EIA is a requirement, it should be stipulated in male’ Planning regulations. if the permit was acquired through corruption, it is a matter for the courts. individual authorities making isolated decisions is not the most effive course of action.

We have highlighted the development issues on Male’ in the report and there are many more, such as regulating land uses, etc. (warehousing and workshops on residential land, which also have impacts on peoples lives and the environment). the report was very focused and the main issue was leasing the limited public land available for the development of a massive hotel on one of the only remaining open areas on this island.

having said that, if the government had valid reasons to stop the development after reassessing the situation, they should in my opinion have issued a joint ruling on this particular issue, provided a clear set of action for the developers to follow and provided appropriate compensation.

By: sanity-in

sanity-in — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:28:52 +0000

The article raises some very valid questions, however the article is basically written with an environmental focus as clearly the title suggests. the Athireege issue, in my opinion is less of an environmental issue than it is a regulatory and a structural issue. One of the issues, as the article rightfully highlights the lack of co-ordination of the relevant government ministries. the problem is not just lack of inter-agency co-ordination, but also, the gaps and overlaps which exists in the exiting regulatory framework, capacity and the complexity of the physical development of Male’. there are gaps in the planning regulations, construction standards, and the environment act and regulations.

The necessary mechanisms to deal with the complex urban development issues simply do not exist and that is the core issue. to state examples, there is no construction standards (Building Code, etc) which should in effect provide a unified set of rules for people to follow.
the EIA regulations are simply another layer of beaurocracy and seems to have been developed from just one dimension. it does not for such example refer to any other regulations such as Male’ Planning Regulations (which by the way are developed with representation from the environmental authorities). in itself, the EIA Act and regulations are very powerful, but is practice vague and unenforceable, and uncoordinated to other regulations in existence. According to the EIA regulations, you and will need to do an EIA for even cooking biriyani in the house, anything we do has “an impact on the environment”.

By: Oi Iya Vattalau

Oi Iya Vattalau — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 05:57:56 +0000

excellent that bluepeace has taken and brought up the issue. we have to protest against such unsuitable options of putting up business tycoons business settlements killing others.

By: Yaamyn

Yaamyn — Sun, 02 Mar 2008 06:56:12 +0000

@Karisma :
I think Bluepeace has asked a very appropriate question. It is quite standard to do an Environmental Impact Assessment when carrying out a large construction in a region as fragile as our coral islands. However, in this case, it was quite clearly not done until the project had taken off and protests began pouring in.
The cracks on nearby building are indeed a cause for concern, especially with the safety of schoolchildren at risk, as the article points out.
Oh, and the Maldives is nowhere near to being a contributor towards global warming. We’re 300,000 something people with no CFCs! :p

By: shafeeg

shafeeg — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 23:54:32 +0000

I am just a normal person, not an engineer in respect to environment. However, I have to say that Male’ is already over crowded. The wealthy people, just like the government is responsible for making the capital city a concrete block. THere is hardly any space for trees to grow. With each of the project like this, there will no doubt be an influx of people to add to the already existing over crowd. Besides, I wonder whether there is any engineer who has done any testing in Male’ or for that matter any research after their graduation. Just because they were taught that in developed countries these methods works does not mean it is suitable for Male’. The consequences of pervious harbour piling etc is to be seen in Male’ with the damage to the reef it has occured. When would this stop.

By: concrete evidence

concrete evidence — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:06:37 +0000

I am a Bluepeace member and I think Karisma’s comments are off mark. After reading the blog post by Bluepeace, I see that Bluepeace’s concern is about how the EIA was done after starting the project and “the lack of coordination between government ministries.” I don’t think Bluepeace is “just infringing on someone’s constitutional right to build on their private property.” How can Bluepeace say with absolute facts that this will damage the environment when even the environment ministry is not certain? When there is the possibility of damage to environment, then concern should be raised. It is up to the government ministries to say definitely that there will be no damage. As far as the EIA is concerned, it is a poorly done work as Analyzer said, and done by a consultant appointed by the contractor. Nobody should believe that EIA. I don’t think deep piling was used in Male’ Harbour. I think it was sheet piling, which is a totally different thing. Then again I may be wrong and you can tell me to verify facts before commenting. Knowing that there is a crack on the eastern reef of Male’ I am more worried about that than global warming and CFC in my refrigerator. I hope Bluepeace will stay out of any family feuds in this, but be courageous to raise concerns about possible damages to environment. Bluepeace should do that with or without concrete evidence (no pun intended) of structural or fabric damage to environment. This whole fiasco is showing nothing but the incompetency of government in protecting the environment.

By: afu

afu — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:51:13 +0000

i’d like to reply to a comment posted here by a certain ‘karisma’… to reproduce an often used cliche of the times, ‘with rights come responsibilities’… family feud or not, these responsibilities have to be borne while they exercise their rights. you ask, ‘Why have you not raised the matter before when the Harbour was made?’. this might be the first time, or to be generous, one of the few times, you’ve been concerned with environmental issues. bluepeace has been involved in creating awareness for the past 15 years; how do you know they have not raised their concerns about irreversible damages to bedrock in the past? its only recently that environnmental issues have been given much attention. most people have remained ignorant, and largely because efforts of many parties such as bluepeace have not been given due attention or publicity. which of course leads people to questions as you do, why have they done nothing before? just because you are not aware of the facts. this ignorance is obvious when you talk about CFC emissions contributing to global warming. this is confusing the public – CFC is an agent that depletes the ozone layer and in fact the Maldives has a ban on it. not to be rude, but please get your facts straight.

By: Familyibilees

Familyibilees — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:27:23 +0000

Because there is some talk of this being a family fued I thought I’ll just shed some more light on how much this thing runs in the family.

The developer of the hotel leased the land (on which the hotel is being constructed) through his sister-in-law who owns the land. The developer brother in law is incidentally married to the Environment Minister’s niece, who approved the hurried and shoddily done EIA. The brother-in-law’s ex-wife is a close relative of the Minister of Construction and Public Infrastructure, who approved the controversial construction methodology at the heart of the issue. The Construction minister is incidentally first cousins with the Minister of Education under whose competence falls Dharumavantha School,which has sustained the most structural damage. The education minister’s silence is very conspicuous in what is is obviously a family drama of Hindi soap opera proportions.

By: karisma

karisma — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 10:54:25 +0000

YOu say that you are concerned about the possible impacts on the bedrock of Male’ and on the reef. Were you aware that the new Harbour was build using deep piling? Has there been any evidence of irreversible damage to the bedrock and reef of Male? As you know it is the same reef even if there is no land above it. Why have you not raised the matter before when the Harbour was made?.

As you know the biggest concern to the Maldives currently is global warming and sea level rise. It is a scientifically proven fact that emissions from the use of fuel in cars/motor cycles and the use of such appliances such as airconditioners and fridges contribute to global warming? Why arent you concerned about this and trying to stop this in Male? Do Bluepeace members know what their carbon footprint is? Do they use any vehicles that emit CFCs? dont you think you are being unethical here?

You are just insinuating things that you have no scientific basis or any concrete proof? Instead of just “wondering” if this is a proven and tested technology for a coral island, why dont you find the facts first. The EIA obviously stated that this is an environment friendly method. If so why are you refusing to believe it, without having any evidence yourself to the contrary.

You are just infringing on someone’s constitutional right to build on their private property. I would have thought that a respectable NGO would have hard facts before they try to do this.

But to be fair on Bluepeace, I personally believe that Bluepeace is an unwitting innocent party to a family feud!

By: Bluepeace

Bluepeace — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 06:38:00 +0000

From an environmental perspective Bluepeace is more concerned that an EIA was not made before this project. We wonder if this is a proven and tested technology for a coral island. We are concerned about the possible impacts on the bedrock of Male’ and on the reef. We are not explicitly saying that deep piling techniques are inappropriate but we are raising our concerns that without a proper EIA such projects and experiments should not be started. Cracks on nearby buildings is of secondary concern to us. But we are worried that a school is next to the project site.