The Times of Zambia (Ndola)
November 27, 2006
A CONSERVATIONIST and concerned citizen has petitioned the National Assembly to thoroughly investigate the signing of a tourism concession agreement (TCA) for a 75-year land lease to the Legacy Zambia Holdings by Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA).
The petitioner also criticised the people of Mukuni Village for accepting to be used by Legacy as potential beneficiaries from employment to be created by Legacy Holdings.
The same thing had happened in the case of Sun Hotels where the Mukuni people were allegedly only employed as casual workers
Mr Kalaluka Mulyokela said in a letter dated November 20, 2006 that since numerous anomalies in the transaction had been brought to the public knowledge, there was need for the parliamentary committee on energy, environment, water and natural resources to probe the matter thoroughly.
Many legal requirements of the Zambian laws had not been followed and the environmental impact assessment (EIA) was inadequate as it failed to identify and address the expected negative impact.
"Having gone through the EIA, I am sure that many things need to be addressed and that the path taken by ZAWA need to be corrected before we see many of our parks sold or unjustifiably encroached."
HE said no tender procedures were followed in allocating 220 hecatres of land in the national park to Legacy, which had only won a bid for two hectares initially advertised.
He also said former vice-president, Lupando Mwape, in his speech to unveil the foundations stone on July 29, 2006 allegedly intimidated the Environmental Council of Zambia (ECZ) by saying the Government had already sanctioned the project, which was not correct because the project was subject to approval by ECZ.
Mr Mulyokela also accused ZAWA of not consulting many stakeholders and concerned citizens, resulting in many people being caught unawares by the project.
The EIA scoping meeting also which should have accorded the developer an opportunity to get views from the public turned out to be a muscle flexing forum where ZAWA stressed that it did not need to consult anyone.
It was the custodian of national parks, regardless whether there were other heritage sites controlled by other statutory bodies.
The petitioner also complained that the November 11, 2006 EIA public hearing meeting was allegedly hijacked by politicians as cadres were ferried to the meeting to intimidate objective views deemed against the project and showered racist remarks on those with genuine views.
ZAWA created a problem by allowing such developments in an area meant for minimal developments and insisted that the EIA was not comprehensive and failed to bring out ecological impact and provide practical mitigations.
The expected total cutting of indigenous trees and others was also likely to affect the park adversely.
He questioned why ZAWA gave three per cent of the park and 15 per cent of the river frontage at the expense of other well deserving users to one investor.
Mr Mulyokela said the area in question was within the 30 kilometre radius of Zambia's only world heritage site the Victoria Falls and giving it out without consultation with other international stakeholders was an affront to international treaties that Zambia was a signatory to.
"UNESCO in whose classifications and management guidelines are drawn has indicated in not uncertain terms that they will down grade the Victoria Falls and further decampaign Zambia as unenvironmentally friendly tourism destination.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment