Birds of a feather

When the Satyam debacle took place early this year, there wasn’t a single news 
story that went without a quip on the ‘Golden Peacock Award’ bestowed upon the 
company for Corporate Governance the same year. Of course, the ‘prestigious’ 
award was promptly ‘stripped off’ the company causing much embarrassment to the 
jury. In the same year Coca-Cola, the soft drink multinational bagged the 
Golden Peacock for Corporate Social Responsibility amid severe protests by 
activists as well as communities facing the brunt of ground water pollution and 
over-extraction by the companies’ various plants across the country.

This year the panel of judges outdid itself and awarded the controversial 
Vedanta Alumina Limited, a UK-based mining company, the Golden Peacock in 
Environment Management for its project at Lanjigarh in Orissa. For those, 
especially respected members of the jury, who are unaware of the notorious 
reputation of the company, precisely for the same project, here are some of the 
well-known facts and allegations.

Like for the last six years the rural, tribal and indigenous populations of 
Lanjigarh have suffered enormously as a result of the company’s ambitious 
aluminium refinery project. The refinery has poisoned the water and air, making 
life miserable for local people. As per reports of the Orissa Pollution Control 
Board, environmental norms and clearance procedures have been violated for the 
same. The company proposes to mine a thickly forested hill inhabited by Dogaria 
Kondhs despite consistent resistance.

Not only on the Indian soil, but in Zambia, Africa as well the company has 
flouted official environment rules. The Norwegian government has blacklisted 
the company for investments due to serious malpractices and contraventions of 
environment norms. Based on the Norwegian government’s report, the Supreme 
Court of India, in 2007, had stated that it cannot take the ‘risk’ of handing 
such a national asset (the Niyamgiri hills in Lanjigarh) to the company for 
mining bauxite. Never mind that the court also allowed the company’s Indian 
subsidiary to carry out the mining instead.How did the ‘expert’ jury of these 
‘renowned’ awards miss some of these very critical pieces of information?

Let us not fall into the trap of digging up the selection criteria and whether 
site visits are made to verify information provided by the companies, who apply 
to be considered for the award. Let us instead remind ourselves that the 
constituents, sponsors and members of the institutions that organise these 
awards are none other than the awardees themselves, if not of their clan.

The UK-based World Environment Foundation is one of the organisers and the 
other is the Institute of Directors, New Delhi.

Several former bureaucrats, judges and corporate stalwarts are part of these 
organisations and even the jury. While many of the jury members have told the 
media that they had dissociated themselves from the ‘Golden Peacock’ after the 
Satyam controversy, or are not active on the jury, others have been silent. 
Perhaps what has been most unfortunate and disturbing is the government’s 
endorsement of these ‘private’ awards, whose credibility and efficacy needs to 
be viewed with caution if not suspicion.

Like every year, this year too Vedanta was to receive its award at the ‘Global 
Convention on Climate Change’, in mid-June in Palampur, Himachal Pradesh — the 
home town of London-based corporate guru Madhav Mehra, also the founder of the 
World Environment Foundation. The quaint Himalayan town offers the perfect 
setting. Surrounded by forests and mountains the peacocks can preen in their 
feathers and conveniently forget about the ugly side of this business. This 
time however, a group of activists staged a demonstration at the opening 
ceremony to set the record straight on Vedanta’s Golden Peacock.

The slogans were clear and straightforward ‘Stop Green washing corporate 
crimes’ and ‘Stop selling climate change’. Prior to the protest more than 150 
organisations had written to the jury appealing for withdrawal of the award and 
dissociation from it. The Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh and other 
government officials also withdrew their participation in the event after the 
campaign against the award gained momentum and got media attention at the State 
level. While the organisers have decided to withhold and review the award, they 
must have realised by now that their bluff has already been called. 

Reply via email to