BLAISE COSTABIR
An image of a gigantic casino soon to be per manently moored in the Mandovi has been flash ing on social media. It was pictured as it anchored in the water of the Mormugao Port, awaiting permission to move to its home in the Mandovi. At 112 metres long and 28 metres in breadth, it oc cupies a plot of 3136 square metres. While the height is unavailable in the public do main, visual estimates from available images suggest a structure possibly exceeding 35 metres. To add context, the maximum one can con struct on land in Panjim is 2 FAR, ie 6272 sqm, and the maximum height is 24 me tres. It is gigantic. Picture it on the Mandovi, garishly lit like the others, and you will not be able to see anything else.
If you enjoyed reading this article, you can help support our journalism by adding OHeraldo as a preferred source.
The 112-metre floating casino vessel, with the ca pacity to hold nearly 2,000 people, will soon become a permanent feature of the Mandovi. This is more than the current capacity of all the casino boats put together. At that scale, this is no longer merely a debate about gam bling. It is a question about public space, governance, safety, environmental re sponsibility, and whether the rules applied to ordinary citizens apply equally to powerful commercial inter ests. Do planning rules apply in the water? The only phys ical limitation appears to be that the vessel cannot move beyond the Mandovi bridge. The Mandovi is not an empty stretch of water wait ing for commercial occu pation.
It is the visual and ecological heart of Panjim. It is part of Goa’s identity. Yet over the years, the riverfront has gradually transformed into what increasingly re sembles a privately occupied gaming zone. The burden of this expansion is dispro portionately borne by Pan jim residents through con gestion, parking pressure, noise, and increasing strain on public infrastructure. What should concern citi zens is not simply the exist ence of casinos, but the man ner in which “temporary” permissions appear to have evolved into permanent oc cupation. For years, succes sive governments assured the public that offshore casi nos would eventually move out of the Mandovi. Licenc es and notifications repeat edly referred to relocation and alternative sites. Even licence conditions explicitly stated that operations in the river were temporary ar rangements pending move ment into territorial waters outside the Mandovi. Yet the deadlines kept shifting.
What was first projected as a transitional arrangement has now been extended re peatedly until 2027. In Goa, nothing appears more per manent than a temporary casino permission. This matters because laws and regulations derive le gitimacy from consistency. Ordinary citizens are ex pected to comply with every conceivable rule. A home owner faces scrutiny over setbacks, parking, sewage connections, height restric tions, heritage regulations, and CRZ norms. Even minor deviations can invite notices and penalties. Yet a massive floating commercial structure — 112 metres long and 28 me tres wide — can permanent ly dominate an entire public riverfront through a chain of executive approvals and extensions. That contradic tion surely deserves public scrutiny. The scale of the proposed vessel changes the character of the issue entirely.
This is not a modest replacement vessel. The reported capac ity of approximately 2,000 persons exceeds the com bined capacity of several existing casino vessels. The visual impact alone will fundamentally alter the riv erfront experience for resi dents and visitors alike. Citizens do not merely live beside buildings and roads. They live within shared landscapes. Skylines, wa terfronts, and public views are part of the collective urban experience. Once surrendered to unchecked commercialisation, they are rarely recovered. Every day, casinos are taking up more and more space along the riverfront. More troubling is that con cerns regarding navigational safety were reportedly re corded within government files themselves. Authori ties are said to have warned about navigational hazards, the clustering of vessels, and bottlenecks at mooring posi tions.
These are not alarmist claims invented by activists. They are concerns allegedly raised internally by officials tasked with managing the river and its navigation. That should worry everyone. The Mandovi is not simply a tourist postcard. It is an active river system used by ferries, fishing communities, tourism operators, and lo cal traffic. The introduction of ever-larger, permanently moored structures inevita bly increases navigational pressure and risk. The environmental di mension is equally serious. Reports indicating elevat ed faecal coliform levels in parts of the Mandovi sug gest a river already under ecological stress. Expanding high-density floating infra structure without public discussion raises questions about its environmental im pact, waste management, and long-term river health. Fishing communities have repeatedly voiced concerns about declining water quali ty and marine impact. These anxieties cannot simply be dismissed as anti-develop ment sentiment. They re flect the lived relationship between local communities and the river on which many livelihoods still depend.
If economic benefits to near by businesses justify casino expansion, equal consid eration must be given to fishing communities whose livelihoods may be adverse ly affected. The economy de serves closer examination. Large passenger vessels require periodic surveys and maintenance certifications. The long-term operational implications of permanent ly stationing such massive structures within an already congested river system de serve far greater public dis cussion than they have re ceived. If sewage from these ves sels is required to be trans ferred to onshore treatment facilities, the public is enti tled to ask what safeguards exist against accidental or unauthorised discharge into an already stressed river system. Reasonable people may differ on gambling policy. But all citizens should be concerned when temporary arrangements quietly be come permanent realities, and when public spaces are incrementally surrendered without meaningful civic debate.
Rivers are not vacant spac es waiting to be occupied. They are ecological systems, shared commons, and part of a community’s memory. Goa must decide wheth er the Mandovi remains a public river around which a city exists— or merely a backdrop for ever-expand ing commercial occupation. We must remember: Once a public riverfront is sur rendered incrementally, re claiming it becomes nearly impossible. (The author prefers to write rather than chat in a balcao)
