---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *C. R. Bijoy* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: *Campaign for Survival and Dignity*
<[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
Friends,
The struggle for forest rights continues on the ground, in the
courts and in the halls of the legislature. Contrary to the rosy
official versions put out by the Ministry of Tribal Affaris, and
also contrary to the piecemeal information that has come out in the
press, the situation on the ground is in flux. Below this is a full
state-wise update on the ground status of the Act in the States
where our member organisations, or friendly groups, work. (In case
you need it for future reference, this update will also be posted at
http://forestrightsact.awardspace.com
<http://forestrightsact.awardspace.com/> in an easier to read form.)
Across the country, villages have demarcated the boundaries of their
community forest resources and sought to protect their traditional
forests. Across the country, manipulation of the rights recognition
process has been challenged. Yesterday - May 30th - a morcha took
place in Bhopal, organised by the Jangal Jeevan Adhikar Bachao
Abhiyan (a platform of movement organisations, political party mass
organisations and other groups) and attended by more than 6,000
people. The morcha demanded that the MP government implement the
Act in its true spirit, permit / support recognition of community
forest rights and allow all forest communities to apply for their
rights. Today - May 31st - a mass demonstration took place in
Ranchi, Jharkhand, by the Bharat Jan Andolan, attacking the
Jharkhand State government for its continued apathy and demanding
that the Act's provisions, particularly on hamlet level gram sabhas,
should be implemented properly. These are only two of a series of
mass mobilisations over the past two months.
In other spheres, the offensive against forest dwellers continues.
In the courts a total of seven writ petitions have now been filed
(four by retired forest officers, one by an ex zamindar and two by
elitist conservationist organisations), the status of which will
shortly be posted on our website
http://forestrightsact.awardspace.com
<http://forestrightsact.awardspace.com/>. The Ministry of Tribal
Affairs at the Centre continues its special combination of apathy
and sabotage.
Yet the fact remains that, for all its problems, this Act was and is
a victory. On the ground one thing is clear - it is the government
and the Forest Department, for so long the untrammeled lords of the
forest, who are now on the wrong side of the law. This law has
tilted the balance. Now the sabotage is in the open and the fight
is on. The rising tide of popular struggle will prevail.
The update is below. The first section defines some of the
terminology that is being used.
Campaign for Survival and Dignity
DEFINITIONS OF TERMINOLOGY
Many of the State reports refer to three issues:
1. WHAT KIND OF GRAM SABHAS ARE BEING CALLED: The "gram sabha"
(village assembly) is the first tier of decision-making in the Act.
But, which gram sabha? In reality gram sabhas can be called at three
levels: as the assembly of all voters in a gram panchayat, as the
assembly of all the residents of a revenue village, or as the
assembly of the residents of a hamlet. A typical gram panchayat may
include multiple revenue villages, which each in turn include
multiple hamlets. The movements had long demanded that the gram
sabhas for this Act should be at the level of the actual settlements
- the hamlets, or at most the revenue villages - and not at the
artificial administrative level of the gram panchayat, where they
would be very large and make democratic functioning impossible. The
Act requires hamlet level gram sabhas in Scheduled Areas and revenue
village gram sabhas elsewhere.
2. THE FOREST RIGHTS COMMITTEES: Each village is to elect a
committee of 10 - 15 people from its own residents as a "Forest
Rights Committee", which will do the initial verification of rights
and place its recomnendations before the gram sabha (which makes the
decision).
3. THE QUESTION OF "RESIDING IN FORESTS": The Act states that only
those who "primarily reside in forests or forest land" will be
eligible for rights. What does this mean? In practice some States
have interpreted it to mean that only those with a residence on
forest land will be eligible. This is in direct violation of the
assurance of the Minister of Tribal Affairs before Parliament, who
said that this provision is not to be interpreted in this manner.
In fact the definition in the Act relates to whether the
person lives in a forest area, not to whether the person's own house
is on forest land.
Madhya Pradesh
Implementation began in the first week of February, and by the end
of February, most Forest Rights Committees had been formed. In
Schedule V areas the Committees have been formed at the revenue
village level, while in other areas - Burhanpur District in
particular - the Committees were formed at the panchayat level. MP's
PR Act provides for hamlet level GSs in scheduled areas, and recent
(May 27) orders on the FR Act have required that such gram sabhas
should take place where people demand them (provided that very
recent settlements cannot have their own gram sabhas). Unsurveyed
villages are facing difficulties in being included in gram sabhas
or in forming Forest Rights Committees of their own, especially in
Burhanpur, Khandwa and Khargone. The government has also often
ignored the requirement for one third women's representation on the
Forest Rights Committees.
As in other States, there have been problems getting ST
certificates, which has partially been resolved by orders to the
SDM's to issue the certificates in a time bound manner (people were
earlier being directed to their sarpanches). In some unsurveyed and
forest villages, people are being required to get signatures from
local forest guards for being issued ST certificates, who are
refusing and claiming that the residents are "encroachers." Recent
orders (May 27th) now state that lack of an ST certificate should
not be grounds for denying a claim at the stage of filing the claim;
instead, when the claim reaches the Sub-Divisional Committee level,
the SDO should be required to verify the antecedents and issue the
certificate as per normal procedures. If the person is found
ineligible, the claim will be rejected at that stage.
Claims for community rights are being treated as low priority and
there is little awareness on community rights among the government
officials. While the actual field work is being handled primarily
by revenue officials, the Forest Department has been charged with
training the concerned government staff, allowing them some degree
of dominance. Collectors and other revenue officials have objected
to this.
The State government had put in place a three month deadline for
rights claims to be filed. When they were approached with
objections that this would result in problems, they informed the
organisations that this deadline will not be enforced and it will be
left to the gram sabhas to decide when to stop receiving claims.
The Madhya Pradesh government has imposed additional conditions
similar to those imposed in Gujarat (see below). The stand of the
government on the "reside in forests" issue remains unclear, though
a clarification has been requested from the Central government.
On May 27th, new orders issued by the Principal Secretary, Tribal
Welfare to all District Collectors have clarified some of the
earlier issues, as noted above. It is now clearly stated that
rights have to be recognised in all areas, including protected
areas. Applications of claimants without official documentary
evidence in support of their claims are to be accepted with the SDO
being asked to obtain the required documents from the concerned
departments. It remains to be seen how this order will be implemented.
The organisations have begun the demarcation of community forest
resources and village boundaries across the State. Also, from May
5th onwards, protests have taken place demanding that the problems
in implementation be addressed. On May 19th, coordinated protests
were held in Damo, Badwani, Satna and Burhanpur districts.
Rajasthan
FRCs have been constituted in about 70% of the villages in Scheduled
Areas in south Rajasthan (including protected areas), mostly between
April 8th and 17th, but in non-Scheduled Areas there are
difficulties. For the remaining villages in the Scheduled Areas,
gram sabhas are being called again now to form the Committees. In
some villages where FRCs were wrongly constituted, the Andolan has
succeeded in getting them re-constituted. In scheduled areas, gram
sabhas of revenue villages are being called, whereas in
non-scheduled areas, gram sabhas of the panchayats are being called.
This is a major source of the problem: in Pali block of Pali
district, for instance, the villagers are not being permitted to
form a Forest Rights Committee, mainly because the panchayat level
gram sabha has a majority of non-forest dwellers and non-tribals.
The people have demanded a village level gram sabha. Protests have
also taken place in Kotra block and in Pai village in Udaipur
district against panchayat level gram sabhas.
Post formation of the Committees there has been no action from the
government side. There is a severe shortage of claim forms, with
the government declaring that only claim forms carrying official
stamps will be accepted - but not printing sufficient claim forms
afterwards.
There are continued efforts to relocate villagers from Sariska Tiger
Reserve, though such relocation is now illegal without the consent
of the affected persons. They do not want to leave their villages.
Some relocation is also planned from Ranthambore National Park but
the details are not yet available. In some villages, the potential
conflict with JFM committees has surfaced.
Gujarat
FRC's have been constituted in most villages in tribal areas, with
relatively little difficulty and little signs of party manipulation
so far. Gram sabhas have since then been held again in order to
initiate the calling for claims. In most cases these committees have
been constituted at the revenue village level, but in some cases
where people have demanded hamlet level GSs in schedule V areas,
those have also been permitted. Claim forms have not reached all the
villages and the process of receiving claims has not yet begun. This
is despite the calling of 2nd gram sabha meetings in April, when the
FRCs were authorised to start receiving claims. FRCs have been
instructed to invite claims for community forest rights during the
first month before accepting claims for individual rights. The
FRC's have also been granted quasi-judicial status so that they can
receive affidavits without requiring those affidavits to be on stamp
paper, a major obstacle in many other areas.
In some areas, particularly in the Dangs, the forest department is
continuing to harass villagers and dig pits in their fields. In
other areas they have cut down bamboo in order to prevent people
from claiming rights over this minor forest produce, though the
organisations have stopped them.
The district and sub-divisional level committees have still not been
properly constituted. People wanting information or clarifications
are unsure of where to go. Revenue officials who have conducted most
of the gram sabhas have created confusion in many places. In some
cases, claimants were not permitted to become FRC members due to
misinterpretation of the rules. Till now there has been no
systematic dissemination of information about the Act amongst the
villagers and little proper training of the government staff, though
such training has begun.
The Gujarat government has imposed some additional conditions for
recognising rights over cultivated forest land. In particular,
those owning some revenue land, or who have already received pattas
to some forest land under the earlier 1992 GR, will be eligible to
rights over a maximum of 10 acres including the land already in
their name. The justification is that that is all the land required
for meeting bonafide livelihood needs. There still appears to be
some confusion on this matter. The government has also issued
instructions that those holding jobs will not be eligible, though
apparently an exemption is being made for those in "very small time"
jobs.
The government has indicated that it is attempting to take a more
liberal view of the "reside in forests" requirement, but is also
awaiting a clarification from the Centre. The tribal department has
issued a number of positive clarifications of the FRA for government
staff, including that the forest department should not be involved
with liason work in the field due to the fact that it is an
'interested party'.
Chhattisgarh
The situation in Chhattisgarh continues to be difficult. In
practice, FRCs have been formed hurriedly in late February/early
March without any dissemination of information about the Act to the
people. In all areas, FRC's were constituted at the panchayat
level. Filling of claim forms has begun but only claims for private
land rights are being sought. The forms for claiming community
rights have not even been distributed. DLCs and SDLCs have been
formed. Due to faction fighting within the Congress, most of the
elected representatives in the higher level committees, including
the state level monitoring committee, are from the BJP. The
activists have met the Governor who said that he would talk to the
tribal secretary and the Collector. Others met the tribal secretary
who said that not many people are likely to get rights as only those
living on forest land are being deemed eligible. Officials are
indicating that not even all those in occupation of forest land
identified through the visual surveys done by forest guards are
likely to be eligible for rights under the Act. Despite the Tribal
Dept being the nodal agency, FRA implementation seems to effectively
be controlled by the Forest Department. The government seems bent
upon sticking to the deadline for filing claims and their
verification and intends to start issuing pattas to approved
claimants in June.
Much of this is not surprising, given that the orders issued by the
State government (originally on February 8th) were themselves in
violation of the Act and the Rules. Thus, the first gram sabha
meetings called between Feb 25 & 29, were called by the Panchayat
Secretary and not the Panchayat. Although claims for community
forest rights are to be prepared by the Forest Rights Committees,
the order asks the panchayat secretary to seek the assistance of
forest and revenue officials, effectively making it a process
controlled and managed by officials instead of the gram sabha, as
provided for in the law. Gram sabha resolutions based on FRC
recommendations were to be passed after giving an opportunity to
officers/staff of concerned departments to be heard before
forwarding them to the SDLCs. The Gram sabhas were also expected to
pass resolutions on relocation packages from critical wildlife
habitats of sanctuaries and national parks even before these had
been identified. The Panchayat secretary is to be the secretary of
every FRC despite the rules providing that a member be elected
secretary. All records are to be kept in the Panchayat office rather
than with the gram sabha. Claimants are asked to deposit their
claims in the Panchayat office instead of to the FRC. Verification
of claims was to start straight after their receipt by the panchayat
secretary (instead of the FRC) after intimating revenue & forest
officials. After verification of claims, survey teams for forest
land are to be constituted by the DFO & for revenue land by the
Collector. The SDO is to direct the FRC & Gram Sabha when to have
their meetings.
Overall, thus, officials are trying to control the process from
start to finish - in violation of both the spirit and letter of the
Act. Chhattisgarh has already seen numerous protests against this,
including a mass cycle rally in Raipur in which more than 2,000
people participated, as well as numerous dharnas, morchas and
smaller protests in the districts.
Orissa
The government claims to have formed more than 30,000 FRCs during
the two days in March when gram sabhas were called. FRC's have been
constituted at the revenue village level. The formats distributed by
the PRI department for gram sabha resolutions etc. said that the
FRCs had to start inviting claims from the date of their election.
Subsequently, the revenue secretary sent a letter to all district
collectors asking them to give due importance to implementing the
Act. It also said that the maps prepared by FRCs need not be to
scale. The SDLCs would have the responsibility to prepare proper
maps based on the received claims.
After the initial bout of energy, no further gram sabha meetings
have been called officially to initiate the process of inviting
claims. Although the government has printed a large number of claim
forms, these have not yet reached all the villages. The level of
understanding of the villagers about the Act, and also the quality
of members elected to FRCs varies widely. In some districts the
collectors and other government officials have been responsive to
dealing with problems and procedural irregularities brought to their
notice. However, in many districts there is no such interest taken
by senior officials. In Karlapat wildlife sanctuary, the villagers
have made contributions to generate a fund for buying registers for
gram sabha resolutions/FRC meeting minutes, receipt books for claims
received etc. and a large number of active women have been elected
to the FRCs. In Sunabeda sanctuary and the Simlipal Tiger Reserve,
on the other hand, the villagers are facing a lot of problems due to
the forest department not permitting even awareness raising meetings.
There is no clarity on the "reside in forests" issue, though the
Orissa government had earlier indicated that it is unlikely to take
a strict interpretation, pending clarification from the Centre.
Tribals are facing acute problems in obtaining ST certificates. A
website has been set up by Vasundhara (www.fra.org.in
<http://www.fra.org.in/>) that provides more information on the
situation in Orissa, and also provides information for other
organisations to use.
Maharashtra
The first gram sabhas were called in April in Nandurbar and Jalgaon
districts. In some places FRCs were constituted, but in others the
gram
sabhas were adjourned due to lack of quorum. The Tribal Welfare
department
organised a number of District and Sub-Divisional Workshops to spread
awareness regarding the Act. The Department announced that the
process of
holding gram sabhas would begin from May 1st. It was also decided
by the
State Monitoring Committee that Gram Sabhas in Scheduled and
non-Scheduled
Areas will be held at revenue village level. Gram sabhas at smaller
unit
level will be held only under exceptional circumstances (eg. remote
areas,
geographical difficulties, "Naxalite" affected areas etc. But such
smaller
units should have a minimum population of 500. Steps have also been
taken to ease the requirement of proving ST status.
Accordingly, the process of calling Gram Sabhas has begun. In Thane
District the process has begun in Jawhar and Dahanu sub-divisions
but not in Bhiwandi/Thane sub-division. In
Raigad district no gram sabhas have been called as yet, but very
successful
workshops were called by the administration to plan out the process of
implementation. In Gadchiroli district, FRCs have been constituted
in some
villages, but in many others no gram sabhas have been held.
Despite the fact that the decision has been taken by the SLMC that gram
sabhas are to be called at the revenue village level, in many
places, FRCs are being
formed at the Group Gram Panchayat level. Initially the state
government
had announced that the Gram Sevak will be the secretary of the FRC, but
under pressure this decision was changed and the Tribal Welfare
Department has now
announced that an educated person from the village is to be
appointed as
Secretary. However, even so, in some villages, the officials
present at the
Gram Sabha insist and appoint the Gram Sevak as Secretary of the FRC.
No forms have as yet been made available by the SDLC to the various
gram sabhas.
Dadra and Nagar Haveli
In meetings held in April, the administration agreed to implement
the Act by taking the revenue village as the unit rather than the
very large panchayats. However, till date no further implementation
has occurred.
Jharkhand
Despite repeated demonstrations and protests from mass organisations
and political parties, implementation has yet to begin in Jharkhand.
The government is claiming that it is not able to implement the Act
as Jharkhand has no elected panchayats (due to panchayat elections
not being held for other reasons), and the Act requires elected
members in the Sub Divisional and District Level Committees while
the Rules require the panchayats to summon a gram sabha. Ministry
of Tribal Affairs has been requested for a clarification on this.
It has been pointed out by the Minister of State for Tribal Affairs
that the Act specifically provides, in section 2(p), that in States
that have no panchayats, the traditional village institutions will
perform the role of gram sabhas. The local organisations have
pointed out that these traditional leaders can serve as the members
of the higher Committees. However, the Ministry has as yet not sent
any formal reply to the request for clarification and the Jharkhand
government has made no move to proceed. There are also concerns
that the government intends to make the Forest Department the nodal
agency under the Act.
Hundreds of settlements have submitted resolutions seeking
constitution of hamlet level gram sabhas. Protest demonstrations
were held in several block and district headquarters between 5th and
9th May. On May 31st, a demonstration is planned in Ranchi.
Tamil Nadu
On February 19th, the State government constituted the State Level
Monitoring Committee and directed the District Collectors to
constitute the District and Sub-Divisional Level Committees. On
February 22nd, a letter was issued directing the convening of gram
sabhas. It appears that at the May 1st normal gram sabhas, the Act
was raised at some villages in Erode and Dindigul Districts.
However to our knowledge only one village has elected an FRC so far.
In addition, on February 21st, the Madras High Court issued a stay
order against any issuing of pattas or felling of trees (under
section 3(2)). On April 30th, after an application for vacation of
this order was moved by a tribal organisation, the High Court
clarified that implementation of the Act should proceed, but no
title for any rights should be granted until further orders of the
Court. These court orders have also proven a convenient excuse for
the government to not implement the Act.
Andhra Pradesh
While FRCs have been formed in some districts, in others no FRCs
have been formed excepting for pilot implementation of the Act in
one or two selected villages. In some districts, only some awareness
raising activities have been undertaken by the government. Forms for
filing claims have been distributed but haven't reached all the
villages.
The procedures laid down in the Act and rules are not being followed
in many places. Both forest and revenue officials are accompanying
FRC members when they go for field verification of claims. During
this, forest department staff have been rejecting claims for land
under shifting cultivation. This means that instead of acceptance or
rejection of claims by the FRC and the gram sabha, many claims are
being prematurely rejected by the forest department. Revenue
officials are unclear about the provisions in the Act related to
this. At least in some areas, GPS is being used for preparing final
maps.
The AP government is not focusing on strict enforcement of the
requirement of residing on forest land, though statements to that
effect were made earlier, pending clarification from the Centre.
West Bengal
Implementation of the Act appears to have begun near the end of
March, with a circular that directed constitution of Forest Rights
Committees at the gram sansad level. This circular had a number of
problematic sections. However, the process stopped soon after the
end of March due to the announcement of panchayat elections. It is
expected to begin again after the elections are over.
Kerala
A Working Group has been set up to recommend the best methods to
implement the Act. The working group had finished its work some
weeks ago and was expected to submit its report. The only other
available information indicates that the government has asked gram
panchayats to call gram sabhas in June.
Karnataka
There was an initial burst of activity in February, when Forest
Rights Committees were constituted in several districts of southern
Karnataka. In some areas Committees were constituted without even
holding a gram sabha. Elected representatives and local
organisations protested to demand the cancellation of these
Committees. No further developments appear to have taken place
since, as the government machinery has been busy with the elections.
Goa
Forest Rights Committees were constituted in some villages on the
28th of February. After that, no implementation appears to have
taken place since.
--
C.R Bijoy
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
