sweeping powers to “prevent the
commissionof offence”,whichin-
cludeusing “as littleforceincluding
firearms anddo as littleinjuryto
personandproperty...”.It givesthe
officers,whoare deemedto haveac-
ted in “goodfaith”,the benefit of the
doubt.
Section66 (A)givesunfettered
rightsto ForestOfficers to enterand
search any place where there is
reasonto believethatanyforestpro-
duce,tool,plant,equipment,rope,
vehicleor machineryhasbeenused
in the commissionof a forest offence.
TheForestOfficer “may”informthe
gramsabhaor the villagepanchayat,
butit is notobligatory for the officer
to do so.
PENALACTIONFORABETMENT
A newsection curiouslytitled “At-
tempts and Abetment” in the
amendmentsprovidesfor penalac-
tionagainstthosefoundaidingand
abetting thecontravention of the
Act.
According to thedraftersof the
amendments, thissectionis inten-
dedto “dissuadepolitical executives
to incite massesagainsttheprovi-
sionsof theAct”.Sucha provision
wasnecessaryalsobecause “many
Stategovernments”hadwithdrawn
casesregisteredundertheIFA of
1927 to draw “political mileage”.
Therefore, thenew insertionsays
“suchactionhasto be curbed witha
heavyhandbecause theresultsare
disastrous.Porosityis the rootcause
of destructionof forestareas.”
‘PRIVATEFORESTS’
In a radical departure, theamend-
mentsprovideforthecreationof
“private forests”,or privatelyowned
forests. Theyalsoenvisage thecon-
stitution of a National Forestry
Boardheadedby the PrimeMinister
withtheChief of theArmyStaffas
oneof themembersbut completely
excludinggramsabhas.
Communist Party of India
(Marxist)leaderBrindaKaratwas
thefirst political leader to writea
publicletterto UnionMinisterof
Environment, Forest and Climate
ChangePrakash Javadekarexpress-
ing concern on the proposedamend-
ments.OnJune28,replying to a
questionby SushilKumarSinghin
the LokSabhahighlightingconcerns
pertaining to the amendments,
Javadekarsaidthattherewasa need
to amendthe IFAto bringit on a par
withStateForest Actsandthe devel-
opments over90 years.
He saidthefirst drafthadbeen
preparedby a coredraftingcommit-
teecomprising technical andlegal
expertsandcirculatedto Stateand
UnionTerritorygovernments. Ac-
cordingto him,the proposal“wasto
recognisethe rightsandroleof villa-
gers in managing village forests
throughthe jointforest management
committees”.Thebenefits were in
additionto forestrightsandoccupa-
tionof forestlandvestedin the FRA,
he added. Headmittedthatforest
officialshadbeenempoweredto use
“littleforceincludingfirearms with
appropriateprecautions underSec-
tion66”.TRIBALPEOPLE’SRIGHTS
In herletterto Javadekar afterhis
reply,Brinda Karatsaidthe Minister
had“playeddowntheextremelyre-
pressive measuresproposedin the
Act”.Shesaidthe 91 clauses,includ-
ing newsections,wentbeyondwhat
theBritishdaredto do,by militar-
ising forest conservation. The
amendments, according to her,
criminalisedeveryaspectof tribal
life by giving “untrammelledpowers
to theforestbureaucracyto arrest
withoutwarrantandto usearmsto
implement the law”.
Thedraftwasa “blueprintforcentralisation, commercialisation
and criminalisation”, she said,
addingthatthe repeatedequatingof
tribalpeoplewithother communit-
ies in thedraftdeniedthespecial
statusof tribalpeoplein relation to
forests.
There is nota singleclausethat
recognised thecriticalroleof the
gramsabha in forestconservationor
thatmandatedits consentin anyde-
cisionpertainingto forests. Brinda
Karatalsoraisedjurisdiction issues,
statingthatit wasthe domainof the
Ministryof TribalAffairs,if at all, to
deliberateon therights of tribal
people.
Thearrogationof rightsto the
FSOregardingtribal rightswould
maketribalpeoplevulnerableto the
forestbureaucracy,she wrote.It was
alsoa violation of theFRAto pre-
sumethat allforest produce be-
longedto the government.
The Central government had
been given overriding powers in
manyclauses, including decisions
pertainingto the“protection and
management” of forestsandto make
rules for shifting cultivation and
gathering of forestproduce,andde-
clare any forest as conservation
forestor community reserve,which
wasan encroachment on the rights of
the States,shewrote.
Shealsopointedoutthatthere
wasa longlist of prohibitedactsun-
der Section26, rangingfromcultiva-
tionof forestlandtofishing andthe
rightsto pastureandforest produce.
In eachandeverycase,theperson
(tribal)hadto show“authorisation”ATRIBALCOUPLEpickingout “vippakaya”seedscollectedfromthe forest
in theBhadrachalamareaof Telangana.G.N.RAO