CAMPAIGN FOR SURVIVAL AND DIGNITY
National Convenor: Pradip Prabhu, 3 Yezdeh Behram, Malyan, Dahanu Road 401602.
Ph: 02528-22760
Delhi Contact: SRUTI, Q-1 Hauz Khas Enclave, Delhi 110016. Tel. 26569023 /
26560558
The Scheduled Tribes and Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Bill,
2005
TRUTHS AND FALSEHOODS
For the first time, the government is preparing a bill to recognise forest
communities' rights. The debate about this Bill has been pitched as if it is a
question of balancing people’s rights with forest conservation. In fact the bill
is not directed against forest conservation at all. It is directed against the
abuses of the forest authorities, who have failed both to protect forests and to
respect the rights of forest communities. The Forest Department (FD) has both
failed to protect forests and has illegally seized huge areas of community land
as ‘state forests’, whereupon they declared the true owners and cultivators to
be “encroachers.” The Ministry of Environment and Forests itself filed a sworn
affidavit in the Supreme Court describing this as a 'historic injustice' and
admitted that “the rural poor, especially tribals” were deprived of their
livelihood rights.[1] Meanwhile, the real commercial and mafia encroachers
carrying on destroying forest with the full knowledge and support of the forest
authorities.
This note answers some of the myths spread against the bill, so that debate can
focus on the real issues.
MYTH: The Bill will distribute 2.5 hectares of land to every tribal family or
will allow each generation to claim new lands. The Bill will “destroy 60% of
India’s forests.”
Reality: This Bill will not give a single square inch of land to anyone. The
Bill only requires the government to give legal recognition to lands that people
have already been farming since 1980. Section 3 (a) of the draft Bill clearly
states that Tribes will only receive rights to “land under their occupation”
since 25-10-1980, up to a maximum of 2.5 hectares per family. No one, not this
generation or the next, will receive rights to new lands. Finally, land rights
cannot be sold or transferred in any way except by inheritance.
All that this Bill requires is that the Forest Department change its records and
recognise what is already true. The FD’s records are so glaringly wrong that at
least 12% of the land that it records as “forest” does not have any forest, and
often never did (this is seven times the area officially classified as
“encroached”). The Forest and the Revenue Departments records are so
inconsistent that their estimates of the country’s forest area differ by 7.66
million hectares (which is more than five times the area officially classified
as “encroached”). Most of the 'state forests' consist of community lands (often
not forests at all) declared as such by fiat, such as the following:
·In 1893, all of Uttaranchal's uncultivated common lands, including pastures and
other village common lands, were declared to be state “forests” by the British.
As late as 1997, the Uttaranchal Forest Department claimed that this entire area
– much of which is now under other uses – is “forest" and therefore subject to
their control. At least 31% of Uttaranchal’s recorded forest land currently has
no forest.
·In Himachal, all “waste lands” - 66.4% of the State's area, including grazing
lands and seasonal pastures of nomadic pastoralists - were declared to be
"forests". Over half this land is incapable of supporting forest, since it is
alpine pastures, snowbound peaks, etc. At least 61% of Himachal’s recorded
forest land currently has no forest.
·More than 75% of Mizoram's area has been declared “forest”, though 33% of this
is communally owned shifting cultivation land that, under the VIth Schedule, is
to be controlled by local communities.
·Official data states that 40% of Orissa’s state forests were “deemed” so
without any survey process till date.
When Madhya Pradesh was created, most of the 94.8 lakh hectares of recognised
community lands were declared “protected forests”, on the condition that the
authorities respect villagers’ rights where the Princely States had done so (in
the ‘nistari’ areas). But, in February 2005, the Forest Department overnight
declared that no such rights exist. In fact, 14 lakh hectares of this area are
disputed between the forest and revenue departments themselves; lakhs of farmers
have been given pattas in these disputed areas.
In Raigad and Thane districts, Maharashtra, so-called ‘dali’ and ‘ek Sali’ lands
were leased to adivasis by the British government. Until 2002, the Forest
Department still claimed all of this was ‘forest.’ Meanwhile, using outdated
records, the Forest Department now claims that over one lakh small farmers'
lands are also 'forest'.
By no stretch of the imagination can the eviction of lakhs of poor cultivators
contribute to forest conservation. Indeed, as the Ministry itself put it, it
will be harmful: “because of the absence of legal recognition of their
traditional rights, adjoining forests have become “open access” resources as
such for the dispossessed tribals, leading to forest degradation in a classic
manifestation of the tragedy of commons.”
MYTH: The Bill will eliminate “legal protection for the forest cover” in
large parts of India.
Reality: Section 5 requires forest rights holders to not only refrain from
“any activity… that adversely affects the forest and the biodiversity in the
local area” but also requires the entire community to “stop any activity which
adversely affects wildlife, forest and biodiversity”, whoever might be
responsible for that activity. In fact, this is the first law that actually
requires communities to protect the forest.
As well, Section 8 of the Act makes it an offense for any person to contravene
section 5 or to engage in unsustainable use of the forest, kill wildlife or fell
trees for commercial purposes. Anyone who commits these offenses more than once
will lose any rights that they may have – including their lands. This is in fact
a stricter provision than applies to ‘ordinary’ property holders, who will not
lose their property regardless of the trees they fell or the forest they clear.
How is this “eliminating legal protection”? In fact, forests do not need
protection from communities – they need protection from the Forest Department.
Let us look at a few incidents in their record:
Between 1951-1979, 3.33 million hectares of natural forests were felled and
replaced by “industrial” plantations. This is 2.5 times the area currently said
to be ‘encroached’.
The forest authorities have destroyed 90% of our natural grasslands by planting
commercial tree species on them, wiping out some of the country's most sensitive
ecosystems.
Since 1980, the forest authorities have diverted 9.81 lakh hectares of land for
non-forest use but only done 7.3% of the required compensatory planting. Because
of their failure to follow the law, the country has lost 8.9 lakh hectares of
tree cover, which is 66% of the area supposedly encroached.
In the single taluka of Gudalur, Tamil Nadu, between 1996 and 2002, 3000 acres
of forest were felled by land grabbers with Forest Department connivance and
support.
During the last 5 years, in Orissa alone, the forest authorities regularised
1230 hectares of forest land illegally diverted for mines - in violation of a
Supreme Court stay on regularisations. But, since 1980, they have only managed
to regularise a grand total of 29 hectares of subsistence cultivators' land in
Orissa, though such cultivators were legally entitled to regularisation.
Democratisation is necessary if India’s forests are to be protected; as the MoEF
stated in its affidavit, recognition of rights will “remedy a serious historical
injustice… [and] lead to better forest conservation.”
MYTH: The existing law contains enough guarantees for peoples’ rights.
Reality: The existing forest laws are a colonial invention, designed to
seize community resources for the sake of British profit and infrastructure. The
only laws that exist on this issue are the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled
Areas) Act, 1996, and a set of five 1990 Ministry circulars. The former has been
ignored, and the Ministry itself says that “the State / UT Governments have
failed to give any response” to the 1990 guidelines. The only exception is
Maharashtra, which also did nothing until an SC order and mass protests.
MYTH: Local communities are enemies of the forest.
Reality: The most extensive and harmful forest degradation is caused by the
timber mafia, land grabbers and industry, particularly mining. In this they are
greatly assisted by the legal or illegal support of the forest authorities, as
noted above. The Ministry swore before the Court that the “benefit of
indiscriminate diversion [of forests] by State / UT Governments remained in the
hands of a few powerful lobbies”. Meanwhile, thousands of forest communities are
protecting forests in states like Orissa and Jharkhand, while more than 7000 Van
Panchayats in Uttaranchal have been protecting their village forests since 1931;
satellite data says these forests are flourishing. As of 1999, 65.41% of India’s
forests were in 137 tribal districts.
Indeed, communities have fought to protect their forests from the FD itself – as
in the famous Chipko movement. Three years ago, police shot dead three adivasi
protesters demanding a halt to commercial felling in Dewas District, Madhya
Pradesh. In the Nilgiris District, Tamil Nadu, thousands of villagers have faced
lathi blows, police harassment, and false cases when defending their forests
against FD-supported land grabbers.
MYTH: The forest authorities cooperate with local communities.
Reality: The forest authorities treat local communities as enemies and
repress them with tremendous brutality. The most recent incident is the
post-2002 mass eviction of lakhs of people across India, on the basis of a
misinterpreted Supreme Court order. Evictions have been accompanied by severe
violence, including reported mass burnings of houses in Madhya Pradesh,
Chattisgarh, Gujarat, and Andhra Pradesh, and the use of elephants to demolish
entire villages in Maharashtra and Assam. Most recently, the Forest Department
killed one adivasi protester and burned 180 adivasis’ houses in Khandwa, Madhya
Pradesh in early April. The death toll these evictions have caused, through
disease, exposure and starvation, is unknown – but is undoubtedly enormous.
This is why this law must be passed, and must be passed now. If not, neither
India’s forests nor India’s forest communities will survive.
[1] Ministry of Environment and Forests in IA 1126 in IA 703 in Writ Petition
202/95 in the Supreme Court, dated 21.7.2004.