PM IAS JULY 08 EDITORIAL

Odisha eyes Forest Act implementation by 2024

GS 2,3; Govt Policies and Interventions, Environment and Conservation.

Context:

The Odisha government is aiming to complete implementation of the Forest Rights Act (FRA) by 2024, by giving all types of rights specified under the historic Act.
All tribe members will be given their due ownership. The Finance Department and the Planning and Convergence Department are both looking into the Mission.
The state administration has established a timetable for converting 587 forest communities into income villages. Only 15 forest communities have been designated as income villages as of yet.

Forest Rights Act (FRA):

The successful implementation of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, commonly known as the Forest Rights Act (FRA), is of importance.
It is the culmination of a long effort by our country’s marginal and tribal populations to claim their rights to the forestland on which they have historically relied.
It tries to remedy the historical wrong done to forest inhabitants during the colonial period, when the British Raj refused to recognise their customary rights in the 1850s.
FRA has the ability to guarantee forest rights and address other concerns for at least 200 million tribals (who own half of India’s forest land). However, even after a decade and a half of legislation, it is laxity in execution that hinders the law’s fructification.

Concerns Include:

Despite the passage of substantial time since its implementation, the process of recognising forest residents’ rights has yet to be completed.
The implementation of Section 5 of the Act is also a source of concern. Section 5 addresses the responsibilities of recognised forest inhabitants, such as conserving animals, forests, and biodiversity; ensuring that catchment regions, water supplies, and other ecologically vulnerable places are effectively safeguarded, and so on.
Section 3(1)(i) of the Act grants the right to protect, regenerate, conserve, or manage any communal forest resource, however the clause is not strictly enforced.

Rights:

Title rights – i.e., ownership – to land farmed by tribals or forest dwellers as of 13 December 2005, subject to a limit of 4 hectares; ownership is only for land farmed by the concerned family as of that date, implying that no additional lands are awarded.
Use rights include minor forest produce (including ownership), grazing pastures, pastoralist routes, and so on.
Relief and development rights include the right to rehabilitation in the event of an illegal eviction or forced relocation, as well as the right to basic amenities, subject to constraints for forest conservation.
Forest management rights are used to safeguard forests and animals.

Rights Recognition Procedure:

The Gram Sabha, or village assembly, will first approve a resolution proposing who should have rights to certain resources.
This resolution is then inspected and accepted at the sub-division (or taluka) level, and finally at the district level.
The screening committees are made up of three government employees (from the departments of Forestry, Revenue, and Tribal Welfare) and three elected members of the local body at that level. These panels hear appeals as well.

Forest Conservation Constitutional Mandates:

The Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act of 1976 was passed, and Article 48A was added to the section of Directive Principles of State Policy, as well as Article 51A as a basic obligation of every Indian citizen.
According to Article 48A, the state shall enact legislation to conserve and develop the environment in order to protect our country’s forests.
According to Article 51A(g), it is the responsibility of every Indian citizen to maintain and develop the natural environment, particularly our country’s forests.
The judiciary has played a vital role in forest conservation and environmental protection by hearing various Public Interest Litigation (PIL) brought under Article 32 and Article 226 of the Constitution. While hearing the PILs, the Supreme Court and the High Courts issued a number of significant decisions concerning forest and environmental conservation.

Union of India v. Tarun Bharat Singh (1993)

The petition was filed in response to illicit mining in the Alwar District’s restricted area. The Court ruled that once an area is designated as a protected forest, it falls under the jurisdiction of the Forest (Conservation) Act, and the State government is henceforth prohibited from engaging in any non-forest activity in the reserved area without the prior consent of the Central government.

Krishnadas Tikaram v. State of MP (1994)

According to Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, the state cannot award or renew the licence without the previous consent of the Central government.

Bombay Environmental Action v. Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia (2011)

The Supreme Court ruled that salt production by solar evaporation of saltwater is not permissible in the region since it contains mangrove trees. Mangrove forests are of considerable ecological value and are also environmentally sensitive, which is why they are classified as CRZ-I. (Coastal Regulatory Zone-I).

The Act’s Goal:

The Act’s goal is to protect ecological and preserve our country’s forest. This Act also aims to rejuvenate forests by planting trees and boost forest growth in our country.
To save the forest, its flora and animals, and other ecologically varied components. To safeguard the forest’s integrity, territory, and uniqueness.
To safeguard the woods and avoid deforestation, which would result in soil erosion and subsequent land degradation.
To avoid the extinction of forest biodiversity.
To prohibit the conversion of forests into agricultural or grazing grounds, or the construction of commercial or residential units.

Features of the Act:

This Act has the following provisions:

This Act limits the ability of the state government and other authorities to make decisions in some areas without the previous approval of the central government.
Under this Act, the Central Government has complete authority to carry out the provisions of this Act.
This Act also establishes penalties for violations of its requirements.
An advisory group may be created under this Act to advise the Central Government on forest conservation issues.

What Are the Causes of Ineffective Implementation?

Inadequacy within Gram Sabha- According to the Act, the Gram Sabha (village assembly) is the first rung of decision-making. However, in most states, the Gram Sabha lacks the necessary infrastructure and technological know-how to retain these data. Gram Sabha has yet to be formed in many tribal regions.
Lack of frequent panchayat elections- In many states, the panchayat system is weak, and panchayat elections are not held on a regular basis. In such places, Gram Panchayats are not functioning at the level required for the Act’s implementation.
Ambiguity in the establishment of the Forest Rights Committee- Each village is to elect a Forest Rights Committee of 10-15 individuals from its citizens, who will perform the first verification of claims and make recommendations to the Gram Sabha. However, in most states, the Gram Panchayat responsible for the creation of the Forest Rights Committee, which includes these persons, is ineffective in enforcing the Act in letter and spirit.
An intentional emphasis on individual rights above community rights- community forest management is the most sustainable and democratic approach of forest administration. Nonetheless, the administrative apparatus appears to be focusing on claims for individual user rights rather than communal rights. So yet, relatively few claims have been submitted under community rights, and the majority of them have been ignored.
Lack of awareness and illiteracy – Because the majority of the beneficiaries of this legislation are uneducated, filling out and submitting claims forms becomes extremely difficult. Many middlemen with vested interests try to take advantage of the circumstances in this instance. Furthermore, not only are the beneficiaries unaware of the requirements of the legislation, but so are the personnel in charge of enforcing it.
Lack of land records as proof- According to the Act, it is the obligation of the officials to deliver needed documentation to individuals and communities as proof, however this is not being done by the relevant agencies. Actual eligible persons confront considerable difficulties in claiming their entitlements in the absence of genuine documents.
Non-recognition of rights in Protected Areas (PA)- In protected areas, the process of resolving claims is exceedingly sluggish, and there are also efforts to unlawfully remove claimants.
Other Traditional Forest Dwellers’ claims are not accepted in most states, owing to a misunderstanding that they must have held property for three generations. There is no documentary evidence that they have lived in the region for 75 years.
Primitive Tribal Groups – The provision for Primitive Tribal Group, pre-agricultural tribes’ community/habitat rights has not been properly applied thus far. There is a lack of clarity on the method for asserting rights. Such communities are primarily interested in habitats since they provide them with a permanent home.
Lack of inter-departmental coordination- Although the tribal department was designated as the nodal agency for the passage of this Act, the records for the forest lands are in the custody of either the forest department or the revenue department. The involvement of three agencies – tribal welfare, revenue, and forest – makes it difficult to maintain effective communication between them.
Non-Coordination by forest Authorities: Under the Indian Forest Act of 1927, the government has the arbitrary ability to take away forest land without properly rehabilitating tribals and other forest inhabitants, exposing them to harassment by local forest officials, particularly in Naxal-affected regions. It also leads to a substantial number of claims being rejected in Naxal-affected regions.
Attempts to weaken the act’s requirements – The FRA is now being attempted to be violated through different legislations and rules by skirting the Gram Sabha in the pretext of ease of doing business and wildlife protection. The Ministries of Tribal Affairs and Environment have been at odds over the necessity to acquire property for industry, particularly forest land.
Forest lands diverted for non-forest purposes- There is concern that the Land Acquisition Act, Mines and Mineral Development Act, and Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act would allow the government to revoke rights granted under the Forest Rights Act, 2006.

Digitisation of Records:

Historical records of rights [land pattas] have been digitised, and future pattas will be digitised as well.
To retain all records, a separate website has been set up.
Nongovernmental organisation partners aided in the entire process of demarcating land and reaching out to the last citizen.

Way-Forward:

Awareness campaigns: large-scale awareness and information distribution campaigns should be organised to reach out to the public through radio, television, and other media to guarantee that the relevant information about the act is distributed.
Collaboration with Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs)- It is necessary to find NGOs functioning in the region to give backup assistance to destitute tribals and aid them in filing applications, identifying and measuring land (individual or community), and negotiating with officials.
Capacity building- It is critical to design a thorough training and capacity building strategy for those responsible for implementing the FRA, including as Panchayats, Gram Sabhas, village level Forest Rights committees, and so on.
Keep Village Maps at The Panchayat Level – The required maps and records should be made available to the Forest Rights Committee and claimants to make the Gram Sabha’s role of identifying and filing claims for individual and community rights easier.
Interdepartmental Collaboration – Steps should be taken to improve coordination between officials from the Revenue Department and the Forest Department in order to expedite the verification of claims.
Clarifying the time restriction for resolving claims the statute makes no mention of a time restriction for settling disputes. Most authorities and recipients are ignorant of this truth in most regions. Clarity on the time period may go a long way toward enhancing the claims settlement process.Odisha eyes Forest Act implementation by 2024GS 2,3; Govt Policies and Interventions, Environment and Conservation. Context:
The Odisha government is aiming to complete implementation of the Forest Rights Act (FRA) by 2024, by giving all types of rights specified under the historic Act.
All tribe members will be given their due ownership. The Finance Department and the Planning and Convergence Department are both looking into the Mission.
The state administration has established a timetable for converting 587 forest communities into income villages. Only 15 forest communities have been designated as income villages as of yet.
Forest Rights Act (FRA):
The successful implementation of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, commonly known as the Forest Rights Act (FRA), is of importance.
It is the culmination of a long effort by our country’s marginal and tribal populations to claim their rights to the forestland on which they have historically relied.
It tries to remedy the historical wrong done to forest inhabitants during the colonial period, when the British Raj refused to recognise their customary rights in the 1850s.
FRA has the ability to guarantee forest rights and address other concerns for at least 200 million tribals (who own half of India’s forest land). However, even after a decade and a half of legislation, it is laxity in execution that hinders the law’s fructification.
Concerns Include:
Despite the passage of substantial time since its implementation, the process of recognising forest residents’ rights has yet to be completed.
The implementation of Section 5 of the Act is also a source of concern. Section 5 addresses the responsibilities of recognised forest inhabitants, such as conserving animals, forests, and biodiversity; ensuring that catchment regions, water supplies, and other ecologically vulnerable places are effectively safeguarded, and so on.
Section 3(1)(i) of the Act grants the right to protect, regenerate, conserve, or manage any communal forest resource, however the clause is not strictly enforced.
Rights:
Title rights – i.e., ownership – to land farmed by tribals or forest dwellers as of 13 December 2005, subject to a limit of 4 hectares; ownership is only for land farmed by the concerned family as of that date, implying that no additional lands are awarded.
Use rights include minor forest produce (including ownership), grazing pastures, pastoralist routes, and so on.
Relief and development rights include the right to rehabilitation in the event of an illegal eviction or forced relocation, as well as the right to basic amenities, subject to constraints for forest conservation.
Forest management rights are used to safeguard forests and animals.
Rights Recognition Procedure:
The Gram Sabha, or village assembly, will first approve a resolution proposing who should have rights to certain resources.
This resolution is then inspected and accepted at the sub-division (or taluka) level, and finally at the district level.
The screening committees are made up of three government employees (from the departments of Forestry, Revenue, and Tribal Welfare) and three elected members of the local body at that level. These panels hear appeals as well.
Forest Conservation Constitutional Mandates:
The Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Act of 1976 was passed, and Article 48A was added to the section of Directive Principles of State Policy, as well as Article 51A as a basic obligation of every Indian citizen.
According to Article 48A, the state shall enact legislation to conserve and develop the environment in order to protect our country’s forests.
According to Article 51A(g), it is the responsibility of every Indian citizen to maintain and develop the natural environment, particularly our country’s forests.
The judiciary has played a vital role in forest conservation and environmental protection by hearing various Public Interest Litigation (PIL) brought under Article 32 and Article 226 of the Constitution. While hearing the PILs, the Supreme Court and the High Courts issued a number of significant decisions concerning forest and environmental conservation.
Union of India v. Tarun Bharat Singh (1993) The petition was filed in response to illicit mining in the Alwar District’s restricted area. The Court ruled that once an area is designated as a protected forest, it falls under the jurisdiction of the Forest (Conservation) Act, and the State government is henceforth prohibited from engaging in any non-forest activity in the reserved area without the prior consent of the Central government. Krishnadas Tikaram v. State of MP (1994) According to Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, the state cannot award or renew the licence without the previous consent of the Central government. Bombay Environmental Action v. Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia (2011) The Supreme Court ruled that salt production by solar evaporation of saltwater is not permissible in the region since it contains mangrove trees. Mangrove forests are of considerable ecological value and are also environmentally sensitive, which is why they are classified as CRZ-I. (Coastal Regulatory Zone-I). The Act’s Goal:
The Act’s goal is to protect ecological and preserve our country’s forest. This Act also aims to rejuvenate forests by planting trees and boost forest growth in our country.
To save the forest, its flora and animals, and other ecologically varied components. To safeguard the forest’s integrity, territory, and uniqueness.
To safeguard the woods and avoid deforestation, which would result in soil erosion and subsequent land degradation.
To avoid the extinction of forest biodiversity.
To prohibit the conversion of forests into agricultural or grazing grounds, or the construction of commercial or residential units.
Features of the Act: This Act has the following provisions:
This Act limits the ability of the state government and other authorities to make decisions in some areas without the previous approval of the central government.
Under this Act, the Central Government has complete authority to carry out the provisions of this Act.
This Act also establishes penalties for violations of its requirements.
An advisory group may be created under this Act to advise the Central Government on forest conservation issues.
What Are the Causes of Ineffective Implementation?
Inadequacy within Gram Sabha- According to the Act, the Gram Sabha (village assembly) is the first rung of decision-making. However, in most states, the Gram Sabha lacks the necessary infrastructure and technological know-how to retain these data. Gram Sabha has yet to be formed in many tribal regions.
Lack of frequent panchayat elections- In many states, the panchayat system is weak, and panchayat elections are not held on a regular basis. In such places, Gram Panchayats are not functioning at the level required for the Act’s implementation.
Ambiguity in the establishment of the Forest Rights Committee- Each village is to elect a Forest Rights Committee of 10-15 individuals from its citizens, who will perform the first verification of claims and make recommendations to the Gram Sabha. However, in most states, the Gram Panchayat responsible for the creation of the Forest Rights Committee, which includes these persons, is ineffective in enforcing the Act in letter and spirit.
An intentional emphasis on individual rights above community rights- community forest management is the most sustainable and democratic approach of forest administration. Nonetheless, the administrative apparatus appears to be focusing on claims for individual user rights rather than communal rights. So yet, relatively few claims have been submitted under community rights, and the majority of them have been ignored.
Lack of awareness and illiteracy – Because the majority of the beneficiaries of this legislation are uneducated, filling out and submitting claims forms becomes extremely difficult. Many middlemen with vested interests try to take advantage of the circumstances in this instance. Furthermore, not only are the beneficiaries unaware of the requirements of the legislation, but so are the personnel in charge of enforcing it.
Lack of land records as proof- According to the Act, it is the obligation of the officials to deliver needed documentation to individuals and communities as proof, however this is not being done by the relevant agencies. Actual eligible persons confront considerable difficulties in claiming their entitlements in the absence of genuine documents.
Non-recognition of rights in Protected Areas (PA)- In protected areas, the process of resolving claims is exceedingly sluggish, and there are also efforts to unlawfully remove claimants.
Other Traditional Forest Dwellers’ claims are not accepted in most states, owing to a misunderstanding that they must have held property for three generations. There is no documentary evidence that they have lived in the region for 75 years.
Primitive Tribal Groups – The provision for Primitive Tribal Group, pre-agricultural tribes’ community/habitat rights has not been properly applied thus far. There is a lack of clarity on the method for asserting rights. Such communities are primarily interested in habitats since they provide them with a permanent home.
Lack of inter-departmental coordination- Although the tribal department was designated as the nodal agency for the passage of this Act, the records for the forest lands are in the custody of either the forest department or the revenue department. The involvement of three agencies – tribal welfare, revenue, and forest – makes it difficult to maintain effective communication between them.
Non-Coordination by forest Authorities: Under the Indian Forest Act of 1927, the government has the arbitrary ability to take away forest land without properly rehabilitating tribals and other forest inhabitants, exposing them to harassment by local forest officials, particularly in Naxal-affected regions. It also leads to a substantial number of claims being rejected in Naxal-affected regions.
Attempts to weaken the act’s requirements – The FRA is now being attempted to be violated through different legislations and rules by skirting the Gram Sabha in the pretext of ease of doing business and wildlife protection. The Ministries of Tribal Affairs and Environment have been at odds over the necessity to acquire property for industry, particularly forest land.
Forest lands diverted for non-forest purposes- There is concern that the Land Acquisition Act, Mines and Mineral Development Act, and Compensatory Afforestation Fund Act would allow the government to revoke rights granted under the Forest Rights Act, 2006.
Digitisation of Records:
Historical records of rights [land pattas] have been digitised, and future pattas will be digitised as well.
To retain all records, a separate website has been set up.
Nongovernmental organisation partners aided in the entire process of demarcating land and reaching out to the last citizen.
Way-Forward:
Awareness campaigns: large-scale awareness and information distribution campaigns should be organised to reach out to the public through radio, television, and other media to guarantee that the relevant information about the act is distributed.
Collaboration with Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs)- It is necessary to find NGOs functioning in the region to give backup assistance to destitute tribals and aid them in filing applications, identifying and measuring land (individual or community), and negotiating with officials.
Capacity building- It is critical to design a thorough training and capacity building strategy for those responsible for implementing the FRA, including as Panchayats, Gram Sabhas, village level Forest Rights committees, and so on.
Keep Village Maps at The Panchayat Level – The required maps and records should be made available to the Forest Rights Committee and claimants to make the Gram Sabha’s role of identifying and filing claims for individual and community rights easier.
Interdepartmental Collaboration – Steps should be taken to improve coordination between officials from the Revenue Department and the Forest Department in order to expedite the verification of claims.
Clarifying the time restriction for resolving claims the statute makes no mention of a time restriction for settling disputes. Most authorities and recipients are ignorant of this truth in most regions. Clarity on the time period may go a long way toward enhancing the claims settlement process.

Comments

Leave a Reply Cancel reply