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
  • An Act to recognise and vest the forest rights and occupation in forest land in forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers who have been residing in such forests for generations but whose rights could not be recorded; to provide for a framework for recording the forest rights so vested and the nature of evidence required for such recognition and vesting in respect of forest land.
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 Opponents of the law claim it will lead to massive forest destruction and should be repealed.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.

Forest in india.jpg

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] In 28 June 2022, the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) introduced an amendment that enabled state governments to de-reserve or divert forest lands. [13]

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 su

ch as nistar, by whatever name called, including those used in erstwhile Princely states, Zamindari or such intermediary regimes;

  1. 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;
  2. 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;
  3. Rights including community tenures of habitat and habitation for primitive tribal groups and pre-agriculture communities;
  4. Rights in or over disputed lands under any nomenclature in any State where claims are disputed;
  5. Rights for conversion of Pattas or leases or grants issued by any local council or any State Govt. on forest lands to titles;
  6. Rights of settlement and conversion of all forest villages, old habitation, unsurveyed villages, and other villages in the forest, whether recorded, notified or not into revenue villages;
  7. Right to protect, regenerate or conserve or manage any community forest resource which they have been traditionally protecting and conserving for sustainable use;
  8. Rights which are recognized 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;
  9. Right of access to biodiversity and community right to intellectual property and traditional knowledge related to biodiversity and cultural diversity;
  10. 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 the 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 forest 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. [19]

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 recognized (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. [20]

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. [21]

New 2022 Forest Conservation Amendment

In the new 2022 Forest Conservation Rules, [22] the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC) introduced an amendment to the Forest Conservation Act of 1980 [23] which violates the Forest Rights Act of 2006. This amendment transferred the rights of forests from tribal communities to large corporations such as private mining and pharmaceutical companies. The amendment allows district collectors to override the approval of Gram Sabhas and transfer the forest land to private entities. [24] In doing so, the amendment revokes the participatory rights of the forest dwellers by making them bystanders to actions that directly impact their livelihood. Instead, it provides corporations with unlimited rights to develop the land for exploitative uses such as underground mining.

The Union Government's rationale for enacting the new 2022 Rules was to simplify the forest clearance process by streamlining the process and eliminating elements that were thought to hinder the approval of land transfers under the Forest Act. [25]

The new 2022 Rules are seen as emblematic of the Modi administration's pro-business focus at the expense of environmental protection and the rights of indigenous communities. [26] Such an approach has raised serious concerns about the potential exploitation of forest resources and the harm inflicted upon forest-dependent communities. Many have called for the government to repeal the amendment and ensure that the Forest Rights Act is implemented in a way that protects the rights of forest-dwelling communities and the environment. [27]

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. [28] 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. [29] 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. [30] 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. [31] [32]

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". [33]

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. [34] [35]

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. [36]

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. [37] 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. [38]

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. [39] 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. [40]

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. [41] 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. [42]

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. [43] 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. [44]

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." [45]

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. [46]

Related Research Articles

The Jenu Kuruba are a tribal group from the Nilgiris, numbering around 37000. They are concentrated in the districts bordering the states of Kerala and 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. and in 2021 protests have continued against "the forest department as an encroacher, promoting eco-tourism and safaris … [in a way which] … is illegal under Indian and international laws."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Khonds</span> Tribal community in India

Khonds are an indigenous Adivasi tribal community in India. Traditionally hunter-gatherers, they are divided into the hill-dwelling Khonds, and plain-dwelling Khonds for census purposes, but the Khonds themselves identify by their specific clans. Khonds 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 as an assertion of their ownership of the forests wherein they dwell. Khonds speak the Kui language and write it in the Odia script.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indian Forest Act, 1927</span>

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 the Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 was enacted by the Parliament of India to prevent atrocities and hate crimes against the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. The Act is popularly known as the SC/ST Act, PoA, or simply the 'Atrocities Act'.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972</span> Act of the Parliament of India

The Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted for protection of plants and animal species. Before 1972, India had only five designated national parks. Among other reforms, the Act established scheduled protected plant and hunting certain animal species or harvesting these species was largely outlawed. The Act provides for the protection of wild animals, birds and plants; and for matters connected therewith or ancillary or incidental thereto. It extends to the whole of India.

A reserved forest and protected forest in India are forests accorded a certain degree of protection. The concept was introduced in the Indian Forest Act of 1927 during the British Raj to refer to 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 reserved and protected forests, and extended protection to other forests. Many forests that came under the jurisdiction of the Government of India during the political integration of India were initially granted such protection.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Forestry in India</span> Environmental resource – 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 9 other 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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Tiger Conservation Authority</span>

The National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA) was established in December 2005, following a recommendation of the Tiger Task Force, The Prime Minister of India established it to reorganise the management of Project Tiger and India's 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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">POSCO India</span>

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

Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) describes indigenous and other traditional knowledge of local resources. As a field of study in Northern American anthropology, TEK refers to "a cumulative body of knowledge, belief, and practice, evolving by accumulation of TEK and handed down through generations through traditional songs, stories and beliefs. It is concerned with the relationship of living beings with their traditional groups and with their environment." Indigenous knowledge is not a universal concept among various societies, but is referred to a system of knowledge traditions or practices that are heavily dependent on "place". Such knowledge is used in natural resource management as a substitute for baseline environmental data in cases where there is little recorded scientific data, or may complement Western scientific methods of ecological management.

The Mannan people are a scheduled tribe (ST) of Kerala, India. They are one of the Adivasi who live in Idukki District. The Mannan follow a matrilineal system of descent, and their ruler, the Raja Mannan, is elected by community headmen from among those eligible by heredity. They are traditional forest-dwellers, gaining their livelihood by collecting and utilising resources of the dense forest, and supplementing these with shifting agriculture. They are believed to be descendants of a Pandyan King and their mother tongue is Tamil. Changes since the mid-20th century, including an influx of settlers from the plains of Kerala, degradation of the forest environment, and exposure to modern economic and cultural systems have all posed challenges to their survival as a people continuing their customary way of life.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conservation in India</span>

Conservation in India can be traced to the time of Ashoka, tracing to the Ashoka Pillar Edicts as one of the earliest conservation efforts in the world. Conservation generally refers to the act of carefully and efficiently using natural resources. Conservation efforts begun in India before 5 AD, as efforts are made to have a forest administration. The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change is the ministry responsible for implementation of environmental and forestry program in India, which include the management of national parks, conservation of flora and fauna of India, and pollution controls.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013</span> Act of Indian Parliament

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 replaced the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 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.

National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) is an Indian constitutional body that was established through Constitution Act, 2003.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996</span> 244(A)

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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Katkari people</span> Tribe mostly belonging to the state of Maharashtra, India

The Katkari also called Kathodi, are an Indian tribe from Maharashtra. They have been categorised as a Scheduled tribe. 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.

The Niyamgiri is a hill range situated in the districts of Kalahandi and Rayagada in the south-west of Odisha, India. These hills are home to Dongria Kondh indigenous people. The hills have one of India's most pristine forests in the interior. It is bound by Karlapat Wildlife Sanctuary on the north-west side and Kotgarh Wildlife Sanctuary on the north-east end.

Fortress conservation is a conservation model based on the belief that biodiversity protection is best achieved by creating protected areas where ecosystems can function in isolation from human disturbance. Its implementation has been criticized for human rights abuses against indigenous inhabitants when creating and maintaining protected areas.

References

  1. ↑ "The Forest Rights Act". The Forest Rights Act. Retrieved 3 July 2019.
  2. ↑ Forest Rights Act- Official website
  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/ Archived 29 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine
  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. ↑ maniyar, zahid (25 October 2022). "Forest Conservation Rules, 2022- An overview of changes that snatch rights of Gram Sabhas". CJP. Retrieved 12 May 2023.
  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(1) of the Act Archived 25 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  17. ↑ Section 3(2) of the Act
  18. ↑ Sections 3(1) and 5 of the Act Archived 25 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  19. ↑ Sections 2(c) and 2(o) of the Act
  20. ↑ Sections 6(2)-6(6) of the Act Archived 25 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  21. ↑ Section 4(2) of the Act Archived 25 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  22. ↑ Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (June 2022). MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, FOREST AND CLIMATE CHANGE NOTIFICATION (PDF). Controller of Publications.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  23. ↑ "Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 Amended". Indian Journal of Public Administration. 35 (3): 707–709. July 1989. doi:10.1177/0019556119890344. ISSN   0019-5561.
  24. ↑ "Environment Ministry's New Forest Diversion Rules Are Bad News for Forest Rights". The Wire. Retrieved 12 May 2023.
  25. ↑ "Forest Conservation Rules 2022: The smokescreen of 'compensatory afforestation'". Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy. 11 January 2023. Retrieved 12 May 2023.
  26. ↑ Sirur, Simrin (30 March 2023). "Will Modi govt's new bill dilute existing protections for forests? All about proposed law". ThePrint. Retrieved 12 May 2023.
  27. ↑ Sirur, Simrin (30 March 2023). "Will Modi govt's new bill dilute existing protections for forests? All about proposed law". ThePrint. Retrieved 12 May 2023.
  28. ↑ "The Hindu Business Line : Too hot for the Planet". Archived from the original on 8 May 2009. Retrieved 26 December 2007.
  29. ↑ Thapar, Valmik (23 December 2007). "Conflict will go up by 10000 per cent", Daily News and Analysis
  30. ↑ "The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act"
  31. ↑ Truths and Falsehoods About the Forest Rights Act
  32. ↑ Section 4(2) of the Act Archived 25 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine
  33. ↑ Kothari, Ashish (30 December 2006). "For Lasting Rights". Frontline. 23 (26).
  34. ↑ Kothari, Ashish (30 December 2006). "For Lasting Rights". Frontline. 23 (26).
  35. ↑ "Understanding the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act"
  36. ↑ Sethi, Nitin. "Activists Come Out With Ads to Slam Forest Act", Times of India, 23 October 2007.
  37. ↑ Vanashakti.com
  38. ↑ Sethi, Nitin. "Activists Come Out With Ads to Slam Forest Act", Times of India, 23 October 2007.
  39. ↑ Prasad, Archana (30 December 2006). "Survival at Stake". Frontline. 23 (26).
  40. ↑ "Campaign press release (see bottom of the linked page)". Archived from the original on 3 December 2007. Retrieved 26 December 2007.
  41. ↑ "Notify Rules of Forest Act, says Brinda Karat", The Hindu, 28 November 2007
  42. ↑ Press releases on the Forest Rights Act by the Campaign for Survival and Dignity
  43. ↑ Sethi, Nitin and Mukul, Askhaya, (2 January 2008). "Forest Act Notified, Tribals Unhappy". Times of India.
  44. ↑ "The Forest Rights Act". The Forest Rights Act. Retrieved 3 July 2019.
  45. ↑ "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.
  46. ↑ "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.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.