Dr. Subramanian Swamy's letter to Secretary, The Committee of Eminent Persons On Sethusamudram Shipping Channel Project.

October 28,2007.

Secretary,

The Committee of Eminent Persons

On Sethusamudram Shipping Channel Project,

“Malligai”, 30/95 P.S. Kumarasamy Raja Road,

Chennai, TN 600 028.

Dear Sir,

Kindly place the following objections and suggestions to, and for the implementation of the Sethusamundrum Channel Project (SSCP). I reserve the right to question the objectivity as also raise the matter of heavy bias and prejudice against the historicity of Sri Rama afflicting this Committee later before the Supreme Court.

I. OBJECTIONS:

1. It is false as declared by the Chairman of the Committee, Prof. S. Ramachandran to the media in a written statement, on June 11, 2007, that “There is no doubt that this chain of islands (i.e., Rama Setu) formed due to natural process” (Annexure 1). This creates an apprehension of bias and pre-judgment by the leader of this Committee on the issue whether or not a ship channel in the Palk Straits can safely and without causing public disorder, be dredged by cutting through the Rama Setu. The report prepared by the former Director of the Geological Survey of India, Dr. S. Badrinarayanan, is available with the Government and should be accessed by the Committee, to correct this erroneous view of the Chairman, which view has profound consequences. The President of India, on a reference to the Earth Sciences Department had received an opinion, submitted in March 2007, holding that the Setu is constructed and not “formed due to natural process” as the Chairman has held publicly. I am enclosing extracts of both these reports (Annexures 2 & 3). The media had made this disclosure on the basis of these reports as far back as May 8, 2007 (Annexure 4).

2. It is false as stated by the Minister of Culture, Ms. Ambika Soni in answer to a question in Rajya Sabha, that there is no “scientific evidence” to establish that the Rama Setu qualifies to be an ancient monument and that it lacks the essential ingredients required under law to be considered for inclusion in the list of ancient monuments. The evidence in Annexures 2 to 4 is sufficient under Sections of the Ancient Monuments and Archeological Sites & Remains Act (1958) requiring an investigation by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in association with the Geological Survey of India (GSI) and National Institute of Ocean Technology (NIOT), to decide this question.

3. It is false as stated by the Minister of Shipping and Transport Mr. T.R. Baalu that the SSCP is environmentally sustainable, and cleared by the NEERI and other scientific establishments. The NEERI had conveyed in writing in a letter dated April 8, 1999 to the Government that prima facie the Institute was not in favour of the SSCP project at all. The NEERI also specifically rejected the Alignment No.5, circling Dhanushkodi because then the coral reef rocks beyond east of Dhanushkodi would have to be blasted by explosives, which would completely de-stablilize the marine environment and life.

On June 17, 2002, the NEERI did revise it’s opinion, in order to support the presently chosen Alignment No.6, but on the condition that explosives will not be used for cutting through the Rama Setu. However, the Minister of Shipping, Mr. Baalu has made a public statement that the Government (having failed repeatedly to cut through Rama Setu with dredger machines) proposed to use explosives to create a breach in Rama Setu. This is in violation of NEERI’s considered opinion. Moreover, as Chief Minister, Ms. Jayalalitha publicly disclosed on September 2, 2005, an expert committee headed by the former Director of the NIOT, Mr. M. Ravindran in a report submitted on May 30, 2005 to the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, well before the SSCP was inaugurated, had recommended more studies, tests and research as the NEERI 2002 study was shoddy, made without consulting the GSI, and professionally inadequate. Moreover, the NEERI failed to take into account as brought out by Shipping companies (Business Line, October 2007) that fishing activities in deep sea cannot be carried out after the SSCP becomes operational. That is, fishing and SSCP are mutually exclusive activities. This will cause monumental distress to the poor sections of Tamil society.

4. It is false to state that the SSCP is economically profitable. The rate of return calculation, the estimated time saved by ships in using the Sethusamudram Ship Channel, and the interest rate to be paid for loans to finance the project, are grossly wrong because these are based on contrived or bogus data. The studies of Captain H. Balakrishnan, and infrastructure consultant Dr. Jacob John may be referred to for more accurate calculation (See Annexures 5 & 6).

On the best and most favourable assumptions, the rate of return on the SSCP cannot exceed 2.75%, at which rate no public sector project can be sanctioned. It is then better to put the project funds in a fixed deposit and provide subsidies to ships to encourage them to dock at Thoothukudi port. Further, no ship of tonnage more than 30,000 DWT will be able to use the Channel, thus excluding the majority of ships plying on the Indian Ocean from the alleged benefits of the SSCP.

5. The Minister of Shipping Mr. T.R. Baalu, through relatives and benamis has commercial interests in the shipping industry through a company which charters ships of less than 30,000 DWT, which raises a serious question of conflict of interest on part of the Minister.

II. SUGGESTIONS:

1. If the Committee would want to be objective and just, then it ought to recommend to the Government to set up a multi-disciplinary agency (MDA) to re-calculate the economic returns, maintenance costs, environmental implications and social benefits of the Sethusamudram Shipping Channel Project. This MDA consisting of experts from GSI, NIOT, and overseas Indian origin consultants, should explicitly recognize that issues of public order and national security will matter in making its final recommendation.

2. The Committee in view of the irrefutable objections given above, has to rule out Alignment No.6 as impossible to implement, in view of the Rama Setu being an inalienable legacy of the nation that cannot be in the slightest desecrated and that too merely to satisfy perverse desires of a few atheistic persons in office or those ignorant or unaware of how deeply the nation worships Sri Rama. The nation-wide public order will be jeopardized if the Rama Setu is damaged in any way. Moreover, if the ASI finds that Rama Setu is indeed qualified to be an ancient monument, the SSCP cannot touch it under law. Hence Alignment No.6 must be abandoned forthwith as impossible to implement in Indian democracy. I have however no objection to Alignment No.1 being chosen (Annexure 7).

3. The Committee ought to recommend to the Ministry of Culture that it may immediately declare and notify the Rama Setu as an “Ancient Monument” within the meaning of the law laid out in the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act (1958). The Committee should also recommend to the Government to approach the UNESCO to declare the Rama Setu as a ‘World Heritage Site’, and take necessary steps to provide the essential infrastructure to render Rama Setu as a ‘Tirthstan’ and ‘Divya Kshetra’.

Yours Sincerely

(Subramanian Swamy)

PRESS RELEASE FROM DR.SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY

Statement [s1] [s2] Made by Dr. Subramanian Swamy Before the Sethusamudram Channel Project Committee On October 31, 2007 in Chennai.

1. Since this Committee is of the Respondent Union of India in Transfer Case No. 26&27 in the Supreme Court, my statement may be taken as made to assist the Respondent to draft a revised counter-affidavit to be filed later in Court. My Writ Petition is in the nature of a public interest litigation and hence non-adversarial.

2. I have already in writing submitted on October 29 ^th to this Committee the main points that need to be considered, before this Committee makes a recommendation to it's master, the Union of India on the content that should be the basis of a fresh counter-affidavit. These written submissions are part of, and taken by the Committee as a portion of my statement today.

3. In keeping with the public statement of the Union Law Minister, H.R. Bhardwaj that Sri Rama is as real to Hindus as Ganga and the Himalayas, and the statement in Court of the Additional Solicitor General, Mr. Gopal Subramaniam that the Union of India is open to considering alternative channel alignment that meets the aspiration of the people, I urge the Committee members here to shed their past positions on the subject, and advise the Union Shipping Ministry to drop Channel Alignment No. 6 as violative of the Constitution, the statutory provisions on public order, a gross breach of environmental norms, and a serious threat to national security. I have suggested an alternative alignment through the Mandappan area, and if this Committee considers it as not feasible for any rational reason, then the Sethusamudram Channel Project may be abandoned.

4. The current cost-benefit analysis of the project, irrespective the alignment chosen is heavily flawed and based on unacceptable, untenable, and highly conjectural data. The public statement of the Union Shipping Minister, Mr. T.R. Baalu that the internal rate of return on the project investment is in excess of 10 percent is false. Any reasonable, albeit tentative calculation will place the IRR at less than 2.75 percent. Moreover, the DPR of the project has no social costing, social auditing, or a discussion of the social discount rate for a more accurate present value calculation. Hence, it is a grossly incomplete analysis, and needs to be re-worked and drafted with greater transparency.

5. Now that it is apparent that the people of India will not brook any damage to the Rama Setu, this Committee should consider recommending to the Union government of India that the Rama Setu be declared as an ancient monument with the meaning the law passed by Parliament, develop infrastructure for it as a site for pilgrimage, and that the government approach the UNESCO to have it declared as a World Heritage Site. The Committee may also recommend to the government that the mischievous British Imperialist hangover of regarding the two Sanskrit words, "Arya" and "Dravida" as two distinct racial communities of different geographical origins, and which mischief has grossly sullied the debate on the viability of the SSCP, be notified as violative of Section 295 of the IPC, and cognisable offence.

Subramanian Swamy

The foam and fraud of SSCP’s nautical falsehood — I

By: V Sundaram
http://newstodaynet.com/col.php?section=20&catid=33&id=1214

Many of the Union Cabinet Ministers and many of the public servants in positions of high authority in the government of India need public insults in the larger public interest. Many of them behave or conduct themselves so abominably that they cry out for public abuse.’

There is no table of weights and measures for ascertaining or determining what constitutes the Due Process. It varies with the subject matter and necessities of the situation. DUE PROCESS OF LAW requires that the proceedings shall be fair, but fairness is a relative, not an absolute concept. It is fairness with reference to particular conditions or particular results.

Whichever way one looks at it, there has been a total violation of the DUE PROCESS by the government in according sanction for the SSCP with breakneck speed in 2005. That is why I am appealing to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India to treat this article as as a Public Interest Litigation and to stay the construction work till all the public issues are fully thrashed out openly in the highest Judicial Tribunal of the land.
.

In these columns in May 2007, I had written three articles based on the data and facts collected by a brilliant officer of the Indian Navy Captain Balakrishnan. Based on his acute analysis, and endorsing his view, I had come to the conclusion that that the SSCP project makes no nautical sense in so far as the Indian Coastal Trade (clearly distinct from Foreign Trade involving Foreign Vessels and Foreign Exchange) is concerned.

I said that going through the SSCP Canal no Indian Ship will save either money or time - both of which have been fraudulently claimed as significant benefits arising from the SSCP project.

Now Captain Balakrishnan, with his vast, rich and varied marine experience in the Indian Navy and later in the Merchant Navy, has mathematically proved in a rigourously scientific manner that even in the area of Foreign Trade (so very vital for the Indian economy if not for T.R. Baalu’s private and political SSCP!) SSCP makes no nautical sense - either from point of view of savings in Cost or saving in Time.

I have shown the Nautical Calculations done by Balakrishnan to some of the most distinguished Officers of the Indian Navy and Indian Merchant Navy and all of them have endorsed the Technical/Marine facts and figures based on which he has given his finding in regard to the implications of SSCP for India’s Foreign Trade.

I would like to pay my tribute to Balakrishnan in the words that Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965) used in the case of Admiral Lord Fisher: Ruthless, Relentless and Remorseless.

I am presenting below the TIME AND DISTANCE CALCULATIONS FOR FOREIGN TRADE done by Captain Balakrishnan in his own words:

TIME AND DISTANCE CALCULATIONS- NAVIGATING AROUND SRI LANKA AND THROUGH SSCP - PASSAGES FROM MUSCAT AND ADEN TO CHITTAGONG/ SINGAPORE

1. The Detailed Project Report (DPR), of the SSCP, states all vessels up to 20,000 DWT, about 75 % of 30,000 DWT, 10% of 40,000 DWT vessels and 5% of 50,000 DWT vessels will be able to use the canal. Also, all empty vessels (in ballast) can pass through the canal.

2. The DPR, highlighting other USPs of the SSCP, anticipates that from the very first year of its operation, 60% of its revenue will accrue from vessels plying on foreign trade routes.

3. In an earlier series of analysis of the SSCP, published in the media, the nautical viability of the SSCP, from the Indian coastal trade standpoint had been analysed. This paper analyses the same issue from the foreign sea trade point of view. Two voyages have been chosen, where a ship has the option of either circumnavigating Sri Lanka or navigating through the SSCP.



(The foregoing distances above have been derived from actual plotting on navigational charts.)
18. Additional Time For Passage Planning For purposes of embarkation/disembarkation of ‘Pilot’, manoeuvering of engines in the SSCP, as also for any delays in embarkation of ‘Pilot’- ADD = 2 hours (at the minimum) to all the passage times indicated above.

DEDUCTIONS

19. From the foregoing calculations, the following deductions can be arrived at:

A. The difference in time taken to reach Chittagong from Muscat, circumnavigating Sri Lanka and navigating through the SSCP at speeds of 12 and 6 knots is = 8.9h

B. The difference in time taken to reach Chittagong from Muscat, circumnavigating Sri Lanka and navigating through the SSCP at speeds of 12 and 8 knots is = 12.4h

C. The difference in time taken to reach Chittagong from Muscat, circumnavigating Sri Lanka and navigating through the SSCP at speeds of 15 and 6 knots is = 3.9h

D. The difference in time taken to reach Chittagong from Muscat, circumnavigating Sri Lanka and navigating through the SSCP at speeds of 15 and 8 knots is = 7.4h

E. The difference in time taken to reach Singapore from Aden circumnavigating Sri Lanka and navigating through the SSCP at speeds of 12 and 6 knots is = 14.2h (NOTE: THIS IS ON ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT THE VOYAGE DISTANCE INCREASES BY 63nm BY TRANSITING THROUGH THE SSCP!!

F. The difference in time taken to reach Singapore from Aden circumnavigating Sri Lanka and navigating through the SSCP at speeds of 15 and 8 knots is = 11.1h

G. Comment: The deductions in voyage time between Aden and Singapore implies that SHIPPING TRAFFIC ORIGINATING FROM EUROPEAN/MEDITERRANEAN/RED SEA PORTS AND BOUND FOR THE FAR-EAST WILL BYPASS THE SSCP AND CIRCUMNAVIGATE SRI LANKA. THE SAME HOLDS TRUE FOR TRAFFIC ORIGINATING FROM PORTS IN THE HORN OF AFRICA/EAST AFRICA. A SIZEABLE SLICE OF GLOBAL SHIPPING TRAFFIC!!

H. While there is a nominal savings in distance navigating through the SSCP,this does not automatically translate into commensurate savings in time, on account of the ‘slow speeds’ required to navigate through the SSCP. This is on account of a phenomenon termed ‘SHALLOW WATER EFFECT’, or, ‘SQUAT EFFECT’, where the ship’s propellers tend to seek the sea bottom while proceeding at High Speeds in shallow waters.

The SSCP is to have a dredged depth of 12 meters and can be used by ships having a draught of upto 10.7 meters. Thus the difference between the ship’s keel and the sea bottom will be 12.0-10.7=1.3 metres. This explains the necessity for ‘slow speeds’ through the SSCP.

I. It is mandatory for ships using the SSCP to embark a ‘pilot’. In the calculations above, at a conservative estimate, a time 2 hours has been added to passage time calculations. Under actual conditions, this time may be more than the 2 hours.

All the major ports of India suffer from a shortage of ‘pilots’. Therefore, the SSCP is also likely to suffer from this prevailing malaise. It is therefore appreciated that vessels arriving at the ‘pilot boarding grounds’ at the SSCP may have to anchor and await ‘pilot boarding’. In this light, it would further tend to reduce the difference in time between circumnavigating Sri Lanka and using the SSCP.

CONCLUSION

20. The foregoing calculations and the analysis based on them, from first principles, clearly highlight the NON-VIABILITY OF THE SSCP, for foreign trade vessels.


(To be continued)

October 25, 2007
PRESS RELEASE by Dr. Subramanian Swamy

1. Now that the Supreme Court has disowned the Government –appointed so-called “Committee of Eminent Persons on Sethu Samudram Canal Project”, it is necessary to re-name the committee as “Baalu’s Anti-Rama Committee (BARC)”, since it contains as members only those who have to date rubbished Hindu holy scriptures and ridiculed the Rama Setu.

2. Judging by the defensive mode of the Congress Party on the Rama Setu issue in the Gujarat election campaign currently in progress, it is obvious that this BARC is a waste of time and a drain on the public exchequer.

3. The Sethu Samudram Canal Project is now doomed because the Alignment No.6 chosen earlier at the insistence of the DMK called for breaking through Rama Setu by use of explosives. This is not acceptable to the people of India. Even Kashmiri leaders like Mirwaiz Maulvi Farooq and Shabir Shah have publicly opposed this route because Muslims regard Rama as “Imam-E-Hind” (the divinity of Hindustan).

4. Of the remaining five alternatives, four are barred by the environment impact assessments of the NEERI and hence not feasible. The only remaining route is via the land route west of Pamban and through Mandapam. For that, the SSCP has to be first scrapped and re-written.
(Subramanian Swamy)

October 24, 2007
PRESS RELEASE

The Supreme Court's First Bench consisting of Chief Justice K.Balakrishnan, Judges Raveedran and Dalbir Bhandari todaydisowned the Committee of Eminent Persons, appointed by the Government of India in the Sethusamudram Canal Project matter, which committee is tosuggest a new counter affidavitto be filed iby the government in the Supreme Court by mid-December. The CJI observed that theapexcourt did not constitute the said committee and therefore is not interested whether it is biased or not. The CJI further observed that when the matter comes up in January 2008, I would beat liberty to raise all objections to the Committee at that stage before the Court if the Government relies onthe committee'sreport.

I had in my Interlocutory Applicationsaid thattheCommittee was biased and rigged, and since it's formationwas announced by the Additional Solicitor General in Court, direction ought tobe given by the Bench to quash the present committee and a new unbiased committee should be set up.
(SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY)

VHP wants Kalam in Sethu committee

Allahabad, Oct 17: The Vishwa Hindu Parishad today demanded that a committee be set up under the chairmanship of former President A P J Abdul Kalam to study the feasibility of the Sethusamudram project in its proposed form.

"We have no faith in any feasibility study conducted by any experts committee set up by the central government as it is unlikely to serve any purpose other than protecting the interests of vested interests and, to some extent, appeasing the Marxists who have never had any respect for traditions and sentiments of Hindus", VHP International President Ashok Ssinghal told reporters here.

He said that to resolve the crisis, a team of experts headed by Kalam, "who is himself a native of Rameswaram and whose patriotism is unquestionable", should be constituted which would "honestly state the perils involved in demolishing the Ram sethu and also suggest suitable alternatives".

Lauding the Supreme Court's tough stand against Tamil Nadu's ruling DMK when it threatened to stage a bandh for speedy completion of the project, the VHP supremo hoped "the country's highest judicial body will make the necessary intervention in the matter".

Singhal also said VHP would go ahead with its mass awareness campaign on the Sethusamudram issue, "which would be of much greater magnitude than Ayodhya and eventually lead to a political atmosphere in which no outfit would dare to take Hindus for granted".

To all those who live in Canada

Faith Journal show will air the show on Hinduism with guest Dr. Subramanian Swamy on Saturday, Oct.13 & Saturdy, Oct.20. These shows air on CTS at 6pm Saturday evening (with a repeat on Monday at 1pm). Dr. Subramanian Swamy will be on both Saturday night shows consecutively. Please feel free to copy the show for yourself.