Streets as Commons (Bengaluru)

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search

(from Vocabulary of Commons, article 41)

by Vinay Sreenivasa

Streets as commons
What’s happening to our streets?

Streets and their sidewalks are the main public places of a city; they are its most vital organs. Think of the city and what comes to the mind? Its streets. —Jane Jacobs, 1961.

Irrespective of how we define the word street and understand it, we all know that the space between two rows of buildings in a city—the space containing the road, the tree, the pani-puri stand, the street-light—is changing. For this chapter, we shall take the street to mean that space defined above. The street is the tarred road and the footpaths together. It contains the trees and the light-poles, car and the cart, sleeping places and walking places, street-side benches and buses. In Indian cities today, streets serve various purposes—transport, market spaces to earn livelihoods, to source goods, to sleep (for the homeless), as socialising spaces in the form of street-side benches, and as urban forestry locations. Streets which are meant to be shared by all are a form of urban commons.

This chapter takes a look to the changes happening in Bengaluru’s streets and why it may be happening. It is probably similar to what is happening in the rest of the Indian cities. Rapid urbanisation within the context of liberalisation is changing the traditional relationship between people and the space around them. The fundamental change is that access to streets is becoming easier for an advantaged few, at the expense of the majority. In occupying more space on the streets, the advantaged are reducing the amount of space for the rest.

Here is a quick look at a few significant projects and developments in Bengaluru and the impact it is having on Bengaluru’s streets. The majority of sources are drawn from newspaper accounts, interviews, and personal experience. Drawing this into, and placing this within, a more academic approach will be done as follow-up work. This chapter documents the changes wracking the city in recent years.

Licensing and Controlling of Assemblies and Processions (Bengaluru City) Order, 2009

In March 2009, the Commissioner of Police of Bengaluru City, with the approval of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of Karnataka (GoK) brought out an order to ‘control and regulate assemblies and processions’. This was issued because ‘it was observed that smooth flow of traffic in Bengaluru City is being affected due to the processions and assemblies of persons that are organised by political, religious and social groups’. This order states that no procession1 or assembly2 will be allowed in Bengaluru without obtaining a license under this order. Inspite of opposition to this order from political parties3 and civil society, this order has been brought into force.

The impact of this order has been that even for a marriage procession or any religious procession with more than 25 people, a license from the police is required. For a protest march with more than 25 people or to organise a gathering of more than 250 people, a seven day notice is required. This appears to be a clear attempt not just to impose a certain ‘order’ to the streets but also to stifle dissent. As a result of this order, any social event on streets now needs a license from the law and order machinery.

The local police stations seem to have taken this up with gusto. Although the order says that a seven day notice and license is required for gatherings of more than 250 people (if they are stationary), police stations try to press for a license for even the smaller protests. On more than three occasions in 2009 and 2010, local police stations have tried to prevent us (as members of Hasiru Usiru and other groups) from carrying out protests because we did not inform them seven days in advance. On two of the occasions, making a call to the higher-ups in the police department helped us carry out the protest. On one occasion, an inspector allowed us to protest but not on the footpath (which on that road was very wide) but away from the road and footpath, inside a large bus depot on a side where there are hardly any people. This order is leading to a stifling of dissent within the city.

Streets are not just meant to be a passage for vehicles but also spaces for celebrations, social gatherings and dissent. India has a long tradition of displays of joy, anger, sorrow, and political expression in the street. The order mentioned above is dangerous for the impact it has on streets and the practice of democracy, and indeed life, in Bangalore. It clearly states that it gives priority to vehicular traffic over all other purposes at all times. Not only is this an attempt to reserve the streets for vehicular traffic and little else, but it also hands over sole control of the commons to the law and order machinery. This reduces access to the streets for a variety of uses and makes the street less of an urban commons.

Eviction of street vendors in Shivajinagar

Since July 2010, the street hawkers of Bengaluru have been the victims of forcible eviction by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP, Greater Bengaluru Metropolitan Council), the police and Muzrai departments who have undertaken an aggressive and continuous exercise to ‘clear’ the streets and pavements of Shivajinagar without giving any prior notice or allocation of any alternate location.

In March 2010 the Urban Development Department (UDD), GoK passed an order to all urban local bodies in the state stating that the Karnataka high court, through its order in WP14607/20084 has directed GoK to comply with the judgment reported in AIR 2004 SC 416 of the Maharashtra Ekta Hawkers Union and another vs Maharashtra Municipal Corporation, Greater Mumbai and Others. This order by the UDD, GoK also asks the local bodies to implement the conditions mentioned in the above mentioned order. These conditions included among others the following— There should not be any hawking

  • Within 100 metres of any place of worship, holy shrine, educational institutions and hospitals.
  • Within 150 metres from any municipal or other markets or from any railway station.
  • On foot-bridges and over-bridges.

Following this order, on 6 July 2010, the BBMP evicted around 350 vendors from their place of business in the area surrounding Shivajinagar bus-stand. The vendors had been conducting business for the last 2515—20 years on these streets. Around 120 of them were given an alternate location for their business at a lane close-by in which there is hardly any pedestrian movement. As a result there has hardly been any business. The remaining 230 people have been left with no place to run their business and so have no incomes since July. After the evictions, the vendors met the local police station inspector and visited the local corporation office several times but have not been allowed to resume their business again. When they did try and sit there again, the police chased them away and confiscated their goods.

The vendors along with other progressive organisations and groups have had two protests in October and November 2010 at the BBMP head office demanding that they be allowed to resume business at their original place of business. After two protests, the mayor has finally agreed to meet them. It is still unclear as to whether they will be allowed to go back.

The police and the BBMP have been saying that they evicted the vendors because it was inconveniencing pedestrians. They are not, however, open to looking at mechanisms where both can be accommodated. For instance in Shivajinagar, the footpaths are eight feet wide in some cases, and if three feet is given to vendors and the rest for pedestrians, both groups can use the footpaths. The state likes to make it an either-or case, pitting the pedestrians against the hawkers. They try to push through the argument that pedestrians are inconvenienced by hawkers. As the cars increase, roads get bigger and footpaths narrower, pedestrians (most of whom are walking since they cannot afford anything else) and the hawkers are forced to fight for the shrinking footpath.

This particular eviction drive, where the vendors have not been able to come back even after four months, has been only in the Shivajinagar area of Bengaluru (for now). While other areas of Bengaluru have been facing increased threats to vendors, there have been no such long term eviction drives yet. However, it is easy to imagine that other such drives are likely to appear in the future.

The case of free parking

Bengaluru city has free parking for its two-wheelers and four-wheelers. As a result of this policy, private vehicles can park for as long as they want on the streets, without paying for the space. Not only do they park on the tarred portion, reducing space for other vehicles, they sometimes park on footpaths also, obstructing pedestrians. While parking space on streets may be spoken of as commons too, the fact remains that private vehicle owners, facing no charges for using the commons, tend to over-exploit it and reduce the space available on the streets for the other users. Ironically while free private parking increases more private vehicle usage and abuse of the commons, the state’s transport minister is supportive of this policy.5

Making the poor ‘invisible’ on city streets—Anti beggary drive and urban homeless census

The social welfare department of Karnataka recently launched a beggary eradication drive to ‘remove’ the beggars from the city.6 People found begging were rounded up and taken away to the beggars’ homes.7 People who have nothing and have taken recourse to begging are being denied that too. In a country where the informal sector has no provisions of pensions or any other social security, many people are forced to beg when they cannot work due to old age, ill-health or other vulnerabilities. However, the state views the people who are begging as a problem and as ‘something that needs to be cleared off’. Begging on the streets should ideally be a legitimate right of anyone residing in the city. Acts like the Bombay (Prevention of Beggary) Act8 which criminalise begging have been around for a long time but people have managed to continue begging. However in recent times, the state seems to be determined to make them ‘invisible’ and is mobilising the law for that purpose.

As for the urban homeless, they have no option but to use the streets as living spaces in spite of facing sexual harassment, torture from the police or criminals.9 They mostly do not exist in any government records and barely have any documentation.10 The state does not recognise their existence. And in some ways, this probably is better than what is happening currently. Based on an order by the Supreme Court in a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Peoples Union for Civil liberties (PUCL), GoK recently conducted a census of the urban homeless. After the census, the government declared that Bengaluru had only 2533500 people who were homeless.11 However a recent initiative by a group of NGOs in Bengaluru had identified 17,141 people who were homeless in a survey of just two nights.12 If these organisations could identify seventeen thousand people in just two nights, one fails to understand how the government identified only 3500 people after such a census! Earlier, the homeless were not there on any records, but at least had the possibility of being counted. Now with a official census saying there are only 3500 people, the state has effectively made the rest of the homeless in the streets permanently invisible.

It is shocking that a city which provides free parking to cars on its streets, constructs flyovers for cars to move well, that does not permit the homeless or people who are begging to use the streets as living spaces.

Street trees

Street trees in Bengaluru face multiple threats. Around ten thousand street trees have made way for road widening, the Bengaluru Metro and other projects in Bengaluru recently. Transport projects like the metro and road widening are essentially a response to the congestion crisis created by cars. However, by cutting trees to implement these projects, the state is depriving the whole population of the benefits of street trees. Recent research13 has shown that street trees in Bengaluru have a huge role to play in keeping the city cool and reducing pollution, something that clearly benefits all city dwellers. Trees on the streets make it easier for people to walk, to cycle and for vendors to run their business under shade. In spite of the fact that this indiscriminate tree cutting benefits some users at the cost of all others, this seems to be an accepted practice in the city.

The other issue is that the BBMP has decided to plant trees with smaller canopies only14 and ignore trees with larger canopies. In addition, the BBMP in its recent moves to improve footpaths has concretised every inch without leaving any space around the tree for water percolation, leading to their imminent fall. If this was not enough, BBMP has designed its newer roads in such a way that even if some one wants to plant a tree on the road, there will be no space.

Transport and the streets

Much has already been written about the issue of how transport is dominating the streets. In this section we will have a brief look at the major transport projects in Bangalore and their likely impact.

Bengaluru Metro, Monorail and High Speed Rail Link

Bengaluru is building a metro rail at a cost of more than 25,000 crores (Phase 1 and 2 put together at present cost).15 A lot has been written earlier about the impact the metro on the local economy,16 livelihoods17 and street trees.18 CASSUM’s work19 also shows how metros lead to gentrification of the corridors along which the metro will run. In spite of these known socio-economic and ecological impacts, Bangalore also plans to have a mono-rail and a high speed rail link to the airport. This decision has been taken by the Industries Department20 GoK. These three projects will create a total length of 200km of trains systems on the city’s streets with most if it being overground.

Signal-free corridors

In BBMP’s budget speech of 2009–2010, the commissioner of the BBMP announced a project to make seven corridors in Bengaluru signal-free.21 He mentioned that this was being done as directed by an extra-constitutional body ABIDe. The total plan involved grade separator projects and road widening across the 12 arterial corridors in the city.22 For just seven of these corridors 60 underpasses/flyovers will be constructed to provide motorists a ‘signal-free’ corridor so that they travel faster. Signal-free corridors make life that much more difficult for pedestrians since there is now no signal to cross the road. Not only pedestrians, but cyclists too get impacted as they need to go up and down many underpasses and flyovers. The resulting high speeds on the roads will drive pedestrians and street vendors away from the road, changing the very nature of the road. While transport is edging out all other uses of our streets, it is critical to note that it is only private motorised transport which is benefiting and not non-motorised transport like cycling and walking.

Road widening

Bengaluru had 1.6 lakh cars in 1998 and 5.1 lakh cars in 2008. The number of people who walk in Bengaluru reduced by half from 2006 to 2008, and the number of cyclists reduced by half too. Traffic congestion in Bengaluru has increased rapidly. From the data it is clear that the increase in private transport, especially cars, is one of the main causes for the congestion. However, between 2005 and 2007, the Bengaluru Mahanagar Palike (BMP)23 and the BBMP issued notifications for widening 91 roads. These notifications were issued based on an order passed by UDD, GoK. BBMP wants to widen these roads to reduce traffic congestion in Bengaluru city. The plan involved widening of roads by acquiring private property (homes and shops), and cutting thousands of trees. BBMP however did not (and still does not) have enough money to acquire private property, so they instead offered a toll called Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)24 which property owners can sell to others or use that to build extra floors. However, barely any property owners have accepted this offer.

This coupled with the fact that a campaign against road widening was launched and a PIL25 was filed against this project by Environment Support Group and others delayed the project. (The campaign itself is elaborated in the section on decision making).

Inspite of the fact that such projects would only be adding more capacity, encourages private transport like cars and makes travel more difficult for pedestrians and cyclists, the corporation has not abandoned this project. What is of interest is that while BBMP has not been able to widen roads where private property is involved, it has widened roads where no acquisition of private property was involved. BBMP has widened six of the 91 roads—Mysore Road, Sheshadri Road, Racecourse Road, Palace Road, Hosur Road and Magadi Road. In most of these roads, huge rain trees and other old trees have made way for wider roads. In Hosur road, portions of a cemetery adjoining the road have also been dug up. That portion of the street which was the commons (trees) has been removed to make way for private transport. The situation in Racecourse road best illustrates it. Trees were cut on this road to widen it. Now cars are parked on both sides of the roads. Public assets (trees) made way for private resources (parking). The Assistant Commissioner of Police (Traffic) who is the chief bureaucrat in charge of traffic in the city admitted that widened roads are becoming parking lots.26

While one concern is that the road is being widened and trees are being sacrificed to encourage private transport, there are other serious issues with this project. This project seeks to reduce the loss of private property owners who lose out, but does nothing to compensate for the loss of tenants who have shops on the roads or for street vendors who might lose out on space to carry on with their business. There is no talk of compensation for these groups. This project seeks to change a commons in a way that will make life difficult for pedestrians, who will find it tougher to cross and cyclists who will find it difficult to ride. Street vendors will have a treeless road with high traffic and lower pedestrian movement. In addition in case the project is executed as per plan, then a lot of the smaller shops in the older areas of Bangalore will be demolished, hitting the informal economy very hard. One is not saying there should never be a rearranging of the road space. Rather, when there is a rearrangement, it must happen after statutory consultations with the users of the space. This rearrangement must also allow for better transportation by giving priority to walking, cycling and buses.

Decision making

People have had absolutely no formal role in the decision making of all of these projects which impacted the streets. People have had to wrest the decision making power through their actions.

For instance, after the road widening project was announced a spirited campaign led by Environment Support Group (ESG), Alternate Law forum (ALF), CIVIC under the banner Hasiru Usiru ensured that the Chief Secretary, GoK declared that road widening would be done after consulting the public, in particular Hasiru Usiru.43 The Karnataka high court also passed an order asking ESG and Hasiru Usiru to be consulted on issues of road widening. However when this did not happen, ESG and others went to court again in 2008 ‘challenging the legality of the road widening schemes and the fact that the interests of pedestrians, senior citizens, school children, differently abled, and other road users have been ignored’.44 This PIL brought out clearly how the road was supposed to be used as a commons and how road widening would ensure that the road would serve only a few.

Decision

Agency which took the decision

Implementing agency

Party in power *State #BBMP

Year in which the decision was taken

People’s role in the process

Road widening

GoK-UDD, BBMP, High court of Karnataka

BBMP

*Congress (I) #Congress (I)

2005

  • Campaigns, 1 2 Public Interest Litigation 3 and protests 4 5 stalled road widening in most roads
  • Court appointed committee6 of experts to look into issue. Committee allowed for public participation only after court directs it to.
  • No formal role offered to people from BBMP.

For chronology of campaign from 2007 to 2009 see: http://www.esgindia.org/campaigns/Tree%20felling/Hasire%20Usiru/current_09.html)

Metro

High court of Karnataka; GoK, GoI

Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited

*Congress (I) – JD(S)
#Congress (I)

2004 – 2006 7

  • Some Resident Welfare Associations 8 and civil society groups supported the Metro
  • Tenants and some property owners 9 10 , and some civil society groups protested against the Metro on issue of land acquisition, alignment, ecology 11 and the decision making process 12
  • Court appoints committee to look into grievances of people in one road 13 . People of CMH road petitioned the committee.
  • No formal role in governance process

Signal-free corridors

ABIDE, BBMP

BBMP, BDA

*BJP
#No elected government

2009 14

  • Property owners against the project
  • Some organisations protesting against the project
  • No formal role in government process

Vendor evictions

Bangalore City Police, BBMP, GoK-UDD, High court of Karnataka

Bangalore City Police

*BJP
#BJP

2010 15

  • Vendors and organisations protesting against the evictions
  • No formal role in govt. process

Rules for public processions

Bangalore City Police

Bangalore City Police

*BJP
#No elected Government

2009

  • Civil Society and opposition parties protested the move
  • No formal role in government process

Free Parking (this decision was taken by an elected BMP council in 2005 and has not been reversed since)

BBMP— unelected, elected

BBMP

*Congress (I),
*BJP
*Congress (I),
#No elected Government

2005 16

  • Some organisations demand ban on free parking
  • No formal role in government process

Anti-Beggary Drive

GoK

GoK—Social Welfare Department

*BJP
#BJP

2010

  • Not much organised protests
  • No formal role in government process

Urban Homeless Census

GoK, Supreme Court of India

GoK— Directorate of Municipal Administration

*BJP
#BJP

2009–2010

  • Urban Homeless played no role
  • Some NGOs worked with the government on the census

Wall Paintings

BBMP

BBMP

*BJP
#No elected Government

2009

  • BBMP open to suggestions and volunteers, no formal role
  • No organised move for or against

Source: Compiled by author

Along with the PIL, there was a vigorous campaign which involved many workshops, protests and community meetings to highlight the issue with road widening. The court appointed a committee of experts to review road widening and other infrastructure projects and take peoples opinion before passing orders which would be binding on authorities. The committee initially did not allow public participation and relented only after the court intervened again. The committee meanwhile functioned in an arbitrary manner and allowed two roads to be widened. The court passed a final order in the case45 saying BBMP could proceed only if they strictly follow the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act and Karnataka Tree Preservation Act.

In 2010, the BBMP again started speaking of road widening and began issuing notices for TDR. Resident’s Associations46 and Hasiru Usiru once again started protests.47 Later a huge protest was organised by the Save Bangalore Committee, where around a 1000 people from more than 60 roads came to protest the move.48 These protests along with the fact that people refused TDR ensured that roads which had private property at stake were not widened, However BBMP continued to widen roads where public property was at stake or the rare case where TDR was accepted, for instance on Jayamahal road. In this case, as this chapter is being written, a campaign49 is going on to save this road. In fact for the first time after the new council was elected, Hasiru Usiru arranged for a public meeting with elected corporators to discuss this issue.50 It is all these public actions which have saved the roads of the city from the state itself.

From the table, it is also clear that most decisions concerning the streets of the city have taken place outside the city government. Decisions have been taken at a higher level or by agencies at the city level, which are outside of the ambit of the city corporation. If even the city corporation is not involved in these decisions, how do people of the city even indirectly participate in the decision making? Even in the decisions taken by the city corporation, these have not been discussed or put through ward committees, the constitutionally mandated ward level decision making body. In fact for the last four years, Bengaluru has not even had ward level committees.

Informally people may have managed to influence smaller decisions. For instance, it is rumoured that people managed to change the route of the metro in exchange for money. Formal approaches have not helped to change the route of the metro or the decision to have the metro itself. If we are to really work to establish the discourse that streets are urban commons and have it looked at that way, we need to be able to think of a way of altering the formal or informal decision making structures in such a way that decisions impacting streets are taken at a local level, involving people who are impacted by the project. It is clear also that these projects which have negatively impacted access to the streets to a majority have been taken by parties at opposite ends of the political spectrum. When it comes to the impact on streets, irrespective of political affiliation it looks like the decision making impacts the streets and the people negatively.

Another crucial aspect to be noted is that the courts have stepped in on decision making on some of these big projects. It is also important to note that the judgments of the courts have been in line with the argument of the state and their judgments have had a role in restricting access to the streets. In a PIL filed by ESG and others on the metro case, (WP13241/2009)51 the judgement was delivered more than a year after the PIL was filed and much after the metro destroyed entire parks and roads. While the judgement is path-breaking in terms of mandating public planning in infrastructure development, it must also be noted that even as the judgement recognises mistakes have been made in the way the project is implemented, it does nothing to restore the destroyed streets and parks and chooses not to interfere since the project is at an advanced stage.52

Reclaiming the streets

Streets are increasingly serving only as transport corridors and little else. Even in terms of transport, they are serving the advantaged (private vehicles, metro users) more than the others. These changes are making the streets lose their vibrancy and in turn affecting social life in the cities. There is an urgent need to reclaim the streets as vibrant social corridors and make them work equitably for all users. Or in the least, this is how many activists feel. However, the perception of the majority in the city might be different. There have been a significant number of people who feel that the trees belong to all and that they must be saved. But one sees that more people have come out on protests to save their properties from being acquired than the number of people who come out to save trees. Even with the evictions of the vendors, it is the vendors who lost their rights who have come out strongly in protest. There have not been many voices of protest otherwise. However, at least some do feel the need to reclaim the streets.

One way of reclaiming the streets would be to make sure that streets are indeed regarded as commons and are governed that way. However it is difficult to say if urban areas, especially built areas like streets, should be considered public spaces or commons. As Dr. Solomon Benjamin has said in another chapter in the same issue, we can look at processes of commoning to reclaim our streets. There can however be no one strategy to reclaim our streets. Multiple strategies are required.

The first task would be to deal with the depoliticisation of the city. In a depoliticised environment, talk of equitable and just use of streets does not really cut much ice with the people. Although projects like the metro and road widening lead to a certain gentrification of the city and change the local economy, the way the city works, these changes do not get recognised in a depoliticised environment. Some of the decisions on the streets needed to have been taken through a political process but instead have been at the behest of technocrats and corporate interests. If we did have a politicised city, a political environment and the resulting processes might have ensured that projects like the Bengaluru Metro or the Licensing of Protests and Assemblies Order might not have been pushed through. There needs to be a politicisation process—a mobilisation process which engages minds in the city. Along with the politicisation, we need to be able to deepen the democratic processes in the city. We should be pushing for a greater role for the elected representatives of the city corporations in decision making of the city. Corporators are more easily accessible to people than are MLAs or bureaucrats. In addition, there is a need to push for elected ward committees in each ward. Other than the ward committees, which will be part of the formal governance structure, informal structures and processes also need to be conceived. For instance, every time a major change to a street is proposed, the socio-economic impact assessment of the changes should be made mandatory. This assessment needs to be done by involving users of the street. This is one way of getting control of the streets back to the street-users.

Another aspect which needs to be further researched is the role of the judiciary and recent jurisprudence affecting city streets. We cannot escape the fact that some of these issues will be taken to court and that decisions taken by courts will impact our streets. The vendor evictions in Bangalore actually were triggered off by a PIL in the Karnataka high court asking for a order of the Maharastra high court (related to street vendors) to be implemented. Further research also needs to be conducted on the recent jurisprudence related to city streets.

Then there is of course a need to look at the technical solutions to transportation problems for streets to be reclaimed. Unless the dominance of the car is uprooted, we cannot save our streets. There is a need to push for policies which will make the city safer for cyclists and pedestrians, will increase the share of buses and reduce those of cars in the city. There is much written elsewhere on what is to be done on urban transport.

As for street trees, there is a need to evolve a street tree policy from bottom up. We need to speak to the traditional gardening communities in the city,53 urban ecologists, people who depend on trees (pedestrians, vendors and cyclists) and several others and work on a street tree policy which will look at the trees as an integral part of the street.

How we achieve the above changes also need to be thought through. Looking only at a narrative of justice/injustice or exploitation might not work by itself. We need to focus on cultural narratives, need to bring back memories of streets as social spaces. The narrative also needs to shift from streets as transport corridors to streets as urban commons which support a variety of uses. Employing art is also something we need to do, for art can reach out in ways that other forms of communication cannot.

Going ahead, we first need more research on the changing nature of the streets in India, how this is changing and what impacts it has. We need to use this research and initiate dialogues with various groups in the cities on how they perceive the streets—as commons or otherwise. These dialogues then need to be taken ahead to form a larger campaign to reclaim our streets.

Acknowledgments

Much of what I have learnt on this issue is due to my involvement with the network Hasiru Usiru in Bangalore. This network has been fighting for the last five years to ensure the urban commons remain so. I want to thank all the members of the network. I would also like to thank other people whose inputs over the last few years have helped me gain the knowledge to put together this brief chapter (in no particular order): Sheshadri Ramaswamy, Clifton D’Rozario, Isaac Arul Selva, Sunil Dutt Yadav, Deepak Srinivasan, Vinay Baindur, Leo Saldhana, Roshni Nuggehalli, Divya Ravindranath, Jahnavi Pai, Rohan DSouza, Dr.Harini Nagendra, Dr.Sudhira H.S, Dr. Robin King, Dr.Solomon Benjamin

Endnotes

1 Defined in this order as a congregation with a common object consisting of more than 25 people passing in a group on any public road in the city.

2 Defined in this order as a congregation of more than 250 people assembling at one place with the intention of conducting a meeting, protest or to hear a public speech.

3 http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/report_parties-rally-against-govt-order-on-rallies_1239517

4 A PIL 14607/2008 was filed by K.Ranganath, S/o Sitaram asking for action against hawkers and vendors, setting up of hawking zones through a committee. This PIL was based on the decision of the apex court in AIR 2004 SC 416 of the Maharashtra Ekta Hawkers Union and another vs Maharashtra Municipal Corporation, greater Mumbai and Others.

5 http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/report_no-more-paid-parking-in-bangalore-city_1325502

6 expressbuzz.com/Cities/Bangalore/anti-begging-drive-in-bangalore-mysore/150784.html

7 http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/interview_you-ll-see-no-more-begging-bowls-in-bangalore_1382880

8 http://www.delhi.gov.in/wps/wcm/connect/f2214e0043383b63b2d1f3cf71a315bd/THE+BOMBAY+PREVENTION+OF.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=f2214e0043383b63b2d1f3cf71a315bd

9 http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/report_for-bangalore-s-thousands-of-homeless-life-s-a-nightmare-every-waking-hour_1463171

10 http://www.indiatogether.org/2008/jun/pov-homeless.htm

11 http://www.hindu.com/2010/11/28/stories/2010112853660400.htm

12 http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Bangalore/article245170.ece

13 http://www.deccanherald.com/content/49877/trees-help-temperature-reduction-pollutants.html

14 http://www.deccanherald.com/content/34488/vanishing-canopies-affect-air-quality.html

15 http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/report_cabinet-approves-metro-phase-ii-at-rs14727-crore_1464584

16 http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/articles/view/237-metro-mkk-bmrc

17 http://yaarametro.wordpress.com/resources/

18 http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/report_road-will-grow-wider-only-by-gobbling-up-40000-trees-in-bangalore_1393332

19 http://casumm.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/metro-booklet-dec-2007-16-2-08.pdf

20 http://www.idd.kar.nic.in/hsrl.html

21 ABIDe has directed BBMP to develop these roads as signal free corridors over the next 24 months. pg 14, 2009-10 Budget speech by the BBMP Commissioner

22 http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/articles/view/1574-grade-separator-projects-bengaluru

23 The City Corporation of Bangalore was called Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BMP) till 2006. In 2006, the area under the corporation was increased and it was renamed as Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP)

24 http://www.esgindia.org/campaigns/Tree%20felling/Hasire%20Usiru/action/FAQ_road_widening.html

25 http://www.esgindia.org/campaigns/Tree%20felling/Hasire%20Usiru/legal/PIL_ESG_RoadWidening_Indexed_Final_HC_2008.pdf

26 See page section III.1 , pg 5 in http://www.abidebengaluru.in/proceedings/5-Sept-2009.pdf

27 http://www.esgindia.org/campaigns/Tree%20felling/Hasire%20Usiru/other.docs/NammaRaste_newsletter.html

28 http://www.esgindia.org/campaigns/Tree%20felling/Hasire%20Usiru/action/Namma_Raste_Workshop_report_190708.pdf

'29 http://www.esgindia.org/campaigns/Tree%20felling/Hasire%20Usiru/legal/PIL_ESG_RoadWidening_Indexed_Final_HC_2008.pdf

30 http://www.esgindia.org/campaigns/Tree%20felling/Hasire%20Usiru/press/NammaRaste_Walk_09Nov2008.html

31 http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/report_bangalore-comes-out-to-save-bangalore_1421818

32 http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/articles/print/271-green-committee

33 http://www.indianexpress.com/news/bangalore-metro-gets-centre-green-signal/33290

34 http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/articles/print/1101-bengaluru-metro-alignment-nanda-road

35 http://bangalorebuzz.blogspot.com/2006/03/kuvempu-road-traders-too-shun-metro.html

36 http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/articles/view/81-infrastructure-roads-and-transportcmh-road-no-to-metro-clash-of-local-economies

37 http://www.hindu.com/2009/04/18/stories/2009041860670400.htm

38 http://www.esgindia.org/campaigns/Tree%20felling/Hasire%20Usiru/press/Metro_Rebuttal_PressRelease_220409.pdf

39 http://bangalorebuzz.blogspot.com/2006/08/its-official-metro-is-on.html

40 ABIDE has directed BBMP to develop these roads as signal free corridors over the next 24 months. pg 14, 2009–10 Budget speech by the BBMP Commissioner

41 http://www.hindu.com/2010/10/22/stories/2010102261780700.htm

42 http://www.hindu.com/2006/04/24/stories/2006042421540300.htm

43 http://www.esgindia.org/campaigns/Tree%20felling/Hasire%20Usiru/other.docs/Report_public_cons.html

44 http://www.esgindia.org/campaigns/Tree%20felling/Hasire%20Usiru/action/Namma_Raste_Workshop_report_190708.html

45 http://www.esgindia.org/campaigns/Tree%20felling/Hasire%20Usiru/press/PressRel_ESG_HC_KTCPappliestoRoadWidening_020409.pdf

46 http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/articles/view/1739-tannery-road-widening-protests

47 http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/report_bangalore-s-sankey-road-astir-over-moveto-massacre-trees_1381252

48 http://in.mc363.mail.yahoo.com/mc/welcome?.gx=1&.tm=1292781743&.and=bgdgjhko2rjhj#_pg=showFolder;_ ylc=X3oDMTBucWZvMXBkBF9TAzM5ODMyMTA 0M QRhYwNjaGtNYWls&&.rand=1930696981&order=down&pSize=25&tt=796 5&clean&hash=01ac9a63a9b4dde2284ec7a9788520fb&.jsrand=6195953

49 http://bangalore.citizenmatters.in/blogs/show_entry/2588-demanding-smarter-roads

50 http://www.dnaindia.com/bangalore/report_bangalore-corporation-answers-tough-questionsfrom-citizens_1469762

51 http://www.esgindia.org/campaigns/Tree%20felling/Hasire%20Usiru/legal/PIL_Lalbagh_Metro_May09.doc

52 http://www.thesouthasian.org/archives/2010/public_consultation_mandatory.html

53 Suggested by members of the network Hasiru Usiru.