Skip to main content

Gujarat land acquisition amendments "undermine" communities' right to participate in consultation: Amnesty

Counterview Desk
Amnesty International, one of the most influential human rights organization, has taken strong exception to the amendments passed by the Gujarat government to land acquisition laws, saying they “undermine the rights of communities to participation and genuine consultation.”
Pointing out that these amendments would “contribute to forced evictions”, Amnesty in a statement issued on Friday has said that the Gujarat amendments “fall short of national and international standards related to consulting communities and conducting impact assessments.”
Amnesty quotes a minister in the Gujarat government as telling journalists, “Through this bill, we are doing away with the social impact assessment clause, as it consumes a lot of time.”
The Gujarat legislative assembly passed the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Gujarat Amendment) Bill, 2016 in its just-concluded session.
The Bill, currently pending before the Gujarat governor for a nod, was passed amidst opposition by the Congress and independent farmers' organization, Jameen Adhikar Andolan Gujarat (JAAG).
“These amendments mirror the controversial land acquisition bill that was rejected last year, following wide-scale protests by farmers, opposition parties and civil society,” Amnesy quotes Tara Rao, Programmes Director of its Indian branch as saying.
“The safeguards in the central land acquisition law must not be weakened”, Amnesty demands, adding, “The Gujarat government says it is attempting to promote industrial development, but a model that finds human rights a time-consuming hindrance must be questioned.”
Amnesty recalls, “The central Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, which came into force in January 2014, states that the consent of 70 per cent of families is mandatory where land is sought to be acquired for public-private partnership projects, and 80 per cent for private projects.”
It adds, “It also requires a social impact assessment team to determine whether a project will serve a ‘public purpose’ through a detailed cost-benefit analysis.”
However, Amnesty regrets, “The amendments passed by the Gujarat assembly remove the requirement for seeking the consent of affected families for a range of projects, including those relating to defence and national security, rural infrastructure, affordable housing, industrial corridors, and infrastructure projects.”
“The amendments also exempt these projects from having to go through a social impact assessment – a study by independent experts to map a project’s impact on people’s lands and livelihoods in consultation with affected communities”, Amnesty notes.
It comments, “Without a social impact assessment, rehabilitation and compensation measures are likely to be flawed and inadequate. Exempting projects from these assessments can deprive communities of the opportunity to be consulted on decisions that have far-reaching social and economic impacts on them.”
“The Gujarat government, through its amendments, has in effect created its own definition of public purpose. The government must withdraw these amendments, which jeopardize the human rights of millions”, it adds.

Comments

TRENDING

Civil society at a crossroads: Service delivery vs. rights in the fight for social change

Counterview News   In the latest episode of the podcast Unmute , hosts Gagan Sethi and Minar Pimple convened a profound conversation with two veteran development practitioners to dissect a persistent tension within civil society: the perceived divide between service delivery and the struggle for rights. The episode, titled "Beyond Service Delivery: Civil Society, Rights, and the Politics of Social Change," featured Apoorva Oza , a development practitioner with decades of experience in rural development and institution-building, and Professor Dipa Sinha , a development economist known for her work on food, nutrition, gender, and social policy.

Bangkok IMF-World Bank meetings: New reports put India's debt, climate, accountability crisis in focus

Counterview News   As the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) concluded their Annual Meetings in Bangkok this week, civil society groups and policy experts outside the official proceedings released two critical documents challenging the institutions' legacy and prescriptions for Asia, calling for a fundamental overhaul of the global financial architecture.

European banks accused of coal double standard after shunning Adani’s Galilee mine in Australia

By Rajiv Shah    European banks that helped shut down Adani ’s Galilee Basin coal frontier in Australia a decade ago are now bankrolling a far larger coal expansion just 150 kilometres away, according to a new report from Reclaim Finance and partner NGOs. The study , "Coal Hypocrisy: European Banks’ Double Standard on Thermal and Metallurgical Coal in Australia", finds that 19 European banks provided US$30.3 billion to companies planning metallurgical coal expansion in Queensland’s Bowen Basin between 2021 and 2025, out of a total of US$105.9 billion from international banks.