韦金那亚克：科伦坡港口城僵局破解
2015-05-27 10:27
来源:共识网作者:都铎·韦金那亚克，译者：张树彬1023次点击:我要评论
“公众需要被告知，斯里兰卡政府已经签署了具有国际效力的协议，国家也会通过整个项目获益。万一取消该项目，政府可能不得不向开发商支付巨额赔偿。可能的环境问题也早已经被科伦坡南港工程造成了。国家对该项无需任何投入，但会在金融和经济上从该项目获益。
《每日金融时报》(Daily FT)是斯里兰卡一份面向首都科伦坡地区出版的英文日报，与其姊妹报纸斯里兰卡《每日镜报》(Daily Mirror)和斯里兰卡《星期日泰晤士报》(Sunday Times)，都是斯里兰卡的重要报纸。
该报网站2015年3月10日刊文指出，现任总理拉尼尔·维克拉马辛哈原本是科伦坡港口城项目的倡议者和支持者，现在却极力反对，令人费解。文章对科伦坡港口城项目被指控存在的所谓环境和安全等问题进行专业解读，提出了破解僵局的思路。
——译者按
斯里兰卡总统选举之前的一段时间内，当时的拉贾帕克萨(Rajapaksa)[1]政府遭到严肃的指控，大型公共工程被指称费用过高，存在大量贪腐。声称有些道路工程的建设费用是世界其他地方所建相似工程费用的数倍，中国承包商以过高的造价获得合同。
严厉的批评指向最近修建的高速公路，特别是目前在建的由中国投资者开发，时任总统拉贾帕克萨在其生日当天为工程奠基的科伦坡外环路(the Outer Circular Road )工程[2]，以及拟建的科伦坡至康迪高速公路(Expressway to Kandy)。还有针对中国投资开发的科伦坡港口城项目的指控，拉尼尔·维克拉马辛哈(Ranil Wickremesinghe)[3]告诉公众，如果反对党赢得选举，他们就会废弃该项目。
迈特里帕拉·西里塞纳(Maithripala Sirisena)[4]以承诺要打造诚实、透明的政府而赢得总统选举。公众大声要求揭露和惩处为那些罪行负责的人，并取消这些工程。
图为科伦坡港口城项目工地
选举之后，科伦坡港口城开发商中国交通建设公司(China Communications Construction Company ，CCCC)就立即通知记者，他们已经获得了所有必需的事先批准。政府发言人也向记者声明，政府认可该项目。但是，几天之后，拉尼尔·维克拉马辛哈总理就否认了这个声明，宣布指派一个委员会重新评估这项交易，并要求与中国就给予开发商的税收减免和土地获得等问题重新谈判。
科伦坡港口城项目面临着来自关心环境问题的团体持续不断的指控，并成为媒体每天炒作的节目。 而媒体播出的对此问题基本不知情的公众的评论则完全把情况扭曲了。
由于几个月后就要进行选举[5]，政府对公众舆论非常敏感，便指定了一个委员会和一个内阁小组来调查此事。与此同时，开发商仍在继续施工建设。这每天都被媒体炒作。最后，内阁发言人告诉公众，“内阁鉴于该委员会的中期报告，决定暂时停止该项目，并通知这家中国公司两周之内提交所有的审批文件。”
科伦坡港口城
中国交通建设公司拟建的港口城，需要围海造地233公顷(576英亩)[6]。斯里兰卡将拥有125公顷填海所得的土地，20公顷由中国交通建设公司拥有，剩余88公顷租期99年，将会出售给潜在的投资者。
2014年9月17日，中国国家主席习近平为斯里兰卡最大的外资投资项目科伦坡港口城开工剪彩。该项目预期耗资15亿美元。
中国交通建设公司声明
为回应各种停止科伦坡港口城项目的指控与动议，项目建议者中国交通建设公司在媒体上刊发广告声明，表示将会“与斯里兰卡政府充分合作，为评估和审查该项目提供所有必要的资料”。
这家公司在2014年“财富五百强“企业中排名187位，宣称作为一家负责任的企业，在该项目开始之初就遵循了所有必要的程序。
该公司称2010年开始项目开发之前，在斯里兰卡港口局(Sri Lanka Ports Authority)指示下，由莫勒图沃大学(the University of Moratuwa) 对项目进行了最初的技术可行性研究(Technical Feasibility Study)和环境影响评估(EIA, Environmental Impact Assessment)。
科伦坡港口城项目的技术可行性研究被斯里兰卡政府批准，为了公众的利益，项目的环境影响评估报告也予以公布。一俟公众询问获得解答，环境影响评估报告就获得了政府核准机构的批准。此外，中国交通建设公司还提交了环境管理计划 (Environmental Management Plan， EMP)，并在按照环评报告要求检测该项目对环境和海岸的影响后获得批准。
从提交报告到签署协议整个过程的持续时间延长到四年，以确保所有步骤都遵循政府的采购法规 。
背 景
据该公司的声明，1998年欧洲船长协会联盟(Confederation of European Shipmasters' Associations，CESMA)的一家新加坡公司第一次提出建设港口城的尝试。2004年公布由斯里兰卡和新加坡团队研发的最终方案， 建议在2030年之前建造一座“西区大都市”(“Western Region Megapolis“)。然而，由于在深水区建设防浪堤保护填海所造土地的成本巨大，该计划未能实施。
只是在防波浪堤与科伦坡港口扩建项目融合成为一体后，科伦坡港口城在财政上才变得可行。据该公司，他们在评估该项目的可行性时，向国际知名的开发咨询公司征寻了专家意见。
拉尼尔·维克勒马辛哈的建议
注意一下如下事实会很有意思，中国交通建设公司提及的“西区大都市”正是九十年代末库马拉通加政府[7]拟建的“科伦坡都市区域结构计划1998 ”(“Colombo Metropolitan Regional Structure Plan 1998)
拉尼尔·维克勒马辛哈曾撰写《科伦坡就是科伦坡》(Colombo is Colombo)一文，发表于2011年9月25日斯里兰卡《星期日时泰晤士报》(Sunday Times)，突出介绍了该计划(文章链接：http://www.sundaytimes. lk/110925/ news /nws28. html)。下为该文摘录：
“欧洲船长协会联盟的最终方案，系由斯里兰卡和新西兰团队共同研发。方案提议建设“西区大都市”，以科伦坡市为核心，从尼甘布(Negombo)延伸至贝鲁沃勒(Beruwala)。这将是一个850万人口的大都市，预期成为南亚唯一的一座规划好的城市。
“该方案建议内项链从莫勒图瓦(Moratuwa)到贾埃勒(Ja-Ela)，外项链从尼甘布(Negombo)到霍马格默(Homagama)再到卡卢特勒(Kalutara)。
“根据该计划，总计面积超过1033公顷，包括城堡区(Fort)[8]、贝塔区(Pettah)[9]、克鲁皮提亚区(Kollupitiya)和马拉达纳区(Maradana)在内的的整个地块，将成为新的市中心区(New Downtown)，商务金融区将建于区内，奴岛区(Slave Island)和加勒大道(Galle Road)将成为购物区。
“考虑到加勒菲斯绿地(Galle Face Green)[10]是具有历史意义的地标，为了使人们能够继续在此处眺望大海，商务区的扩展将从目前国防部岔路到南港延伸区(the South Port extension)填海造地，这将为科伦坡市增加20公顷多的土地。
“这是有史以来第一个把城市延伸至大海的建议。然而现在却有许多人宣称是他们提出了这些建议。港口、玛塔库利亚(Mattakkuliya)、格兰德帕斯(Grandpass)和克塔赫纳(Kotahena)(面积总计928公顷)将会成为一座港口城。港口城里有货船和物流枢纽，还有一个巨大的居民区。
“该计划完成于2004年4月，而此前我已经不再担任总理。因此，这个三卷本计划的正式文本移交给了时任总理马欣达·拉贾帕克萨”(摘录结束)
谁能理解，曾经提议并支持通过填海造地扩大商业区的拉尼尔·维克勒马辛哈，现在竟然会如此反对科伦坡港口城项目?
港口城环境评估被认可
科伦坡港口城建设方案现已通过环境评估，但环评报告有很多缺点。环境评估核准包含一份中国交通建设公司提交的环境管理方案。确保这些条件被开发商遵守是项目委托人的责任。如果一个项目已经被环境评估认可，总理有权力将环境评估否决吗?
有人指称，前政府内阁核准科伦坡港口城项目时，上午提交了内阁报告，晚上报告就获得了批准。即使环境评估和内阁是有错误的，那这怎么能让开发者负责呢?
人们要问，既然现政府内阁已经决定暂停港口城建设，那么谁来负责移除已经堆积在那里的岩石和其他材料?
从开发商的观点来看，他们已经遵循正确的程序获得了项目所需的所有法律要求和核准文件。“战略发展项目”下的免税协议需要在开工三个月内获得议会批准，但是现政府却拒绝向议会提交核准所需的必要文件。照此，免税期也会成为问题，但是施工是合法的。
环境评估核准之前未遵循适当程序和内阁匆忙核准环境评估等问题，应该由负责官员和内阁成员来回答，而目前他们当中就有人在现政府任职。
如果废除协议，开发商将会在地方法庭或者国际法庭索赔。观察一下过去类似性质的事情也会很有意思。
卡图纳耶克高速公路
卡图纳耶克高速公路(Katunayake Expressway)是在钱德里卡·库马拉通加(Chandrika Kumaratunga)政府任内，由一家韩国公司建设的。随着政府的更迭，2001年12月拉尼尔·维克勒马辛哈被任命为总理，新政府的紧缩货币政策减少了对承包商的付款，项目进程减缓，导致2003年1月合同终止。但是承包商并没有得到其应该获得的应付款项。
三年后，当拉贾帕克萨政府想要重新启动该项目时，就不得不首先解决原先的合同。数年过去，斯里兰卡国家公路发展局(the Road Development Authority ，RDA)对承包人提出的索赔几乎没有任何可以回旋的余地，赔付承包人27.94亿卢比才得以解决。
如果科伦坡港口城项目也被唐突地终止，斯里兰卡也将会不得不赔付大笔费用，而且还会造成中斯两国的关系紧张。
港口城的环境关切点
科伦坡港口城项目会造成所谓关心环境的团体和抗议者们宣称的环境灾难吗?港口城是深入大海的建设项目，不可避免会对环境有影响。但是，港口城的防浪堤和建筑物不会超越科伦坡南港(Colombo South Port)的防浪堤。
在斯里兰卡，洋流会将河流带来的入海泥沙往北冲。泥沙堆积在一些地段的岸边，洋流就侵蚀其他地段的海岸。这取决于海底的物理构造和洋流的速度与方向，洋流反过来也会改变风速和风向。研究海洋对某个地点的侵蚀很复杂，需要由相关专家进行。
与原来15米深、16米宽的入港通道相比，新开发的科伦坡南港引以为豪的船舶航行通道深19米、宽20米。这就意味着新港的入港通道需要不断疏浚，额外维持距海洋底部四米的深度，从港口口门开始到大海的深度才可以达到20米。持续不断的疏浚，实际上导致所有从斯里兰卡南部抵达的泥沙将会被清除掉，这一极其严重的情况将影响科伦坡北部的海岸地区。
科伦坡港口城的防浪堤只是将洋流方向移开，而科伦坡南港的防浪堤远远超过科伦坡港口城的防浪堤，因此科伦坡港口城防浪堤对环境的造成的影响是最低限度的。这样看来，与科伦坡南港所造成的环境破坏相比，港口城的影响可以说是微不足道的。任何活动，不论是建设或者是其他活动都对环境有影响，需要注意的是将积极的回报与消极的破坏进行比较。
供水和污水处理
有人指出，科伦坡供水体系和已有200年历史的污水处理系统无法应对港口城的需求。实际上科伦坡，特别是加勒菲斯(Galle Face)周边正在开发和拟建的许多开发项目，都面临同样的问题。科伦坡市政府应该立即对此引起注意。
安全关切
在批准中国交通建设公司拥有20公顷土地，其余88公顷以99年为期租售给潜在投资者时，投资开发者与政府有没有基于使用许可和斯里兰卡安全关切达成协议?缺乏一份双方共同认可的对中国交通建设公司拥有的土地使用许可，以及把土地授予其他投资者的许可，这需要与开发者一起解决。
政府要求开发商中国交通建设公司提交所获得的审批以供详细审查。这就又提出一个令人担心的事情。政府机构核准该项目应该有沟通的详细资料与核准原件。这些文件莫非是已经被利益相关各方错放了地方或者删除了?
未来方向
总统选举之前，现任政府的成员未经深入调查就做出各种各样的承诺。新总统的 “百日变革”计划(100-day program)时间过半，新的议会选举[11]日益逼近，公众呼吁新政府兑现竞选承诺。现政府尤其是总理，处境不妙，政府需要向公众显示有所动作，结果，科伦坡港口城的建设就暂停了。
科伦坡港口城项目系由中国国家主席揭幕开启，取消该项目会对两国双边关系带来严重关切。
科伦坡港口城项目建设不需要斯里兰卡政府任何花费，还可以获得125公顷的填海造地，这对于政府是获益。已有200年历史的科伦坡污水处理系统超期服役，亟待改善，而中国人会很高兴为此提供优惠贷款。港口城工程建设期间和后期的新投资还会创造大量的就业机会。如前所述，该项目的消极环境影响很低，因为大部分环境问题是由科伦坡南港早就造成的。
环评报告的批准方法和前政府内阁的审批已经受到公众的质疑，公众也通过推翻政府表明了他们的愤恨。中国交通建设公司作为开发商不能为过去政府的行为负责。
取消该项目会导致中国交通建设公司在国际法庭索赔，斯里兰卡将不得不支付巨额赔偿。移除已经实施的建筑也将花费不菲。
唯一的关切就是中国交通建设公司所拥有土地的使用和其他投资者对安全的关注。有权进入和检查有关国家的安全关切，需要讨论并就关于筛查项目的办法达成一致。当然，中国会理解，问题也会以彼此满意的方式加以解决。
公众需要被告知，斯里兰卡政府已经签署了具有国际效力的协议，国家也会通过整个项目获益。万一取消该项目，政府可能不得不向开发者支付巨额赔偿。可能的环境问题也早已经被科伦坡南港工程造成了。
国家对该项无需任何投入，但会在金融和经济上从该项目获益。
国家需要与每个国家保持良好关系，而中国是斯里兰卡的好朋友。至于土地被授予开发者和投资者，斯里兰卡有安全问题，这可以与中国开发者相互理解友善解决。
作者：都铎·韦金那亚克(Tudor Wijenayake)，特许土木工程师，毕业于斯里兰卡佩拉德尼亚大学(Peradeniya University)，受雇于斯里兰卡国内及海外，曾任斯里兰卡国家工程公司(State Engineering Corporation of Sri Lanka)总经理。
电子邮箱tudor@rivendaleresort.com
译者：河北经贸大学尼泊尔研究中心 张树彬
来源：斯里兰卡《每日金融时报》
链接：http://www.ft.lk/2015/03/10/settling-colombo-port-city-impasse/
英语原文
Settling Colombo Port City impasse
http://www.ft.lk/2015/03/10/settling-colombo-port-city-impasse/
Published : 12:01 am March 10, 2015
During the pre-election period, serious allegations were made against the Government for excessive costs and massive corruption in the awarding of large public projects. It was claimed that the costs of some road projects were several-fold over the similar projects built elsewhere in the world and that the Chinese contractors were awarded contracts at exorbitant prices.
Heavy criticism was directed at the recently-built expressways, especially the Outer Circular Road currently under construction, and the proposed Expressway to Kandy, for which then-President Rajapaksa laid foundation stones on his birthday. Allegations were also made against the Colombo Port City Project under development by a Chinese investor and Ranil Wickremesinghe informed the public that they would scrap the project if the Opposition won the 2015 presidential elections.
Maithripala Sirisena won the presidency over a promised honest, transparent government and public are clamouring to expose and penalise those responsible for misdeeds; and to cancel such projects.
Immediately after elections, the China Communications Construction Company (CCCC), the promoter of Port City, informed reporters that they have obtained all necessary prior approvals. The Cabinet Spokesman informed the reporters of the Government’s acceptance of the project. But a few days later Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe denied the statement and informed that a committee had been appointed to reassess the deal and the requirement to renegotiate with China over the tax concessions given to the developer and land ownership issues.
The Port City project is facing continuous allegations from groups concerning environmental issues, which is being highlighted by media in daily programs, and the airing of comments by the public who are mostly ignorant of the issue has completely twisted the situation.
With an election looming in a few months, the Government – sensitive to public opinion – appointed a committee and a Cabinet sub-committee to look into the issue. Meanwhile, the developer continued construction, which was highlighted daily by the media. Finally, the Cabinet Spokesman informed the public that “the Cabinet, considering the interim report of the Committee, decided to temporally suspend the project and advise the Chinese company to submit its approvals obtained within two weeks.”
The Colombo Port City
The development of the Port City as proposed by CCCC involves reclamation of 233 hectares (576 acres) from the sea. Sri Lanka will own rights to 125 hectares of the reclaimed land and 20 hectares will be held by China Communications, with the remaining 88 hectares on a 99-year lease to be sold to potential investors.
The Colombo Port City project, the largest foreign-funded investment in Sri Lanka, commenced on 17 September 2014, by Chinese President Xi Jinping, is expected to cost $ 1.5 billion.
Statement by CCCC
Amid various allegations and moves to stop the Colombo Port City Project, the project proponent CCCC, in a press advertisement informed it would “extend its fullest cooperation to the Sri Lankan Government and provide all necessary information for the purpose of assessing and reviewing the Project”.
The company, ranking 187th in 2014 among the ‘Fortune Five Hundred’ companies in the world, claims, as a responsible corporate, that all necessary procedures were followed in the initiation of the project.
The company claims that prior to undertaking the development of the project in 2010, an initial Technical Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Assessment of the Project was performed by the University of Moratuwa, under the directive of the Sri Lanka Ports Authority.
The Technical Feasibility Study was approved by the Sri Lankan Government and the EIA was published for the public benefit. Once public inquiries were answered, the EIA was approved by government-approved agencies. Additionally, an Environmental Management Plan (EMP) was submitted by CCCC and approved after monitoring the project’s environmental and coastal impact, as per the requirements of the EIA.
The total duration of the process from submitting the proposal to signing the agreement, extended to four years, to ensure all procedures of the Government’s procurement regulations were followed.
Background
According to the company, the first attempt for a Port City was made by the Singaporean company CESMA in 1998. The final plan published on 2004, developed by the Sri Lankan and Singaporean team, proposed a ‘Western Region Megapolis’ by 2030. However, the concept could not be implemented due to the vast cost in building the breakwater in deep water to protect the reclaimed land.
The Port City became financially feasible only when the breakwater was integrated with the Colombo Port Expansion Project. According to the company, they sought the expertise of internationally-reputed development consultancy firms in assessing viability of the project.
Ranil Wickremesinghe proposals
It would be interesting to note the ‘Western Region Megapolis’ mentioned by CCCC was the proposed ‘Colombo Metropolitan Regional Structure Plan 1998’ developed by the Kumaratunga Government in the late ’90s.
The proposal was highlighted in an article by Ranil Wickremesinghe in the Sunday Times of 25 September 2011 under the heading ‘Colombo is Colombo’ (http://www.sundaytimes.lk/110925/News/nws_28.html). Following are extracts from the article:
“The CESMA final plan, developed by the Sri Lankan and Singaporean team, proposed a Western Region Megapolis – stretching from Negombo to Beruwala with the city of Colombo as the core. The CESMA Plan provided the answer – a Megapolis of 8.5 million, which was envisioned as the only planned city in South Asia.
“The plan proposed an inner necklace from Moratuwa to Ja-Ela and an outer necklace from Negombo to Homagama and Kalutara. The Colombo Core was to be a high-density area with major facilities. The inner necklace was to consist of self-contained townships and was to be a medium-density area. The outer necklace was conceptualised as low-density townships.
“The plan proposed an inner necklace from Moratuwa to Ja-Ela and an outer necklace from Negombo to Homagama and Kalutara. The Colombo Core was to be a high-density area with major facilities. The inner necklace was to consist of self-contained townships and was to be a medium-density area. The outer necklace was conceptualised as low-density townships.
“According to the proposal, Fort, Pettah, Kollupitiya and Maradana with a total land area of over 1,033 hectares were envisaged as the New Downtown containing the Business and the Financial District. Slave Island and Galle Road were to be the shopping areas.
“The business district was to be extended by filling the sea (and adding over 20 hectares to the city) from opposite the turn-off to the present Ministry of Defence to the South Port extension, allowing for the historical landmark of the Galle Face Green to continue overlooking the sea.
“This was the first-ever proposal to extend the city to the sea. Yet many are now claiming authorship for such proposals. The Port, Mattakkuliya, Grandpass and Kotahena (an area of 928 hectares) were to become the Port City with a cargo and logistics hub as well as a large residential neighbourhood.
“The Plan was completed in April 2004. By then I had ceased to be the Prime Minister. Therefore the official copies of the three-volume Plan were handed over to the then Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa. For reasons best known to the UPFA Government they did not proceed with these plans.” (End of extracts)
Can one understand how Ranil Wickremesinghe, who proposed and supported the extension of the business district by filling the sea, would be in such opposition to the Port City?
EIA acceptance of Port City
Now it has emerged that the Port City proposal has been accepted by EIA, but there are many shortcomings in the report. The EIA approval had an Environmental Management Plan submitted by CCCC; ensuring these conditions were respected by the developer is the responsibility of the client. When a project is accepted by the EIA, does the Prime Minister have the power to overrule the EIA?
It is claimed that during the Cabinet approval of the Port City Project, the Cabinet paper was submitted in the morning and accepted in the evening. If the approval procedure of EIA and the Cabinet was faulty, can the developer be held responsible?
People are questioning, now that the Cabinet has decided to suspend construction of Port City, who will be responsible for the removal of rocks and other materials already deposited.
On the developer’s point of view, he has followed the correct procedure and obtained all legal requirements and approvals for the project. But the tax holiday agreement under the ‘Strategic Development Project’ needed to be accepted by Parliament within three months of commencement, but the present Government refused to submit the necessary papers to Parliament for acceptance. As such, the tax holiday would be in question, but the construction is legal.
The non-following of proper EIA procedure prior to approval and hurrying through the Cabinet needs to be answered by the responsible officials and the Cabinet members, some whom are presently with the current Government.
In case of revocation of agreement, the developer could claim damages either in local courts or in international courts. It would be interesting to look into past incidences of similar nature.
Katunayake Expressway
The Katunayake Expressway was under construction by a Korean contractor under the Chandrika Kumaratunga Government. With the changes on the political front, Ranil Wickremesinghe was appointed Prime Minister in December 2001. The tight monetary policies of the new Government reduced payments to the contractor and the progress slowed down, resulting in termination of the contract in January 2003. But the contractor was not settled his dues.
Three years later, when the Rajapaksa Government wished to re-start the project, the former contractor had to be settled first. Years afterwards the RDA had little leeway in negotiation on the contractor’s claim and in settlement the contractor was paid Rs. 2,794 million.
If the Port City too were to be terminated abruptly, Sri Lanka will have to pay a massive sum in settlement and relations between the two countries would be strained.
Port City’s environmental concerns
Can the Port City project create an environmental disaster as claimed by the so-called environmentally concerned groups and the protesters? The Port City is a construction into the sea and will definitely have an impact. But the constructions and breakwaters of Port City do not extend beyond the breakwaters of the Colombo South Port.
In Sri Lanka, sand brought by the flowing rivers to the sea are carried northwards by the ocean currents. Sand gets deposited on the shore at some locations and currents erode the shore on other locations, depending on the physical formation of the sea bottom and speed and direction of the currents, which in turn may modify with wind speed and direction. The study of sea erosion of a location is a complex study conducted by specialists on the subject.
The newly-developed Colombo South Harbour boasts of 18m depth and an access channel of 20m depth for ship movement, as opposed to the previous 15m and 16m respectively. This means the new harbour’s access channel requires constant dredging and maintenance of additional depth of 4m from the sea bottom, commencing from the harbour mouth until sea depth reaches 20m. This continuous dredging results in practically all sands arriving from south Sri Lanka being dredged away, an extremely serious situation which would affect coastal areas north of Colombo.
The Port City’s breakwaters would only divert the currents away, but the harbour’s breakwaters extend beyond, so the effects of the Port City’s breakwaters would be minimal. As such, compared to environmental damage caused by Colombo South Port, the effect of the Port City would be negligible. Any activity, construction or otherwise affects the environment and attention needs to be paid to positive returns vs. the negative damages.
Water supply and sewage disposal
It has been pointed out that Colombo’s water supply and the 200-year-old sewerage disposal system cannot cope up with the demands of the Port City. The numerous development projects under development and proposed in Colombo, especially around Galle Face, would face the same problem and the Colombo Municipality should draw attention to this immediately.
Security concerns
In the approval of 20 hectares to be held by China Communications and the remaining 88 hectares to be sold on 99-year leases to potential investors, has any agreement been reached by the promoter with the Government on the basis of usage acceptance and security concerns of Sri Lanka? The absence of an accepted basis of usage of land held by CCCC and awarding to other investors needs to be ironed out with the developer.
The Government requesting the developer to submit approvals obtained for scrutiny raises another concern. The Government agencies which gave approval for the project should have details of communication and originals of approvals. Have these files been misplaced or removed by interested parties?
Way forward
During the pre-election period, members of the present Government made various promises without inquiring in-depth; now under the 100-day program and with a looming election, the public is clamouring for the new Government to honour election pledges. The Government, especially the Prime Minister, is in a tight spot and the Government needs to show the public some action; as a result, construction was suspended.
The Port City Project was inaugurated by the President of China and cancellation of the project would have serious concerns in bilateral relations between two countries.
The construction of the Port City without any cost to the Government and Sri Lanka getting 125 hectares of reclaimed land is a profit to the Government. The improvement of the 200-year-old sewerage disposal system is long overdue and the Chinese would be happy to offer a concessionary loan for the improvement. Large employment generation during construction and afterwards with new investments would benefit the country. As shown before, negative environment concerns of the project are minimal as most problems were due to the Colombo South Harbour.
The approval methodology of the EIA and by the Cabinet of the previous Government has been questioned by the public and the people showed their resentment by overturning the Government. CCCC as project developer cannot be held responsible for the past Government’s actions.
The cancellation of the project can lead to CCCC claiming damages in international courts and Sri Lanka would have to pay enormous sums. Removal of construction already carried out will turn out be a costly exercise.
The only concern is the usage of land by CCCC and other investors over security concerns. A method of screening projects, with power to enter and inspect regarding the country’s security concerns, need to be discussed and agreed upon. Surely China will understand and problems could be solved in a mutually-satisfactory manner.
The public needs to be informed that the Government of Sri Lanka has signed an agreement which is internationally valid and the country is to gain by the entire project. In the event of cancellation of the project, the Government may have to pay a large sum to the promoter. The possible environmental problems have already been caused by the Colombo South Port Project.
The country does not undergo any expenses over the project, but will benefit financially and economically from the project.
The nation needs to have good relations with every country and China has been a good friend of Sri Lanka. Regarding the lands to be given to developer and offered to investors, Sri Lanka has security issues, which could be amicably settled with a mutual understanding with the Chinese developer.
(The writer is a Chartered Civil Engineer graduated from Peradeniya University and has been employed in Sri Lanka and abroad. He was General Manager of State Engineering Corporation of Sri Lanka.
He can be contacted on tudor@rivendaleresort.com.)
[1] 马欣达·拉贾帕克萨(Mahinda Rajapaksa)，2002年2月被任命为斯里兰卡自由党领袖。在2004年4月2日，其党“统一人民自由联盟”在2004年斯里兰卡大选获胜后，2004年4月6日，他当选为斯里兰卡总理。2005年11月18日当选为斯里兰卡总统。2010年1月27日赢得大选获得连任。2015年1月8日谋求第三次连任总统失败。迈特里帕拉·西里塞纳赢得选举，并于1月9日在科伦坡的独立广场宣誓就职，统一国民党(United National Party)领袖拉尼尔·维克勒马辛哈同时宣誓就任总理。
[2] 2014年 8月20日，中国二十冶集团承建的斯里兰卡科伦坡外环高速公路开工。
[3] 拉尼尔·维克拉马辛哈，2015年1月9日起担任斯里兰卡总理。1994年11月起担任斯里兰卡统一国民党领袖，此前1993年5月7日至1994年8月19日，2001年12月9日至2004年4月6日两度担任总理，奉行亲西方外交政策。
[4] 迈特里帕拉·西里塞纳，曾任斯里兰卡自由党(Sri Lanka Freedom Party)总书记，斯里兰卡卫生部长等职务，2015年1月8日赢得斯里兰卡总统选举，次日宣誓就任。
[5] 2015年1月12日，斯里兰卡新总统迈特里帕拉·西里塞纳组成临时内阁，发表讲话表示，新的临时内阁首要任务是：全力以赴完成此前承诺的“百日变革”计划，包括打击贪腐，消除权力过度集中现象，建立起英联邦国家沿袭的威斯敏斯特式的政府体制。100天后，即4月23日斯里兰卡现议会解散，举行新议会选举，由占有多数议席的党派领袖出任新总理，正式内阁则由新总理任命形成。
[6] 公顷为面积的公制单位，一公顷为10000平方米，比一个标准足球场面积稍大。233公顷合3495 亩。
[7] 钱德里卡·班达拉奈克·库马拉通加 (Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga) ，1994年8月出任总理，同年11月当选总统，成为斯里兰卡历史上第一位女总统;1999年12月再次当选总统(至2005年11月)。
[8] 城堡区，也译为福特区、要塞区，科伦坡市中心区，原为葡萄牙殖民者建造的要塞，斯里兰卡全国的神经中枢，议会、政府、银行、商店、旅游部门、航空和轮船公司所在地。
[9] 贝塔区，城堡区以东的旧城，有名的闹市区，纪念班达拉奈克国际会议大厦、斯里兰卡国家博物馆、德希韦拉国家动物园就在该区。区内还有许多佛教寺庙、印度教寺庙、清真寺、天主教堂、基督教堂等。
[10] 加勒菲斯绿地广场(Galle Face Green)地处于科伦坡城堡区黄金心脏地带，濒临大海、景色宜人。荷兰人统治时期，这里被当作防波堤和堡垒，后来1859年，由当时英国驻斯里兰卡总督主持开辟这片绿地，被用于板球场、赛马场和高尔夫球场。
[11] 据新华社报道，前总统拉贾帕克萨将在2015年4月23日现议会解散后举行的新议会选举中代表工党角逐总理一职。
责任编辑：黄南
