INDIA INTELLIGENCE REPORT
Information
Democracy Government States Neighbors Religions Organizations
The Eternal Way
Introduction The Scriptures Principles Karma The Individual The Society
Content
Latest Editorials Questions Search
 

News Analysis - Missiles
Tasting success with stopping the Government’s plan to rightfully amend the Right to Information Act, activists are now targeting the Scheduled Tribes (Recognition of Forest Rights) Bill 2005, also known as the Tribal Bill (TB), to bulldoze through Parli

 
 

Tasting success with stopping the Government’s plan to rightfully amend the Right to Information Act, activists are now targeting the Scheduled Tribes (Recognition of Forest Rights) Bill 2005, also known as the Tribal Bill (TB), to bulldoze through Parliament. The TB has many provisions where there is no consensus because of the hazy nature of the bill but the activists want the circumvent debate, due process, and consultation to further their agendas while the minority Government has no option but to accede to these unnatural requests.

An umbrella organization calling itself “Campaign for Survival and Dignity” and bringing in 100 tribal rights organizations from 11 states is trying to persuade a reluctant but in-hostage Government to bring the legislation to the Parliament this session. They plan agitations to coerce the Government to accept the recommendations made by the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) which studied the Bill.

In a populist move, the JPC had advocated the cut-off date to acquire rights to the forest from 1990 to 2005 and also to allow non-tribals to own the forest. Having stuffed party cadre into forest areas, political parties are trying to use this bill as means to aggrandize resource-rich forest land. Specifically, the communists who hold the Government hostage on all issues, is particularly interested to ensure that the JPC recommendations are adopted as it is the Left that will gain from such a move.

Significant bodies have been opposing the bill on several grounds. The Ministry of Environment and Forests supported vastly by the wildlife lobby have been arguing that granting living rights to tribals will greatly impede conservation efforts. Corporations worry that “recognizing” large tracts of forest land will strengthen land mafias who will brush tribals with their hooliganism and start controlling mining and adjoining heavy industries.

Tribal activists argue that the purpose of the Bill is merely to “recognize” that the land is being cultivated by Scheduled Tribes and that “There is no provision for granting two and a half hectares of land to the Tribals.” They claim that the recognition is necessary because some future Government may deem them “encroachers” and evict them. They also want “provisional right” for those living in national parks and sanctuaries and a case by case analysis on allowing continued habitation of these sanctuaries.

This argument is disingenuous because when Governments have been unable to evict encroachers and squatters in cities how could it even begin to evict those who live in forests. Besides, these activists do not say why they want the cut-off date to be 2005 and not 1980 as originally proposed. Further, they do not address concerns that the land may be occupied by land mafias and greatly affect conservation of wildlife and biodiversity.

The only silver lining is that since only a week remains for this session of the Parliament, it is unlikely that the Bill may be considered now giving some succor to fast depleting forest cover. The Government must focus on hammering out a compromise formula where the cut-off date remains at 1980, strong occupancy and criminally enforceable text that will prohibit forest inhabitation by non-tribals, and a clear no-human inhabitation clause in national parks and sanctuaries.

This is yet another instance where the Constitution and governance process needs update to allow for transparent, peaceful, and collaborative consultation process that will include information from experts, activists, and stakeholders. This will ensure that decisions are not made only with votes and election campaigns in mind.