Events
& Issues
New Delhi, 6 March 2019
Forest Rights
AVOID TRIBAL BACKLASH
By Dhurjati Mukherjee
The Supreme Court
decision asking States to implement their own orders, rejecting 11.8 lakh claims
over forest land by Scheduled Tribes and Other traditional forest dwellers
(OTFDs) by reportedly describing these as baseless, triggered a massive stir in
the country. In fact, the widespread criticism from tribal groups, civil
society organisations and the Central government filing a petition, the Supreme
Court had to temporarily stay its own order. Organisations are now gearing up
to appeal against the order and build up pressure.
On February 13, 2019,
the Supreme Court ordered that all households whose rights claims under Forest Rights
Act (FRA) have been rejected should be evicted from forests by July 2019. Two
weeks later, on February 28, it stayed its own order till July 10.
The 21 States will, however,
need to explain how the FRA claims were rejected or accepted. These are: Andhra
Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Goa, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand,
Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Manipur, Odisha, Rajasthan,
Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Tripura, Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal).
This, after the petitioners i.e. the Wildlife First, Nature Conservation
Society and Tiger Research and Conservation Trust, had argued that rejection of
an FRA claim implies that the claimant is an encroacher and not a bona fide
forest dweller.
The eviction order by
the apex court was expected to have affected anything around 18-20 lakh forest
dwellers and their families. The Forest Rights Alliance –Bhumi Adhikar Andolan, termed it as a continuation of historic
injustices against the Adivasis and OFDC by pro-corporate and conservation
lobby since enactment of the FRA in the name of public interest.
One may also recall
that an earlier SC bench headed by Justice Madan B. Lokur had on April 18 last
imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 each on Karnataka, Kerala, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh,
Assam, Odisha, Andhra Pradesh and Telengana for not filing affidavits regarding
eviction carried out despite several opportunities.
After this, States
filed affidavits of forest right claim by STs and OTFDs. Andhra said 1.14 lakh
acres of land has been encroached upon and though it rejected claims and
ordered eviction, not a single order has been complied with. Madhya Pradesh said
it had rejected claims of 204,123 STs and 150,664 OFTDs, while West Bengal
rejected claims of 50,288 STs and 35,858 OFTDs.
As per data of Ministry
of Tribal Affairs on the implementation of FRA till November 30, 2018, there
have been more claims rejected than those for which title deeds distributed. Of
the approximately 42.24 lakh claims, both individual and community-filed so
far, around 18.94 claims have been given title deeds, whereas around 19.39
claims rejected.
What is of grave
concern is that under the FRA’s Section 12, only the Gram Sabha has the supreme
power over a number of committees and their recommendations along with that of
the Forest Rights Committees have precedence over technical ‘rejections’ by the
district and other committees, which has been overlooked. In some States,
including Jharkhand, it emerged that the claims were rejected at district and
sub-divisional levels, though committees at these levels can only ask for a
reviewing of these claims.
Meanwhile, the
Campaign for Survival and Dignity (CSD) announced a countrywide protest against
the ruling party, specially in MP, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Rajasthan and
Odisha. CSD and other civil rights’ organisations are appalled and aggrieved
that during the past four hearings in the apex court, the government side remained
silent and didn’t utter a word. This says the CSD “is the last step in this
government’s consistent sabotage of this law from May 2014 onwards.”
The CSOs have urged
political parties to oppose the eviction order and not fall victim to the
malicious propaganda of the wild life groups and instead engage in
implementation of the FRA. As General elections approach, there is need for an
open political debate.
So far, the Chhattisgarh
government has declared full support for the tribal communities and decided to
present the State’s view on the eviction row before the Court. Its Chief Minister
assured his government stood by its tribal brothers and sisters in the fight
for ‘jal, jungle and zameen’ (Water,
forest and land). Congress President Rahul Gandhi too, with regard to implementation
of the FRA, has observed that less than 45 per cent of individual forest rights
and 50 per cent of the community forest rights’ claims were approved as on
April 2018 as the Ministry itself stated that forest staff were rejecting
claims on frivolous objections.
Importantly, the latest
apex court order has Odisha’s Dongria Kondh tribals resolving to resist any
attempt to force them out. Recall, this particular tribe shot into the
limelight for their successful resistance against the Vedanta Group’s plan to
mine bauxite in the ecologically and mineral-rich Niyamgiri hill range.
Meanwhile, what
surprises the CSOs is the fact that after giving a spate of pro-people and pro-society
judgments in the recent past, the apex court has chosen to give a devastating order
for the forest dwellers despite their rights having been emphasised repeatedly not
only at various national but also international forums. The order is
undoubtedly a big setback for the impoverished sections of society and is bound
to have negative social repercussions.
Further, it appears
that amnesia of sorts has developed among State government authorities when it
comes to the implementation of the FRA, 2006 and the process which needs to be
followed once a claim has been rejected. Today, forest communities are at great
risk and the question of eviction must be dealt with utmost caution.
As is well known, eviction,
be it in whatever form, without rehabilitation is unacceptable. As such,
judging the entire matter from a broad perspective, the apex court’s first
order was not justified. Obviously, the States have to review the claims
rejected, not in strictly legal but rather judicious manner, before taking any
drastic action. Moreover, even if at some point of time, a number of forest
dwellers need to be evicted, genuine rehabilitation must be arranged to ensure
they have bare minimum access to some form of livelihood.
Social scientists are
of the opinion that the crisis is indeed one of basic human rights and no one
can be uprooted from his place of living and also livelihood. The whole issue has
to be tackled from the standpoint of social justice.
It goes without saying
that the government must safeguard the rights of the tribals, specially those
guaranteed by the Constitution, and not set any precedent that would erode
these rights. Only the claim of newer entrants may be rejected in order to
protect forest from illegal encroachments. Perhaps, the Government or the SC may
consider formation of a committee at the national level that would evolve a sound
procedure to re-affirm the claims of genuine claimants and review those that
have been rejected. At the same time, protecting forests and wildlife from
fresh encroachers, who have commercial interests, can definitely be undertaken
but not those who have been living in and around the forests for decades.
The State governments
must show political will and make every attempt that the FRA is not diluted and
that the law is not violated in the name of development and conservation. ---INFA
(Copyright, India
News & Feature Alliance)
|