Affected communities of ADB Sri Lanka highway project: “We are being denied proper compensation”

ADB requested to move quickly on establishing an independent resettlement monitoring panel.

Proper compensation is being withheld from affected communities by the Sri Lanka Road Development Authority (RDA). This was one of the issues raised by the Joint Organization of the Affected Communities on Colombo Matara Highway (JOACMH) in a recent letter dated August 31, 2005 to Mr. Kunio Senga, Director General of the ADB South Asia Department. In the letter, the affected communities raised the following concerns:

  1. The additional compensation (25% of the compensation amount) that is due to severely affected families who own land and structures is being withheld by the RDA,
  2. Rent stipend and other relocation allowances are similarly being withheld, and
  3. Houses and lands are being grossly undervalued.
In addition to asking the ADB to ensure that these injustices are swiftly dealt with, the affected communities are pushing the ADB to soon set up an Independent Resettlement Monitoring Panel, as recommended by the ADB Compliance Review Panel, by incorporating this in the Action Plan that the ADB South Asia Regional Department will be submitting to the Board. Lastly, the affected peoples, in their letter, dispelled the argument that only a few people are complaining.

On September 19, Alessandro Pio, Country Director of the ADB Sri Lanka Resident Mission sent a reply to the affected peoples’ letter, stating that their office:

  1. will collect further information on the issue of the 25% ex-gratia payments, by looking into whether individuals are indeed entitled to it as stated in the resettlement plan,
  2. has requested a report on the land acquisition process to determine whether land & houses are being undervalued, and will make the report, after excising confidential information, publicly available, and
  3. take action to implement the external resettlement monitor.

Mr. Pio also reiterated that other redress mechanisms are available, such as the LARC and Grievance Committees, but affected communities argue that the LARC mechanisms are not effective and impartial as the RDA has significant influence over their members, and that the grievance committees are unheard of.