The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006

Last updated

The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006
Emblem of India.svg
Parliament of India
Citation Act No. 2 of 2007
Enacted by Parliament of India
Enacted29 December 2006
Assented to29 December 2006
Commenced31 December 2007
Status: In force

The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, is a key piece of forest legislation passed in India on 18 December 2006. It has also been called the Forest Rights Act, the Tribal Rights Act, the Tribal Bill, and the Tribal Land Act. The law concerns the rights of forest-dwelling communities to land and other resources, denied to them over decades as a result of the continuance of colonial forest laws in India.

Contents

Supporters of the Act claim that it will redress the "historical injustice" committed against forest dwellers, while including provisions for making conservation more effective and more transparent. The demand for the law has seen massive national demonstrations involving hundreds of thousands of people. [1]

However, the law has also been the subject of considerable controversy in India. Opponents of the law claim it will lead to massive forest destruction and should be repealed.

A little over one year after it was passed, the Act was notified into force on 31 December 2007. On 1 January 2008, this was followed by the notification of the Rules framed by the Ministry of Tribal Affairs to supplement the procedural aspects of the Act. [2]

Background

India's forests are home to hundreds of millions of people, including many Scheduled Tribes, who live in or near the forest areas of the country. Nearly 250 million people live in and around forests in India, of which the estimated indigenous Adivasi or tribal population stands at about 100 million. To put these numbers in perspective, if considered a nation by themselves, they would form the 13th largest country in the world, even though they cannot be depicted as representing any singular, monolithic culture. [3] Forests provide sustenance in the form of minor forest produce, water, grazing grounds and habitat for shifting cultivation. Moreover, vast areas of land that may or may not be forests are classified as "forest" under India's forest laws, and those cultivating these lands are technically cultivating "forest land". [4] Forest Rights Act is also known as Community Forest Management (CFM) in Telangana.

Since time immemorial, the tribal communities of India have had an integral and close-knit relationship with the forests and have been dependent on the forests for livelihoods and existence. The relationship was mutually beneficial and not one-sided. However, rights were rarely recognized by the authorities and in the absence of real ownership of the land, the already marginalized local dwellers suffered. [5]

The reason for this latter phenomenon is India's forest laws. India's forests are governed by two main laws, the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and the Wild life (Protection) Act, 1972. The former empowers the government to declare any area to be a reserved forest, protected forest or village forest. The latter allows any area to be constituted as a "protected area", namely a national park, wildlife sanctuary, tiger reserve or community conservation area. [6]

Under these laws, the rights of people living in or depending on the area to be declared as a forest or protected area are to be "settled" by a "forest settlement officer." This basically requires that officer to enquire into the claims of people to the land, minor forest produce, etc., and, in the case of claims found to be valid, to allow them to continue or to extinguish them by paying compensation.

Studies have shown that in many areas this process either did not take place at all or took place in a highly faulty manner. Thus 82.9% of the forest blocks in undivided Madhya Pradesh had not been settled as of December 2003, [7] while all the hilly tracts of Odisha were declared government forests without any survey. [8] In Odisha, around 40% of the government forests are "deemed reserved forests" which have not been surveyed. [9]

Those whose rights are not recorded during the settlement process are susceptible to eviction at any time. This "legal twilight zone" leads to harassment, evictions, extortion of money and sexual molestation of forest dwellers by forest officials, who wield absolute authority over forest dwellers' livelihoods and daily lives. [10]

The Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Forest Rights Act describes it as a law intended to correct the "historical injustice" done to forest dwellers by the failure to recognise their rights. [11]

"The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006" was enacted by the Parliament of India in December 2006. [12]

Provisions

The Act as passed in 2006 has the following basic points.

Types of rights

The rights which are included in section 3(1) of the Act are:

  1. Right to hold and live in the forest land under the individual or common occupation for habitation or for self-cultivation for livelihood by a member or members of a forest dwelling Scheduled Tribe or other traditional forest dwellers;
  2. Community rights such as nistar, by whatever name called, including those used in erstwhile Princely states, Zamindari or such intermediary regimes;
  3. Right of ownership, access to collect, use, and dispose of minor forest produce( includes all non-timber forest produce of plant origin) which has been traditionally collected within or outside village boundaries;
  4. Other community rights of uses of entitlements such as fish and other products of water bodies, grazing (both settled or transhumant) and traditional seasonal resource access of nomadic or pastoralist communities;
  5. Rights including community tenures of habitat and habitation for primitive tribal groups and pre-agriculture communities;
  6. Rights in or over disputed lands under any nomenclature in any State where claims are disputed;
  7. Rights for conversion of Pattas or leases or grants issued by any local council or any State Govt. on forest lands to titles;
  8. Rights of settlement and conversion of all forest villages, old habitation, unsurveyed villages and other villages in forest, whether recorded, notified or not into revenue villages;
  9. Right to protect, regenerate or conserve or manage any community forest resource which they have been traditionally protecting and conserving for sustainable use;
  10. Rights which are recognised under any State law or laws of any Autonomous Dist. Council or Autonomous Regional Council or which are accepted as rights of tribals under any traditional or customary law of the concerned tribes of any State;
  11. Right of access to biodiversity and community right to intellectual property and traditional knowledge related to biodiversity and cultural diversity;
  12. Any other traditional right customarily enjoyed by the forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes or other traditional forest dwellers, as the case may be, which are not mentioned in clauses-1 to 11, but excluding the traditional right of hunting or trapping extracting a part of the body of any species of wild animal

These can be summarised as:

Eligibility criteria

According to Section 2(c) of Forest Rights Act (FRA), to qualify as Forest Dwelling Scheduled Tribe (FDST) and be eligible for recognition of rights under FRA, three conditions must be satisfied by the applicant/s, who could be “members or community”:

1. Must be a Scheduled Tribe in the area where the right is claimed; and

2. Primarily resided in forest or forests land prior to 13-12-2005; and

3. Depend on the forest or forests land for bonafide livelihood needs.

According to Section 2(o) of Forest Rights Act (FRA), to qualify as Other Traditional Forest Dweller (OTFD) and be eligible for recognition of rights under FRA, two conditions need to be fulfilled:

1. Primarily resided in forest or forests land for three generations (75 years) prior to 13-12-2005, and

2. Depend on the forest or forests land for bonafide livelihood needs.

Section 2(o) refers to “any member or community” for this purpose, and hence if an OTFD village establishes its eligibility under the Act, there is no need for every individual to do so separately. [18]

Process of recognition of rights

Section 6(1) of the Act provides that the gram sabha, or village assembly, will initially pass a resolution recommending whose rights to which resources should be recognised (i.e. which lands belong to whom, how much land was under the cultivation of each person as on 13 Dec 2005, etc.). This resolution is then screened and approved at the level of the sub-division (or taluka) and subsequently at the district level. The screening committees consist of three government officials (Forest, Revenue and Tribal Welfare departments) and three elected members of the local body at that level. These committees also hear appeals. [19]

Resettlement for wildlife conservation

Section 4(2) of the Act lays out a procedure by which people can be resettled from areas if it is found to be necessary for wildlife conservation. The first step is to show that relocation is scientifically necessary and no other alternative is available; this has to be done through a process of public consultation. The second step is that the local community must consent to the resettlement. Finally, the resettlement must provide not only compensation but a secure livelihood. [20]

Misunderstanding the Act as a land distribution scheme

A great deal of the debate is fuelled by misunderstandings of the purpose of the Act. The most common is that the purpose of the law is to distribute forest land to forest dwellers or tribals, often claimed to be at the rate of 4 hectares per family. [21] The Act is intended to recognise lands that are already under cultivation as on 13 December 2005, not to grant title to any new lands.[ citation needed ]

Opposition

The Act has been met with much concern and opposition from environmentalists and wildlife conservationists. Some of this opposition has been motivated by those who see the law as a land distribution scheme that will lead to the handing over of forests to tribals and forest dwellers (see Vanashakti, a group opposed to the Act, as an example). But the strongest opposition to the Act has come from wildlife conservationists who fear that the law will make it impossible to create "inviolate spaces", or areas free of human presence, for the purposes of wildlife conservation. [22] Tiger conservation in particular has been an object of concern.

Interpretation regarding Deadline cut-off-date: M.Sai Sampath, Founder-President ECO FAWN Society had actively engaged in environment and wildlife conservation who also appeared before Hon'ble Parliamentary Committee suggested for incorporation of "Deadline cut-off-date" to complete whole process of identification, verification and recognition of Forest Rights to genuine tribals and other traditional forest dwellers in the country. Also importantly Mr.M.Sai Sampath had correlated decline/encroachment of forest land with the implementation of FRA 2006 in the country where the Hon'ble Parliamentary Committee has agreed the submission made and pointed an extent of 16.21 Lakh Ha of forest land encroached after implementation of the Forest Rights Act 2006, subsequently various measures were suggested by the Parliamentary Committee. (9th and 18th Report of the Parliamentary Committee on Petitions, 16th Lok Sabha).

Supporters of the Act take the position that the Act is not a land distribution measure, and further that the Act is more transparent than existing law and so can help stop land grabbing. [23] Regarding wildlife conservation, they have argued that the Act actually provides a clear and explicit procedure for resettling people where necessary for wildlife protection, but also provides safeguards to prevent this being done arbitrarily. [24] [25]

Indeed, while concerned at some of the provisions, some environmentalists have also argued that "Conservationists who have stated that the Forest Bill will be the death-knell of India's forests are indulging in unsubstantiated exaggeration". [26]

Supporters of the Act and others also argue that the provisions in the Act for community conservation will in fact strengthen forest protection in the country. This is said to be because it will provide a legal right for communities themselves to protect the forest, as thousands of villages are already doing in the face of official opposition. [27] [28]

Television advertisements

In October 2003, Vanashakti, a group based in Mumbai, ran television advertisements against the Act. This is the first time any Indian legislation has been attacked through a television campaign. [29]

Six advertisements were run by the organisation across major Indian news and television channels, ads which continue to be available on their website. The group criticised the Forest Rights Act as having the potential to cause huge floods, droughts, and to increase global warming. [30] They also decried it as an effort to keep "tribals in the forest" instead of assisting their "development."

In response to questions from a newspaper, Vanashakti claimed to have been formed over "a dinner table conversation" as a result of deep concern about the Forest Rights Act and the lack of media attention to it. [31]

The television ad campaign was met with angry responses from forest rights organisations. The Campaign for Survival and Dignity, a federation of tribal and forest dwellers' organisations from several States of India, wrote an Open Letter to Vanashakti, criticising them for "attacking the Forest Rights Act through distortions and untruths that do nothing to reinforce forest protection, and a great deal to undermine it." The Campaign also put up a website entitled "Vanashakti's Distortions and Untruths". An exchange of correspondence followed, which can be found both at the Vanashakti website and at the website on the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act" put up by the Campaign .

Criticism by forest rights supporters

While supporting the principles of the law, forest rights supporters are not entirely satisfied with the law as finally passed. The recommendations of a Joint Parliamentary Committee on the law were partly rejected, and supporters of forest rights have claimed that some of the rejected clauses were important. In particular, the final form of the law is said to make it easier to exclude some categories of both tribal and non-tribal forest dwellers, to have undermined the democratic nature of the processes in the Act and to have placed additional hindrances and bureaucratic restrictions on people's rights. [32] The Campaign for Survival and Dignity described the final form of the law as "both a victory and a betrayal" in their official statement on the occasion. [33]

Notification

The one-year delay in the notification of the Act and the Rules was the subject of considerable Parliamentary and political uproar in the winter session of the Indian Parliament in 2007. [34] There was also mass protests across India demanding that the Act be notified in October 2007, and in November 2007 a week-long sit down protest took place in Delhi with the same demand. [35]

On 31 December, the Act was notified into force, and on 1 January the Rules for the Act - which provide the procedures for implementing its provisions - were also notified. [36] The Campaign for Survival and Dignity welcomed the notification but sharply criticised a number of provisions in the Rules, claiming that they undermined democracy and the spirit of the Act. [37]

Implementation

There have been numerous complaints regarding the manner in which the Act has been implemented after its notification. For instance, in September 2010, the Council for Social Development, a New Delhi-based think tank, released a "Summary Report on Implementation of the Forest Rights Act" which stated that:

All of the key features of this legislation have been undermined by a combination of apathy and sabotage during the process of implementation. In the current situation the rights of the majority of tribals and other traditional forest dwellers are being denied and the purpose of the legislation is being defeated. Unless immediate remedial measures are taken, instead of undoing the historical injustice to tribal and other traditional forest dwellers, the Act will have the opposite outcome of making them even more vulnerable to eviction and denial of their customary access to forests... both the Central and the State governments have actively pursued policies that are in direct violation of the spirit and letter of the Act." [38]

The Ministry of Tribal Affairs releases monthly reports on the status of implementation of the Act. These can be obtained from the Ministry's website.

Judgements

Recently, Sc in Wildlife first vs Moefcc has ordered eviction of encroachers on forest land, in which majority of tribal and forest dwellers were also ordered to be evicted. This order invited challenges from various quarters as in many cases request was cancelled on non availability of documents by district level committee under the act. Therefore, court agreed to review its judgement and give time of 4 months to state governments to complete the process again. [39]

Related Research Articles

Adivasi Collective term for the tribes of India who are considered indigenous people of India

Adivasi is the collective term for tribes of the Indian subcontinent, who are considered indigenous to places within India wherein they live, either as foragers or as tribalistic sedentary communities. The term is also used for ethnic minorities, such as Chakmas of Bangladesh, Tharus of Nepal, and Vedda of Sri Lanka.

Baiga tribe

The Baiga are an ethnic group found in central India primarily in the state of Madhya Pradesh, and in smaller numbers in the surrounding states of Uttar Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand. The largest number of Baiga is found in Baiga-chuk in Mandla district and Balaghat district of Madhya Pradesh. They have sub-castes: Bijhwar, Narotia, Bharotiya, Nahar, Rai Bhain and Kadh Bhaina. The Baiga are a Munda or Kolarian people(part of the Bhuiya tribe) located in the central highlands of India. The name Baiga means "sorcerer- medicine man".

The Jenu Kuruba are a tribal group from the Nilgiris, numbering around 37000. They are concentrated in the Kodagu and Mysore districts of Karnataka. 'Jenu' means 'honey' in Kannada, referring to their traditional occupation as collectors of honey in the forest. In the early 20th century they lived in huts in the forests and cultivated. Starting from the 1970s and continuing today, many of the Jenu Kurubas have been evicted from their homes due to conservation measures in the various tiger reserves of the Nilgiris, like Nagarhole and Bandipur. Those who have been relocated outside the forest are daily wagers and agricultural labourers, who live in extreme poverty. Many work as labourers on coffee estates in Kodagu or for the Forest Department. They speak the Jenu Kurumba language, either classified as being related to Kodava or a rural dialect of Kannada. The tribals have fought multiple times to live in the reserved forests, most recently in 2020, under the terms of the Forest Rights Act.

Khonds

Khonds are a tribal community in India. Traditionally hunter-gatherers, they are divided into the hill-dwelling Khonds and plain-dwelling Khonds for census purposes; all the Khonds identify by their clan and usually hold large tracts of fertile land but still practice hunting, gathering and slash-and-burn agriculture in the forests as a symbol of their connection to and ownership of the forest. Khonds speak the Kui and Kuvi languages and write them in Odia script.

The Forum for Fact-finding Documentation and Advocacy (FFDA) is an Indian human rights monitoring organization founded in 1995 that fights to promote and protect human rights in India by working with the victims of human rights violations and their organizations. It educates the victims and their communities, and facilitates and builds the capacity of organizations of victims to take collective action on their own. It addresses the issues of displacement and forced eviction, violence against women and children, exploitation, torture, abuse and discrimination against Dalits, and attacks on minorities and indigenous communities.

American Indian Religious Freedom Act United States Law protecting Native Americans religious practices

The American Indian Religious Freedom Act, Public Law No. 95-341, 92 Stat. 469, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1996, is a United States federal law, enacted by joint resolution of the Congress in 1978. Prior to the act, many aspects of Native American religions and sacred ceremonies had been prohibited by law.

Indian Forest Act, 1927

The Indian Forest Act, 1927 was largely based on previous Indian Forest Acts implemented under the British. The most famous one was the Indian Forest Act of 1878. Both the 1878 act and the 1927 act sought to consolidate and reserve the areas having forest cover, or significant wildlife, to regulate movement and transit of forest produce, and duty leviable on timber and other forest produce. It also defines the procedure to be followed for declaring an area to be a Reserved Forest, a Protected Forest or a Village Forest. It defines what is a forest offence, what are the acts prohibited inside a Reserved Forest, and penalties leviable on violation of the provisions of the Act.

The Scheduled Castes and Tribes Act, 1989 is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted to prevent atrocities against scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. The Act is popularly known as the SC/ST Act, POA, the Prevention of Atrocities Act, or simply the Atrocities Act.

Reserved forests and protected forests of India

A reserved forest and protected forest in India are terms denoting forests accorded a certain degree of protection. The term was first introduced in the Indian Forest Act, 1927 in British Raj, to refer to certain forests granted protection under the British crown in British India, but not associated suzerainties. After Indian independence, the Government of India retained the status of the existing reserved and protected forests, as well as incorporating new reserved and protected forests. Many forests which came under the jurisdiction of the Government of India during the political integration of India were initially granted such protection.The first Reserve Forest Of India was Satpura National Park.

Forestry in India

Forestry in India is a significant rural industry and a major environmental resource. India is one of the ten most forest-rich countries of the world. Together, India and these other 9 countries account for 67 percent of total forest area of the world. India's forest cover grew at 0.20% annually over 1990–2000, and has grown at the rate of 0.7% per year over 2000–2010, after decades where forest degradation was a matter of serious concern.

National Tiger Conservation Authority

The National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) was established in December 2005 following a recommendation of the Tiger Task Force, constituted by the Prime Minister of India for reorganised management of Project Tiger and the many Tiger Reserves in India.

Conservation refugees are people who are displaced from their native lands when conservation areas, such as parks and other protected areas, are created.

POSCO India Private Limited is an Indian subsidiary of Korean conglomerate POSCO.

Sathyamangalam Wildlife Sanctuary Tiger Reserve in Tamil Nadu, India

Sathyamangalam Tiger Reserve is a protected area and tiger reserve in the Eastern Ghats in the Erode District of the Indian state of Tamil Nadu. It has a tiger population of 83 and a leopard population of 111 according to the 2019 census.

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013

The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 is an Act of Indian Parliament that regulates land acquisition and lays down the procedure and rules for granting compensation, rehabilitation and resettlement to the affected persons in India. The Act has provisions to provide fair compensation to those whose land is taken away, brings transparency to the process of acquisition of land to set up factories or buildings, infrastructural projects and assures rehabilitation of those affected. The Act establishes regulations for land acquisition as a part of India's massive industrialisation drive driven by public-private partnership. The Act replaced the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, a nearly 120-year-old law enacted during British rule.

The Society for the Promotion of Himalayan Indigenous Activities (SOPHIA) is a non-profit organisation based in the state of Uttarakhand in India. SOPHIA's office is located in Dehradun, Uttarakhand, while its operational coverage extends through the states of Uttar Pradesh (UP), Uttarakhand (UK), and Himachal Pradesh (HP). The organisation works for indigenous communities to improve their living conditions and to facilitate the process of claiming forests rights through the 2006 Forest Rights Act. SOPHIA's director is Praveen Kaushal.

Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996

The Provisions of the Panchayats Act, 1996 or PESA is a law enacted by the Government of India for ensuring self governance through traditional Gram Sabhas for people living in the Scheduled Areas of India. Scheduled Areas are areas identified by the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution of India. Scheduled Areas are found in ten states of India which have predominant population of tribal communities. The Scheduled Areas, were not covered by the 73rd Constitutional Amendment or Panchayati Raj Act of the Indian Constitution as provided in the Part IX of the Constitution. PESA was enacted on 24 December 1996 to extend the provisions of Part IX of the Constitution to Scheduled Areas, with certain exceptions and modifications. PESA sought to enable the Panchayats at appropriate levels and Gram Sabhas to implement a system of self-governance with respect to a number of issues such as customary resources, minor forest produce, minor minerals, minor water bodies, selection of beneficiaries, sanction of projects, and control over local institutions. PESA is an Act to provide for the extension of the provisions of Part IX of the Constitution relating to the Panchayats and the Scheduled Areas. PESA was viewed as a positive development for tribal communities in Scheduled Areas who had earlier suffered tremendously from engagement with modern development processes and from the operation of both colonial laws and statutes made in independent India. The loss of access to forest, land, and other community resources had increased their vulnerability. Rampant land acquisition and displacement due to development projects had led to large scale distress in tribal communities living in Scheduled Areas. PESA was seen as a panacea for many of these vulnerabilities and sought to introduce a new paradigm of development where the tribal communities in such Scheduled Areas were to decide by themselves the pace and priorities of their development.

The Katkari are an Indian Tribe mostly belonging to the state of Maharashtra. They have been categorised as a Scheduled tribe. Other names and spellings include Kathkari, Kathodi and Kathodia. They are bilingual, speaking the Katkari language, a dialect of the Marathi-Konkani languages, with each other; they speak Marathi with the Marathi speakers, who are a majority in the populace where they live. In Maharashtra the Katkari have been designated a Particularly vulnerable tribal group (PVTG), along with two other groups included in this sub-category: the Madia Gond and the Kolam. In the case of the Katkari this vulnerability derives from their history as a nomadic, forest-dwelling people listed by the British Raj under the Criminal Tribes Act of 1871, a stigma that continues to this day.

Wildlife SOS (WSOS) is a conservation non-profit in India, established in 1995 with the primary objective of rescuing and rehabilitating wildlife in distress, and preserving India’s natural heritage. It is currently one of the largest Wildlife Organisations in South Asia.

Eksali forest land or Eksali plots are areas designated for shifting cultivation in the forest areas of the Thane and Raigad districts of Maharashtra state, India. These plots are 4 hectares or more in area. Separate Eksali plots working circle are carved in the working plan for the management of these forest lands. Before independence in the British Raj, Eksali plots were provided for cultivation with the objective of encouraging human habitation in outlying forest areas to supply labourers for forest works including the felling of trees, raising of plant nurseries, planting saplings, nurturing the tree plantations and protecting the forests. Though these lands were marked on the forest maps due to the Indian Forest (conservation) Act, 1980, it was not possible to permanently allot the land to the cultivator until the declaration of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers Act, 2006. This second act made it possible to allot the lands to the tribal landless cultivators holding the plots in forest areas. While the ownership of Dali land was collective, the ownership of Eksali forest land was individual and enabled allotments.

References

  1. "The Forest Rights Act". The Forest Rights Act. Retrieved 3 July 2019.
  2. Ministry of Tribal Affairs [ permanent dead link ]
  3. Khare, Arvind (27 June 2015). "Let's not miss the wood". The Hindu. ISSN   0971-751X . Retrieved 3 July 2019.
  4. Sarin, Madhu (5 May 2005). "Scheduled Tribes Bill: A Comment" (PDF). Economic and Political Weekly. 40 (21). Retrieved 26 December 2007.[ permanent dead link ]
  5. http://greencleanguide.com/2012/12/16/forest-rights-act-part-1-2/ [ dead link ]
  6. Legislations on Environment, Forests and Wildlife, from Ministry of Environment and Forests,
  7. Prabhu, Pradip (August 2005). "The Right to Live With Dignity". Seminar (552).
  8. "Bad in Law", Madhu Sarin, World Bank website [ permanent dead link ]
  9. "Dispossessed and displaced: A brief paper on tribal issues in Orissa", Kundan Kumar, Vasundhara
  10. Gopalakrishnan, Shankar (June–July 2005). "Missing the Woods for the Trees". Combat Law. 4 (4).
  11. The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers Act, 2006 Archived 25 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  12. "Environmental legislation", The Statesman , 19 January 2017
  13. Section 3(1) of the Act Archived 25 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  14. Section 3(1) of the Act Archived 25 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  15. Section 3(1) of the Act Archived 25 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  16. Section 3(2) of the Act [ permanent dead link ]
  17. Sections 3(1) and 5 of the Act Archived 25 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  18. Sections 2(c) and 2(o) of the Act
  19. Sections 6(2)-6(6) of the Act Archived 25 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  20. Section 4(2) of the Act Archived 25 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  21. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 8 May 2009. Retrieved 26 December 2007.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  22. Thapar, Valmik (23 December 2007). "Conflict will go up by 10000 per cent", Daily News and Analysis
  23. "The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act"
  24. Truths and Falsehoods About the Forest Rights Act
  25. Section 4(2) of the Act Archived 25 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  26. Kothari, Ashish (30 December 2006). "For Lasting Rights". Frontline. 23 (26).
  27. Kothari, Ashish (30 December 2006). "For Lasting Rights". Frontline. 23 (26).
  28. "Understanding the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act"
  29. Sethi, Nitin. "Activists Come Out With Ads to Slam Forest Act", Times of India, 23 October 2007.
  30. Vanashakti.com
  31. Sethi, Nitin. "Activists Come Out With Ads to Slam Forest Act", Times of India, 23 October 2007.
  32. Prasad, Archana (30 December 2006). "Survival at Stake". Frontline. 23 (26).
  33. "Campaign press release (see bottom of the linked page)". Archived from the original on 3 December 2007. Retrieved 26 December 2007.
  34. "Notify Rules of Forest Act, says Brinda Karat", The Hindu, 28 November 2007
  35. Press releases on the Forest Rights Act by the Campaign for Survival and Dignity
  36. Sethi, Nitin and Mukul, Askhaya, (2 January 2008). "Forest Act Notified, Tribals Unhappy". Times of India.
  37. "The Forest Rights Act". The Forest Rights Act. Retrieved 3 July 2019.
  38. "Summary Report on Implementation of the Forest Rights Act, Council for Social Development, as posted on Campaign for Survival and Dignity website". Archived from the original on 9 January 2011. Retrieved 4 October 2010.
  39. "Order of the Supreme Court of India regarding claims under Forest Rights Act 2006, 13/02/2019 - India Environment Portal | News, reports, documents, blogs, data, analysis on environment & development | India, South Asia". www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in. Retrieved 3 July 2019.