Forest commission rips apart tribal bill

Blasting the bill provisions, it said, 8216;8216;the politically motivated and ecologically suicidal proposal of providing temporary rights in these protected areas for a period of five years and if they are not relocated in that period that rights to become permanent, is a mere facade, and considering the past record and political motivations will never be achieved and the grant of such rights will irrevocably impair the ecological viability of protected areas.8217;8217;

However, one part-time member of seven-member Commission did not agree with these recommendations.

Earlier, commission Chairman Kirpal had written a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and UPA Chairperson Sonia Gandhi on the bill, raising the commission8217;s objections. 8216;8216;We in the NFC, are of the considered opinion that the proposed legislation is going to be harmful to forests and the ecological security of the country, and that it is going to create a social divide and animosity among the communities themselves. It would be bad for law and will be in open conflict with the rulings of the Supreme Court,8217;8217; he wrote.

The NFC was set up in February 2003 during the tenure of the NDA government.

The letter conveyed in unambiguous terms the commission8217;s displeasure at not being consulted before drawing up the bill, the subject matter of which has a direct bearing on the country8217;s forests.

8216;8216;You would, I am sure, agree with me that it would have been in the fitness of things, if the proposed bill would have been referred to the National Forest Commission in its formative stage. As it is apparent that Government does not wish to consult the NFC in this regard despite its clear mandate to opine in this context, I take it upon myself to convey the views of the NFC, in brief, with regard to the proposed legislation,8217;8217; the letter read.

The NFC chairman also had the following words of wisdom for the Government.

8216;8216;Tribals and other forest-dwelling communities,8217;8217; he said, 8216;8216;cannot be kept perpetually in a state of backwardness, though there should be no forcible efforts to change their lifestyle. They must be facilitated to come into the mainstream of economic activity and development, if they wish to do so. There is nothing idealistic about retaining tribals in the present deprived condition in remote areas.8217;8217;

Though both the Prime Minister and the UPA Chairperson acknowledged receipt of the letter, 8216;8216;none of the recommendations of the commission on the draft bill have been taken into account in the bill which was introduced in Parliament in December 2005 except that the cut-off date for consideration of settlement of encroachment has been fixed as October 25, 1980 and the clause 8216;on such other date as the Central Government may, by notification in the official gazette, notify8217; has been dropped,8217;8217; the commission said in its report.

Objections

8226; The bill provides for a separate system of jurisprudence for the tribals. Would mean two laws and punishments for the same offence, one under the IPC, another as envisaged in the bill.

8226; All forest settlements in the past have led to spate of further encroachments in the hope of future regularisation. The Bill may not be able to stop this.

8226; Vesting Gram Sabhas with exclusive power to take cognizance of offences of tribals would mean depriving courts of their power and is 8220;dangerous8221;.