The shocking story of a mother who was not allowed to breast feed her insect bitten daughter, by a so called ‘adoption agency’. With a lack of clear guidelines and rules on the functioning of adoption agencies, the process of duping poor illiterate people of their babies in Goa continues. Innocent mothers are made to sign documents that actually surrender their children for adoption while they are made to believe that the baby is just going to a home for care and shelter.
Preetu Nair investigates this big baby bloomer and looks into the various rules and loopholes that govern the adoption process When 17-year-old Nagamma Bedgini, a rag picker from Baina, decided to take her one month old baby to a Children’s Home in Goa, she had a dream of a better future. But she never ever bargained for the nightmare that followed.
“I was told that my child would be looked after well in the home and whenever desired I would visit my child and even stay with her. I signed the papers, though the contents were never read out to me in Kannada (the only language she is speaks and understands) neither did I ask them to read out the contents to me”, she informed. Why? “I never ever in my wildest dream thought that they would make me sign an affidavit stating that I am relinquishing my child and giving her up for adoption,“ she added.
Thankfully, when Nagamma came to know that her child was given for adoption without her real consent, NGO’s got into the act and mounted pressure after which the child was returned to her.
Probably, when Nagamma was persuaded by Celsa Antao, President, Desterro Eves Mahila Mandal to take her one-month-old baby to Preet Mandir, Aldona, on July 30, 2005, she never realised that her “madam” was actually asking to sign an affidavit in Marathi stating, “…I am giving in writing that I am handing over my child on 30 July, 2005 to Preet Mandir, Goa. The organisation can give my daughter in the country/outside the country and to any person from any caste, religion who can rehabilitate her…. If I don’t contact within two months then you have to take this as my legal affidavit in affirmation of which I am signing below.” This despite the fact that Preet Mandir, Goa is not a licensed and recognised agency for adoption, as yet.
When this reporter contacted Celsa Antao, she said, “I am being unnecessarily blamed. I don’t want to take anyone’s child or harass anyone. I just wanted to give
the child a home. When the mother came to me, she was distressed and eager to throw the child even in the dustbin. So I suggested that she should keep her child at Preet Mandir, to ensure that the child has a home.” But when questioned about the affidavit that Nagamma alleged she was coaxed to sign, stating she was giving away her child for adoption, Celsa took the easy way out, “I don’t know the technical side of it. At present I just know that it is a shelter home.”
In another case, Sazin (name changed), an unwed mother had dreams of bringing up her child. But little did the illiterate Sazin realise that her new born baby would be taken away from the hospital after she was coaxed to sign few documents. When she asked to return her child, she was told that the child was dead.
Recently, a destitute woman Maya (name changed) from Vasco was approached by few “volunteers”, who advised her that she should put her five-year-old and seven-year-old sons in Children’s home to ensure a better and safe tomorrow. Homeless and jobless with three children, she is confused and unable to make a decision.
There are many like Nagamma, Sazin and Maya– illiterate, poor and single mothers– who are being persuaded by “friendly volunteers” to give away their children for rehabilitation (read as adoption) either to a Children’s Home or directly to a family. And extreme poverty and the stigma of unwed motherhood often forces these young women to abandon their children at birth. “After the Baina demolition, majority of women are jobless and helpless. They have to struggle hard for survival and so fall easy victims to people who approach them with a promise of a better future for their child and some cash. We know for sure that some agencies and volunteers are exploiting the poverty of mothers staying in the slums and trying to lure the women to give away their kids,” said Arun Pandey, ARZ, Baina.
Investigations also revealed that some private clinics are also involved in shoddy deals, though they are not supposed to place children in adoption.
Legally, adopting a child in Goa is not easy. Lawyers and women activists opine that the prime reason for such illegal adoption rackets surviving is the fact that only Goans who come under Portuguese Civil Code are allowed to become legal guardians of a child.
Under the Civil Code, if a Goan Hindu wants to adopt, he can only do so only under the personal law, “Usages and Customs of Gentile Hindus”. Under this law he can adopt only a male child and that too from a family member. That is not all. Under the Civil Code even though the parents became guardians of the child, their names cannot be entered as “parents” on the birth certificate of the child.
Hence, to bypass these restrictions, some got into a seedy baby purchase racket that came to light in October 1998 when the sale of a baby in a private nursing home in South Goa was proven. It was found that those wanting to buy/adopt/sell used to take the babies of very poor parents directly from the hospital and get a birth certificate issued with the names of the “buyer” parents. This was also confirmed by Susan Furtado, lawyer and expert on adoption in Goa.
However, she admitted that such incidents have drastically gone down after the court of Justice F. I. Rebello of Bombay High Court, in a path-breaking judgement in 1999, stated that only after being a guardian for two years, could the parents be allowed to go for legal adoption.
Under Central Adoption Resource Agency (CARA) guidelines, respective state governments have to formulate laws for shelter homes to give away kids for adoption either under the Women and Children’s Institutions Act, 1956 or Orphanage or Charitable Institutions (Supervision & Control) Act, 1960. According to the Secretary, Women and Child Development, in Goa, the state government follows the Orphanage or Charitable Institutions (Supervision & Control) Act, 1960.
However, Albertina Almeida, lawyer and activist contradicts this. “Orphanage or Charitable Institutions (Supervision & Control) Act, 1960 is not yet implemented in Goa. When the drafting of the Goa Children's Bill was going on, AK Wasnik, ex- Director, Department of Women and Child, claimed ignorance of this law and categorically stated that no registration of homes was being done under this Act. Then a suggestion was made that since the contents in law is outdated, it may be more sensible to have a better law in place as regards the supervision and control of children's homes. That is how there was a specific section in the Goa Children's Act 2003 regarding Children's homes, but a section on adoption was not incorporated”, she argued.
Even the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 provides for adoption and is applicable to Goa. But the State government is required to frame rules to carry out the purposes of this Act, which includes giving the children from Apna Ghar in adoption. “Since Goa does not have any law on adoption as such, there was all the more need for State-specific rules to be framed under the Juvenile Justice Act, but even this has not yet happened”, added Albertina.
Sources in the Women and Child Department revealed that only two organisations – Caritas and Matruchaya-- in Goa are licensed by CARA as adoption agencies on the recommendation of the state government
However there is loophole even here in the light of the fact that the Goa government still hasn’t framed any adoption rules either under the Juvenile Justice Act or under the Orphanage or Charitable Institutions (Supervision & Control) Act, 1960.
In fact the Goa government wrote to Caritas a couple of months ago asking them under which law were they giving the kids for adoption. Caritas replied that they were doing so under CARA guidelines and was willing to comply with any guidelines or directives of the state government.
When contacted, Rajani Verenkar, Social Welfare Officer, Department of Women and Child said, “Children’s homes registered under section 6 of the Goa Children’s Act, 2003, is a place which can take in a child for shelter and rehabilitation. But they can’t give away kids for adoption. For this the home needs to be registered under CARA guidelines,” she opined.
Further, CARA guidelines clearly states that in case of surrender of a child by a biological parent(s), the surrender document should be executed on a stamp paper
in the presence of two responsible witnesses of whom one should be a responsible person who is not an employee of the organisation and documents should also be signed by a Notary or a Oath Commissioner. In case of a minor surrendering the child, at least one signature(s) of a parent (s), relative (s) of the minor should be obtained in the presence of the minor. However, these procedures are hardly followed in totality.
Investigations revealed that often facts and figures are distorted and residence address and age falsified to ensure that the child is taken away from the parent, all this in violation of Article 9 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which ensures that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents “unless such separation is necessary for the best interests of the child”. Besides, the state government has the right to cross check all surrender documents and copies of these are to be sent to the Adoption Cell/Department. “But Goa doesn’t have an Adoption Cell,” stated Susan Furtado.
“I was not allowed to breast feed my child, she was bitten by an insect”- Nagamma Bedgini Preet Mandir, a shelter home in Goa and a supposedly reputed adoption agency in Pune, claims that it’s actions are above board, but try telling it to a 17 year old mother whose child was taken away about to be given for adoption without her knowledge. Weekender asks Preet Mandir some questions and carries their replies in full without any editing Nagamma Bedgini, 17-year-old, a rag picker was asked to sign an affidavit stating, “…I am giving in writing that I am handing over my child on 30 July, 2005 to Preet Mandir, Goa. The organisation can give my daughter in the country/outside the country and to any person from any caste, religion who can rehabilitate her…. If I don’t contact within two months then you have to take this as my legal affidavit in affirmation of which I am signing below.”
The reason for discarding her child according to the affidavit: “I couldn’t accept the child because she is born out of an illicit relationship and so there is no social acceptance. As I want to get married in future and live a happily married life, I have expressed my thought to give up the child legally.”
What is interesting to note here is that Preet Mandir, Goa is not registered under CARA nor do they have license to give children for adoption. Then how can they take a child for adoption from a minor girl? GT investigations reveal that they have already taken seven kids in the shelter home to give for adoption and have also started registering people interested in adopting these kids. When this reporter visited the home in Aldona, which got a license under Goa Children’s Act on November 10, 2004 to run a shelter home for 100 children, a counsellor there said, “We are not giving kids for adoption as we are not registered under CARA guidelines”.
Later when Nagamma expressed her desire to meet her daughter and breast feed her there, the Preet Mandir authorities refused. “I started crying profusely when they said that I can’t even see my child. Finally, they took me inside and I was shocked to see my that some insect had bitten my child and she was bleeding,” revealed Nagamma. She insisted on taking back her child, but was told that she can’t take the child back.
That’s when she met people at ARZ and revealed her tale. ARZ in turn got in touch with CRG, Bailancho Saad and Sandarsh organisation and approached Preet Mandir. Under pressure from the NGO’s, Preet Mandir was forced to return Nagamma’s child on August 11, 2005.
Nagamma got back her daughter but everyone is not as lucky as her. We faxed few questions to Preet Mandir with regard to Nagamma’s case. YV Krishnamurthy, General Manager of Preet Mandir replied to the same.
Question: In the first affidavit, issued on June 16, 2005 you show Nagamma Bedgiri’s age as 18 and in the final affidavit on August 3, 2005 you state her age as
being 17. Why this discrepancy? And if she is a minor (as she herself claims to be) did you follow proper procedures before taking her child in your home?
Preet Mandir (PM) replies: The affidavit dated July 30 2005 (and not June 16, 2005 as stated under the query) is executed before the notary public by Nagamma Bed Giri, while she came to relinquish the child with our Goa unit. The subsequent affidavit dated August 3, 2005 deliberately states her age as seventeen years because she was deliberately asked to change her stand with regard to her age by five other NGOs whose representatives accompanied her along with her mother and demanded that the child be returned back.
This subsequent affidavit dated August 3, 2005 has been executed by Nagamma Bed Giri herself disclosing her age as seventeen years at the time of taking back the child. In view of these facts the variation in the age of Naggamma Bed Giri is entirely due to the executant and Preet Mandir is not accountable for the same. There was no reason for Preet Mandir to doubt the first Affidavit and the bonafide of the mother who came to relinquish the child.
Naggamma Bed Girl is educated upto 4th standard and she is not fluent in reading Marathi language accordingly, the version in Kannada language of Affidavit dated 3rd August 2005 is also accompanied with the affidavit dated 30th July, which she has duly been signed and then there was no reason to doubt the authority of the version as set out in the affidavit dated 30th July 2005.
BUT: Doesn’t a respectable trust like Preet Mandir, working for the rehabilitation of orphan as well as women in need, have to maintain proper records and verify the age claims properly. If they are right (as they claim to be) do they really need to budge under pressure from NGO’s and change Nagamma’s age?
Question: You claim that you had a certificate of
Directorate of Health Services (Cottage Hospital, Chicalim) which states Nagamma’s age as 18 years, 4 months. But the date on the certificate is August 3,
2005. But the date on which you took Nagamma’s baby, Goa is July 30, 2005 is prior to that date Did you make any effort to counter check her real age?
PM replies: Naggamma Bed Giri was suffering from some kind of disease, she was asked to obtain medical certificate for her medical fitness from competent doctor in order to maintain the medical history of the child. The certificate mentioned by you in the query is in that context The fact as stated under query again do not raise any doubt with regard to the age of Naggamma Bed Giri but the age stated in the Medical Certificate further confirms that she is a major, which is the first version dated July 30, 2005.
BUT: Nagamma claims that she had never produced this certificate nor was she ever taken to Cottage Hospital, Chicalim. So how can a certificate be produced without her knowledge. Besides, Naggamma Bed Giri is not suffering from any sort of disease. Yes, when she urged that she wanted to breast feed her child, she was taken for a blood test. Unfortunately, the poor soul didn’t even realise that they were doing an HIV/AIDS test, as she was not even given pre or post counselling.
Question: Preet Mandir is a registered home under Goa Children’s Act. You are not an adoption agency, then why did you ask Nagamma to sign papers stating “…I am giving in writing that I am handing over my child on 30 July, 2005 to Preet Mandir, Goa. The organisation can give my daughter in the country/outside the country and to any person from any caste, religion who can rehabilitate her…. If I don’t contact within two months then you have to take this as my legal affidavit in affirmation of which I am signing below.” (she knew nothing of what she was signing)
PM replies: As already stated under reply to the query No.1 above pending grant of certificate/ license under the Goa Children Act and the Rules framed there under, pursuant to our application dated 23rd October 2004 under Sec.6 of the said Act the declaration obtained form Naggamma Bed Giri is neither objectionable nor the same requires any further explanation in view of the fact that the interim license dated 10th November 2004 permitted us to start our activities as per prescribed laws. Hence the query-raised is already explained above in view of the reply to query No.1 and this query does not arise separately which is repeatedly in nature.
BUT: Secretary, Women and Child categorically stated that section (6) of Goa Children’s Act doesn’t deal with adoption. So how did Preet Mandir ask Nagamma to sign papers stating that the organisation can give my daughter in the country/outside the country and to any person from any caste, religion who can rehabilitate her.
Question: Our investigations reveal that Preet Mandir, Goa has already taken seven kids in the shelter home to give in for adoption and have also started registering people interested in adopting these kids. But can you really do this, especially since you are not a registered agency for adoption?
PM replies: Under your query Preet Mandir, Goa is described as shelter home, which is factually in-correct.
But: Rajani Verenkar, Social Welfare Officer, Department of Women and Child said, “Preet Mandir is only registered under section 6 of the Goa Children’s Act, 2003, which gives them permission to take in a child for shelter and rehabilitation. But they can’t take children for adoption under this Act”. However, Preet Mandir neither denies nor accepts that it has already taken seven kids in the shelter home to give in for adoption and have also started registering people interested in adopting these kids.
(This article first appeared in Gomantak Times, Panaji- The author can be contacted at preetunair@yahoo.com)
Saturday, December 15, 2007
No aid for HIV positive ‘outsiders’
No aid for HIV positive ‘outsiders’
Preetu Nair
preetu_nair@gomantaktimes.com
(This article appeared in GT Weekender, Panjim edition dated February 12,2006)
If you are a poor HIV/AIDS patient in Goa and do not have a ration card, it will be a matter of time before your family gets your death certificate. Harsh! but shockingly true. The Goa Medical College has been refusing to supply antiretroviral therapy (ART) drugs to non residents or those who have no proof of residence in Goa, in gross violation of NACO guidelines and the fundamental right to life, Preetu Nair finds out how your ration card becomes your life saving drug.
PANJIM: The outsider versus insider battle has been dragged even in to the Goa Medical College, where HIV patients without rations cards or proof of residence are refused ART life sustaining tablets. Those who can afford to it can buy it privately, but what about the hundreds of poor HIV patients who have a right to life, but are expected to show proof of living in Goa, to get that right. Check out these cases:
Positively speaking, we don’t treat ‘outsider’ HIV patients
Lata, an HIV positive is staying in Goa since last 30 years and had a ration card. But as bulldozers razed her house in Baina on June 14, 2004, she lost her ration card. As a result she has become an outsider in Goa where she was born and brought up. Recently, doctors at Goa Medical College (GMC) put her on Antiretroviral therapy (ART) but refused to give her the free medicine because she didn't have a ration card. She explained her problem but to no avail. Her problem is dual: on one side she is denied medicines because she doesn't have a ration card, while on the other hand government authorities refuse to give her a new ration card, despite several applications for the same.
The ART of refusing aid
As the CD4 count machine (a blood check-up for HIV/AIDS patient which has to be done every six months) was dysfunctional in GMC in October and November 2005, Shanti was advised to take her critically ill husband to a private hospital for CD4 count. The test revealed that his CD4 count was very low at 111 (normal is 200). The couple immediately rushed to GMC to start ART but was denied the tablet because they are from Karnataka and not from Goa. When they argued that ART has to be given for free to anyone who has HIV/AIDS irrespective of the state to which they belong, they were told by doctors at GMC that they have orders to give free ART tablets only to Goans. Another doctor added that as the CD4 count was done at private hospital, they would not receive any medicine from GMC for free.
Want a tablet, go back to your village
A 32-year-old man from Nepal, who came to Goa three years back to work as a labourer at the construction site, was detected to be HIV positive in 2005. He used to have high fever and felt weak. He went to GMC where he was tested and found to be HIV positive. He was regularly denied basic drugs. In January 2005 a CD4 count was done at GMC and he was counseled to start. But when he went to take his free ART tablets, he was asked to go back and take the medicine free from his village. Reason? He is not a resident of Goa. He cried and begged but in vain.
Some free lunches, but no free tablets
Reshma, 25, purchased ART tablets for one and half year when she was pregnant to avoid HIV/AIDS transmission from mother to child. This was two and half years back, when ART tablet was not given free of cost at GMC. However, she was forced to stop the medicine later as she couldn't afford it. However, when she got a CD4 count done recently it was found that her CD4 count had gone down and she was put on ART. But when she went to GMC for the medicine, she was denied tablets, as she couldn't produce proof of residence.
Believe it or not! From January 2006, if you don't have a ration card in Goa , you will be denied ART, which is considered to be an elixir of hope for HIV/AIDS patients; especially symptomatic patients with CD4 count less than 200 by GMC. ART drugs, while they do not cure HIV, can, if successfully administered, slow and even virtually stop the proliferation of HIV in the body. This reduces susceptibility to other diseases and allows for longer and better quality of life. Though available in the market, the drugs cost anywhere between Rs 2500 to 5000, thus making it unaffordable for the poor.
This is happening even as Chief Minister of Goa, Pratapsing Rane in his message in Goa State AIDS Control Society's book HIV/AIDS in Goa, Situation and Response 2005-06 has said, "My government is fully committed to prevent the spread of HIV and to provide care, support and treatment to people living with AIDS who access our health services and to mitigate the impact of theepidemic on communities".
It just doesn't matter that they live, work and love Goa. What matters is that they don't have a ration card or an electoral card! All this in complete violation of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which recognizes the right to life as a fundamental right and also imposes an obligation on the State to safeguard the right to life of every person: "The
Government hospitals run by the State and the medical officers employed therein are duty bound to extend medical assistance for preserving human life". Failure on the part of a Government hospital to provide timely medical treatment to a person in need of such treatment results in a violation of his right to life guaranteed under Article 21.
Dr JJ Dias, Project Director, Goa State AIDS Control Society (GSACS) admitted that many NGO's working with HIV/AIDS patients have complained that the patients are asked to show proof of residence in order to get free ART drugs. "But this is done to ensure adherence from the patient, so that they don't leave the treatment mid-way. Otherwise, I don't think there is any reason to refuse free ART drugs as we want more and more HIV/AIDS patients to take the medicine," he said.
But isn't the right to life and health a fundamental right guaranteed to every person living in India and is non-negotiable? "That is true. We can't deny the drug to anyone. But our focus is on adherence," added Dr Dias. Asha Vernekar, NGO Advisor, GSACS also admitted that she had received complaints about patients being denied ART drugs because they don't have a ration card. "We have also followed up with GMC," she added.
This is happening even as National AIDS Control Organization (NACO) envisions an India in which every person living with HIV is treated with dignity and has access to quality care. However, many like Reshma and Lata are denied free ART drugs because they are "outsiders". This despite the fact that NACO made the promise: "one nation one resolve: we shall defeat AIDS together" and for the same launched free ART drugs to all HIV/AIDS patients in state at GMC in March 2005, to provide universal access to HIV care.
"It is done to ensure that there is continuity of the medicine. What if they stay in Goa for few months and go to their native place and discontinue the medicine? By and large medicines are not denied to patients," added Dr Rajan Kunkolienkar, Medical Superintendent, Goa Medical College.
But can a patient be denied medicine on the presumption that he may stop taking the medicine in the near future? Well, no one seems to have the answer!
(Some names have been changed)
*****************************************************************
Words hurt more that the disease. Here is a sample of how insensitive medical professionals in government hospitals are when they deal with HIV positive patients.
“Leave your HIV positive husband”
A 25-year-old local boy was admitted in November in the General ward of GMC because his CD4 count was very low and he required immediate medical attention. In the presence of relatives he was given a bed, but in the night when the relatives left, he was vacated to a dark laboratory and made to sit there alone. Scared and worried, he called his relatives for help. They intervened and he was got medical attention but not before his wife was advised by the doctor to leave her HIV positive husband.
“You are HIV positive, we can’t give you a receipt for a CT scan”
When Shakeela took her 27-year-old husband, who is suffering from HIV/AIDS to GMC in December, they were asked to go to Hospicio Hospital, Margao. At Hospicio, she was charged Rs 200 for CT scan. She paid the money but didn't get a receipt. When the couple insisted, the staff insulted them saying they are HIV positive.
“Hey get out of the line, someone may get the disease”
Leena and Manoj had left home in Maharashtra and settled in Goa, far away from friends and relative, because they were regularly ridiculed by everyone for
being HIV positive. But Leena got a greater shock when she went to GMC and was ridiculed by a nurse, who said, "Hey, you are HIV positive, just get out of the
line or someone may just get the disease." She is yet to overcome the embarrassment and agony she experienced then.
This is happening even when it is openly agreed that maintenance of confidentiality of an individual's health status is one of the cornerstones of public health. Not only does the principle rest on human rights norms of autonomy and respect for privacy, but it has also been viewed as crucial to encouraging those most at risk to come forward for HIV testing, counseling and clinical attention.
Even NACO states, "All Government hospitals have been instructed to admit HIV/AIDS cases without any discrimination. They have to be managed in the general wards of the hospitals along with other patients except cases having sputum positive (open pulmonary tuberculosis) and when the patient's immunity is completely diminished. This is required to protect him from other infections and thus he needs to be managed in a separate room. Any special marking or board near the beds for HIV positive patients is discouraged".
Only noise, but no CD machines
CD4/CD8 count facility was established at GMC in July 2001. On an average 6 to 8 patients are screened everyday for CD4/CD8 blood count facility to verify and assess the immune status of a HIV patient. In 2005 upto September at least 449 people went for CD4/CD8 count. However, in October and November, the CD4 machine was not working and due to this few patients who could shell out Rs 1000 plus went to private hospital, while many couldn't do the test.
Dr Dias admitted that there was a problem sometime back. "The problem is that at the moment we have just one CD4 machine and it does give trouble. At the moment we have three option: have another CD4 machine, outsource the tests or purchase CD4/CD8 kits so that it can be used as substitute," added Dr Dias.
Preetu Nair
preetu_nair@gomantaktimes.com
(This article appeared in GT Weekender, Panjim edition dated February 12,2006)
If you are a poor HIV/AIDS patient in Goa and do not have a ration card, it will be a matter of time before your family gets your death certificate. Harsh! but shockingly true. The Goa Medical College has been refusing to supply antiretroviral therapy (ART) drugs to non residents or those who have no proof of residence in Goa, in gross violation of NACO guidelines and the fundamental right to life, Preetu Nair finds out how your ration card becomes your life saving drug.
PANJIM: The outsider versus insider battle has been dragged even in to the Goa Medical College, where HIV patients without rations cards or proof of residence are refused ART life sustaining tablets. Those who can afford to it can buy it privately, but what about the hundreds of poor HIV patients who have a right to life, but are expected to show proof of living in Goa, to get that right. Check out these cases:
Positively speaking, we don’t treat ‘outsider’ HIV patients
Lata, an HIV positive is staying in Goa since last 30 years and had a ration card. But as bulldozers razed her house in Baina on June 14, 2004, she lost her ration card. As a result she has become an outsider in Goa where she was born and brought up. Recently, doctors at Goa Medical College (GMC) put her on Antiretroviral therapy (ART) but refused to give her the free medicine because she didn't have a ration card. She explained her problem but to no avail. Her problem is dual: on one side she is denied medicines because she doesn't have a ration card, while on the other hand government authorities refuse to give her a new ration card, despite several applications for the same.
The ART of refusing aid
As the CD4 count machine (a blood check-up for HIV/AIDS patient which has to be done every six months) was dysfunctional in GMC in October and November 2005, Shanti was advised to take her critically ill husband to a private hospital for CD4 count. The test revealed that his CD4 count was very low at 111 (normal is 200). The couple immediately rushed to GMC to start ART but was denied the tablet because they are from Karnataka and not from Goa. When they argued that ART has to be given for free to anyone who has HIV/AIDS irrespective of the state to which they belong, they were told by doctors at GMC that they have orders to give free ART tablets only to Goans. Another doctor added that as the CD4 count was done at private hospital, they would not receive any medicine from GMC for free.
Want a tablet, go back to your village
A 32-year-old man from Nepal, who came to Goa three years back to work as a labourer at the construction site, was detected to be HIV positive in 2005. He used to have high fever and felt weak. He went to GMC where he was tested and found to be HIV positive. He was regularly denied basic drugs. In January 2005 a CD4 count was done at GMC and he was counseled to start. But when he went to take his free ART tablets, he was asked to go back and take the medicine free from his village. Reason? He is not a resident of Goa. He cried and begged but in vain.
Some free lunches, but no free tablets
Reshma, 25, purchased ART tablets for one and half year when she was pregnant to avoid HIV/AIDS transmission from mother to child. This was two and half years back, when ART tablet was not given free of cost at GMC. However, she was forced to stop the medicine later as she couldn't afford it. However, when she got a CD4 count done recently it was found that her CD4 count had gone down and she was put on ART. But when she went to GMC for the medicine, she was denied tablets, as she couldn't produce proof of residence.
Believe it or not! From January 2006, if you don't have a ration card in Goa , you will be denied ART, which is considered to be an elixir of hope for HIV/AIDS patients; especially symptomatic patients with CD4 count less than 200 by GMC. ART drugs, while they do not cure HIV, can, if successfully administered, slow and even virtually stop the proliferation of HIV in the body. This reduces susceptibility to other diseases and allows for longer and better quality of life. Though available in the market, the drugs cost anywhere between Rs 2500 to 5000, thus making it unaffordable for the poor.
This is happening even as Chief Minister of Goa, Pratapsing Rane in his message in Goa State AIDS Control Society's book HIV/AIDS in Goa, Situation and Response 2005-06 has said, "My government is fully committed to prevent the spread of HIV and to provide care, support and treatment to people living with AIDS who access our health services and to mitigate the impact of theepidemic on communities".
It just doesn't matter that they live, work and love Goa. What matters is that they don't have a ration card or an electoral card! All this in complete violation of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which recognizes the right to life as a fundamental right and also imposes an obligation on the State to safeguard the right to life of every person: "The
Government hospitals run by the State and the medical officers employed therein are duty bound to extend medical assistance for preserving human life". Failure on the part of a Government hospital to provide timely medical treatment to a person in need of such treatment results in a violation of his right to life guaranteed under Article 21.
Dr JJ Dias, Project Director, Goa State AIDS Control Society (GSACS) admitted that many NGO's working with HIV/AIDS patients have complained that the patients are asked to show proof of residence in order to get free ART drugs. "But this is done to ensure adherence from the patient, so that they don't leave the treatment mid-way. Otherwise, I don't think there is any reason to refuse free ART drugs as we want more and more HIV/AIDS patients to take the medicine," he said.
But isn't the right to life and health a fundamental right guaranteed to every person living in India and is non-negotiable? "That is true. We can't deny the drug to anyone. But our focus is on adherence," added Dr Dias. Asha Vernekar, NGO Advisor, GSACS also admitted that she had received complaints about patients being denied ART drugs because they don't have a ration card. "We have also followed up with GMC," she added.
This is happening even as National AIDS Control Organization (NACO) envisions an India in which every person living with HIV is treated with dignity and has access to quality care. However, many like Reshma and Lata are denied free ART drugs because they are "outsiders". This despite the fact that NACO made the promise: "one nation one resolve: we shall defeat AIDS together" and for the same launched free ART drugs to all HIV/AIDS patients in state at GMC in March 2005, to provide universal access to HIV care.
"It is done to ensure that there is continuity of the medicine. What if they stay in Goa for few months and go to their native place and discontinue the medicine? By and large medicines are not denied to patients," added Dr Rajan Kunkolienkar, Medical Superintendent, Goa Medical College.
But can a patient be denied medicine on the presumption that he may stop taking the medicine in the near future? Well, no one seems to have the answer!
(Some names have been changed)
*****************************************************************
Words hurt more that the disease. Here is a sample of how insensitive medical professionals in government hospitals are when they deal with HIV positive patients.
“Leave your HIV positive husband”
A 25-year-old local boy was admitted in November in the General ward of GMC because his CD4 count was very low and he required immediate medical attention. In the presence of relatives he was given a bed, but in the night when the relatives left, he was vacated to a dark laboratory and made to sit there alone. Scared and worried, he called his relatives for help. They intervened and he was got medical attention but not before his wife was advised by the doctor to leave her HIV positive husband.
“You are HIV positive, we can’t give you a receipt for a CT scan”
When Shakeela took her 27-year-old husband, who is suffering from HIV/AIDS to GMC in December, they were asked to go to Hospicio Hospital, Margao. At Hospicio, she was charged Rs 200 for CT scan. She paid the money but didn't get a receipt. When the couple insisted, the staff insulted them saying they are HIV positive.
“Hey get out of the line, someone may get the disease”
Leena and Manoj had left home in Maharashtra and settled in Goa, far away from friends and relative, because they were regularly ridiculed by everyone for
being HIV positive. But Leena got a greater shock when she went to GMC and was ridiculed by a nurse, who said, "Hey, you are HIV positive, just get out of the
line or someone may just get the disease." She is yet to overcome the embarrassment and agony she experienced then.
This is happening even when it is openly agreed that maintenance of confidentiality of an individual's health status is one of the cornerstones of public health. Not only does the principle rest on human rights norms of autonomy and respect for privacy, but it has also been viewed as crucial to encouraging those most at risk to come forward for HIV testing, counseling and clinical attention.
Even NACO states, "All Government hospitals have been instructed to admit HIV/AIDS cases without any discrimination. They have to be managed in the general wards of the hospitals along with other patients except cases having sputum positive (open pulmonary tuberculosis) and when the patient's immunity is completely diminished. This is required to protect him from other infections and thus he needs to be managed in a separate room. Any special marking or board near the beds for HIV positive patients is discouraged".
Only noise, but no CD machines
CD4/CD8 count facility was established at GMC in July 2001. On an average 6 to 8 patients are screened everyday for CD4/CD8 blood count facility to verify and assess the immune status of a HIV patient. In 2005 upto September at least 449 people went for CD4/CD8 count. However, in October and November, the CD4 machine was not working and due to this few patients who could shell out Rs 1000 plus went to private hospital, while many couldn't do the test.
Dr Dias admitted that there was a problem sometime back. "The problem is that at the moment we have just one CD4 machine and it does give trouble. At the moment we have three option: have another CD4 machine, outsource the tests or purchase CD4/CD8 kits so that it can be used as substitute," added Dr Dias.
Stuck in traffic
Stuck in traffic
Peter de Souza & Preetu Nair
(The article appeared in GT Weekender, Panjim edition, January 29, 2006)
An National Human Rights Commission report conducted by the Institute of Social Sciences on trafficking of women and children in India 2002-2003", reveals that Goa has the highest levels of trafficking of women and children compared to other states. Peter De Souza and Preetu Nair goes behind the statistics and zero's in on the men and women who add to the traffic on Goa's sex highway. And it's piling up. Tragically there are no rules or committed policemen to even control, far less eradicate this jam that is ruining our land
Calangute/ Colva: Welcome to the kingdom. This is not quite the Alice in Wonderland and this story does not go through the rabbit hole but it sure does go through a hell hole, and there is no mad hatter's tea party but surely a crazy sex party. This is not a fairy tale for children Coz there are no fairies or fairy Godmothers, just trafficking women who pose as mothers.
And unlike Alice in Wonderland, where a rabbit leads Alice to the fascinating adventure, in Goa, you have characters like "The Jackal", "Sex" and "Hoyo" who perform a medley of vice and torture, to take Goa to the top of charts in India's sex traffic map.
Trafficking has acquired grave dimensions in the state after Baina demolition (Red light area in Vasco demolished in 2004). The trafficker is no more a gharwali or brothel keeper and there is more sophistication, complexity and consolidation of trafficking networks. Further, sex tourism has generated a high demand for virgin girls and young children.
Many tourists now demand young children, in view of the popular myth that sex with virgins can cure them of HIV and other serious diseases. Besides, it is reliably learnt that the pain that the children undergo during intercourse, gives the abuser the thrill. Sadly enough, though sex tourism and related trafficking of women and children is increasing, what is shocking is the response of the concerned agencies, which has adopted a lackadaisical attitude and shows no will to combat sex tourism.
Our investigations revealed that organised crime of trafficking revolves around two master traffickers: Carlos, the Jackal in North Goa and Raju in South Goa. At the moment they are arch manipulators, chief profiteers, master criminals and the kingpin of the entire trafficking operations in the state. But they manage and modulate all activities and transactions in such a way that they remain unnoticed. Further, GT investigations reveal that to ensure that the trade goes on unhindered, they pay the police and politicians not only in cash but also in kind, which often includes allowing 'free sex' with the trafficked victims.
Meet the merchants of the human trade in Goa:
Carlos, the Jackal, who hails from Pomburpa had escaped from judicial local-up at Margao somewhere in August. He has 150 cases of extortion and robbery at almost all police stations in Goa. And it is reliably learnt that he strengthened his flesh trade operations while in jail.
At the moment he is living and operating from a huge rented house in Ucassaim, which surrounded by thick forest. His modus operandi is simple: He purchases Lamani, Rajasthani children, children of rag pickers and even from as far as Orissa, Bihar and Tamil Nadu between the ages of eight and twelve for Rs 30,000 or even less through unscrupulous agents whom he had met in jail. These children are trafficked to Goa by a woman, who poses to be the child's mother, to escape the clutches of the law. Once in Goa, the children are handed over to Carlos's accomplice, a woman nicknamed Hoyo from Anjuna. Hoyo, a sex worker, supplies these kids to foreigners from Anjuna, Calangute and Sinquerim. These children are sent as a helping hand along with a woman (who claims to be their mother), who is also incidentally in the flesh trade, as a maid. The charge per child ranges from $ 1000 to 2000 a month. Younger the child, higher the price. But the child only gets mere Rs 2000 to 3000 for his services, while the fictitious mother gets Rs 5,000. Carlos and his gang members share the rest.
Our investigations reveal that in Calangute and Sinquerim alone there are at least forty rich and elderly foreigners who openly live with children and click pornographic pictures. Though Carlos is the most wanted criminal in Goa, he moves around freely on a Yamaha bikes, without any fear of the police or child activists.
Raju's operations are almost similar to Carlos. But his earning per child is almost double than that of Carlos. Just like Carlos, Raju also purchases children between the age of eight and eleven from Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh for Rs 30,000 or less and trafficks them to Goa through a fictitious mother. His main accomplice is not a woman; but a man, a shack owner in Colva nicknamed Sex. Sex's job is to provide bikes and young children to foreigners and he carries on with his trade without any hindrance, as his godfather is a top and controversial politician from South Goa.
While Raju hails from Tamil Nadu and stays in Colva- Betalbatim and looks after a foreigner's bungalow, Sex hails from Potwado, Colva. They also have an Italian partner, who runs a prominent Italian restaurant near the fish market in South, and has connection with rich foreign tourists along the entire beach belt in the South. Sex takes children in a large vehicle with tinted glasses to the Italian, who in turn supplies them to rich foreigners, including Europeans and Arabs.
When contacted Santosh Vaidya, Secretary, Women and Child said that he was not aware of these illegal operators. But he admitted that trafficking is a really a matter of concern. "That's why we had brought the Goa Children's Act which clearly defines trafficking. After the Act was introduced, there has been a check on trafficking. But also a co-ordinated action is required from everyone," admitted Vaidya.
"We have not heard of them, not at least by these names. Illegal trafficking of girls and children for the flesh trade is not high in Goa. Delhi is way ahead of Goa. I talk about this from experience," added DIG Ujjwal Mishra.
Goa serves as a source, transit and destination where thousands of young girls and children are exploited day in and day out. Often, the actors in the trafficking network collaborate and protect each other. Just check out the types of prostitution phenomenon in Goa and the traffickers:
TYPES OF PROSTITUTION PHENOMENON IN GOA
Brothel based prostitution: Baina & Margao
Street based prostitution: Vasco, Margao, Colva, Panjim, Calangute, Anjuna
Hotel based prostitution: All over Goa
Vehicle based prostitution: North & South Goa tourist belt
Traffickers
Brothel keepers previously operating in Baina
Few pilots ( Two wheeler taxi) and taxi owners
Few hotels and lodges in the tourist areas and on the highways - Karwar, Molem & Sawantwadi
It is generally believed that trafficking is driven by a demand for women's and children's bodies in the sex industry, fuelled by a supply of women and children denied equal rights and opportunities. But trafficking is not just limited to flesh trade. Check out the trafficking in its manifestations:
1. Trafficking for sex-based exploitation, i.e. for brothel based and non-brothel based commercial sexual exploitation, pornography, paedophilia, sex tourism, mail-order bride system, disguised sexual abuse in the garb of massage parlours, beauty parlours, bartending, friendship clubs.
2. Trafficking for non-sex-based exploitation, including a vast area of servitude, slavery and exploitation, either as bonded or forced labour or using them as drug peddlers, for begging, giving in adoption, trading in human organs, trafficking for false marriages and other similar exploitative practices.
The study, "A report on trafficking of women and children in India 2002-2003", reveals that Goa has the highest levels of trafficking of women and children compared to other states. However, though inter-state trafficking is high, the intra-state trafficking is a minimal with only 0.6 percentage, just as in the case of Delhi.
The study commissioned by National Human Rights Commission was carried out with the support of UNIFEM and conducted by the Institute of Social Sciences (ISS) also confirms that trafficking, though not reported from many places, is happening almost everywhere.
Based on primary data collected through interviews of 4006 persons in 13 states and Union Territories, including victims, exploiters and perpetrators, the study encompasses major areas of trafficking. On one hand, the study confirmed that majority of trafficked persons are girl children and on the other hand it negated certain popular myths that the clientele who visit the brothels or abuse trafficked girls are men who live away from their families and, therefore, look for options to satisfy their sexual urges.
"The exploitation of women and children takes place not only before trafficking, but also during trafficking and after trafficking. The rights of the trafficked persons are violated with impunity. They are subjected to physical and emotional harm from sexual assault to economic deprivation, and violation of human dignity," the study reveals.
What is shocking is that even the post-trafficking scenario finds the victim at the end of the tunnel, with almost no hope of survival. The victim is subjected to different types of conceivable and inconceivable acts of perversion and exploitation. Further, the law enforcement, in most places, violates the rights of victims as the common practice is to arrest, chargesheet, prosecute and convict the trafficked victims, the study confirmed.
"Even in Goa the target of action is not the traffickers but the trafficked victims. Statistics reveal that most of the offences booked under ITPA relates to sec 7 and 8 are against trafficked victims and not against the traffickers. Trafficked victims are arrested but no customer, pimp, transport agent, lodge owner, hotel owner, taxi owner, etc are arrested, though the law is very clear that those who commercialize prostitution and those who benefit from the earning from prostitution are committing an offence", said Arun Pandey, ARZ, who conducted the study for ISS in Goa.
NAME: CARLOS, THE 'JACKAL'
Hails from : Pomburpa
Now lives in : Huge Rented House in Ucassaim,
Violation: 15O Cases of Extortion and Robbery
Traffic Operation: buys children from Rajasthan, Orissa and Bihar for Rs 30,000 each who are trafficked to Goa by a woman posing as their mother
Preferred vehicle: Yamaha bike
Traffic partner: Hoyo, a woman
Name : HOYO
Lives in: Anjuna
Occupation: Sex worker cum Trafficker
Traffic operation: Supplies Children to foreigners from Anjuna, Calangute and Sinquerim. Children are sent with a woman (who claims to be their mother).
Traffic 'toll tax' to be paid by customers: $ 1000 to 2000 a month. Child gets a mere Rs 2000 and the "mother", Rs 5000
NAME: RAJU
Hails from: Tamil Nadu
Now lives in: Colva-Betalbatim
Traffic operation: Buys children between the age of eight and eleven from Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh for Rs 30,000 or less and traffick's them to Goa through a fictitious mother
Traffic partner: A Shack owner called 'sex'. (Yes you read it right)
NAME: SEX
Hails from: Potwado, Colva
Traffic operation: Takes children in a large vehicle with tinted glasses to an Italian, who in turn supplies them to rich foreigners, including Europeans and Arabs.
Traffic partner: THE ITALIAN who runs a prominent Italian restaurant near a fish market in South Goa
Peter de Souza & Preetu Nair
(The article appeared in GT Weekender, Panjim edition, January 29, 2006)
An National Human Rights Commission report conducted by the Institute of Social Sciences on trafficking of women and children in India 2002-2003", reveals that Goa has the highest levels of trafficking of women and children compared to other states. Peter De Souza and Preetu Nair goes behind the statistics and zero's in on the men and women who add to the traffic on Goa's sex highway. And it's piling up. Tragically there are no rules or committed policemen to even control, far less eradicate this jam that is ruining our land
Calangute/ Colva: Welcome to the kingdom. This is not quite the Alice in Wonderland and this story does not go through the rabbit hole but it sure does go through a hell hole, and there is no mad hatter's tea party but surely a crazy sex party. This is not a fairy tale for children Coz there are no fairies or fairy Godmothers, just trafficking women who pose as mothers.
And unlike Alice in Wonderland, where a rabbit leads Alice to the fascinating adventure, in Goa, you have characters like "The Jackal", "Sex" and "Hoyo" who perform a medley of vice and torture, to take Goa to the top of charts in India's sex traffic map.
Trafficking has acquired grave dimensions in the state after Baina demolition (Red light area in Vasco demolished in 2004). The trafficker is no more a gharwali or brothel keeper and there is more sophistication, complexity and consolidation of trafficking networks. Further, sex tourism has generated a high demand for virgin girls and young children.
Many tourists now demand young children, in view of the popular myth that sex with virgins can cure them of HIV and other serious diseases. Besides, it is reliably learnt that the pain that the children undergo during intercourse, gives the abuser the thrill. Sadly enough, though sex tourism and related trafficking of women and children is increasing, what is shocking is the response of the concerned agencies, which has adopted a lackadaisical attitude and shows no will to combat sex tourism.
Our investigations revealed that organised crime of trafficking revolves around two master traffickers: Carlos, the Jackal in North Goa and Raju in South Goa. At the moment they are arch manipulators, chief profiteers, master criminals and the kingpin of the entire trafficking operations in the state. But they manage and modulate all activities and transactions in such a way that they remain unnoticed. Further, GT investigations reveal that to ensure that the trade goes on unhindered, they pay the police and politicians not only in cash but also in kind, which often includes allowing 'free sex' with the trafficked victims.
Meet the merchants of the human trade in Goa:
Carlos, the Jackal, who hails from Pomburpa had escaped from judicial local-up at Margao somewhere in August. He has 150 cases of extortion and robbery at almost all police stations in Goa. And it is reliably learnt that he strengthened his flesh trade operations while in jail.
At the moment he is living and operating from a huge rented house in Ucassaim, which surrounded by thick forest. His modus operandi is simple: He purchases Lamani, Rajasthani children, children of rag pickers and even from as far as Orissa, Bihar and Tamil Nadu between the ages of eight and twelve for Rs 30,000 or even less through unscrupulous agents whom he had met in jail. These children are trafficked to Goa by a woman, who poses to be the child's mother, to escape the clutches of the law. Once in Goa, the children are handed over to Carlos's accomplice, a woman nicknamed Hoyo from Anjuna. Hoyo, a sex worker, supplies these kids to foreigners from Anjuna, Calangute and Sinquerim. These children are sent as a helping hand along with a woman (who claims to be their mother), who is also incidentally in the flesh trade, as a maid. The charge per child ranges from $ 1000 to 2000 a month. Younger the child, higher the price. But the child only gets mere Rs 2000 to 3000 for his services, while the fictitious mother gets Rs 5,000. Carlos and his gang members share the rest.
Our investigations reveal that in Calangute and Sinquerim alone there are at least forty rich and elderly foreigners who openly live with children and click pornographic pictures. Though Carlos is the most wanted criminal in Goa, he moves around freely on a Yamaha bikes, without any fear of the police or child activists.
Raju's operations are almost similar to Carlos. But his earning per child is almost double than that of Carlos. Just like Carlos, Raju also purchases children between the age of eight and eleven from Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh for Rs 30,000 or less and trafficks them to Goa through a fictitious mother. His main accomplice is not a woman; but a man, a shack owner in Colva nicknamed Sex. Sex's job is to provide bikes and young children to foreigners and he carries on with his trade without any hindrance, as his godfather is a top and controversial politician from South Goa.
While Raju hails from Tamil Nadu and stays in Colva- Betalbatim and looks after a foreigner's bungalow, Sex hails from Potwado, Colva. They also have an Italian partner, who runs a prominent Italian restaurant near the fish market in South, and has connection with rich foreign tourists along the entire beach belt in the South. Sex takes children in a large vehicle with tinted glasses to the Italian, who in turn supplies them to rich foreigners, including Europeans and Arabs.
When contacted Santosh Vaidya, Secretary, Women and Child said that he was not aware of these illegal operators. But he admitted that trafficking is a really a matter of concern. "That's why we had brought the Goa Children's Act which clearly defines trafficking. After the Act was introduced, there has been a check on trafficking. But also a co-ordinated action is required from everyone," admitted Vaidya.
"We have not heard of them, not at least by these names. Illegal trafficking of girls and children for the flesh trade is not high in Goa. Delhi is way ahead of Goa. I talk about this from experience," added DIG Ujjwal Mishra.
Goa serves as a source, transit and destination where thousands of young girls and children are exploited day in and day out. Often, the actors in the trafficking network collaborate and protect each other. Just check out the types of prostitution phenomenon in Goa and the traffickers:
TYPES OF PROSTITUTION PHENOMENON IN GOA
Brothel based prostitution: Baina & Margao
Street based prostitution: Vasco, Margao, Colva, Panjim, Calangute, Anjuna
Hotel based prostitution: All over Goa
Vehicle based prostitution: North & South Goa tourist belt
Traffickers
Brothel keepers previously operating in Baina
Few pilots ( Two wheeler taxi) and taxi owners
Few hotels and lodges in the tourist areas and on the highways - Karwar, Molem & Sawantwadi
It is generally believed that trafficking is driven by a demand for women's and children's bodies in the sex industry, fuelled by a supply of women and children denied equal rights and opportunities. But trafficking is not just limited to flesh trade. Check out the trafficking in its manifestations:
1. Trafficking for sex-based exploitation, i.e. for brothel based and non-brothel based commercial sexual exploitation, pornography, paedophilia, sex tourism, mail-order bride system, disguised sexual abuse in the garb of massage parlours, beauty parlours, bartending, friendship clubs.
2. Trafficking for non-sex-based exploitation, including a vast area of servitude, slavery and exploitation, either as bonded or forced labour or using them as drug peddlers, for begging, giving in adoption, trading in human organs, trafficking for false marriages and other similar exploitative practices.
The study, "A report on trafficking of women and children in India 2002-2003", reveals that Goa has the highest levels of trafficking of women and children compared to other states. However, though inter-state trafficking is high, the intra-state trafficking is a minimal with only 0.6 percentage, just as in the case of Delhi.
The study commissioned by National Human Rights Commission was carried out with the support of UNIFEM and conducted by the Institute of Social Sciences (ISS) also confirms that trafficking, though not reported from many places, is happening almost everywhere.
Based on primary data collected through interviews of 4006 persons in 13 states and Union Territories, including victims, exploiters and perpetrators, the study encompasses major areas of trafficking. On one hand, the study confirmed that majority of trafficked persons are girl children and on the other hand it negated certain popular myths that the clientele who visit the brothels or abuse trafficked girls are men who live away from their families and, therefore, look for options to satisfy their sexual urges.
"The exploitation of women and children takes place not only before trafficking, but also during trafficking and after trafficking. The rights of the trafficked persons are violated with impunity. They are subjected to physical and emotional harm from sexual assault to economic deprivation, and violation of human dignity," the study reveals.
What is shocking is that even the post-trafficking scenario finds the victim at the end of the tunnel, with almost no hope of survival. The victim is subjected to different types of conceivable and inconceivable acts of perversion and exploitation. Further, the law enforcement, in most places, violates the rights of victims as the common practice is to arrest, chargesheet, prosecute and convict the trafficked victims, the study confirmed.
"Even in Goa the target of action is not the traffickers but the trafficked victims. Statistics reveal that most of the offences booked under ITPA relates to sec 7 and 8 are against trafficked victims and not against the traffickers. Trafficked victims are arrested but no customer, pimp, transport agent, lodge owner, hotel owner, taxi owner, etc are arrested, though the law is very clear that those who commercialize prostitution and those who benefit from the earning from prostitution are committing an offence", said Arun Pandey, ARZ, who conducted the study for ISS in Goa.
NAME: CARLOS, THE 'JACKAL'
Hails from : Pomburpa
Now lives in : Huge Rented House in Ucassaim,
Violation: 15O Cases of Extortion and Robbery
Traffic Operation: buys children from Rajasthan, Orissa and Bihar for Rs 30,000 each who are trafficked to Goa by a woman posing as their mother
Preferred vehicle: Yamaha bike
Traffic partner: Hoyo, a woman
Name : HOYO
Lives in: Anjuna
Occupation: Sex worker cum Trafficker
Traffic operation: Supplies Children to foreigners from Anjuna, Calangute and Sinquerim. Children are sent with a woman (who claims to be their mother).
Traffic 'toll tax' to be paid by customers: $ 1000 to 2000 a month. Child gets a mere Rs 2000 and the "mother", Rs 5000
NAME: RAJU
Hails from: Tamil Nadu
Now lives in: Colva-Betalbatim
Traffic operation: Buys children between the age of eight and eleven from Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh for Rs 30,000 or less and traffick's them to Goa through a fictitious mother
Traffic partner: A Shack owner called 'sex'. (Yes you read it right)
NAME: SEX
Hails from: Potwado, Colva
Traffic operation: Takes children in a large vehicle with tinted glasses to an Italian, who in turn supplies them to rich foreigners, including Europeans and Arabs.
Traffic partner: THE ITALIAN who runs a prominent Italian restaurant near a fish market in South Goa
Aldeia de Goa
PANJIM: In what could be termed as a major embarrassment to the government, the High Court has directed the Chief Secretary JP Singh to remain present in the Court today, if Town and Country Planning department fails to produce the file containing details of a construction project at Bambolim.
The Court has asked TCP department to produce the file containing Town and Country Planning approvals, plans and No Objection certificates in respect of the construction project coming up at the site of Goa Real Estate and Construction Ltd (GRECL, popularly known as Aldeia de Goa) today in the Court. Further, the Sarpanch and Secretary of Curca-Bambolim panchayat has to remain present in the Court today with all necessary documents.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto passed this order while hearing an affidavit by Patricia Pinto, General Secretary, People's Movement for Civic Action (PMCA), who is one of the petitioner in a petition against GRECL.
The counsel for the petitioner, Norma Alvares, submitted that the Pinto had applied on August 21, 2007 to the Assistant Public Information Officer of the TCP department under the Right to Information Act for inspection of the file containing TCP approvals, plans and No Objection certificates in respect of the construction project coming up at the site in Bambolim, which is the subject matter of a petition filed by PMCA and Goa Foundation against GRECL.
However, Pinto was denied access to the information by a letter dated September 18, 2004, (much after the statutory period under the RTI Act) and was informed that the file could not be traced.
Even the effort to get some crucial documents from the Secretary of village panchayat of Curca/ Bambolim under RTI Act didn't materialize. On October 16, 2007, under RTI the petitioner requested for crucial documents listed at I-v so that the file that was told to be not traceable since it was send to the Block Development Officer's office in 2003, could be traced. However, on November 14, 2007, she received a formal letter from the Panchayat stating that neither the memorandum for the BDO's office nor the Panchayat letter sending the file to the BDO's office can be traced.
Not impressed with these submissions the Court observed that it is not possible for the files pertaining to a particular project to disappear overnight and asked the concerned authorities to produce the files today.
The Court has asked TCP department to produce the file containing Town and Country Planning approvals, plans and No Objection certificates in respect of the construction project coming up at the site of Goa Real Estate and Construction Ltd (GRECL, popularly known as Aldeia de Goa) today in the Court. Further, the Sarpanch and Secretary of Curca-Bambolim panchayat has to remain present in the Court today with all necessary documents.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto passed this order while hearing an affidavit by Patricia Pinto, General Secretary, People's Movement for Civic Action (PMCA), who is one of the petitioner in a petition against GRECL.
The counsel for the petitioner, Norma Alvares, submitted that the Pinto had applied on August 21, 2007 to the Assistant Public Information Officer of the TCP department under the Right to Information Act for inspection of the file containing TCP approvals, plans and No Objection certificates in respect of the construction project coming up at the site in Bambolim, which is the subject matter of a petition filed by PMCA and Goa Foundation against GRECL.
However, Pinto was denied access to the information by a letter dated September 18, 2004, (much after the statutory period under the RTI Act) and was informed that the file could not be traced.
Even the effort to get some crucial documents from the Secretary of village panchayat of Curca/ Bambolim under RTI Act didn't materialize. On October 16, 2007, under RTI the petitioner requested for crucial documents listed at I-v so that the file that was told to be not traceable since it was send to the Block Development Officer's office in 2003, could be traced. However, on November 14, 2007, she received a formal letter from the Panchayat stating that neither the memorandum for the BDO's office nor the Panchayat letter sending the file to the BDO's office can be traced.
Not impressed with these submissions the Court observed that it is not possible for the files pertaining to a particular project to disappear overnight and asked the concerned authorities to produce the files today.
Aldeia de Goa:Files go missing
PANJIM: Calling the disappearance of the documents and files containing details of a construction project at Bambolim, too serious a matter "not to be taken note of" by the High Court, the Court has now asked the Curca- Bambolim village panchayat to file a complaint with the Agacaim police about the missing files.
Acting on the Court's oral instructions on Thursday, the Town and Country department had already lodged a complaint about the missing files and documents in the Panjim police station and issued show cause notice to the Khalasi (read sweeper) of Tiswadi taluka branch office.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto has asked the Police Inspector of Panjim and Agacaim to head the investigations into both the complaints. The PIs will have to submit their first report to the Court within 15 days.
With the panchayat stating that they have not received the files that were forwarded by them to the concerned government department and the TCP submitting that the file is lost/ missing, the Court has now asked the Technical Officer of PWD based in Panjim to deposit with the Registrar of the Court, the development/ construction plans of Goa Real Estate and Construction Ltd (GRECL, popularly known as Aldeia de Goa), by today.
The TCP submitted that the files were given to M/s SPRY Resources India Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad for scanning for record purposes and TCP department has written a letter to M/s SPRY Resources India Pvt Ltd, asking whether they have scanned the files. Responding to this, the Court instructed the Advocate General Subodh Kantak to inform the Court on the next date if the documents were scanned and computerized and to produce the same in the Court.
Further, taking note of the Curca-Bambolim panchayat and TCP department's statement that the files are missing, the Court observed that the two authorities are defeating the provision and objective of Right to Information Act, which is in its initial stage. The objective of RTI Act is to make public life more open and the administration more accountable to citizens by making available information whenever it is sought, the Court observed.
The Court has given time till November 29, 2007 to the state government to file their reply and the matter will be placed on board on November 30.
What does a government department do when a file goes missing and the Chief Secretary is summoned to the Court? The obvious reply is initiate action against the erring officers.
But when it is the TCP department, which is involved in the mystery of the missing files on the GRECL project, then expect the unexpected. Instead of taking the officers involved to task, the TCP Chief Town Planner Morad Ahmad by an office memorandum of November 22, has issued a show cause notice to the Khalasi (sweeper) of the TCP Tiswadi taluka office at Panjim. Show cause notice has been served to Mahadev Morajkar, seeking explanation and reasons for not performing his duties effectively and regarding the loss of the file.
Not impressed with this, the Court stated that though they don't want to comment on the show cause notice served to the Khalasi, they observed that the Khalasi can't act without the connivance of a senior officer and it is for the department to take proper action.
Acting on the Court's oral instructions on Thursday, the Town and Country department had already lodged a complaint about the missing files and documents in the Panjim police station and issued show cause notice to the Khalasi (read sweeper) of Tiswadi taluka branch office.
The Division bench of Justice FI Rebello and Justice NA Britto has asked the Police Inspector of Panjim and Agacaim to head the investigations into both the complaints. The PIs will have to submit their first report to the Court within 15 days.
With the panchayat stating that they have not received the files that were forwarded by them to the concerned government department and the TCP submitting that the file is lost/ missing, the Court has now asked the Technical Officer of PWD based in Panjim to deposit with the Registrar of the Court, the development/ construction plans of Goa Real Estate and Construction Ltd (GRECL, popularly known as Aldeia de Goa), by today.
The TCP submitted that the files were given to M/s SPRY Resources India Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad for scanning for record purposes and TCP department has written a letter to M/s SPRY Resources India Pvt Ltd, asking whether they have scanned the files. Responding to this, the Court instructed the Advocate General Subodh Kantak to inform the Court on the next date if the documents were scanned and computerized and to produce the same in the Court.
Further, taking note of the Curca-Bambolim panchayat and TCP department's statement that the files are missing, the Court observed that the two authorities are defeating the provision and objective of Right to Information Act, which is in its initial stage. The objective of RTI Act is to make public life more open and the administration more accountable to citizens by making available information whenever it is sought, the Court observed.
The Court has given time till November 29, 2007 to the state government to file their reply and the matter will be placed on board on November 30.
What does a government department do when a file goes missing and the Chief Secretary is summoned to the Court? The obvious reply is initiate action against the erring officers.
But when it is the TCP department, which is involved in the mystery of the missing files on the GRECL project, then expect the unexpected. Instead of taking the officers involved to task, the TCP Chief Town Planner Morad Ahmad by an office memorandum of November 22, has issued a show cause notice to the Khalasi (sweeper) of the TCP Tiswadi taluka office at Panjim. Show cause notice has been served to Mahadev Morajkar, seeking explanation and reasons for not performing his duties effectively and regarding the loss of the file.
Not impressed with this, the Court stated that though they don't want to comment on the show cause notice served to the Khalasi, they observed that the Khalasi can't act without the connivance of a senior officer and it is for the department to take proper action.
Health facilities in Goa
PANJIM: Not impressed with the State government's tall claims that the state has excellent health facilities, the High Court has orally asked the Amicus curiae, senior counsel Saresh Lotlikar, and petitioner Prakash Sardessai, to make suggestions to improve the health facilities in the government hospitals in the state.
Further, the Division bench of Justice D B Bhosale and Justice NA Britto has also recommended that they look into the aspect of setting up a committee with a lawyer, doctor and architect—to inspect the hospital buildings in the State. The Court also orally observed that in the government hospitals the equipments don't function and the even the doctor, nurses and patient ratio is not adequate.
The Court made this observations in a petition filed in public interest and raises a grievance about the standard of health care in the state, including facilities for treatment in all fields of medical science and super-specialties.
This despite the fact that the Joint Secretary (Health) Dattaram Sardessai in the affidavit filed in the Court, as per the High Court order of August 27, 2007 directing the government to file an affidavit indicating the present status and of improvements to be made – adequacy of staff, medicine, equipment for surgery, aftercare and available beds – in respect of each of the 3 government hospitals, Goa Medical College at Bambolim, Asilo Hospital in Mapusa and Hospicio hospital at Margao, present a rosy picture.
Here is what the affidavit states:
Goa Medical College
* Bed strength of 1030
* An additional hospital building being constructed, which will have bed strength of 450.
* Staff strength as per the sanctioned strength and is as per the guidelines of Medical Council of India and Nursing Council of India. Further, additional staff -- doctors, nurses, ward boys, attendants, drivers -- will be recruited for the new hospital block.
* Equipped with all up to date and efficient surgical equipments and other facilties like X-Rays, CT Scanning, Ultrasound etc.
* Patients are supplied medicine free of costs.
* From January to December 2006 there were 4,36,152 outpatients, 50,397 admission and 17,628 operations. For the period from January 2007 to June 2007, there were 2,01,663 outpatients, 25,776 admission and 8,085 operations.
* Hygiene is well maintained with mechanized swiping and sopping
Hospicio Hospital
* Has the sanctioned staff strength and periodical review carried out to assess the staff requirement.
* Proposal with the Government to construct new district hospital at Margao, which will have a capacity of 450 beds.
* Medicines supplied free of cost
* Provided with all required equipments for surgery in all departments.
* Testing machine like X-Ray, Ultrasound, C.T. Scanning available in the hospital
* Bed strength is 250 beds.
Asilio Hospital
* Staff strength as per sanctioned and there is periodical review to assess the staff strength.
* Asilio Hospital has bed strength of 190.
* Another new District Hospital will be constructed in Mapusa. It will be made operational by end of this year. Steps are already taken to recruit the staff. It will have a bed strength of 30.
* Has necessary surgical equipment facilities as well as CT scan, X-Ray, ultra sound etc
HEALTH CENTRES
* One Cottage Hospital at Chicalim, 5 community health centers at Sanvordem Curchorem, Canacona, Ponda, Valpoi and Pernem and 13 primary health centers are well staffed and for every PHC there is a doctor and nurses besides the attendant and compounders.
Further, the Division bench of Justice D B Bhosale and Justice NA Britto has also recommended that they look into the aspect of setting up a committee with a lawyer, doctor and architect—to inspect the hospital buildings in the State. The Court also orally observed that in the government hospitals the equipments don't function and the even the doctor, nurses and patient ratio is not adequate.
The Court made this observations in a petition filed in public interest and raises a grievance about the standard of health care in the state, including facilities for treatment in all fields of medical science and super-specialties.
This despite the fact that the Joint Secretary (Health) Dattaram Sardessai in the affidavit filed in the Court, as per the High Court order of August 27, 2007 directing the government to file an affidavit indicating the present status and of improvements to be made – adequacy of staff, medicine, equipment for surgery, aftercare and available beds – in respect of each of the 3 government hospitals, Goa Medical College at Bambolim, Asilo Hospital in Mapusa and Hospicio hospital at Margao, present a rosy picture.
Here is what the affidavit states:
Goa Medical College
* Bed strength of 1030
* An additional hospital building being constructed, which will have bed strength of 450.
* Staff strength as per the sanctioned strength and is as per the guidelines of Medical Council of India and Nursing Council of India. Further, additional staff -- doctors, nurses, ward boys, attendants, drivers -- will be recruited for the new hospital block.
* Equipped with all up to date and efficient surgical equipments and other facilties like X-Rays, CT Scanning, Ultrasound etc.
* Patients are supplied medicine free of costs.
* From January to December 2006 there were 4,36,152 outpatients, 50,397 admission and 17,628 operations. For the period from January 2007 to June 2007, there were 2,01,663 outpatients, 25,776 admission and 8,085 operations.
* Hygiene is well maintained with mechanized swiping and sopping
Hospicio Hospital
* Has the sanctioned staff strength and periodical review carried out to assess the staff requirement.
* Proposal with the Government to construct new district hospital at Margao, which will have a capacity of 450 beds.
* Medicines supplied free of cost
* Provided with all required equipments for surgery in all departments.
* Testing machine like X-Ray, Ultrasound, C.T. Scanning available in the hospital
* Bed strength is 250 beds.
Asilio Hospital
* Staff strength as per sanctioned and there is periodical review to assess the staff strength.
* Asilio Hospital has bed strength of 190.
* Another new District Hospital will be constructed in Mapusa. It will be made operational by end of this year. Steps are already taken to recruit the staff. It will have a bed strength of 30.
* Has necessary surgical equipment facilities as well as CT scan, X-Ray, ultra sound etc
HEALTH CENTRES
* One Cottage Hospital at Chicalim, 5 community health centers at Sanvordem Curchorem, Canacona, Ponda, Valpoi and Pernem and 13 primary health centers are well staffed and for every PHC there is a doctor and nurses besides the attendant and compounders.
Aldei de Goa case
PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa has placed a petition against Goa Real Estate and Construction Ltd (GRECL, popularly known as Aldeia de Goa ) for stay on December 17.
It must be recalled that two NGOs -- People's Movement for Civic Action and Goa Foundation—had approached the High Court challenging the permissions granted by the Curca panchayat to GRECL.
The Curca panchayat had granted permission to GRECL to construct a hotel cum residential project at Bambolim village, part of which falls within the 100 mt "no development zone" of the CRZ notification as per the order of the Supreme Court dated April 18, 1996.
The petitioners submitted that the area has been zoned as CRZ III in the approved Goa Coastal Zone Management Plan approved by the Central government on September 27, 1996 and sought to seek stay of the developments in the 100-mt zone on the ground that the proposed construction is in violation of CRZ.
It must be recalled that two NGOs -- People's Movement for Civic Action and Goa Foundation—had approached the High Court challenging the permissions granted by the Curca panchayat to GRECL.
The Curca panchayat had granted permission to GRECL to construct a hotel cum residential project at Bambolim village, part of which falls within the 100 mt "no development zone" of the CRZ notification as per the order of the Supreme Court dated April 18, 1996.
The petitioners submitted that the area has been zoned as CRZ III in the approved Goa Coastal Zone Management Plan approved by the Central government on September 27, 1996 and sought to seek stay of the developments in the 100-mt zone on the ground that the proposed construction is in violation of CRZ.
Night Market Goa
PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa has asked the Chief Secretary to hear the organizers of Saturday Evening Fair/Market (popularly known as Ingo Saturday Nite Market) and decide the matter before December 14, 2007.
The Division bench, while hearing a petition filed by Clive Braganza, challenging the revocation of the NOC/permission to run the market by the Arpora – Nagao village panchayat, asked the petitioner not to operate the market till the matter is decided.
Braganza had approached the Court stating that he along with his mother Preciosa Braganza are co-owners of property surveyed under NO.55/0 at Xim Waddo, Arpora, Bardez and were running the market since the year 2001, after taking necessary permissions from the Panchayat.
This year also they as usual applied for permission vide application dated August 7, 2007 and the permission was granted for the same by the village panchayat. A rmed with permission dated August 23, 2007, they commenced the activity of holding "Saturday Evening Fair/Market" from the month of October 2007. However, on November 12, 2007, the Arpora – Nagao village panchayat revoked the NOC/permission dated as per the circular of the Director of Panchayats without any show cause notice.
The Director of Panchayat circular states: "it has been decided that the village panchayats henceforth shall submit all such proposals to Government through the Directorate of Panchayats for issue of permission."
However, the counsel for the Petitioner Mahesh Sonak stated that it is clear that the impugned circular is prospective in nature and shall apply in the matter of issuance of permissions after 20/9/2007 or for that matter 8/10/2007, and not to the permissions already granted before the said date and Panchayat has clearly misconstrued the circular.
Further, the petitioner upon receipt of the Impugned Revocation Order had addressed a representation to the Director of Panchayats on November 16, 2007, pointing out that "Saturday Evening Fair/Market" provides for highly rated cultural entertainments and is a tourist attraction to tourists from all over the world visiting Goa each year and should be allowed to operate. But there was no response.Advocate SR Rivonkar appeared on behalf of the state government.
The Division bench, while hearing a petition filed by Clive Braganza, challenging the revocation of the NOC/permission to run the market by the Arpora – Nagao village panchayat, asked the petitioner not to operate the market till the matter is decided.
Braganza had approached the Court stating that he along with his mother Preciosa Braganza are co-owners of property surveyed under NO.55/0 at Xim Waddo, Arpora, Bardez and were running the market since the year 2001, after taking necessary permissions from the Panchayat.
This year also they as usual applied for permission vide application dated August 7, 2007 and the permission was granted for the same by the village panchayat. A rmed with permission dated August 23, 2007, they commenced the activity of holding "Saturday Evening Fair/Market" from the month of October 2007. However, on November 12, 2007, the Arpora – Nagao village panchayat revoked the NOC/permission dated as per the circular of the Director of Panchayats without any show cause notice.
The Director of Panchayat circular states: "it has been decided that the village panchayats henceforth shall submit all such proposals to Government through the Directorate of Panchayats for issue of permission."
However, the counsel for the Petitioner Mahesh Sonak stated that it is clear that the impugned circular is prospective in nature and shall apply in the matter of issuance of permissions after 20/9/2007 or for that matter 8/10/2007, and not to the permissions already granted before the said date and Panchayat has clearly misconstrued the circular.
Further, the petitioner upon receipt of the Impugned Revocation Order had addressed a representation to the Director of Panchayats on November 16, 2007, pointing out that "Saturday Evening Fair/Market" provides for highly rated cultural entertainments and is a tourist attraction to tourists from all over the world visiting Goa each year and should be allowed to operate. But there was no response.Advocate SR Rivonkar appeared on behalf of the state government.
Hoardings in Goa
PANJIM: If everything goes fine, then anyone who wants to advertise on the highways need to take permission of the local authority (under the relevant Act) and of the Collector (under the Goa Prevention of Defacement of Property) Act.
Further, the person who has erected hoardings would have to produce permissions obtained by them from the Collector in terms of clause (1) and if no permission has been obtained, either from the local Authority or from the Collector or from both, the concerned person shall immediately apply for such permission.
Accordingly, an application for license has to be made to the Collector within a period of 90 days and any such application must be accompanied by a license from the local authority and shall, be in accordance with procedure laid down in the rules framed under the Goa Prevention of Defacement of Property Act. The Collector shall dispose of the application within a period of 6 months from receipt of the same.
Further, if no application is made then the Collector shall direct removal of those hoardings at the cost of such person who is put the hoarding and if the Collector refuses any application for license, then Collector shall follow the same procedure for its removal as given in clause (8) above.
These were some of the suggestions made by the state government to the Division bench of the High Court of Bombay at Goa, while hearing a suo moto writ petition to examine the legality and propriety of hoardings in the state.
Further, it was also recommended that the Collector (North) and Collector (South) shall prepare list of hoardings existing within their respective jurisdiction. The Court while hearing these suggestions also asked for the suggestions of the All Goa Hoarding Owner's Association.
It must be recalled that the High Court had taken suo moto cognizance to a news item published in GT under the heading, "Drive cautiously, Billboard may…" on June 5, 2007. Reacting to the news item, the court had stated that this shows that billboards are being erected without obtaining NOCs from local authorities and in violation of the 40 metre set back rule set out by the Indian Road Congress and without the NOC's of Traffic cell as well.
According to the Court, it is in public interest that the local authority exercise proper control with the said billboards and order their removal wherever the rules and regulations are not being adhered to.
Further, the person who has erected hoardings would have to produce permissions obtained by them from the Collector in terms of clause (1) and if no permission has been obtained, either from the local Authority or from the Collector or from both, the concerned person shall immediately apply for such permission.
Accordingly, an application for license has to be made to the Collector within a period of 90 days and any such application must be accompanied by a license from the local authority and shall, be in accordance with procedure laid down in the rules framed under the Goa Prevention of Defacement of Property Act. The Collector shall dispose of the application within a period of 6 months from receipt of the same.
Further, if no application is made then the Collector shall direct removal of those hoardings at the cost of such person who is put the hoarding and if the Collector refuses any application for license, then Collector shall follow the same procedure for its removal as given in clause (8) above.
These were some of the suggestions made by the state government to the Division bench of the High Court of Bombay at Goa, while hearing a suo moto writ petition to examine the legality and propriety of hoardings in the state.
Further, it was also recommended that the Collector (North) and Collector (South) shall prepare list of hoardings existing within their respective jurisdiction. The Court while hearing these suggestions also asked for the suggestions of the All Goa Hoarding Owner's Association.
It must be recalled that the High Court had taken suo moto cognizance to a news item published in GT under the heading, "Drive cautiously, Billboard may…" on June 5, 2007. Reacting to the news item, the court had stated that this shows that billboards are being erected without obtaining NOCs from local authorities and in violation of the 40 metre set back rule set out by the Indian Road Congress and without the NOC's of Traffic cell as well.
According to the Court, it is in public interest that the local authority exercise proper control with the said billboards and order their removal wherever the rules and regulations are not being adhered to.
Health in Goa
PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa wanted to know from the advocate general Subodh Kantak, if all major government hospitals in Goa have a housekeeping department. If such a department doesn't exist, then the Court wanted the AG to state on affidavit that they will have a housekeeping department soon.
The Division bench of Justice D B Bhosale and Justice NA Britto observed that cleanliness is a major problem in the government hospitals and there is a need to set up a separate housekeeping department. Unhygienic conditions in the rooms, toilets etc. is what disappoints general public, the Court observed.
The Court made this observation while hearing a petition filed in public interest, which raises a grievance about the standard of health care in the state, including facilities for treatment in all fields of medical science and super-specialties.
Further, not impressed with the State government's tall claims that the there is an Advisory board, consisting of reputed doctors from Delhi and Mumbai, to look into the functioning of government hospitals, the Court orally asked the Amicus curiae, senior counsel Saresh Lotlikar to suggest names of 4 or 5 persons—lawyer, doctor, architect, engineer or social worker—who can inspect the government hospitals.
Referring to the affidavit filed by Joint Secretary (Health), indicating the present status and of improvements to be made – adequacy of staff, medicine, equipment for surgery, aftercare and available beds – in respect of each of the 3 government hospitals, Goa Medical College at Bambolim, Asilo Hospital in Mapusa and Hospicio hospital at Margao, the Court observed that the affidavit doesn't mention the doctor- patients and nurse- patients ratio nor does it mention whether there is adequate staff in the hospitals.
The Division bench of Justice D B Bhosale and Justice NA Britto observed that cleanliness is a major problem in the government hospitals and there is a need to set up a separate housekeeping department. Unhygienic conditions in the rooms, toilets etc. is what disappoints general public, the Court observed.
The Court made this observation while hearing a petition filed in public interest, which raises a grievance about the standard of health care in the state, including facilities for treatment in all fields of medical science and super-specialties.
Further, not impressed with the State government's tall claims that the there is an Advisory board, consisting of reputed doctors from Delhi and Mumbai, to look into the functioning of government hospitals, the Court orally asked the Amicus curiae, senior counsel Saresh Lotlikar to suggest names of 4 or 5 persons—lawyer, doctor, architect, engineer or social worker—who can inspect the government hospitals.
Referring to the affidavit filed by Joint Secretary (Health), indicating the present status and of improvements to be made – adequacy of staff, medicine, equipment for surgery, aftercare and available beds – in respect of each of the 3 government hospitals, Goa Medical College at Bambolim, Asilo Hospital in Mapusa and Hospicio hospital at Margao, the Court observed that the affidavit doesn't mention the doctor- patients and nurse- patients ratio nor does it mention whether there is adequate staff in the hospitals.
IT' is Zuari versus DLF in Goa
PANJIM: While Taleigao residents are engaged in a battle with the government against the establishment of an IT park at Dona Paula, in nearby Sancoale, two corporate giants are battling it out to set up an IT park. However, the irony is that the government is acquiring land from one corporate giant to give it to another to set up an IT park.
With no solution at hand, the battle has now reached the High Court of Bombay at Goa. The petitioner, Zuari Industries Ltd, has alleged that the government is discriminating between two private parties and seeking to favour one -- DLF Commercial Development. Zuari Industries Ltd has further alleged that the government is acquiring their land at throw away prices to give it to DLF Commercial Development to set up an IT park.
The story goes like this. Zuari Industries Ltd proposed to establish a sector specific SEZ dedicated to the development of IT and IT enabled services sector, in the land they had acquired from the Communidade of Sancoale on March 31, 1971. The IT SEZ project worth Rs 730 crores was proposed to be established on 40 acres ( 16.20 hectares) land owned by Zuari Industries Ltd.
For the same, they submitted an application to the Ministry of Industries, GoI on December 27, 2006, for establishment of a sector specific SEZ dedicated to the development of IT and IT enabled services in Goa. They did this because they had to seek approval of the proposal from GoI and then obtain the concurrence of the State government.
Meanwhile, the state government issued a notification on February 5, 2007, under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, wherein it was mentioned that the land (which was owned by Zuari Industries Ltd, on which they proposed to set up an IT SEZ) is likely to be needed for "public purpose", viz land acquisition for expansion of Sancoale Industrial Estate, Phase V.
In other words, Zuari Industries Ltd alleged that the government was proposing to acquire more than 18 hectares of land on which the IT SEZ was to be established, thus reducing the land available for SEZ less than 10 hectares. With the land available with Zuari Industries Ltd being less than 10 hectares, the plans of Zuari Industries Ltd to have an IT SEZ would become infractuous.
Even as on February 15, 2007, GoI addressed a letter to the state government for its comments on Zuari Industries Ltd proposal to set up an IT SEZ, which the petitioners allege the state government has failed to consider, the government allegedly transpired to proceed with the acquisition for establishment of IT park by DLF Commercial Development.
Zuari Industries Ltd has alleged in the Court that the government is not acquiring the land for "public purpose" but to facilitate DLF Commercial Development to set up an IT park. The government's intention, Zuari Industries Ltd alleged, is revealed in the minutes of the 291 st Board meeting of Goa Industrial Development Corporation, which states that DLF Commercial Development had given a proposal to set up an IT park on the land belonging to Zuari Industries Ltd.
With no solution at hand, the battle has now reached the High Court of Bombay at Goa. The petitioner, Zuari Industries Ltd, has alleged that the government is discriminating between two private parties and seeking to favour one -- DLF Commercial Development. Zuari Industries Ltd has further alleged that the government is acquiring their land at throw away prices to give it to DLF Commercial Development to set up an IT park.
The story goes like this. Zuari Industries Ltd proposed to establish a sector specific SEZ dedicated to the development of IT and IT enabled services sector, in the land they had acquired from the Communidade of Sancoale on March 31, 1971. The IT SEZ project worth Rs 730 crores was proposed to be established on 40 acres ( 16.20 hectares) land owned by Zuari Industries Ltd.
For the same, they submitted an application to the Ministry of Industries, GoI on December 27, 2006, for establishment of a sector specific SEZ dedicated to the development of IT and IT enabled services in Goa. They did this because they had to seek approval of the proposal from GoI and then obtain the concurrence of the State government.
Meanwhile, the state government issued a notification on February 5, 2007, under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, wherein it was mentioned that the land (which was owned by Zuari Industries Ltd, on which they proposed to set up an IT SEZ) is likely to be needed for "public purpose", viz land acquisition for expansion of Sancoale Industrial Estate, Phase V.
In other words, Zuari Industries Ltd alleged that the government was proposing to acquire more than 18 hectares of land on which the IT SEZ was to be established, thus reducing the land available for SEZ less than 10 hectares. With the land available with Zuari Industries Ltd being less than 10 hectares, the plans of Zuari Industries Ltd to have an IT SEZ would become infractuous.
Even as on February 15, 2007, GoI addressed a letter to the state government for its comments on Zuari Industries Ltd proposal to set up an IT SEZ, which the petitioners allege the state government has failed to consider, the government allegedly transpired to proceed with the acquisition for establishment of IT park by DLF Commercial Development.
Zuari Industries Ltd has alleged in the Court that the government is not acquiring the land for "public purpose" but to facilitate DLF Commercial Development to set up an IT park. The government's intention, Zuari Industries Ltd alleged, is revealed in the minutes of the 291 st Board meeting of Goa Industrial Development Corporation, which states that DLF Commercial Development had given a proposal to set up an IT park on the land belonging to Zuari Industries Ltd.
Special Economic Zone controversy in Goa
PANJIM: Meditab Specialties Pvt Ltd, which has been allotted land at Keri, Ponda, for setting up Pharma park/SEZ has approached the High Court of Bombay at Goa, stating that the Chief Secretary has threatened them.
MSPL has submitted that in view of the threat of the Chief Secretary, they are compelled to approach the Court by way of the present petition as they have invested huge sums of money.
They have further submitted that contrary to Chief Minister Digambar Kamat's statement on December 8, 2007 that MSPL has voluntarily stopped the work, they have not voluntarily stopped work but forced to do so by the Ponda Deputy Collector and Ponda PI and they desire to continue the work as they are duly authorized to do so.
It is alleged that on December 8, 2007, the Chief Secretary JP Singh in a "very high handed manner" instead of supporting them, orally instructed them to stop the work voluntarily and threatened that if the work is not stopped, the police will not protect the petitioner's workers, its machinery etc.
This instruction was given to the petitioner by the CS when MSPL officials met the CS to apprise him of the situation and to inform him that a mob of people had entered their property and tried to vandalize it on December7, 2007, even as the Ponda deputy Collector and Ponda PI who came to the site, supported the unlawful assembly and instructed the MSPL to stop the construction/ development activities. Incidentally, no order was served to the petitioner under any law for stoppage of the work.
The petitioner wanted to know whether the state government is entitled to stop them working at its duly authorized site at Keri, Ponda and whether the state government can refuse police protection to them for conducting its activities after they have got all necessary permissions and is duly legal. The state of Goa through the Chief Secretary, the Chief Secretary JP Singh, Secretary (Home), GIDC, GSPCB, Ponda Deputy Collector and Ponda PI have been made respondents in the petition.
MSPL was allotted 12,32,000 sq mts land by Goa Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC) on April 28, 2006 and a year later, on April 10, 2007, the Development Commissioner, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, GoI notified the area as SEZ for sector specific industries – pharmaceutical industries. By May 2007, the petitioner starts the development activities in the SEZ area and incurs crores of rupees expenditure in developing the SEZ area.
In May 2007, MSPL allots two plots of land to M/s Cipla Ltd to set up its units for manufacturing aerosol. The said units also get permission from Pollution Control Board for establishing its units.
However, trouble started from November 22, 2007, when a mob of about 20-25 people came to MSPL SEZ, threatened the security men and entered the leased area of the petitioner, wanting to inspect what was happening in the said area and to check whether there were any bore wells or tube wells constructed therein.
MSPL has submitted that in view of the threat of the Chief Secretary, they are compelled to approach the Court by way of the present petition as they have invested huge sums of money.
They have further submitted that contrary to Chief Minister Digambar Kamat's statement on December 8, 2007 that MSPL has voluntarily stopped the work, they have not voluntarily stopped work but forced to do so by the Ponda Deputy Collector and Ponda PI and they desire to continue the work as they are duly authorized to do so.
It is alleged that on December 8, 2007, the Chief Secretary JP Singh in a "very high handed manner" instead of supporting them, orally instructed them to stop the work voluntarily and threatened that if the work is not stopped, the police will not protect the petitioner's workers, its machinery etc.
This instruction was given to the petitioner by the CS when MSPL officials met the CS to apprise him of the situation and to inform him that a mob of people had entered their property and tried to vandalize it on December7, 2007, even as the Ponda deputy Collector and Ponda PI who came to the site, supported the unlawful assembly and instructed the MSPL to stop the construction/ development activities. Incidentally, no order was served to the petitioner under any law for stoppage of the work.
The petitioner wanted to know whether the state government is entitled to stop them working at its duly authorized site at Keri, Ponda and whether the state government can refuse police protection to them for conducting its activities after they have got all necessary permissions and is duly legal. The state of Goa through the Chief Secretary, the Chief Secretary JP Singh, Secretary (Home), GIDC, GSPCB, Ponda Deputy Collector and Ponda PI have been made respondents in the petition.
MSPL was allotted 12,32,000 sq mts land by Goa Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC) on April 28, 2006 and a year later, on April 10, 2007, the Development Commissioner, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, GoI notified the area as SEZ for sector specific industries – pharmaceutical industries. By May 2007, the petitioner starts the development activities in the SEZ area and incurs crores of rupees expenditure in developing the SEZ area.
In May 2007, MSPL allots two plots of land to M/s Cipla Ltd to set up its units for manufacturing aerosol. The said units also get permission from Pollution Control Board for establishing its units.
However, trouble started from November 22, 2007, when a mob of about 20-25 people came to MSPL SEZ, threatened the security men and entered the leased area of the petitioner, wanting to inspect what was happening in the said area and to check whether there were any bore wells or tube wells constructed therein.
CRZ Regulation doesn't provide for classification: Cidade de Goa Case
PANJIM: "CRZ Regulation doesn't provide for classification of CRZ II area or CRZ III area only on the ground whether the area is situated within the Municipal limits or not. A area within Municipal limits, if not substantially developed will not be classified as CRZ II only on the ground that the area is within municipal limit, vice versa, an area outside municipal limit, if substantially developed and has been legally designated as urban area, is classified as CRZ II notwithstanding the fact that it is outside municipal limits."
This submission by the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority Member Secretary to the High Court in a petition filed by Carlos Noronha challenging the construction plan of a hotel project by Fomento resorts on the ground that the re-classification of certain areas from CRZ III to II in 2001, is illegal, points to a simple fact.
According to GCZMA, the relevant aspect while deciding whether the area is CRZ II or CRZ III is not just whether it is in the municipal area or not, but whether it is substantially built up and has been provided with drainage, approach roads and other infrastructural facilities such as water supply and sewerage system.
To substantiate their stand that the area where the proposed hotel is coming up is rightfully designated as CRZ II, GCZMA has stated that the Dona Paula stretch was notified as part of Panjim municipal area in 1970 and although Taleigao was included in Panjim municipal area only in the year 1995, it was already designated as urban area since 1970, vide the following:
* Designated as one of the urban areas (census town) of North Goa district in 1991 census year.
* Notified as art of Panaji City Planning areas vide notification dated 19/11/1996, issued under the provision of Goa, Daman and Diu TCP Act, 1974.
Further to justify their stand, MS GCZMA has stated that the area is urban because of the buildable 69 plots, 52 plots have been built up, having 135 structures and the percentage of built up plots to buildable plots was 75.36 percent. Further, it is also stated that drainage has been provided, approach roads and main roads are existing, water supply through pipelines is available and sewerage scheme is under execution by Goa government and septic tanks are provided for each house/ building complex.
Requesting that the ad-interim relief to the petitioners should be vacated, GCZMA has stated that the distance of the proposed construction from the bank of the river is 86.23 mt, of the landward side of an existing authorized structure, which is within the permissible distance of 100 mts.
* CRZ II : The area that have already been developed upto or close to the shore line. For this purposed "developed" area is referred to as that area within municipal limits or in other legally designated urban areas which is already substantially built up and which has been provided with drainage and approach roads and other infrastructural facilities, such as water supply and sewerage mains."
* CRZ III: Areas that are relatively undisturbed and those, which don't belong to either category I or II. These include coastal zones in the rural areas (developed and undeveloped) and also areas within municipal limits or in other legally designated urban areas which are not substantially built up.
This submission by the Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority Member Secretary to the High Court in a petition filed by Carlos Noronha challenging the construction plan of a hotel project by Fomento resorts on the ground that the re-classification of certain areas from CRZ III to II in 2001, is illegal, points to a simple fact.
According to GCZMA, the relevant aspect while deciding whether the area is CRZ II or CRZ III is not just whether it is in the municipal area or not, but whether it is substantially built up and has been provided with drainage, approach roads and other infrastructural facilities such as water supply and sewerage system.
To substantiate their stand that the area where the proposed hotel is coming up is rightfully designated as CRZ II, GCZMA has stated that the Dona Paula stretch was notified as part of Panjim municipal area in 1970 and although Taleigao was included in Panjim municipal area only in the year 1995, it was already designated as urban area since 1970, vide the following:
* Designated as one of the urban areas (census town) of North Goa district in 1991 census year.
* Notified as art of Panaji City Planning areas vide notification dated 19/11/1996, issued under the provision of Goa, Daman and Diu TCP Act, 1974.
Further to justify their stand, MS GCZMA has stated that the area is urban because of the buildable 69 plots, 52 plots have been built up, having 135 structures and the percentage of built up plots to buildable plots was 75.36 percent. Further, it is also stated that drainage has been provided, approach roads and main roads are existing, water supply through pipelines is available and sewerage scheme is under execution by Goa government and septic tanks are provided for each house/ building complex.
Requesting that the ad-interim relief to the petitioners should be vacated, GCZMA has stated that the distance of the proposed construction from the bank of the river is 86.23 mt, of the landward side of an existing authorized structure, which is within the permissible distance of 100 mts.
* CRZ II : The area that have already been developed upto or close to the shore line. For this purposed "developed" area is referred to as that area within municipal limits or in other legally designated urban areas which is already substantially built up and which has been provided with drainage and approach roads and other infrastructural facilities, such as water supply and sewerage mains."
* CRZ III: Areas that are relatively undisturbed and those, which don't belong to either category I or II. These include coastal zones in the rural areas (developed and undeveloped) and also areas within municipal limits or in other legally designated urban areas which are not substantially built up.
After Vanila Lounge Bar and Club Cabana now it is the time of Club Cabana
PANJIM: After Vanila Lounge Bar and Club Cabana, now another night club in Anjuna finds itself in the midst of midst of a controversy, allegedly for not paying the lease amount to the government, thereby causing loss to public exchequer, besides indulging in CRZ violation.
However, the Division bench of Justice DB Bhosale and Justice NA Britto observing that the Court can't take every public duty, directed the concerned departments Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) and Goa Tourism Development Corporation (GTDC) to look into the matter. The Court then dismissed the petition.
An ordinary citizen, Rutul Sharma, had filed a petition in the High Court to challenge the inaction on the part of GCZMA in respect of the illegal construction carried out by Nandagopal Kudchadkar at Anjuna. It is alleged by the petitioner that Kudchadkar is carrying out an illegal commercial activity of running a discotheque/ night cub named and styled as "Club Paradiso" under the garb of running a restaurant.
According to Sharma, in May 2007, he noticed certain blatant illegal structure being erected in close proximity to the beach in the CRZ III area. On inquiry, he learnt that the property belongs to GTDC and Kudchadkar, who is running a nightclub and restaurant known as "Club Paradiso" at the property, has obtained the said property on lease.
Therefore on June 16,2007, the petitioner approaches the GCZMA highlighting the illegal structures erected by Kudchadkar and calls upon the authority to take immediate action, but in vain. Meanwhile, Sharma under the Right to Information Act learns from GTDC that they had leased the said property to Kudchadkar on October 30, 2001, on a annual lease rent of Rs 5,07,000, yet till date no lease deal has been executed by GTDC in favour of Kudchadkar.
It is further learnt that the accounts and arrears due till July 6, 2007 is Rs 15,32,250 and no action has been initiated by GTDC for recovery of dues.
The High Court has asked GCZMA to decide the matter, whether the structures are legal or illegal within a period of 8 weeks from today. The Court has also stated that it is open for GCZMA to take appropriate action against the alleged construction if found to be illegal and in violation of CRZ regulation.
Further, the Court observed that it is open for the petitioner to make a representation to GTDC, within a week's time. The Court directed that if the petitioner makes a representation, then the same should be decided within a period of 12 weeks, after giving opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and Kudchadkar.
Advocate Shivan Dessai appeared on behalf of the petitioner, while the public prosecutor Winnie Coutinho represented the state government and GCZMA. The counsel for Anjuna village panchayat was advocate Nitin Sardessai and the counsel for GTDC was senior counsel Saresh Lotlikar.
However, the Division bench of Justice DB Bhosale and Justice NA Britto observing that the Court can't take every public duty, directed the concerned departments Goa Coastal Zone Management Authority (GCZMA) and Goa Tourism Development Corporation (GTDC) to look into the matter. The Court then dismissed the petition.
An ordinary citizen, Rutul Sharma, had filed a petition in the High Court to challenge the inaction on the part of GCZMA in respect of the illegal construction carried out by Nandagopal Kudchadkar at Anjuna. It is alleged by the petitioner that Kudchadkar is carrying out an illegal commercial activity of running a discotheque/ night cub named and styled as "Club Paradiso" under the garb of running a restaurant.
According to Sharma, in May 2007, he noticed certain blatant illegal structure being erected in close proximity to the beach in the CRZ III area. On inquiry, he learnt that the property belongs to GTDC and Kudchadkar, who is running a nightclub and restaurant known as "Club Paradiso" at the property, has obtained the said property on lease.
Therefore on June 16,2007, the petitioner approaches the GCZMA highlighting the illegal structures erected by Kudchadkar and calls upon the authority to take immediate action, but in vain. Meanwhile, Sharma under the Right to Information Act learns from GTDC that they had leased the said property to Kudchadkar on October 30, 2001, on a annual lease rent of Rs 5,07,000, yet till date no lease deal has been executed by GTDC in favour of Kudchadkar.
It is further learnt that the accounts and arrears due till July 6, 2007 is Rs 15,32,250 and no action has been initiated by GTDC for recovery of dues.
The High Court has asked GCZMA to decide the matter, whether the structures are legal or illegal within a period of 8 weeks from today. The Court has also stated that it is open for GCZMA to take appropriate action against the alleged construction if found to be illegal and in violation of CRZ regulation.
Further, the Court observed that it is open for the petitioner to make a representation to GTDC, within a week's time. The Court directed that if the petitioner makes a representation, then the same should be decided within a period of 12 weeks, after giving opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and Kudchadkar.
Advocate Shivan Dessai appeared on behalf of the petitioner, while the public prosecutor Winnie Coutinho represented the state government and GCZMA. The counsel for Anjuna village panchayat was advocate Nitin Sardessai and the counsel for GTDC was senior counsel Saresh Lotlikar.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
