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

Right to walk, right to livelihood: Clearing footpaths 'can't mean' clearing out the urban poor

By Aseem Mishra*    India’s cities are locked in a quiet but intensifying struggle over one of their most contested public spaces: the footpath. For pedestrians, a footpath is basic infrastructure—a strip of ground that should allow people to move safely, independently and with dignity. For millions of informal workers, the same stretch of pavement is a workplace, a source of daily income and often the difference between survival and destitution.

Ample evidence of child labour in South Gujarat's cash rich sugarcane belt: Study

By Rajiv Shah A recent German government-funded study , undertaken jointly by the NGO Prayas Centre for Labour Research and Action and the Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung, which mainly deals examines the working conditions of migrant workers in the cash-rich sugarcane zone of South Gujarat, has gone a long way to suggest large scale prevalence of child labour during the harvesting season.

Women lawyers petition Supreme Court, seek reconsideration of Aug 4 order on bar council co-option

By A Representative   A group of women advocates who stood sixth and seventh among female candidates in the recent Bar Council elections have filed a petition before the Supreme Court, seeking a recall and reconsideration of the Court’s August 4 order determining the mechanism for co-opting women into State Bar Councils.