Introduction

The nature and extent of commercialization in the post reform period is so profound that it does not spare any sphere of life and affecting the people’s legitimate entitlements. In the absence of distinctive policies coupled with corruption and lack of political will resulted in exploitation of common natural resources by multinational companies (MNCs) in the developing countries. In this context, let us discuss the people’s resistance against excessive water exploitation and pollution of common resources in Plachimada village, Palakkad district, Kerala state. Broadening the dimensions of health, the current exercise describes it as people’s negotiations for right to livelihood.
The Problem
The Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverage Private Limited started a bottling plant in Plachimada village, Palakkad district, Kerala in the year 2000. The village economy which was primarily agrarian with a large number of labourers was affected adversely by the excessive use of water by the company. Further, the company promoted the use of waste material from the plant as fertiliser through which they solved the waste removal problem. But this practice eroded the soil fertility, contaminated the water and people developed various illnesses. The women had to walk long distance to fetch water due to drying of wells in the village.
For the first time in 2002, the villagers protested against the plant. The struggle was ignored by the main political parties and the authorities did not respond positively. The face of the struggle was Mayilamma, a 50 year old tribal woman from the village. Later, when it was supported by another tribal activist group who fight for tribal land rights and a small militant organisation, the media started focusing on the issues in Plachimada. But the state tried to suppress the protest; several women were injured and arrested. These issues generated wide debate in the media and national level activists like Medha Patkar (Narmada Bachao Andolan) visited the village and extended their support. Though the panchayat (local government) cancelled the plant’s license, the high court reinstated it.
The protest got weakened in between due to split in the local group – one group kept their identity as tribal labourers under the leadership of Mayilamma while the other group comprises of non-tribal and mostly landed small scale cultivators. But there were active contribution from academia and media in sustaining the struggle. The BBC radio reported the Plachimada issue in 2003, national NGOs published study reports, scholars published papers in reputed journals, documentaries were made and lab tests were conducted by several organisations. The lab test revealed the presence of cadmium and lead in dangerous proportions in the soil and water. These all pressurized the government to set up a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) which also emphasized the concerns raised by the activists. During this time, there were protests against Coca-cola plants in some other parts of the country too, and an alliance was formed to coordinate all the struggles.
The subsequent years witnessed enquiries by different committees and in 2011, the state government passed ‘the Plachimada Coca-Cola Victims Relief and Compensation Claims Special Tribunal Bill’, with the objective of ‘polluter pays’. But still the amount is not disbursed and the plant is functioning though with a restricted capacity. The people’s struggle is still going on.
Dynamics of Social Change
• The difference in perspective of ‘global’ and ‘local’ in the post reform world - Struggle against wide spread commercialization and asserting the right of local people over scarce common resources.
• Questioning the hierarchies of power and forcing the state and judiciary to rethink on their understanding of ‘public trust’ and entitlements of people.
• Asserting the rights of marginalized communities and the capacity to mobilize themselves– here tribal people, agricultural labourers and small farmers along with mobilization of women
Drivers of Change
• Popular mobilisation of tribal community, small farmers and women;
• Empowering through information dissemination and prompting to assert for their rights, development of ‘we’ feeling (though with some differences) and perseverance to attain their goal;
• New partnerships with state level and national organisations; collaboration with academia and media as well.
• Alliances with similar movements and coordinated action at the national level exerting pressure on government.
Levers of Power
The levers of power exercised in the struggle are delegitimation, practicing differently, and inspiration. Through the protest, they question the supremacy of the authority and their apathy towards people’s issues. Their strategies were not violent but peaceful ‘sit-in’ dharnas. The movement strengthened with support from similar struggles from other parts of the country. Similarly, the reports during this period question the very existence of soft-drink industry, questioning the contents in these drinks and its health effects. The ethical commitment of the protestors stands at the top. Though there are some spokespersons for the struggle, every member was equally involved with the movement. Inspite of the loss of working days, the poor labourers participated in the ‘satyagraha’ (a peaceful protest strategy). They alternately go for some work so that their hunger won’t kill the struggle.