A joint statement signed by 180 civil society leaders and concerned citizens from 23 states has raised critical concerns over the recently proposed Disaster Management Amendment Bill. The bill not only represents a missed opportunity to strengthen the country’s disaster management architecture through a rights-based framework but also introduces changes that further weaken the existing framework. The statement emphasizes the urgent need for the Bill to be referred to a Select Parliamentary Committee for broader consultations and revisions.
The joint statement was endorsed by civil society groups, fisher organisations, environmental activists, and disaster-affected communities, raising critical concerns regarding the amendments. Key concerns include the removal of provisions related to loan relief, the exclusion of slow-onset disasters such as coastal erosion, droughts, and heatwaves from the Act’s purview, and the lack of comprehensive livelihood restoration measures for affected communities.
Key Objections:
The Regressive Deletion of Loan Relief Provisions
A central concern is the removal of Clause 13 of the Disaster Management Act, which empowered the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) to grant loan relief to disaster-affected individuals. The statement highlights that this removal “hinders the ability of affected communities, such as those impacted by the recent Chooralmala Mundakai landslide in Wayanad, to recover from their losses. It is a double whammy for people to continue paying EMIs for destroyed houses and repay agricultural loans despite the devastation of their crops.” The signatories have demanded the reinstatement of this clause. They advocate for a full waiver of loans for agriculture, housing, and livelihood (SHG) loans along with provisions for interest-free loans that should be reinstated as part of the recovery and rehabilitation process. “It is crucial to recognise”, the statement reads, “that while significant loan waivers have been granted to large corporations, the legitimate needs of disaster-affected individuals must not be overlooked”.
Amendment Weakens Compensation Framework
The Bill also proposes replacing the term “compensation” with “relief” in Clause 61, a shift that diminishes the support disaster-affected individuals can expect. Compensation ensures restoration, while relief is discretionary and inadequate. Signatories demand the reinstatement of “compensation” to guarantee adequate and equitable support for affected individuals, particularly informal labourers, small business owners, and agricultural workers, who often bear the brunt of disasters.
Other Critical Observations
● Centralisation of Authority: The Bill’s new provisions, including Clauses 8A and 8B, overly centralise decision-making and disaster fund allocation, undermining federalism and delaying disaster response. Clear guidelines and decentralised mechanisms are necessary for timely and effective disaster management.
● Transparency and Public Disclosure : The Bill must ensure that state and national disaster databases, along with crucial documents like hazard reports, are publicly accessible to foster transparency and community participation.
● Climate-Sensitive Framework: India ranks 7th in its climate vulnerability, making it one of the top countries facing impacts of climate change events and disasters. The crises faced by the Himalayan region is worsening by the year. Similarly states like Kerala, Gujarat, Assam, Manipur have faced massive floods in the last monsoons. Heatwaves, water scarcity and other issues have also become a prevalent phenomenon. It is critical that the disaster framework be strengthened with a climate sensitive approach.
● Rights-Based and Inclusive Approach: Vulnerable communities such as Dalits, Adivasis, urban poor and informal workers are disproportionately affected by disasters. The Bill must explicitly address equity, inclusion, and human rights to ensure comprehensive disaster response and recovery.
Call for Broader Consultations
The signatories strongly oppose the Bill’s passage without widespread consultations, as claimed by the government. They demand that the bill be thoroughly debated in the Rajya Sabha and referred to a Select Parliamentary Committee to integrate the experiences of disaster-affected communities and relief providers. This is essential to ensure a people-centric, inclusive, and climate-resilient framework that aligns with constitutional principles and international commitments.
C. Nicolas, Chairperson, Friends of Earth, India
Anirban Bhattacharya, Consultant, Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA)
For enquiries, write to us at: info@cenfa.org / foeindia21@gmail.com or call at 9809477058
