[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
DAM-L LS: Delhi hopes to open adivasi lands for mining etc. (fwd)
----- Forwarded message from owner-irn-narmada@netvista.net -----
From owner-irn-narmada@netvista.net Mon Dec 18 14:56:49 2000
subject: LS: Delhi hopes to open adivasi lands for mining etc.
Sender: owner-irn-narmada@netvista.net
Precedence: bulk
http://www.outlookindia.com/20001225/affairs4.htm
TRIBAL LAND: For a few acres more
The Centre hopes to get around a Supreme Court ruling and open
reserved zones to industry
By Ajith Pillai with Amarnath Tewary
The government has initiated a move, albeit secretly, to dereserve scheduled
tribal land, opening up tribal-owned properties for acquisition and commercial
exploitation. The Union ministry of mines has put up a note marked 'secret'-No
16/48/97-M. VI-for the committee of secretaries to push for an amendment of the
Constitution's Fifth Schedule, which covers tribal land. This initiative is
meant to circumvent a Supreme Court ruling of 1997: any lease or licence to
non-tribals as "absolutely void and impermissible."
The move has already sparked off angry reactions. Says .E. Horo, a pioneer of
the Jharkhand movement: "We will oppose this tooth and nail. The
Jharkhand Party
will not only oppose the selling of tribal land to appease some big houses in
the name of industrialisation but we will also come out on the streets to
protest against it with all our might and force." Jharkhand is one of
the states
which will be affected and its bjp chief minister Babulal Marandi was emphatic
when he told Outlook that his "government is not going to make even a single
change in the existing Chotanagpur and Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act which makes
it clear that a non-tribal should not buy a plot of tribal land". Marandi
further said that his government would "plug lacunae in the existing laws to
prevent such acquisitions".
Similar voices are being heard from Chhattisgarh. Activists of the Chhattisgarh
Mukti Morcha point out that the state government will have no other option but
to oppose the amendment should it finally be cleared by the Centre. But chief
minister Ajit Jogi does not agree. Says he: "Development work has to happen if
the tribals have to join the mainstream. Of course it's very
important to ensure
that the tribals are rehabilitated and get their share of development. They
can't continue to remain museum pieces."
Dereservation of tribal land and rehabilitation of those displaced has always
been tricky issues. Even going by official estimates, of the 85.39 lakh tribals
displaced between 1951 and 1990, only 21.16 lakh have been resettled. And this
acquisition of land was for government projects in "national
interest". It's now
being feared that once tribal land is opened up to mining companies,
there will
be large-scale exploitation of those displaced.
Says Rajya Sabha MP Kuldip Nayar, who is on the Parliamentary Committee on the
Land Acquisition Amendment Bill: "As many as 7,000 people displaced by the
Bhakra Nangal dam have not been rehabilitated even after 40 years. If tribal
land is opened to all and sundry, then relocating the affected will
be virtually
impossible."
Extrapolating from the 1991 census, which put the tribal population at 8 per
cent of the total population, the current strength of tribals is about 8 crore.
Of these, approximately 4.5 crore live on scheduled land. It is these tribals
who are threatened with displacement. There are as many as 350
identified tribes
in the country. Studies conducted by researchers at the Indian Social
Institute, Delhi, point to the fact that tribals constituted 40 per cent of
those displaced till 1990 and 50 per cent of those displaced since.
Those who are opposed to any dereservation move point out that any
rehabilitation programme would involve alienating the tribals and all previous
attempts at relocation have failed, leading to the displacement and neglect of
lakhs of people. Those who support such a move see an infusion of foreign
capital and consequent development of the area which will bring
tribals into the
mainstream. However, the Orissa and Andhra Pradesh experiments, where land has
been given for mining, have proved that this is far from true.
Evaluation of rehabilitation programmes indicate that only a small percentage
gain from any rehabilitation package. For example, only 15.4 per cent of the
tribals benefited from Maharashtra's "land-for-land" scheme after the state
acquired land for various irrigation projects. The stories from Orissa and
Andhra Pradesh are similar. Once pushed to leave their land, the tribals are
denied or get delayed compensation.
Says Congress MP Eduardo Faleiro, who has been monitoring attempts to take over
tribal land: "Dereserving tribal land will only open the floodgates of a
thousand Narmadas. Such a move will dispossess the tribals of their ancestral
land and there is no talk of resettlement. All this is similar to what the
Canadians and the white settlers in the US did to the native Americans."
The Land Acquisition Amendment Bill, seen as a precursor to any amendment for
the Fifth Schedule, was to come up in Parliament this session but may not
eventually be taken up. This is being seen as the first step to opening up
tribal land. The bill seeks to make the acquisition of all properties (other
than scheduled tribal land) by Indian and foreign investors easier than ever
before by relaxing earlier curbs. Thus, the definition of public interest has
been redefined to include private enterprise and the pursuance of business. The
move to ammend the Fifth Schedule to dereserve tribal land is seen as the next
step once the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill is passed. The former
would enable
the government to denotify tribal land and offer it for commercial use.
Waiting in the wings are several mncs who have made it conditional that their
investment in mining was subject to their acquiring the land to be prospected.
Huge tracts of tribal land in Jharkhand, Orissa, Andhra Pradesh and
Chhattisgarh
are rich in bauxite, mica, coal and lignite, among other natural resources.
But it is not merely for mining that tribal land is being targeted.
According to
Ravi Pragada, who runs the ngo Mines, Mineral and People,
prospective investors
are also eyeing tribal land to set up five-star resorts. "Since most of the
tribal land is within forests, they are scenic. So there are those who see a
good opportunity in acquiring property and developing it." He cites the example
of a proposal to set up a golf course in a scheduled area in Andhra Pradesh.
Other such scenic spots have also attracted investors.
It is primarily to facilitate the entry of foreign investors that the Union
ministry of mines has been pushing the case for an amendment of the Fifth
Scedule. The 1997 Supreme Court ruling in the Samatha case, relating to tribal
land in Andhra Pradesh, had made commercial exploitation of tribal land by
non-tribals illegal. The ruling was binding to all notified tribal land in the
country. The ministry of mines filed a review petition in the apex court on
February 4, 1999. But that was dismissed. Later, it filed for the modification
of the 1997 order. This too was dismissed in February this year by a Supreme
Court bench.
Attorney general Soli Sorbajee in his advice to the mines ministry has pointed
out that "it is not feasible to move an application before the Supreme Court in
vacuo for reference to a constitutional bench". The attorney general also
advised that the "other course open to Parliament is to effect necessary
amendments so as to overcome the said Supreme Court judgement by removing its
legal basis".
According to the ministry, the Constitution allows for minor changes and,
therefore, the amendment need not be a total change of the schedule but a few
alterations which will allow for denotification. So, the changes can be
technically brought about with a simple majority.
But can the government push through with the changes? The issue is a political
minefield and will be opposed from virtually every quarter. Tribal interests
will certainly dominate in states like Jharkhand, Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and
parts of Gujarat and Maharashtra. Says rjd leader Laloo Prasad Yadav: "From the
beginning, we knew it and that is why I have been opposing the formation of
Jharkhand. It's a deep-rooted conspiracy by the bjp. It has succumbed to the
self-interest of its constituency. If dereservation happens, we won't
sit idle."
Shorn of Laloo's self-interest, this appears to be a valid objection.