Sarthak Kanjilal
Port Blair, Feb 19: Two Court Commissioners on Saturday met a handful of people at Port Blair to understand the impact of Buffer Zone on 2 Lakh odd Islanders of North, Middle and South Andaman. Earlier on 17th February, both the Commissioners had visited Baratang Island and heard the grievances of some public and grass root leaders on this issue. The meeting which actually should have been organized in proper Middle Andaman area, failed to impress public here. At Port Blair the meeting was mainly high-jacked by politicians and only a few could present their points impressively infront of the Commissioners. Among others some started defining the word ‘primitive’ while some started telling the ‘history of ATR’. Many others simply presented their views to show the world that they are really concerned about Buffer Zone.
It seemed the topic of discussion was “Andaman Trunk Road’ and not ‘Buffer Zone’. This is what we can expect when such meetings are organized far away from the affected areas. Moreover, from beginning it appeared as if the meeting was just an eye wash. Many alleged that for this crucial meeting the Administration did not give proper publicity. A simple and short press release was issued at the last moment, perhaps to ensure that not many could reach Port Blair from Middle Andaman to raise the issue. One can easily guess what would be the outcome of the meeting.
Apropos your news item : Public Hearing by Court Commissioners on Buffer Zone failed to impress, I would like to add the public hearing on Buffer Zone, I would like to add that the “all important” meeting was started without any arrangement for Vedio/Audio recording. The court commissioners were heavily dependent on their hearing ability. What the public was speaking was not reaching the court commissioners properly since no speaker was provided in the stage area where the court commissioners were seated. Secondly representations submitted by the public was just being accepted without any acknowledgement or receipt. Thirdly the attendance during the public hearing was not taken/maintained.
The above procedural lapse add substance to the claim that the meeting was actually an eye wash.