Open Letter to the ADB President - please sign
Dear Friends,

You may recall that the protest events and mobilisation in Hyderabad, India
against the ADB AGM between May 3-6, 2006 faced unprecedented security measures.
Participants were harassed by the police and certain events were cancelled
because the Peoples Forum against ADB (PFAADB) was not able to get venues and/or
time of their choice.

Moreover, Indian and Andhra Pradesh governments' intelligence officers were
posted at the protest venues and places where participants stayed.

While the Indian Government and the Andhra Pradesh governments were the ones who
implemented the security measures, the ADB officials definitely enjoyed that
hospitality including having the AGM outside the city itself and miles away from
any possible demonnstration. Thistrampling of democracy was not even objected to
by the ADB rather they seemed to have heaved a sigh of relief.

Please find enclosed an Open Letter addressed to the ADB President strongly
condemning the security measures undertaken and asking for an explanation. This
is being circulated on behalf of PFAADB. The covering note could be changed
depending upon ones' needs.

The Open Letter has been drafted for sign on. Signatures and endorsement could
be sent to or forumcoordination@...

In solidarity
Souparna Lahiri
For Peoples Forum against ADB


July 24, 2006
Mr. Haruhiko Kuroda
President,
The Asian Development Bank
Manila, Philippines
Sub: Security Measures during the Annual Governors Meeting in Hyderabad.

Dear Mr. Kuroda,

We, the undersigned organizations and individuals, are writing to you to
register our strong protest against the completely unwarranted and harsh
security measures that were put in place during the 39th Annual Governors’
Meeting (AGM) of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in Hyderabad this May. These
measures amount to a violation of the democratic rights of all those who oppose
the policies of the ADB and reflect extremely poorly on the ADB’s claims
that it supports democracy, accountability and transparency. They are a clear
indication to us and to the world that contrary to the ADB’s rhetoric, the
ADB is not open or able to accept criticism, and is unwilling to tolerate
dissent with regards to its policies, ideology and operations.

You may wish to claim that you are not aware of the measures we refer to.
Allow us to remind you. From May 2-6, over 5000 people gathered in Hyderabad on
a broad platform titled the Peoples’ Forum Against the ADB (PFAADB). The
aim of this platform was to discuss the nature and impacts of the development
and financing model promoted by the ADB, and share the impacts of this model on
the peoples of the Asia-Pacific region. The spirit and intention of the PFAADB
was non-violent and peaceful. However, delegates to the AGM and members of the
press were given a completely false impression about the PFAADB, and PFAADB
events and plans were subjected to constant harassment and repression by State
security authorities. These include:

Any and all protests near the Hyderabad Convention Centre—the AGM
venue—were banned.
",1] ); //--> souparna.lahiri@... or forumcoordination@...

In solidarity
Souparna Lahiri
For Peoples Forum against ADB


July 24, 2006
Mr. Haruhiko Kuroda
President,
The Asian Development Bank
Manila, Philippines
Sub: Security Measures during the Annual Governors Meeting in Hyderabad.

Dear Mr. Kuroda,

We, the undersigned organizations and individuals, are writing to you to
register our strong protest against the completely unwarranted and harsh
security measures that were put in place during the 39th Annual Governors’
Meeting (AGM) of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in Hyderabad this May. These
measures amount to a violation of the democratic rights of all those who oppose
the policies of the ADB and reflect extremely poorly on the ADB’s claims
that it supports democracy, accountability and transparency. They are a clear
indication to us and to the world that contrary to the ADB’s rhetoric, the
ADB is not open or able to accept criticism, and is unwilling to tolerate
dissent with regards to its policies, ideology and operations.

You may wish to claim that you are not aware of the measures we refer to. Allow
us to remind you. From May 2-6, over 5000 people gathered in Hyderabad on a
broad platform titled the Peoples’ Forum Against the ADB (PFAADB). The aim
of this platform was to discuss the nature and impacts of the development and
financing model promoted by the ADB, and share the impacts of this model on the
peoples of the Asia-Pacific region. The spirit and intention of the PFAADB was
non-violent and peaceful. However, delegates to the AGM and members of the press
were given a completely false impression about the PFAADB, and PFAADB events and
plans were subjected to constant harassment and repression by State security
authorities. These include:

Any and all protests near the Hyderabad Convention Centre—the AGM
venue—were banned.
Barricades and check-posts manned by Hyderabad police were set up in a
radius of 5 kilometers around the AGM venue.

Official delegates to the AGM were advised to travel in official AGM buses
to avoid “security harassment.”

The Hyderabad Police imposed Prohibitory Orders under Section 144
throughout the city that prevented the assembly of more than 4 people at any
given time.

Rallies and other events in public spaces were permitted by Hyderabad
Police only along specific scheduled routes, chosen entirely with the intention
of ensuring least publicity to such acts of democratic expression and especially
to remain “unnoticeable” by AGM delegates. The Hyderabad Police
approved only two routes for demonstration rallies, both of which were on
deserted by-lanes of the city.

The Hyderabad police refused the PFAADB a venue of its choice to hold a
candlelight vigil, and eventually compelled it to cancel the event altogether;

Andhra Pradesh State authorities sabotaged the organization of a film
festival that aimed to screen films on the impact of ADB financed mega projects
on the lives of ordinary people throughout the Asia-Pacific region; in fact, the
management of the state-owned institute where the festival was supposed to be
held said they could not allow “government premises to be used for
anti-government activities;” this was indeed a big surprise for us since we
were not aware that the ADB had become the Government of India. And that
exercising one’s Freedom of Expression, the ground for all democratic
functioning, by organizing a Film Festival, was in itself an
“anti-governmental” activity! Clearly this speaks extremely poorly of
the faith ADB has in democracy itself.

Indian Intelligence Department officers were posted at the venue of
meetings organized by the PFAADB and attempted to record the names of
participants in the events, including by video; these officers also stayed at
the same venues where PFAADB participants were staying without identifying their
true identities and recorded the names and details of all PFAADB participants.
",1] ); //-->
Barricades and check-posts manned by Hyderabad police were set up in a
radius of 5 kilometers around the AGM venue.

Official delegates to the AGM were advised to travel in official AGM buses
to avoid “security harassment.”

The Hyderabad Police imposed Prohibitory Orders under Section 144 throughout
the city that prevented the assembly of more than 4 people at any given time.

Rallies and other events in public spaces were permitted by Hyderabad Police
only along specific scheduled routes, chosen entirely with the intention of
ensuring least publicity to such acts of democratic expression and especially to
remain “unnoticeable” by AGM delegates. The Hyderabad Police approved
only two routes for demonstration rallies, both of which were on deserted
by-lanes of the city.

The Hyderabad police refused the PFAADB a venue of its choice to hold a
candlelight vigil, and eventually compelled it to cancel the event altogether;

Andhra Pradesh State authorities sabotaged the organization of a film
festival that aimed to screen films on the impact of ADB financed mega projects
on the lives of ordinary people throughout the Asia-Pacific region; in fact, the
management of the state-owned institute where the festival was supposed to be
held said they could not allow “government premises to be used for
anti-government activities;” this was indeed a big surprise for us since we
were not aware that the ADB had become the Government of India. And that
exercising one’s Freedom of Expression, the ground for all democratic
functioning, by organizing a Film Festival, was in itself an
“anti-governmental” activity! Clearly this speaks extremely poorly of
the faith ADB has in democracy itself.

Indian Intelligence Department officers were posted at the venue of meetings
organized by the PFAADB and attempted to record the names of participants in the
events, including by video; these officers also stayed at the same venues where
PFAADB participants were staying without identifying their true identities and
recorded the names and details of all PFAADB participants.
Indian Intelligence officers were present inside the Hyderabad Convention
Center and recorded the names of NGO representatives attending the NGO-ADB
“Question Hour” held with you on May 3rd.

The Hyderabad airport was heavily fortified, as were the route from the
airport to
the AGM venue and the hotels where AGM delegates were staying.

Delegates of the PFAADB were harassed at the Hyderabad airport for merely
holding up anti-ADB placards. However, they had no problem whatsoever for a
plethora of welcome signs and graffiti associated with your ADB AGM.

The State Police attempted to harass PFAADB organizers by claiming that the
main venue for PFAADB events--Priyadarshini Hall in the Hyderabad Public
Gardens—could not be used for a gathering of such a large number of people
because it was near the State Assembly; this is despite the fact that prior
permission for using the space had already been granted by Municipal
Authorities.

You and the ADB Management will no doubt claim that it was not the ADB itself
that was responsible for the above measures and that these actions were carried
out by the police and security officials of the Andhra Pradesh State and Indian
Government. Legally speaking, this may be true. However, there no doubt in our
minds that the ADB must take responsibility at the highest levels for creating
such a climate of paranoia and intolerance before and during the Hyderabad AGM.
You cannot win a people by forcing them to be democratically constrained in
their own public spaces.

What happened in Hyderabad was not new to us at all. During the ADB AGM in
2000 in Chiang Mai, Thailand, the AGM venue was heavily fortified and Thai
security agents swarmed all over the alternative Peoples’ Forum events.
Paramilitary and police troops were even brought in from other regions in
Thailand to ensure the levels of security expected by AGM delegates. During the
ADB AGM in Honolulu in 2001, snipers were posted on the rooftop of the AGM
venue—the Honolulu Convention Centre--and the Convention Centre was
cordoned off from public passage. In fact so draconian were the security
measures that serious discord broke out between the Honolulu municipality, the
police, and the agencies charged with providing security for the AGM.
",1] ); //-->
Indian Intelligence officers were present inside the Hyderabad Convention
Center and recorded the names of NGO representatives attending the NGO-ADB
“Question Hour” held with you on May 3rd.

The Hyderabad airport was heavily fortified, as were the route from the
airport to
the AGM venue and the hotels where AGM delegates were staying.

Delegates of the PFAADB were harassed at the Hyderabad airport for merely
holding up anti-ADB placards. However, they had no problem whatsoever for a
plethora of welcome signs and graffiti associated with your ADB AGM.

The State Police attempted to harass PFAADB organizers by claiming that the
main venue for PFAADB events--Priyadarshini Hall in the Hyderabad Public
Gardens—could not be used for a gathering of such a large number of people
because it was near the State Assembly; this is despite the fact that prior
permission for using the space had already been granted by Municipal
Authorities.

You and the ADB Management will no doubt claim that it was not the ADB itself
that was responsible for the above measures and that these actions were carried
out by the police and security officials of the Andhra Pradesh State and Indian
Government. Legally speaking, this may be true. However, there no doubt in our
minds that the ADB must take responsibility at the highest levels for creating
such a climate of paranoia and intolerance before and during the Hyderabad AGM.
You cannot win a people by forcing them to be democratically constrained in
their own public spaces.

What happened in Hyderabad was not new to us at all. During the ADB AGM in 2000
in Chiang Mai, Thailand, the AGM venue was heavily fortified and Thai security
agents swarmed all over the alternative Peoples’ Forum events. Paramilitary
and police troops were even brought in from other regions in Thailand to ensure
the levels of security expected by AGM delegates. During the ADB AGM in Honolulu
in 2001, snipers were posted on the rooftop of the AGM venue—the Honolulu
Convention Centre--and the Convention Centre was cordoned off from public
passage. In fact so draconian were the security measures that serious discord
broke out between the Honolulu municipality, the police, and the agencies
charged with providing security for the AGM.
The repeated record of extreme and unwarranted security measures during ADB
AGMs that suspend the democratic rights of ordinary peoples to express dissent
openly through protests and other public activities cannot be a mere
coincidence.

We also find it inexplicable that an institution that carries as its motto
“Fighting poverty in the Asia and Pacific” is so scared of any
proximity with ordinary people. As we see it, one cannot fight poverty from the
confines of lavish conference venues and Five Star Hotels, financed mainly by
millions of poor and honest tax-payers the world over.

Since its founding, the ADB has been responsible for trampling on the rights
and aspirations of millions of people in the Asia-Pacific region by destroying
their livelihoods, natural resources and ways of life through terribly designed
projects and misguided mal-development policies. There are material and
verifiable reasons why communities and peoples across the region claim that the
ADB creates “development refugees” and are calling for the ADB to quit
the Asia and the Pacific. The experience of the ADB AGMs further demonstrates to
us that the Bank is capable of undermining democracy by its mere presence in any
given place.

We ask you to provide the people of Asia-Pacific, especially those negatively
affected by ADB projects and programmes, with a credible explanation for why
such security measures are considered necessary to protect the ADB from the
constituencies that the Bank is supposed to be assisting.

We look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
[Signatures]

",1] ); //-->
The repeated record of extreme and unwarranted security measures during ADB
AGMs that suspend the democratic rights of ordinary peoples to express dissent
openly through protests and other public activities cannot be a mere
coincidence.

We also find it inexplicable that an institution that carries as its motto
“Fighting poverty in the Asia and Pacific” is so scared of any
proximity with ordinary people. As we see it, one cannot fight poverty from the
confines of lavish conference venues and Five Star Hotels, financed mainly by
millions of poor and honest tax-payers the world over.

Since its founding, the ADB has been responsible for trampling on the rights
and aspirations of millions of people in the Asia-Pacific region by destroying
their livelihoods, natural resources and ways of life through terribly designed
projects and misguided mal-development policies. There are material and
verifiable reasons why communities and peoples across the region claim that the
ADB creates “development refugees” and are calling for the ADB to quit
the Asia and the Pacific. The experience of the ADB AGMs further demonstrates to
us that the Bank is capable of undermining democracy by its mere presence in any
given place.

We ask you to provide the people of Asia-Pacific, especially those negatively
affected by ADB projects and programmes, with a credible explanation for why
such security measures are considered necessary to protect the ADB from the
constituencies that the Bank is supposed to be assisting.

We look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
[Signatures]








Yahoo! Groups Links








",0] ); D(["ce"]); //-->



---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates
starting at 1˘/min.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]