Gam A. Shimray
The land relations among the tribals/indigenous peoples and other forest dwelling communities of the mainland India and Northeast differs, as in the mainland, they have practically lost all their rights over their land, forest and other natural resources. This was through the colonisation of their lands and territories starting from the British time that was taken over by independent India using the same colonial designs and laws. However, in the Northeast, the agrarian land relations have continued to survive because of their fierce struggle against the British and Indian forces for decades. Indian democrats have been good students and are taking the colonial designs towards its upper limit, and are taking over community-controlled forests in the Northeast.
What is interesting is that India does not only seek to fully establish its sovereignty over natural resources in the Northeast but also over the peoples of the region itself. What is left of any democratic peoples’ governance in India is the communities’ governance over natural resources in the Northeast. Hence, it is the last colonial agenda of India. Secondly, India is in a hurry to complete this task to gear up and take control of the resource rich region to be part of the global economic giants. It is in this context that taking over of the region fits very neatly into its liberalization agenda and particularly the ‘look east policy’.
But how is this possible? One wonders! Let us step back a little in time and see how it has progressed.
In the mainland, forests are mainly governed by the India Forest Act, 1927; the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972; and the Forest Conservation Act, 1980. The 1927 Act empowered the government to declare any area as “reserved forest” or “protected forest”. Thus, enabling the colonizers to take control over forest. Ever since, the taking over of forest has continued till today rendering millions (mostly tribals) homeless and denuding their rights to forest and lands. The Wild Life Act further intensified this process through the creation of sanctuaries and national parks. As a result, there have been fierce struggles against this dehumanizing process leading to bloody conflicts between the indigenous peoples and forest dwelling communities with the forest officials. Hardly a day passes by without a lost of life, yet such incidents are considered too trivial by the so-called free media or the bloated democratic system of India.
These laws were not applicable to the tribal areas of the Northeast and hence did not suffer the same destiny because of their fierce resistance against the British and Indian rampage. It is for this reason that various protective laws such as the Sixth Schedule and other similar protective state laws as well as constitutional protections (Articles 371 A and 371 G) in various parts of the region were provided. These laws have summarily provided protection to community control over forest, lands and territories in the region and had slowed down the transformation of land relations in the region.
On a closer scrutiny, one observes these laws are not really intended to strengthen the traditional institutions and customary laws and practices that have been the basis of governance of natural resource management since time immemorial. Various designs were used to slowly replace the traditional democratic system with that of the state by indirectly undermining the local authorities and indigenous systems. Also, the Indian bureaucracy has been given immense power to oversee the functioning of governance at the third tier (below the state level) of the political system but it is least aware of the customary laws or indigenous governance systems. This has given rise to endless conflicts and violence at the ground since it approaches indigenous peoples with paternalistic attitude, and issues are cloaked with racist denigration of their cultures.
Much of the lands in the region are still under the control of the communities and the communal land tenure systems are in operation to a considerable degree. But this may no longer prove to be true. The threat to community control over their forest, lands and territories are eminent in the region. In fact, the take over has begun by using various backdoor methods with the aid of Supreme Court (SC).
Centralisation of Forest Through FC Act and the Supreme Court
Forest and forest laws were within the jurisdiction of the state governments alone and hence, there have been variations (of laws) between states in India. However, this situation changed greatly over time and successively when forests were made a ‘concurrent’ subject in 1975 and with the enactment of Forest Conservation Act, 1980. This was the first step in centralizing control and prohibiting any “non-forestry” activity (including jhum cultivation, felling of trees, building of roads, etc.). However, this affected only the State controlled reserved and protected forests declared under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and the community forests in the Northeast were not touched. But the twist in the game was soon to come. In 1996, the Supreme Court (SC) issued an interim order in what has come to be known as the “forest case” [T.N. Godavarman Thirumalpad and Ors Vs. Union of India and Ors. (WP 202/95)]. The order pronounced that the word “forest” in the FC Act should be understood as:
a. The “dictionary meaning” of the word forest, meaning any land with trees on it;
b. Any land referred to in any official record as “forest”, regardless of whether or not it has forest on it.
The Ministry of Environment and Forest has also now begun taking steps to incorporate this definition as an amendment in the law. This is beginning to have serious implications to the community-controlled forests in the Northeast. Since these lands are recorded as “forest”, through this definition, the FC Act has been extended to the “unclassed state forest” (community forests in the tribal areas in the region falls within this category)- forests that were outside the purview of State’s control. The State Forest Departments in the Northeast affirmed this in their affidavits filed before the Court, where they included community lands as “state forest”. Thus, the state owned forest in Manipur jumped from 9% to 78%, and in Mizoram it jumped to 80% overnight.
This order was followed by new orders of the SC that any diversion of forestland now had to be approved by the Court itself and for this, it appointed the Central Empowered Committee (CEC). Using these orders, the Forest Department (FD) has been seizing lands. In the mainland, by 2002 more than 300,000 families have been brutally driven out of their homes. This is a process that has begun in the Northeast too but because of the fear of fierce resistance from the people, it has still been kept low. Nonetheless, steps are being taken to gradually increase their control over these lands. Examples are many of the roads that are being built on lands donated by the communities in the hill districts of Manipur. The FD using the provision of the FC Act (prohibition of non-forestry activity) and SC rulings (definition of forest and permission for diversion of forestland) is demanding large sum of money from the BRTF to compensate for the “lost forest”. Reportedly there are also cases where they have already received these sums of money. As per the FC Act and the recent SC orders, legally speaking (if tomorrow one is to go to the Court), these implies three things:
i. Community forests in the Northeast now belongs to the FD;
ii The lands on which the roads are built belong to the BRTF (or those who have paid the compensation);
iii. All community activities on what is considered as forestlands are illegal, except forestry as defined by the FD.
The other means of increasing control over community forestlands includes Joint Forest Management (JFM) that was introduced in the mainland in the 1980’s in the so-called ‘degraded’ forests. The FD creates local JFM committees that are to assist with forest management, protection and regeneration. In return, the committees are given a share of the revenue earned from the timber harvested. This is now being replicated at a massive scale in the Northeast as the most successive model. However, in the mainland, this model has left behind nothing but conflicts and dispossession of the tribals. The brainchild and the expounder of JFM himself has now become the most vocal campaigner against this model speaks volume. The memorandum of understanding clearly shows that the FD is intruding into the community forestlands and the 1927 Act is being extended. Further, it can clearly be used as a proof that the communities have voluntarily given up their lands to the FD in the Court of law.
Environmental politics in India today represents a new era in Indian democracy. The SC is subverting all laws that are made by the State and the State is being pretentiously submissive to the SC. The recent trends in the Northeast as well as the stalling of the Forest Rights Act, 2006 are indicative of this. What does this mean? Are we under the dictatorship of SC? Or have the laws made by the State become an obstacle for its newfound passion of economic liberalization that requires demolishing of peoples’ sovereignty over natural resources and blundering the same? Surely, in democratic India, it cannot be the dictatorship of the SC! Then, it can only be a sophisticated reliance of the two in suffocating the people and making them destitute without inviting any resistance. I must congratulate New Delhi for taking its art of power play to its highest plane.
Nonetheless, New Delhi must realise that no matter how sophisticated it gets with the exercise of power, it also sharpens the people who resist such designs. The peoples in the Northeast are beginning to rise to this sophisticated power play.
• The author was part of the Technical and Policy Core Group of the National Biodiversity and Action Plan, India (2001-2003). He is also Research fellow at KDSC, Holy Ghost College, Dublin, Ireland.
