Whereas previously SC
affirmed indigenous people’s inalienable rights to their land, it
now orders their eviction from their land unilaterally.
– Stan Swamy
 |
| Picture Courtesy Stan Swamy’s FB Wall |
There are three significant SC judgments on the indigenous Adivasi people’s rights over their land and natural resources:
1) In 2011 the SC, hearing a
complaint petition by a young Adivasi woman who was raped and paraded
naked by upper caste persons in a Maharashtra village, observed “The ancestors
of the present tribals or Adivasis (Scheduled Tribes) were the original
inhabitants... The injustice done to the tribal people of India is a
shameful chapter in our country's history. The tribals were called ‘rakshas'
(demons), ‘asuras', and what not. They were slaughtered in large numbers, and
the survivors and their descendants were degraded, humiliated, and all kinds of
atrocities inflicted on them for centuries.
They were deprived of their
lands, and pushed into forests and hills where they eke out a miserable
existence of poverty, illiteracy, disease, etc. And now efforts are being made
by some people to deprive them even of their forest and hill land where they
are living, and the forest produce on which they survive… Despite this horrible
oppression on them, the tribals of India have generally (though not invariably)
retained a higher level of ethics than the non-tribals. They normally do not
cheat or tell lies, or commit other misdeeds, which many non-tribals do. They
are generally superior in character to non-tribals. It is time now to undo the
historical injustice to them.” [SC Criminal Appeal 11 of 2011]
2) In 2013 when the Adivasi
people in Niyamgiri, Odisha, resisted their land being taken over by a
corporate Vedanta co the SC ordered “The (adivasi) communities’ decisions must
be respected, and projects must not be allowed without agreement by the
communities in their favour… gram sabha proceedings in Niyamgiri take place
independently and completely uninfluenced,.. the FRA protects a wide range of
rights of forest dwellers and STs including the customary rights to use forest
land as a community forest resource and not restricted merely to property
rights or to areas of habitation.” [SC Niyamgiri judgment, 2013]
3) And now, a historic
injustice is done again by the present SC judgment a few days ago. Hearing a
petition by a wild-life protection group, the SC gave directions to the Chief
Secretaries of 21 States as follows:
(i) Give a lowdown of how
many claims of Scheduled Tribes (STs) and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers
(OTFD) have been adjudicated under the Forest Rights Act, 2006.
(ii) Give the status of
eviction of people whose claims have been rejected under the Act.
(iii) Explain in affidavits
why even after attaining finality, eviction was not
done.
(iv) The Chief Secretaries
should ensure that eviction of rejected claimants are carried out. They have to
file the compliance reports on or before July 24, 2019 which is next date of
hearing. [The Hindu, 22 February 2019]
Some troubling questions
emerge:
The fact is the process of
recognising rights has been poorly implemented. Of the 41 lakh claims filed so
far, 18 lakh have been approved, 3 lakh are still being processed and the
remaining 20 lakh have been rejected.
Even when land-title is
given there is a deception. FRA authorizes every forest-dwelling family at
least 2 hectares (five acres). But the reality is if a family claims four
acres, it is given 40 decimals or even less ! Where is 4 acres and where is 40 decimals?
Clear injustice.
Ø Is not the Gram Sabha
the most credible body to assess the genuineness of the claims? The members of
Gram Sabha know who has been residing and cultivating which pieces of land and
for how long.
Ø How are Committees at the
Block and District level equipped to know whether the claims are true or false?
The members of these committees are mostly outsiders and non-Adivasis who have
no sympathy towards the claimants.
Ø Has the judiciary the
authority to order eviction of Scheduled Tribes people from Scheduled
Areas?
Ø Is it not a plot to clear
forests with its sub-soil minerals to corporate mining companies. The FRA was
meant to correct a ‘historic injustice’, but the misuse of the law by the
bureaucracy and the SC approving it is perpetuating the ‘historic injustice’.
(The writer of this article is
a renowned social activist. He lives in Ranchi.)