Skip to main content

Govt of India wants to "reduce" land acquisition Act into compensation granting mechanism

By A Representative
One of the world's most influential NGOs, Oxfam, taking strong exception to the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (LARR) ordinance, which was hurriedly brought in to replace the LARR Act late last year, has asked the Government of India to roll it back immediately. The ordinance is now being sought to be replaced by an amendment law by the Modi government.
Headquartered in UK, Oxfam in a recent note has said, “By undoing the applicability of the LARR law on critical sectors where the largest amount of land acquisition is taking place, like industrial corridors or mines, the 2014 ordinance reduces the law to a compensation granting mechanism.”
Currently before Parliament for nod, Oxfam says, the LARR ordinance has especially done away with the processes such as social impact assessment (SIA) which was a significant gain and was “welcomed by affected people and social movements”. Then, it has sought to do away with the 2013 law's provision of "seeking consent from owners of land in case land is being acquired for private sector projects or projects under public private partnership (PPP).”
Saying this should not be allowed, Oxfam says, these changes would only go to help “many projects including mining, SEZs, transportation, tourism”, hence they should be “immediately undone and no further dilutions should be allowed”.
Other changes sought by Oxfam include revoking “exemptions to SIA on acquisition of land multicropped land”, and reinstatement of 2013 Act's “provisions related to return of unutilized land” to the original owner. It adds, there are in all “nineteen amendments floated by the Ministry of Rural Development, with possibilities existing for “adversely modifying the rates of compensation”.
Oxfam takes objection to the ordinance adding a “new section to the 2013 Act, which includes a range of projects for which the provisions of SIA and food security safeguards will not apply. This includes acquisition of land for defence or national security projects, infrastructure projects (including tourism, mining, and transportation), industrial corridors (like Special Economic Zones) and affordable housing for low income groups.”
Oxfam also disagrees to the ordinance's provision which ensures that there is no cognizance of offence made by government employees in any court without it being first sanctioned by the government. “The 2013 Act had put the liability of any offence committed under the Act, directly on the head of a government department”, adds Oxfam.
Calling the LARR ordinance, 2014 “a conscious and retrograde step, which aims to bring about long-term changes targeted primarily towards speedy land acquisition for project developers”, Oxfam believes, it is “likely to create more social and environmental conflicts rather than resolve them.”
Prepared by Kanchi Kohli, a researcher on environment, forest and biodiversity governance, for Oxfam's India branch, the note concludes that the ordinance is “in favour of those acquiring land rather than the project impacted communities, especially those who are poor and landless.”

Comments

TRENDING

To Sonam Wangchuk: 'Will undertake 70 hour solidarity fast in Gujarat'

By Martin Macwan *  Dear Colleague Sonam Wangchuk, I have never met you personally. I wrote a short article at the time of your arrest. Your work correctly introduces you. There is truth in your words. You have embarked on a fast, following the footsteps of Gandhiji. Your intention is to make people think. Your demand is reasonable; I believe that the resignation of a single education minister will not improve the state of education in India. However, the question you have raised is extremely important for the future generation of the marginalized. Education is the key to power, development, and progress, which empowers a citizen.

US civil society coalition slams Hudson Institute for hosting RSS leaders

By A Representative   The Hudson Institute ’s “New India Conference,” held on April 23, featured senior figures from India’s ruling political ecosystem, including RSS General Secretary Dattatreya Hosabale and BJP foreign affairs head Vijay Chauthaiwale . The event also included U.S. officials and former diplomats such as Kurt Campbell, Kenneth Juster, and Nisha Biswal, alongside India’s Ambassador to the U.S., Vinay Kwatra.  

Remembering Rampur ka Tiraha: State violence and the birth of Uttarakhand’s struggle

By Vidya Bhushan Rawat*  In the turbulent political landscape of the early 1990s, India witnessed events that reshaped its social and regional equations. After the Babri Masjid demolition in 1992, Uttar Pradesh politics shifted dramatically, bringing the Samajwadi Party–Bahujan Samaj Party coalition to power in 1993 under Mulayam Singh Yadav. But the partnership was uneasy. Mulayam was never entirely comfortable playing the “Mandal card.” While Kanshi Ram and the BSP had consistently demanded the implementation of the Mandal Commission recommendations, Mulayam hesitated, wary of how the move might play out.