It has been more than six years since the enactment of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest
Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 however the objectives that
the Act sought to achieve remain far from being achieved. The forest dwellers
continue to face repression at the hands of the forest department. Forceful
evictions are continue. Let alone implementation of the Act, there are several
areas in Jharkhand where the beneficiaries are not even aware of the Act and
the rights they are entitled to. The process of settlement of claims is being
carried out in a very irregular manner and not as per the provisions of the
Law. Diversion of forest land for industrial and mining purposes is widespread.
Violation of human rights has posed further hurdles for the struggle and
realization of forest rights. The State has fallen short of its duty to
implement the Act in its true spirit.
Apart from the above the right
to protect, regenerate and manage the natural resources is the most crucial
part of rights provided by the Forest Rights Act and it demands our immediate
attention to uphold the real spirit of the Act. Somehow in a little number the
individual claims were settled but community rights for forest governance
as provided in section 3(1)(i) of the Schedule Tribes and other Traditional
forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 still not considered by
the Government. In lack of the unawareness of community claim very less claims
were filed and none of them were settled.
Justice B.N.Kirpal judge of the Supreme Court of India in T.N.
Godavarman vs Union of India (Writ Petition (C) No. 202 of 1995) ordered the
removal of “Encroachers” from the forest,
he did not use the word tribal people. Following the Supreme Courts order lakhs
of people were evicted from the jungles, in Saraikela Kharsawa district more
than 52 hoses were used to demolish. It was after the order of the Supreme Court
that the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of
Forest Rights) Act, 2006 was enacted. The Act as it exists today is not
the law that was drafted by the tribal groups. The FRA though flawed does
guarantee rights to the people, which are unfortunately not being implemented.
In Jharkhand the implementation of the Act began a long time
after its enactment. It was only after immense public pressure that the
government initiated the implementation process. Initially the government had
not even printed the claim forms. Currently a lot of black marketing is taking
place. The community rights form is not available in several places.
In order to provide assistance to the claimants, the
government Jharkhand allotted Rupees Twenty Five Thousand per bloc for holding
workshops on how to fill the claim forms and file them. However this scheme was
never implemented in true spirit and only ad hoc improper efforts were made.
The dismal state of affairs can be gathered from the fact that the government
had printed only 500 booklets containing the provisions of the Act, and nobody
knows where these pamphlets were distributed. The Government quite clearly has
taken only half baked measures to implement the Act.
In Jharkhand there are several communities that are not in the
Scheduled Tribe list but they are tribal people. There have been evictions and
the other traditional forest dwellers have been victimized. The seventy five
years cutoff date prescribed for grant of titles to the other traditional
forest dwellers is unrealistic and unreasonable, it is an attempt to not grant
their rights.
There is need of strong movement for doing survey , because
without proper survey a fair implementation of Forest Rights Act is not
possible.
Department of Revenue failed to provide
village map. Department of Forest harass people who make their claims under the
Forest Rights Act. In Goelkera Block under West Singhbhum district a forest
rights movement of Jharkhand “Jharkhand Jungle Bachao Andolan” has distributed
1300 claim form which were submitted for granting of Patta, unfortunately
only 80 Patta was sanctioned by the authorities. This is one small example that
shows the difference between the claims and allotment.
