Skip to main content

Forest rights law: How joint environment, tribal ministry memo 'ignores' tribal interests

By Palla Trinadha Rao

The recent Joint Communication by both the Secretaries of Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change and Ministry of Tribal Affairs for implementation of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 dilutes the very spirit of the Forest Rights Act.
The Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 was enacted to correct the historic injustice done to Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers whose ‘forest rights on ancestral lands and their habitat were not adequately recognised in the consolidation of State forests during the colonial period as well as in independent India’.
FRA recognises and vests forest rights in the forest landscape in the country. This Act is to restrain the perpetration of coercive methods of forest department against the usage of forest lands as a matter of right.
The joint note signed by the Secretaries of both the Ministries, undermines the very role of Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA), which is the nodal ministry for implementation of the FRA so far issuing guidelines and clarifications in implementation of FRA.
The forest department is only a party to the proceedings in adjudication of claims that are approved by the concerned Gram Sabha for recognition of both community rights as well as individual forest rights under the Forest Rights Act. Tribal Affairs Ministry now saying that henceforth, they and the Environment Ministry will together provide clarifications only is simply not tenable.
Hiding behind the aprons of the Environment Ministry does not get away from the fact that ‘forest rights’ is a subject that is entrusted with the Tribal Ministry and not with the Environment Ministry since 2006.
Thousands of claims filed by tribals in both Andhra and Telangana have been opposed tooth and nail by the forest department personnel during the adjudication process before the committees set up under the Forest Rights Act.
It has become a herculean task to the District Collectors and Project Officers (ITDAs) to convince the forest department officials who are members of the Committees at both Sub divisional and District Level for recognition of forest rights of tribals.
More particularly in erstwhile Kammam and Warangal districts, in the State of Telangana, regular conflicts are reported between the forest department staff and the tribal occupants and also title holders of forest lands. Further, forest department is digging long deep trenches restraining the tribals from exercising their right to individual land cultivation as well as community rights.
The state governments through its high level State Level Monitoring Committee headed by the Chief Secretary is the statutory body anyway to monitor FRA implementation. Therefore now asking the State government to instruct the forest department to lead FRA implementation undermines this committee by pushing Forest Department to the centre stage in implementation of FRA.
This will only create more conflicts, both at ground level as well as within the legal framework of the law in effect, freezing the already half frozen FRA implementation due to the review of rejected claims resulting from the 2019 Supreme Court order to evict the rejected claimants and also the subsequent Covid-19 pandemic. This in effect undermines also the State Tribal Department who is the nodal department to implement FRA. The result would be the abandoning of tribal interest by the Tribal Ministry.
Thousands of claims filed by tribals in both Andhra and Telangana have been opposed tooth and nail by the forest department personnel
Anyway Forest Rights Act gives enough space to the forest department during the verification process of claims filed by the applicants for either individual or community or community forest resource rights and also all the way to the approval stage.
The Joint Statement further says that the frontline staff of State Forest Department should extend assistance to the institutions /committees under Rule 4(1)(e) and (f) of the Act for preparing conservation and management plan etc.
In fact the said Rules empowers the Gram Sabha to constitute a committee for protection of wildlife, forest and biodiversity etc. and also monitor and control the committee which shall prepare conservation and management plan for community forest resources.
Therefore the key role is with the Gram Sabha and its committee, not the Forest Department. The Gram Sabha may take technical advice from the Forest Department as and when required, but not mandatory. Gram Sabha is the fulcrum for forest governance as far as the community forest rights and community forest resources is concerned.
Saying that the benefits gained from the Joint Forest Management Movement need to be harnessed for protection and management of forests by the Joint communication, makes one to understand that the efforts to bring back the role of Joint Forest Management Committees floated by the Forest Department in the management of community forest resources which is a violation of FRA. The role of JFM Committees has been derecognized by the legal frame work of the Forest Rights Act.
The Joint Statement further emphasizes the role of Forest Department in undertaking the lively hood projects or schemes taken by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs in relation to marketing, processing etc of non timber forest products. This undermines the State Tribal Welfare Department. In fact, both the Forest Rights Act and Panchayats Extension to Scheduled Area Act 1996 provide ownership right over minor forest produce to Gram Sabha and also empower them to issue transit permits to transport the non timber forest products and also value added products.
Therefore, the Joint Communication undermines the legitimate role of Gram Sabha in marketing the non timber produce and implementation of its related schemes. The Gram Sabha shall be the approving authority under PESA Act, 1996 to any project or schemes taken up at the village level. It is indeed sad to see the Tribal Ministry receding and acceding its powers, functions and funds to the Forest Department.

Comments

RR PRASAD said…
Excellent revelations of the contradictions.
Conservationist said…
Yeah, tribals should be allowed to deforest as much as possible. They should have the right to poach wildlife, clear forests and drain wetlands.

Forest rights triumphs all.

TRENDING

'Enough evidence' in Indian tradition to support legal basis for same-sex marriage

By Iyce Malhotra, Joseph Mathai, Sandeep Chachra*  The ongoing hearing in the Supreme Court on same-sex marriage provides space for much-needed conversations on issues that have hitherto remained “invisible” or engaged with patriarchal locker room humour. We must recognize that people with diverse sexualities and complex gender identities have faced discrimination, stigma and decades of oppression. Their issues have mainly remained buried in dominant social discourse, and many view them with deep insecurities.

Savarkar 'criminally betrayed' Netaji and his INA by siding with the British rulers

By Shamsul Islam* RSS-BJP rulers of India have been trying to show off as great fans of Netaji. But Indians must know what role ideological parents of today's RSS/BJP played against Netaji and Indian National Army (INA). The Hindu Mahasabha and RSS which always had prominent lawyers on their rolls made no attempt to defend the INA accused at Red Fort trials.

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Our Representative Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Victim of communal violence, Christians in Manipur want Church leadership to speak up

By Fr Cedric Prakash SJ*  The first eleven days of May 2023 have, in many ways, been a defining period of Indian history! Plenty has happened in a rapid-fire stream of events. Ironically, each one of them are indicators of how crimes and the criminalisation of society has become the ‘new norm’; these include, the May Day rallies with a focus on the four labour codes which are patently against the rights of workers; the U S Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) released its Annual Report on 1 May stating that conditions for religious freedom in India “continued to worsen in 2022”; the continued protest by the Indian women wrestlers at Jantar Mantar for the expulsion of the chief of the Indian Wrestlers Federation on very serious allegations; the Elections in Karnataka on 10 May (with communalism and corruption as the mainstay); the release of the fake, derogative and insensitive film ‘The Kerala Story’; the release of World Free Press Index on 3 May which places India

Delhi HC rules in favour of retired Air Force officer 'overcharged' for Covid treatment

By Rosamma Thomas*  In a decision of May 22, 2023, the Delhi High Court ruled in favour of petitioner Group Captain Suresh Khanna who was under treatment at CK Birla Hospital, Gurugram, between April 28 and May 5, 2021, for a period of eight days, for Covid-19 pneumonia. The petitioner had to pay Rs 3,55,286 as treatment costs, but the Ex-Servicemen Contributory Health Scheme (ECHS) only reimbursed him for Rs 1,83,748, on the basis of government-approved rates. 

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Unlike other revolutionaries, Hindutva icon wrote 5 mercy petitions to British masters

By Shamsul Islam*  The Hindutva icon VD Savarkar of the RSS-BJP rulers of India submitted not one, two,or three but five mercy petitions to the British masters! Savarkarites argue: “There are no evidences to prove that Savarkar collaborated with the British for his release from jail. In fact, his appeal for release was a ruse. He was well aware of the political developments outside and wanted to be part of it. So he kept requesting for his release. But the British authorities did not trust him a bit” (YD Phadke, ‘A complex Hero’, "The Indian Expres"s, August 31, 2004)

India joining US sponsored trade pillar to hurt Indian farmers, 'promote' GM seeds, food

Counterview Desk  As many as 32 civil society organisations (CSOs), in a letter to Union Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal on the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) and India joining the trade pillar, have said that its provisions will allow the US to ensure a more favourable regulatory regime “for enhancing its exports of genetically modified (GM) seeds and GM food”, underlining, it will “significantly hurt the livelihoods of Indian farmers.”

Savarkar 'opposed' Bhagat Singh's, Netaji's dream of India, supported British war efforts

By Shamsul Islam* In a shocking development, the student wing of the RSS put the busts of martyrs Bhagat Singh and Subhash Chandra Bose with Savarkar's on one pedestal at the University of Delhi late in the night on August 20, 2019. Bhagat Singh sacrificed his life for a socialist-democratic-secular republic and Netaji raised Azad Hind Fauj (INA) consisting of people of all religions and regions for armed liberation of India.

Undermining law, breastfeeding? Businesses 'using' celebrities to promote baby food

By Rajiv Shah  A report prepared by the top child welfare NGO, Breastfeeding Promotion Network of India (BPNI), has identified as many as 15 offenders allegedly violating the Indian baby food law, the Infant Milk Substitutes Feeding Bottles, and Infant Foods (Regulation of Production, Supply and Distribution) Act 1992, and Amendment Act 2003 (IMS Act), stating, compliance with the law “seems to be dwindling by the day.”