Plans for ‘eco-luxury and tourism’ destination surrounding Bugsuk Airport

A plan for an ‘eco-luxury and tourism project’ encompassing nearly half of Bugsuk Island is the latest of a series of projects triggering a 50-year struggle for recognition of ancestral land and water rights.

Satellite imagery of Bugsuk Island, Balabac municipality, Palawan province, 27th October 2024. Bugsuk Airport and other facilites are indicated.

In 1974 indigenous Pala’wan, Molbog and Cagayanin people were expelled from Bugsuk Island, part of the Balabac Municipality off the southern tip of Palawan, the westernmost point in the Philippines. An article by Indigenous Peoples’ Rights International (IPRI), based on an interview with Jomly Callon, President of the Sambilog-Balik Bugsuk Movement (Association of Indigenous Peoples and Small Fishers from the Southernmost Tip of Palawan), an indigenous people’s group, outlines a 50-year history marked by projects, facilitated by a series of policy decisions, taking the place of agricultural and fishing livelihoods. The land was awarded to Danding Cojuangco, Chief Executive of San Miguel Corporation (SMC), one of the Philippines’ largest business and industrial conglomerates, who established a nursery for hybrid coconut trees. In 1979 Cojuangco, in partnership with a French businessman, Jacques Branellec, formed the Jewelmer International Corporation which established a pearl farm in ancestral waters. Sambilog was formed in the year 2000 in response to land grabbing and reducing access to fishing grounds, working to gain recognition of ancestral land and water rights. They made an application for a Certificate of Ancestral Domain Title (CADT) which has still not been approved by the government. Indigenous people’s access to traditional fishing grounds was eroded further in 2005 when, without consulting indigenous people, the Balabac municipality was declared a ‘protected marine eco-region’, prohibiting indigenous people from fishing in their traditional fishing grounds. In 2014, following Sambilog protests in Manila calling for return of their lands through the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program Extension with Reforms (CARPER) the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) issued a Notice of Coverage over agricultural lands for distribution to the people of Bugsuk Island. But DAR did not implement its decision to return the land to those affected by displacement.

After Cojuangco’s death in 2020 Ramon Ang took up the role of CEO of SMC. Bugsuk Airport (also referred to as Bonbon Airport) was built by SMC to support the coconut plantation. In February 2022 Jose Alvarez, Governor of Palawan, speaking about Bugsuk Airport and a Philippine Air Force (PAF) facility in Barangay Catagupan being ‘crucial to the transformation of Palawan’s southernmost region as a new tourist haven‘, said the coconut plantation had failed but that Bugsuk Airport was still under development with the runway already operational and used by people travelling to Balabac. Satellite imagery of Bugsuk island shows Bugsuk Airport, an airstrip near the southern tip of the island that is being developed for the PAF and a helipad. In 2023 the DAR revoked the Notice of Coverage that was issued in 2014 and under which the land would be returned to its original owners. The reason given for the cancellation was that the area is unsuitable for agriculture. Callon, countered this, explaining that residents were cultivating the land, growing many types of vegetables and fruit trees.

Environmental Impact Statement and Master Plan for resort taking up half the island

Bricktree Properties Inc., a subsidiary of SMC, plans to construct various so-called ‘eco’ tourism facilities surrounding Bugsuk Airport. Bricktree’s presentation at a public scoping event held in Bugsuk Community Center, Bugsuk Island on 25th May 2023 contains a timeframe for 2023-24 which includes access road clearing and construction, tree cutting, land clearing, construction of campsites, perimeter fencing and soil compaction. A number of ‘identified environmental impacts’ includes ‘Land tenurial issues and incompatibility with existing land use’, ‘Potential lost (sic) of fish related livelihood and conflict on the access/navigation of locals’ along with potential changes in water quality, water competition and dust from land clearance. The Environmental Impact Statement Summary for the Proposed Bugsuk Island Eco-Tourism Development Project, prepared for Bricktree, contains maps of the proposed site and a Proposed Master Plan comprising serveral zones taking up much of the south of the island along with a port on the northern tip.

Proposed Master Plan including airport and zones for eco-tourism, forest tourism, coastal resort, industrial, commerical, residential, recreation, port facilities, agriculture and a road network. Screengrab from Environmental Impact Statement Summary, Proposed Bugsuk Island Eco-Tourism Development Project, Bricktree Properties Inc.

The Environmental Impact Statement Summary states ‘The Proposed Project aims to be an eco-luxury leisure and tourism destination governed by sustainable development principles’. A project schedule from 2023 to 2038 is indicated. The project location spans two barangays (districts) – Bugsuk and Sebaring – and the estimated total project land area is 5,567.54 hectares (nearly half of the 11,900 hectare island). Supporting infrastructure plans include power generator, solar farm, water supply primarily from Bugsuk River Lagoon, wastewater and sewage management, telecommunications, materials recovery facility, landfill and beach front maintenance on the Bonbon beach shoreline. The area earmarked for structures, roads and other facilities is 1,141.84 hectares, with the remaining 4.425.7 hectares consisting of areas for future development, open spaces and leasable space. A map of the Proposed Master Plan shows various zones centred around the airport and airport facilities and connected by a road network:

  • Eco-tourism area immediately to the south of the airport
  • Resort development on the southeast coast
  • Two forest / tourism areas
  • Four commercial areas
  • Low density and high density residential areas
  • Recreation area
  • Light industrial area
  • Employee facilities
  • Agriculture zone
  • An area for port facilities on the northern tip of the island

Tinig ng Plaridel, the official student publication of the University of the Philippines College of Mass Communication, challenged the statement in the document that resolutions endorsing the proposed project without objections were obtained from Barangay Bugsuk in September 2023, saying that hundreds of locals oppose the project.

Intimidation and harassment of Mariahangin residents

During the 1974 expulsion of indigenous people from Bugsuk Island the people of Mariahangin (also spelled Marihangin), a small 38 hectare island north of Bugsuk Island, resisted; the eviction was stopped and people remained on the island. But 50 years later Mariahangin residents say the presence of armed men is pressurising them to leave. On 27th June 2024 DAR officials arrived on Mariahangin, to inform residents that their homes would be demolished to make way for an eco-luxury tourism project covering over 5,000 hectares in Barangay Bugsuk. Just two days later, early in the morning of 29th June 2024 16 unidentified armed guards arrived on Mariahangin Island. On 13th September a group of indigenous people from Mariahangin Island arrived in Manila to campaign for land reform, the return of the 10,821 hectares of land awarded to Cojuangco in 1974, for the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples to process their CADT application and to raise awareness of the 50-year struggle. The group included an 18-year old witness to the presence of armed men in Mariahangin in June who said a man wearing black headgear and a black mask had pointed a gun at him.

Satellite imagery of Mariahangin Island, 27th October 2024

SMC denied involvement in the shooting incident and stated it has no connection with anyone involved in the incident and does not own any property holdings on Mariahangin Island. Yet, as reported by Bulatlat, residents claim that SMC does have an interest in Mariahangin Island and, in 2023, presented families with a ‘resettlement programme’, increasing an initial offer to P400,000 (USD6,852) per family to leave their ancestral land. In September 2024 the Philippine Misereor Partnership Incorporated (PMPI), a network of more than 230 social development and advocacy groups, expressed deep concern over human rights violations faced by the Molbog and Palaw’an communities arising from a land grabbing case. Mariahangin residents’ representatives, supported by the National Federation of Peasant Organisations (PAKISAMA) presented testimonies to the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) reporting reported ‘alarming incidents, including threats at gunpoint to force them out of their ancestral lands and intrusive surveillance and intimidation that profoundly disrupt their daily lives and livelihoods’.

On 2nd December 2024, contradicting Bugsuk residents’ assertion of their land rights, SMC reiterated its stated legal ownership of 7,000 hectares of titled properties on Bugsuk Island, saying that the titles had been held since original issuance during redistribution of agricultural land in 1974, predating the 1997 Indigenous People’s Rights Act. Earlier that day, nine indigenous Sambilog leaders began a nine-day fasting and praying event outside the DAR headquarters in Quezon City to amplify the 50 year land struggle of indigenous Bugsuk Island communities. They pointed out that Mariahangin land is agricultural – seaweed farming is the main source of residents’ livelihoods, followed by corn cultivation – so therefore the land should be returned to them under the provisions of the 1998 Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law which states that all public and private agricultural lands are encompassed by the coverage for distribution to the people. An ILC Asia (International Land Coalition) statement in support of the seaweed farmers of Mariahangin Island raises concerns over loss of mangroves in a country particularly vulnerable to climate disasters and notes that mangroves on Bugsuk Island have already been cleared to make way for a 20km white sand beach.

In February 2025 Mariahangin residents refuted government dismissal of their allegations of harassment, land grabbing and restriction of access to fishing grounds. Residents said police and people suspected of being SMC representatives attempted to enter the community on 18th and 20th November and that armed guards had been stationed about 500-500 metres from Mariahangin. One resident said, “People there can barely earn a living because they’re constantly guarding against those armed men at the edge of the island.” Residents guarding the area reported threats from armed guards. Fishermen said guards were blocking access, seizing their equipment nad harassing them, with some being hit with paddles and illegally detained. One fisherman said his boat had been destroyed. On 5th March 2025 The Guidon reported that eight Mariahangin residents had been subpoenaed over allegations of assault and an individual received a subpoena for alleged cyberlibel. residents described these legal proceedings as part of “a pattern of relentless harassment” amidst their long-running land dispute with SMC over ancestral land on Bugsuk Island.

New book – Contested Airport Land in Asia and Africa

A new book draws attention to accelerating airport development in Asia and Africa, elucidating many factors underlying the political sensitivities frequently surrounding greenfield development, airport expansion and airport cities. Contested Airport Land: Social-Spatial Transformation and Environmental Injustice in Asia and Africa, edited by Irit Ittner, Sneha Sharma, Isaac Khambule and Hanna Geschewski, is published by Routledge.

Following a conceptual introduction and overview chapter in-depth case studies give nuanced insights into the complex socio-economic, political and administrative dynamics of seven airport projects: the suspended Nijgadh Airport (Nepal); Mattala Airport (Sri Lanka); Yogyakarta Airport (Indonesia); a critical review of airport land contestations in India focussing on Jewar and Dehradun airports; the airport reserve in Abidjan (Cote d’Ivoire); Durban Aerotropolis (South Africa) and Isiolo Airport (Kenya).

You can listen to a conversation with three of the co-editors on an episode of The Channel podcast from the International Institute for Asian Studies (IIAS) at Leiden University, hosted by Benjamin Linder.

Contested Airport Land: Social-Spatial Transformation and Environmental Injustice in Asia and Africa

Dara Sakor Airport serves tourism zone taking up 1/5 of Cambodia’s coastline

In November 2023 Cambodia’s State Secretariat of Aviation (SSCA) announced that construction of Dara Sakor Airport (Cambodia’s fourth international airport after Phnom Penh Airport, Siem Reap Airport and Sihanouk Airport) was in its final stages. Dara Sakor Airport has been built to serve a gigantic tourism-oriented economic zone, the 451 square kilometre Dara Sakor project encompassing about one-fifth of Cambodia’s coastline. The Dara Sakor developer, Coastal City Development Group Ltd., calls the project ‘Coastal City’ and its website has pictorial maps indicating the many components of the project such as Dara Sakor Airport, a resort, tourism zone, golf courses and a port. The China-Global South Project reflected on the Dara Sakor project in 2023. Of all the anticipated infrastructure only the airport was completed. Yet the project continued with ‘considerable support from the government’. BBC reporters visiting Dara Sakor in September 2023 described unfinished roads and buildings as a stark contrast with ‘dazzling brochures for potential investors’.

Pictorial map of Dara Sakor project including tourism zone, resort, golf courses, development zone and Dara Sakor International Airport. Source: Coastal City Development Group Ltd.

Thousands of people have been forcibly displaced from their homes for the Dara Sakor project, losing their farming and fishing livelihoods. There have been many protests against eviction and inadequate compensation, in many instances met with repression. Unrest dates back to the inception of the project in 2008 when 360 sq km of land in the Botum Sakor and Kiri Sakor districts in the Koh Kong Province was reclassified as state-owned land. A 99-year lease contract was signed with Union Development Group (UDG) of China. Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association (Adhoc) reported that affected communities were not consulted about the project, some only becoming aware when officials arrived to measuring land. In 2011 the project site grew to 451 sq km when UDG was granted an additional 91 sq km land concession to develop a water reservoir and hydropower. During 2011 UDG began dismantling and burning down some villagers’ houses and destroying productive trees.

A key protest took place in February 2014 when about 140 people blocked the road to UDG’s offices leading to a clash with 40 UDG security guards and six soldiers carrying AK-47 rifles. Kiri Sakor District Governor said district authorities had ordered about 100 families to vacate their land for the Dara Sakor project’s hotels, golf courses and an airport. By September 2014 5,791 people had moved to a relocation site where they lacked access to former farming and fishing areas and suffered many problems including poor quality housing damaged by wind and rain, limited water that did not meet national standards, lack of electricity and health care facilities. Reports of destruction of houses and productive trees emerged again in 2018. In april April Koh Kong Provincial Court heard testimony from 13 families claiming that 60 UDG guards had burned their productive trees, seeking compensation for loss of cassava, jackfruit, mango, rubber and coconut crops.

On 27th May 2019 about 20 residents protested in front of the Chinese Embassy in Phnom Penh, calling for resolution of the 11-year land dispute. A report by the Community Legal Education Center stated that 1,143 families were forced to vacate about 100 sq km of land in the first five years fo the project but many families had resisted and fought for rights to the land. Four villagers were detained for 12 hours on 29th September 2020, after camping outside Koh Kong Provincial Hall calling for action over the 12-year land dispute with UDG. A year later 1,333 families rejected compensation offers of between 1 and 3.5 hectares and said they would fight to remain on their land. Protests against compensation offers continues into 2022; some declined the offer as it was insufficient and the village the government wanted to relocate people to was 100 km away and lacked infrastructure.

In June 2023, just four months before SSCA’s announcement about construction of Dara Sakor Airport entering its final stages, there was yet another protest by people affected by displacement for the Dara Sakor project. A group of villagers involved in a Dara Sakor related land dispute attempted to travel to Phnom Penh to submit a petition at the Ministry of Justice, but were met with a police roadblock. Eleven villagers were arrested, forced into a truck, returned to Koh Kong and charged with criminal incitement. Radio Free Asia reported that authorities threatened further arrests after about 20 villagers gathered outside the offices where the 11 people were being detained. Human rights organization Licadho said the protesters had not caused any social disorder and that police had been sent to the the area where many of them lived.

For more information including references for all source material see the case study on EJAtlas, the world’s largest, most comprehensive online database of social conflict around environmental issues – Dara Sakor project, Cambodia.

Eviction of villages bordering Kilimanjaro Airport

In Tanzania state forces are forcefully evicting Maasai residents of eight villages bordering Kilimanjaro Airport. On 8th May 2024 it was reported that hundreds of homes have been demolished and cars with loudspeakers, escorted by armed police, warned residents to evacuate. Plans to expand the 460 hectare airport site to 11,447 hectares date back to 1985 and the government labels the lawful owners of the land as ‘trespassers’. For background information on the land dispute see EJAtlas: Kilimanjaro International Airport. Impacted communities and supporting organisations are calling for and immediate halt to demolition of homes, humanitarian aid including food and shelter to the hundreds of people rendered homeless and establishment of an independent enquiry into the land dispute.

Favourable ruling in Taoyuan Aerotropolis land expropriation case

Taoyuan Aerotropolis is the largest zone expropriation case in Taiwan. The plan for development centred around Taoyuan Airport, the largest and busiest in Taiwan located 40km west of Taipei, encompasses over 4,500 hectares. The megaproject is fraught with controversies, not least because it is estimated that at least 6,000 households will be impacted by land expropriation for the first phase, covering an area of 2,599 hectares. But expropriation for Taoyouan Aerotropolis will be constrained by a June 2023 ruling from the Taipei High Administrative Court. The Taiwan Association for Human Rights reported that a lawsuit calling for cancellation of Taoyuan Aerotropolis land expropriation obtained a favourable ruling with most of the plaintiffs winning their cases.

The 4,500 hectare Taoyuan Aerotropolis plan is centred around Taoyuan Airport and includes a third runway to the north

The lawsuit discussed issues of public interest, necessity and proportionality principles regarding land expropriation. Representing the legal team, Xiong Yiling (熊依翎) expressed gratitude for the court’s judgement which allows for preservation of the plaintiffs’ land and homes. In this case it was found that clients’ land was not expropriated for public interest or necessity. Lu Xueshin (呂學信), representing plaintiffs from both sides of Yugang Road, north of Taoyuan Airport where a third runway is planned, said that their community was not within the scope of Taoyuan Aerotropolis for many years. But they were forcibly included after residents in a neighbouring area petitioned for their inclusion. Lu Xueshin said the land is not needed to construct a third runway and was expropriated due to others’ private interests. Wu Mingzhe (吳明哲), representing Ziqiang Community plaintiffs located near the airport entrance, stated that the area was supposed to remain residential. However, without the knowledge of residents, a large group of other residents expressed their wishes to be included in expropriation plans. As a result a large area of the community was included in expropriation plans, in spite of a 2019 plan for preserving the Ziqiang community and a public hearing establishing that those who refuse to be expropriated can be excluded.

Yu Yicha (余宜家), Deputy Secretary-General of the Taiwan Association for Human Rights, said that the locations of the plaintiffs were excluded from the expropriation plan for many years, or neighboured almost identical lands not requiring expropriation, demonstrating that these areas do not need to be expropriated and keeping their land does not hinder construction of Taoyuan Aerotropolis. Futhermore, Taiwan’s land expropriation system, a system rarely seen in democratic countries, has been heavily criticised becasue of the large areas and numbers of households affected and violation of people’s housing and property rights. The Taiwan Association for Human Rights welcomed the Taipei High Administrative Court’s careful consideration of the serious infringement of people’s basic rights and a verdict marking a significant milestone in Taiwan’s land expropriation system. They urged the relevant authorities to review the Taoyuan Aerotropolis plan as a whole and negotiate with residents to return expropriated land.

The land expropriation case is one of five lawsuits relating to Taoyuan Aerotropolis, assisted by non-governmental organisations including Taiwan Association for Human Rights, Taoyuan Aerotropolis Anti-Forced Eviction, the Environmental Jurists Assoication and the Environmental Rights Foundation.

Demolitions for ‘airport zone’ (zone aéroportuaire Modibo Kéita), Mali

Mass evictions for an ‘airport zone’ next to Modibo Keita Airport, Mali’s main airport on the outskirts of Bamako, the capital city, began on 20th April 1995. Without warning, the government began bulldozing the Senou neighbourhood to make way for expansion of the zone. Demolitions continued for ten days and about 3,707 families, approximately 30,000 people, were forcibly evicted. Further waves of demolitions followed with many instances of land grabbing and speculation. Farmers were displaced for a fertilizer plant on the land in 2007-8 and in 2009 residents resisted instructions to leave the land. A drive to clear remaining communities began in 2021. Bulldozers arrived early in the morning of 14th January, in a major eviction drive covering 1,600 hectares; about 20,000 families in 11 neighbourhoods were impacted. About 800 evictees said they had permits to occupy the land and many affected people were left destitute without shelter.

zone aéroportuaire Modibo Kéita
Map showing zone aéroportuaire Modibo Kéita. Source: https://journals.openedition.org/eps/docannexe/image/7707/img-3.png

The ‘airport zone’ – zone aéroportuaire Modibo Kéita – is vast, extending over 7,194 hectares northwest of the airport. It was classified as a plot of land for airport company use in 1999. Residents contest government claims that their occupation of the airport zone is illicit; they have lived on the land for several generations. An inhabitants’ organization – Plateforme deshabitants de la zone dite aéroportuaire (PHZA) – has been established with active groups, sometimes holding different views about land management, in many affected villages. Women, some of them elderly, play a prominent role in resistance against eviction from the ‘so-called airport zone’. The land struggle is supported by l’Union des Associations et Coordinations d’associations pour le Dévelopement et la Défense des Droits des Démunis (UACDDDD), a national federation fighting the injustices of dispossession. Demonstrations and meetings about the airport zone have been attended by hundreds of people. In November 2021 an independent national commission of inquiry to investigate demolitions in the airport area was established.

For more information about the Modibo Keita airport zone evictions see the case report on EJatlas, the world’s largest, most comprehensive online database of social conflict around environmental issues: Modibo Keith airport zone, Mali

New Phnom Penh Airport land dispute enters fifth year

Disputes over land acquisition for New Phnom Penh Airport date back to 2018 when 2,600 hectares, in the Kandal Province, were allocated for the project. With an estimated cost of US$1.5 billion the development was described as one of the world’s largest airports by land area with an adjoining ‘Airport City’. The site is predominantly agricultural land and villagers were shocked by sudden news of the airport and the prospect of losing homes, land and livelihoods from farming and fishing. A series of protests between February and June 2018 involved hundreds of people, representing about 2,000 families, complaining of low compensation offers, intimidation during negotiations over land and encroachment onto communally held wetlands. By December 2019 foundations for the airport were being laid.

Protest continued into 2020. In June the Kandal Stung district governor said 2,000 plots of land were affected by airport construction and in August villagers from the Kandal and Takeo provinces whose farmland fell within the planned site petitioned the Prime Minister requesting a bigger payout from the airport developer. By May 2021 construction of New Phnom Penh Airport was reported to be 40% complete, with the terminal hall, airfield and 100 metre high control tower already in place. A State Secretariat of Aviation (SSCA) spokesperson said, “We are aware that the pandemic has disrupted many projects and the economy, but the construction of the airport in Kandal Province and other airport projects in the country have been on schedule.” The map below, dated 17th July 2021, shows satellite imagery of part of the airport site and communes impacted by land acquisition including Ampov Prey, Boeng Khyang and Kandork.

New Phnom Penh Airport construction site, satellite imagery 17th July 2021

The land dispute escalated on 14th May 2021 when approximately 200 people who said their rice crops had been destroyed set up a protest camp blocking a road to the construction site. They set up tents and a few days later several of them surrounded a bulldozer and demanded proper compensation for their land and crops. Residents were still blocking bulldozers from clearing farmland in July and authorities warned journalists against covering the land dispute. On 7th September about 50 villagers attempted to block National Road 2 in protest against development of New Phnom Penh Airport. They were confronted by about 100 security officers but the standoff remained non-violent. Then police set up roadblocks to prevent villagers from inspecting land they had been displaced from. A representative of Kampong Talong village (shown to the south of the map) said villagers were being prevented from seeing land that had been seized for airport construction. They had ceased cultivating the land three years ago but economic hardship, due to business shutdowns during the Covid pandemic, had driven them to start farming it again as they had been left without other ways to survive.

On 12th September 2021 a ‘clash’ between about 100 protesters and about 400 police left 13 officers and an unknown number of protesters injured. Kandal provincial police dispersed the protests with teargas and about 30 people were arrested and detained. Nine of the arrested people were accused of violence – specifically being in possession of sticks stones and slingshots, hurling gasoline and burning tyres. In February 2022 a dozen excavators were digging up rice fields and wetland in Boeng Khyang and dozens of police and military officials were dispatched to ensure implementation of authorities’ instructions to carry out the works. The nine protesters charged with violence were acquitted in November 2022. At this time the number of villagers impacted by land acquisition increased; about 200 people demanded to know whether they would be joining the 300 families already being displaced for the airport. Numbers were sprayed in red paint on dozens of houses alongside the 94 canal, located about 5km from the airport site. Then in January 2023 residents affected by the airport development said company workers had instructed them to dismantle sheds housing animals, causing anxiety that their land might be cleared. Representatives of 460 families living around the airport project had requested land titles the previous month but received no response.

For more information about the airport land dispute see the case write-up on EJAtlas, the world’s largest, most comprehensive online database of socio-economic conflict related to environmental issues: New Phnom Aiport and Airport City, Kandal Province, Cambodia

Demolition of +300 houses on Kasompe Airstrip land

On 20th August 2022, beginning at 2am, more than 300 houses built on land surrounding Kasompe Airstrip were demolished by officers from Chingola Municipal Council and the Zambia Police Service. The Council stated it had not allocated the land in question and the buildings had been erected without planning permission. Residents appealed to the government to find them alternative land and some of them attempted to resist the demolition, burning tyres and breaking the windows of bulldozers. A video of the demolition shows houses in plots of land with gardens and trees being bulldozed, as displaced people looked on.

Completed houses as well as houses still under construction were demolished. A number of residents retaliated against destruction of their homes, setting fire to two properties – a guesthouse and servants’ quarters – owned by Johnson Kang’ombe, Mayor of Chingola, whom they accused him of selling them plots of land at Kasombe Airstrip. Two suspects thought to be involved in the arson were apprehended and detained. A group of women protested chanting slogans including “The Mayor must go”. One evicted woman said that her aunt whose home was also demolished had collapsed with suspected high blood pressure.

In the aftermath of the demolitions the only help given to displaced residents was food aid and space in a camping site, provided by the Chingola District Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit (DMMU). On 29th August it was reported that Chingola District Commissioner Raphael Chimupi had said that DMMU had given relief food items to 95 out of 98 families whose houses had been demolished. Chingola Member of Parliament Chipoka Mulenga visited affected residents and promised to help them, saying “I will do everything in my power to help resolve this issue, it is saddening to see a lot of houses demolished, which has left many families in the cold.” Mulenga said the government would provide alternative land to the victims of the demolition of 345 houses, but as of 27th September 2022 some people were still stranded with nowhere to relocate to.

Satellite imagery of an area at the eastern end of the Kasompe Airstrip runway, dated 26th July and 8th September, shows some of the buildings which were destroyed on 20th August 2022. Slide the bar between the images below to compare the area before and after the demolitions.

The land conflict, inustice and human rights violations related to Kasompe Airstrip is documented on EJAtlas, the world’s largest, most comprehensive online database of social conflict around environmental issues. Kasompe Airstrip is located on the eastern outskirts of the city of Chingola, in the Copperbelt Province, a mineral rich area that is the main copper mining region in Zambia. President of the Equity and Economic Party, Chilufya Tayali, said information had surfaced indicating that the demolition of the houses was not driven by the purported illegality of allocation on plots of land but by foreign interests in a mine near Kasompe Airstrip. Aerotropolis-type plans were mentioned in 2019 when the then Mayor of Chingola, Titus Tembo, said Chingola aims to become a city with Kasompe Airstrip being part of this agenda.

The Zambia Air Force (ZAF) denied allegations that it has influenced or pressured Chingola Municipal Council to demolish the houses on Kasompe Airstrip land. ZAF Director Public Relations Lieutenant Colonel Helen Chota said rumours were incorrect and that none of the other ZAF airstrips had been encroached. Yet the day after the demolitions, on 21st August 2022, it was reported that ZAF Commander Lieutenant Colon Barry had alerted citizens to more house demolitions across the country, saying houses and other structures built within 500 metres of airport infrastructure would be demolished and that building civilian structures on or near airports is a threat to national security.

Opposition to acquisition of farmland for airport in Parandur

Thousands of farmers and residents have urged the Tamil Nadu state government and Central government of India not to implement a proposed second Chennai airport in Parandur that would destroy their agrarian activities and livelihoods. Parandur is an agricultural area in the Kanchipuram district and the State government plans to acquire land in 12 villages for the airport project. The proposed site in Purandur is approximately 57 kilometres eastwards of the existing Chennai Airport and to the north of the Chennai-Bangalore national highway which is being constructed in stages. Below is a slideshow of a map of the proposed airport site and Google Earth satellite imagery showing several of the villages that might be impacted by land acquisition.

  • map of proposed airport in Parandur
  • Villages the may be impacted by land acquisition for airport in Parandur

A Times of India article states that the 12 villages from which land for the airport will be acquired are: Parandur, Valathur, Nelvoy, Thandalam, Polavur (Podavur), Madapuram, Ekanapuram, Akkammapuram, Singilipadi, Mahadevi Mangalam, Gunakarambakkam and Edayarpakkam. Other villages to be impacted by land acquisition are listed in other sources referenced in this blogpost, namely Nagapattu, Koothavakkam, Uthyarpakkam and OM Mangalam.

Concerns over acquisition of farmland and environmental issues

On 1st August Union Minister of State for Civil Aviation Vijay Kumar Singh announced that the Parandur site has been finalised after consultation with the Tamil Nadu government. Some Purandar residents demanded suitable replacement land and employment from the government in return for acquiring their land; others said that acquisition of their agricultural land will render them jobless as it is the only work they have known. Some villagers have spoken to media outlets about reluctance to give up their land and uncertainty over provision of compensation:

Ramasamy, from Ekanpuram village, said “A huge tract of our agricultural land would come under this project. We don’t want to lose our agricultural land for this project because farming is our sole source of livelihood.”

Jayakumar, a farmer from Singilipadi, said, “We have been living here for generations. We didn’t know that the airport is coming up here. No one has informed us. If the government suddenly takes away our homes and land, what would we do? Even if they provide compensation, we don’t know what that would be. I am shocked.”

Rajendran, a resident of Thandalam, said, “We are ready to give up land if needed. But we need assurance from the government about good compensation and employment.

Selvaraj from Parandur village said, “We’ve been here in the village for the last 50 years. As per the map released by the government, 5 villages would be destroyed for constructing a new airport. Even if the government gave us compensation for our land, we don’t know what to do for a living, since we know only farming. All of us are shocked by this decision and are planning for a big protest soon. Even last month, the district collector assured us that the airport would not be constructed in Parandur.”

Nachiyappan, a farmer from Koothavakkam, said, ”We are living by farming and if the government acquires our land what will we do for a living? I have small children and want to educate them and am the sole breadwinner for the family. The government will make all sweet talking, but in reality, nothing will happen and we will be the losers. We will protest strongly against this project that will destroy our livelihood as well as the flora and fauna of the area.”

A postgraduate in Economics from Koothavakkam, R. Bindu, said, “Around 800 houses would be demolished in the area and the agrarian economy will be totally destroyed. There are many people in this village who don’t have the patta or the legal rights of the land and they will be totally on the streets.”

Many villagers are employed by the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MNREGS) and are concerned that their livelihoods could be destroyed along with the agricultural fields.

An environmental expert pointed out several hydrological problems that might arise from construction of the airport, from decreased recharge of groundwater to deterioration of water quality and possible flooding during the monsoon. The 4,791-acre site is dotted with water bodies and a large proportion, 2,605 acres, is wetlands. A large number of migratory bird species, especially from eastern Europe, visit the site. Some of the birds fly south to Vedanthangal which would pose a bird strike risk to air traffic. Building a stable structure on wetlands would be challenging. Parandur has a lake where migrant birds – tufted ducks, flamingos and common pochards – are frequently spotted.

An airport on a 4,791-acre site, with a huge aerocity

The proposal is for the new airport, with two runways, to have capacity to handle 100 million passengers annually, almost five times higher than the capacity of the existing Chennai Airport, at 22 million passengers per year. Capacity at Chennai Airport is being increased to 35 million in a seven-year expansion project. The runways at the airport in Purandar would be larger than at Chennai Airport, enabling it to handle larger aircraft carrying more than 600 passengers. Tamil Nadu chief minister Muthuvel Karunanidhi Stalin said the initial estimated cost of the proposed airport is Rs20,000 Crore, more than USD2.5 billion. Details of the break-up of this sum, and the funding route, have yet to be made public.

A Times of India article states that ‘The plan is to develop a huge aero city with facilities for maintenance and repairs, aviation ancillary units, and commercial establishments’. Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) Tamil Nadu Chapter chairman Satyakam Arya has pushed for an aerocity around the new airport, which in addition to aviation related facilities could have a convention centre for global conferences and exhibitions. Shankar Vanavarayar, vice-chairman of CII Tamil Nadu, said the state may introduce special schemes and incentives for industries in order to spur industrialization from Chennai towards Parandur.

The proposed site for the Parandur airport, 4,791 acres (1,939 hectares), is certainly large enough to allocate a significant portion of the site for non-aviation facilities. It is larger than the world’s largest airport, Hartsfield Jackson in Atlanta USA, which, with five parallel runways and a site of 1,902 hectares, handled more than 110.5 million passengers in 2019, before traffic reduced worldwide due to the response to Covid-19. In addition to the 4,791-acre site a further 200 acres of land is required for construction of two airstrips, for which the process of surveys and land acquisition is likely to start soon.

Difficulties acquiring thousands of acres for the airport

Land availability has been the main hurdle stalling the second Chennai airport project since it was first mooted, in 1998. Many attempts at large-scale land acquisition failed until authorities zeroed in on Parandur and an article in The Hindu provides a timeline. In November 2000 a ‘futuristic terminal’ was anticipated on a 3,000-acre site likely to be at Porur in west Meenambakkam, north of the existing Chennai Airport. In May 2007 the then Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, Muthuvel Karunanidhi, said that 4,820 acres would be acquired for the airport in Sriperumbudur. In 2016 the proposed greenfield airport, still planned in the vicinity of Sriperumbudur, was mired in land procurement problems. Union Minister of State for Civil Aviation Jayant Sinha said the thousands of acres required for the new airport were difficult to procure.

In January 2022 the Airports Authority of India (AAI) began to study four potential alternative sites identified by the State government: Pannur, Parandur, Padalam and Thiruporur. Subsequently this list was narrowed down to Pannur and Parandur. On 1st August 2022 Minister of State for Civil Aviation Vijay Kumar Singh said the Tamil Nadu government had shortlisted Parandur as the site for development of a second Chennai airport. The State government will now submit a proposal to the Ministry of Civil Aviation for ‘grant of site clearance’ for the finalised site. The State is also set to begin preparation of a detailed project report. Land acquisition is likely to begin once the State receives approval from the Centre. State government officials have confirmed they will conduct sittings in all affected villages allowing people to express their views to officials.

2010 protest against land acquisition in Sriperumbudur

The article with the project timeline in The Hindu does not mention that the 2007 identification of land for the airport in Sriperumbudur triggered mass protest by villagers resisting land acquisition. In 2010 Moverment against SEZs in Tamil Nadu reported that a 6,921-acre (2,800-hectare) site in Sriperumbudur, located eastward of Parandur and just 30 kilometres from Chennai’s existing airport, had been earmarked for a greenfield airport. The proposed land acquisition for the new airport threatened to displace 2,800 families, about 37,000 people, from 20 villages. Village representatives opposed the airport project and were not interested in compensation from the government. They said agriculture was viable in the proposed site where they cultivated rice paddies, mangos, jasmine trees and vegetables. The site also containing 77 lakes, 120 ponds and 10,000 trees which would be felled. Six village panchayats – Thirumanaikuppam, Vadamangalam, Vayalur, Thirupandiyur, Kottaiyur and Kiloy – passed resolutions opposing land acquisition in a gram sabha meeting.

Proposed site for secodn Chennai airport in Sriperumbudur
Proposed site for a 2nd Chennai airport in Sriperumbudur, triggering mass protest in August 2010. Image: Down to Earth, 15/09/2010

Villagers drove away officials sent to survey the land on at least three occasions. On 12 August 2010, 3,000 people from 26 villages demonstrated against the project. Police attacked them with a lathi (baton) charge. Villagers who went to meet the District Officer and attempted to present a petition were beaten and around 20 of them had to be admitted to hospital. A jet fuel pipeline to Chennai Airport, routed through Sriperumbudur, seemingly hardwired the area for development of a new airport. Inaugurating the fuel pipeline in 2009 Praful Patel, Minister of State for Civil Aviation from 2004 to 2011, said, “This (pipeline) also passes through Sriperumbudur where another airport is planned. Once it comes up, the pipeline will be extremely useful.”

Lio Tourism Estate and Airport ancestral land dispute triggers cease-and-desist-order

Lio Tourism Estate, a masterplanned luxurious development in El Nido, on the northern tip of Palawan – owned by Ayala, one of the largest conglomerates in the Philippines, and operated by one of its many subsidiaries, Ten Knots Philippines Inc. (TKPI) – encompasses a large 325-hectare site. As well as high-end hotels the resort contains its own private airport, Lio Airport, owned and operated by TKPI for the exclusive use of its aircraft. As with most airports worldwide the response to Covid-19 led to Lio Airport reducing operations, but by March 2022 about 600 passengers were flying in and out each day. AirSwift Philippines operates flights between Lio Airport and Manila. There is also a jetty port for visitors to embark on island-hopping boat trips. The tourism project, on a former copra (coconut) farm, began with construction of the airport and seaport to provide access, followed by accommodation and retail facilities. Shown below are satellite imagery and a site development plan published by a property firm.

But the Tagbanua Tandulanen Indigenous People (IP) claim that the project encroaches on their ancestral lands. In April 2021 their attorneys requested that the Department of Tourism (DOT) and Local Government Unit of El Nido cancel, revoke or deny applications for building permits and licenses for more than seven Ayala-owned businesses and projects in El Nido, including Lio Tourism Estate and Lio Airport. The IP group claimed ‘rampant and widespread’ proliferation of illegal transfers and conversion of their ancestral domain. On 15th March 2022, following reports of projects and activities that did not comply with Free and Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) requirements, the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) intervened in the land dispute, issuing a cease-and-desist-order (CDO) ordering temporary halt of projects in Barangays Libertad and Pasadeña. After issuing four notices to comply with the CDO NCIP issued a show cause order to TKPI on 13th February 2022. In March Tagbanua Tandulanen IP’s legal counsel said the group been sending letters to TKPI for two years without receiving a serious response and urged NCIP to maintain the CDO.

Extending northwards of the tourism estate developed area and Lio Airport is a 4.2 kilometre stretch of white sand beach, also part of the resort. In September 2017 the management of Lio Tourism Estate dismissed accusations that its recently opened upscale resort had blocked access to the public beach in front of it for residents of Barangay Villa Libertad. The issue stemmed from a complaint to the Palawan Provincial Board’s Environment Committee. A month previously Board Member Winston Arzaga said they had been asked by local officials to help resolve the issue, saying “The cause of it all is the access of local fishermen to their traditional fishing grounds which the Ayala management had somehow restricted.” A Safeguards Due Diligence Report for El Nido tourism development, prepared by the Tourism Infrastructure and Economic Zone Authority (TIEZA) for the Asian Development Bank (ADB), published in May 2021, includes notes of a consultation on fisheries management concerns and livelihood projects with Barangay Officials of Villa Libertad, which covers Lio beach, part of Lio Tourism Estate. Dwindling fish catch was the major fisheries issue identified by informants, resulting from overfishing and a reduced fishing area. Declining fish catch and reduced access to fishing grounds was also mentioned in relation to three other Ayala resorts in El Nido, on the islands of Miniloc, Pangulasian and Lagen.

More information about the land dispute and issues with access to fishing grounds related to Lio Tourism Estate and Lio Airport has been published on EJatlas, the world’s largest, most comprehensive online database of social conflict around environmental issues: Lio Tourism Estate and Lio Airport