Implementation of Forest Rights Act in Jharkhand

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.