VIBHAV BIRWATKARFSOto usetheRightto FairCom-
pensationandTransparencyin Land
Acquisition, RehabilitationandRe-
settlement Act,2013,in orderto ac-
quire and include land in the
reservedforestscategory.A forest
tribunalshallhear anyappeals and
adjudicateon the same.
Theamendmentsdo notenvis-
age including the gramsabhain such
appellatebodies,leavingmuchof the
decision-making to theforestbur-
eaucracy.Theamendmentsmakea
pretence of recognising the rightsof
tribalpeopleandforestdwellers un-
dertheScheduledTribeandOther
TraditionalForestDwellers(Recog-
nitionof ForestRights)Act,2006.
ThenewSection22 (A),on the
recording of individual andcom-
munityrights, empowers State gov-
ernments,in consultationwiththe
Central government, to “acquire
suchrights”if bothgovernments are
satisfied that theexerciseof this
right—individually and collect-
ively—is inconsistentwiththecon-
servationof reservedforests.
Whiletherights of tribalpeople
andOTFDsstand to be comprom-
ised,theStateandCentralgovern-
ments willnowhavetherightto
allowtheleasing outof reserved
forestland. An additionto Section 23
allowsStategovernments to lease
outanddivertforestlandonlyafter
taking permission fromtheCentral
governmentWithoutit, “every lease
grantedwithoutapprovalshallbe
nullandvoid”.VILLAGEFORESTS
Theamendments providefor the
creationof village forestsfromany
forest landor wasteland, whichthen
would be managedby joint forest
management committees. These
committees would exercise com-
munityforestrightsbut onlyin “con-
sultation” with, and not needing
approval from,gramsabhasandthe
ForestDepartment.Underthe FRA,
the gram sabha’s approval is
mandatory.
UndertheFRA,villageforests
cannotcomeup in areasthatare un-
dertheclaimsof thecommunity.
Does thismeanthattheclaimsof
individualsunder the FRAwould be
abrogatedunderthe definitionof vil-
lageforests? In Chapter 4 on “Protec-
tedForests”,a newclausein the
proposed amendments gives the
Centralgovernment the right overa
State governmentto “constitutea
protected forest”, includinggiving
directionsto Stategovernmentsto
manage contiguous forests in a
“landscape approach”. The land-
scape approach, it is argued,willbe-
nefit “local communities”.
Theproposedamendmentsare,
in someparts,a virtualrepeat of the
colonialActof 1927,withtheonly
change being that they arrogate
morepowersto the CentralandState
governments.Forexample,the titu-
lar clause30 on the“powerto issue
notification reservingtrees”has been
tweakedthus:“powerto issuenoti-
ficationdeclaringconservationarea,
reservingtrees...”.Such areas canbe
declaredclosedforgrazingor for
gatheringforest produceuntilthe
State governmentdecidesotherwise.
This,in effect,meanssuspendingin-
dividualor community rightsover
those trees. Thepenaltiesfor violat-
ingtheclauseinclude evictionof
people fromthose landsandsuspen-
sionof therights to pastureandto
gather forest producefromforest
landsthat havebeendeclared pro-tected.Theproposedamendments
includenewconcepts suchas “pro-
ductionforests” created for thespe-
cific purpose of increasing the
production of certain items after
consideringthe“forest productivity
and the privileges of local
communities”.MANAGEMENTOFFORESTS
Theamendmentsalsopropose to re-
strictthe practiceof shifting cultiva-
tionandbringpartof suchareas
under“settledcultivation”.TheState
governments will have sweeping
powersto “assumemanagementof
forests”,similarto provisions in the
1927 Act.Governments cantakeover
themanagementof suchforestsin
the public interestto ensure its con-
servation. Interestingly,the 1927Act
did not use the term“publicinterest”
butbasicallystatedthatthe govern-
mentcouldtakeoverthemanage-
mentof forests if therewas“wilful
neglector disobedience”butafter
takingintoconsideration objections
fromthe landowner.
In the proposedamendment,the
landowners willhaveno sayin the
matter.TheStategovernmentcanin
the “publicinterest”issuea notifica-
tionandtakeoverthemanagement
of forests andplacethemunderthe
controlof a ForestOfficer.
Entireclausesof the 1927 Act
havebeenretained,includingone
pertainingto the rightof the govern-
mentto “expropriate”forests in cer-
taincases. Such expropriationwould
be donefor “publicpurposes”(with
publicpurposeundefined)underthe
LandAcquisitionAct.FORESTOFFENCES
Thechapteron proceduresfor deal-
ing withforest offences includesnew
features that make the punitive
measures in the 1927 Actappear
lame.Underthe proposedSection 52
(3),personscanbe arrestedwithout
a warrant andthe“ForestOfficer,
PoliceOfficeror RevenueOfficer
shallbe authorisedto use reasonable
forcefor seizureandmakingarrest,
as the circumstanceswarrants so”.
Under Section66, on “powers to
preventcommissionof offence”,the
amendmentsgivesForestOfficers