Thiruvananthapuram: The Wayanand District Administration has once again, and this time emphatically, claimed that the Kalpetta-based Hume Centre for Ecology and Wildlife Biology had not provided it any prior information that suggested the possibility of a landslide.
The first denial came on August 29, nearly a month after the landslides that ravaged Mundakkai and Chooralmala. In response to an RTI application filed by Kottayam-based RTI activist M T Thomas, the office of the Wayanad District Collector said: "This office has not received any alerts officially."
The reply seemed purposefully vague, hinting that the district administration did not want to openly acknowledge the alert but at the same time allowed for the interpretation that the Hume Centre had indeed given the alert but unofficially. The Hume Centre usually delivers its alerts on the 'Wayanand Weather Forecast' WhatsApp Group, not through formal means like mail or official letters.
Not satisfied with the reply, RTI activist Thomas went for an appeal. The latest reply, furnished on October 26, says why the original reply was given. "It was on the basis of a note given by the Hazard Analyst that a reply was given that the office had not received any official information," it states, and then goes further. "The Hazard Analyst's note and also an examination of other information available in this section (Disaster Management Wing) convinced the district administration that the Hume Centre had not given an alert 16 hours prior to the landslide."
When contacted, the Hume Centre director C K Vishnudas sounded amused. "Is that what they told," he said. He reiterated that the alert was shared in the WhatsApp group. "I had even called certain top officials and spoke of the need for evacuation from areas like Mundakkai," Vishnudas told Onmanorama.
The data generated by the Hume Centre indicated that Puthumala, the nearest weather station to Mundakkai, received 200 mm of rainfall on July 28, followed by another 130 mm overnight. Since a landslide could be triggered by approximately 600 mm of rain, the Hume Centre issued a landslide alert at 9 a.m. on August 29, 16 hours before the first landslide struck. Confirming the Hume Centre's fears, the area had received 572 mm of rain within 48 hours.
It was this warning, which can still be pulled out from the history of the 'Wayanand Weather Forecast' WhatsApp group, that the Wayanad administration has now categorically denied that it had received.
Nonetheless, the district administration did issue a warning on August 29, but only by 10.35 p.m., nearly 14 hours after the Hume Centre alert. Even this warning did not have any mention of evacuation, indicating that the administration was not convinced of the urgency of the situation.
In fact, in 2020, the Wayanad administration had taken serious note of a WhatsApp alert provided by the Hume Centre and swiftly relocated people from Mundakkai, thus saving lives.
RTI activist M T Thomas had asked the Collector’s office six questions. Mainly, he wanted to know whether the district administration had received the Hume's Centre's alert. Citing newspaper reports, Thomas said that the Centre had alerted the district administration about the possibility of landslides in Mundakkai and surrounding areas "a full 16 hours prior to the disaster".
Since the reply to the main question was negative, it rendered the rest of his posers and requests irrelevant, in official jargon "not applicable". One, the time of receipt of the report. Two, furnish a copy of the above alert received by you. Three, was any action taken on the basis of the above report? Four, provide the Action Taken Report (ATR) on the matter. Five, the name and designation of the official who has been asked to do the follow-up.
Thomas said that he would urgently move the State Information Commission, asking it to invoke its powers under Section 18 of the Right to Information Act. "This is a clear case of obfuscation of facts. It is a naked lie that the Hume Centre had not provided the alert. In such instances, the State Information Commission has the powers to conduct an enquiry under Section 18," Thomas said.
Under the Right to Information Rules, 2012, the Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions, while conducting such an enquiry, have the powers of a civil court. "It can requisition any public record or copies from any office, and issue summons for the examination of documents," Thomas said.
