The bill seeks to amend the decades old Forest Conservation Act, 1980. It also aims to remove the mandatory central government approval for diversion of forests in certain cases. This means that decisions regarding the diversion of forest land would be taken by state governments and the UT administration only. Among the changes suggested, the below preamble was inserted into the act, and the “Forest (Conservation) Act” is substituted by “Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam” in the principal Act.

A deeper analysis of the Bill and the concerns raised against it can be read here.

Ironically, on September 8, during the much publicised G20 Summit opening day, the New Delhi Leaders’ Summit Declaration was adopted by India and other participating nations which included Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The Declaration also highlighted issues like increase in Global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution, drought, land degradation and desertification threatening lives and livelihoods.

As India plans to work towards” effective implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”, below are some statistics providing an insight into the status of forest land diversion and the extent of compensatory afforestation done in India prior and post the Forest Conservation Act. The said data is based on the answer provided by the government to Shri Feroze Varun Gandhi (BJP) during the monsoon session of the Lok Sabha. Statistics were also provided regarding the land acquired for compensatory afforestation. It is essential to note here that compensatory afforestation is one of the adopted mitigative mechanisms while approving proposals for de-reservation or diversion of forest land for non-forest use. Essentially, the purpose of compensatory afforestation is to compensate for the loss of land by land and the loss of trees by trees. 

Forest Land diverted for non-forestry use since 1980- approximately one million hectares:

The Forest Conservation Act, 1980 was passed by the government in an effort to control the conversion of forest land and prevent additional deforestation. The use of forest land for non-forest purposes was constrained by the act.  Without taking any mitigation measures, 4.1 million hectares of forest area were diverted over a 25-year period between 1951–1952 and 1975–1976. This occurred prior to the passage of the legislation. Approximately 1.65 lakh hectares were diverted annually on average during this time.

After the enactment of the act, over the forty-year period between 1980 and 2021, a total of 9.9 lakh hectares of forest land is diverted for non-forestry purposes. As provided by Factly, the average annual rate of diversion during this period came down to around 23,618 hectares. These figures also illustrate the impact that the legislation has had in reducing the diversion of forest area for non-forest area use, which partially explains why the current government has been eager to bring amendments to the same. 

State-wise statistic on Forest land diversion for non-forestry use in the last 15 years:

As provided by Shri Bhupender Yadav, Minister for Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEFCC), a total of 3,05,945 hectares of forest land had been approved for non-forest use under Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 between 2008-09 and 2022-23. This land has been approved for a total of 17,301 projects.

From the data, it was deduced that from amongst the states, Punjab toped the forest land diversion, followed by the states of Madhya Pradesh and Odisha. As per the data, over the last fifteen years, Punjab had diverted over sixty thousand hectares (61,318) whereas Madhya Pradesh diverted more than forty thousand hectares (40,628), and Odisha diverted nearly thirty thousand hectares (28,321). In fact, as per the data, states namely Punjab, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, and Telangana account for approximately half of the total forest land diversion in the past fifteen years.

The aforementioned answer provided by the MoEFCC also provides that over the period of the last 15 years, mining projects account for the highest diversion of forest land for non-forest uses, accounting for almost approximately sixty thousand hectares of diverted forest land. Mining projects are then followed by road projects, accounting for a diversion of forty-five thousand hectares, and irrigation projects, which accounts for thirty-six thousand hectares of forest land diversion. Crucially, these four project types- mining, road, irrigation, and transmission cumulatively account for more than half of the total forest land diversion.

Over 9 lakh hectares of land taken up for Compensatory Afforestation, reports of poor quality:

Guidelines of the MoEFCC provide for compensatory afforestation is to be raised on suitable non-forest land, equivalent to the area proposed for diversion, at the cost to be paid by User Agency. Additionally, the non-forest land for Compensatory Afforestation had to be located as close to or adjacent to Reserved Forest or Protected Forest.

On compensatory afforestation, the data provided by the MoEFCC depicts that over 9 lakh hectares of land had been taken up as compensatory afforestation in the last 15 years between 2008-09 and 2022-23. Out of that 9 hectares of land, almost 1/3rd was taken up since 2020-21.

Furthermore, the state-level data over the last 15 years indicate that the state of Jharkhand tops in compensatory afforestation with 1.5 lakh hectares, followed by Rajasthan with 1.05 lakh hectares, Karnataka with 0.9 lakh hectares, and Jammu and Kashmir with 0.87 lakh hectares.

The complete answer can be read here:

It is crucial to highlight here that as per a report in the Indian Express, India’s showpiece compensatory afforestation programme has been struggling to compensate for forests being cleared for development. The said report revealed the poor quality of the compensatory afforestation, with land being spread in different locations instead of being contiguous, the quality of lands used for afforestation, using lands belonging to tribals and forest dwellers for afforestation among others.

Inconsistencies in govt data on forest land diversions and compensatory afforestation, raises questions on validity:

The report by Factly, inconsistencies are evident in the data provided by the government on forest land diversions and compensatory afforestation. As per their report, the data provided by various sources on these issues did not match. For instance, the “e-green watch” portal showed that a total of 3,87,239 hectares of forest land had been diverted for non-forest use (no time period specified), while the Lok Sabha answer had depicted that a total 3,05,945 hectares of forest land had been diverted since 2008. These inconsistencies have raising serious questions on the reliability of the data provided to the public.

Furthermore, the 2013 Compliance Report of CAG on Compensatory Afforestation[1] revealed the discrepancies in data given by the individual state forest departments and the Regional Offices of the MoEFCC. The CAG was also concerned about the lack of reliable reporting systems to track the amount of diverted forest land and assess the degree to which these forest lands had been depleted due to a shortage of non-forested land. The entire monitoring system in place at the MoEFCC and State Forest Departments in this regard is called into doubt due to the discrepancies in the data and the validity of the statements on the compensatory afforestation.

[1] Microsoft Word – 01 Ist Page – inner page (cag.gov.in)

Related:

Odisha Government removes “deemed forest” provision

Naga groups unite against controversial amendments to forest law (FCA 2023)

Behind the violence, strip-mining hills and forests for minerals: Manipur

Parliamentary Committee Gives Nod to Proposed Dilution of Forest Rights

Supreme Court affirms right of forest inhabitants, prevents it from being limited to recognized communities

How a battle is being waged within India’s forests, for rights over land and resources

The post 3 lakh hectares of forest land diverted for non-forest use over 15 years, compensatory afforestation programme a showpiece   appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill, 2023 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday and it sent alarm bells ringing, with concerns raised by forest rights activists and environmentalists alike. Let us have a look at the primary concerns raised about the objective and implication of the Bill.

The first and foremost objection to the bill was that the Bill has been referred to a select cpmitte of the Parliament in Lok Sabha. Congress MP Jairam Ramesh objected to this move saying that the Bill should have been sent to the parliamentary standing committee on science, technology, environment and forest that he heads. He said it was intentionally sent to the select committee as the same would be headed by an MP chosen by the Prime Minister. “By referring the Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill,2023 to a Joint Committee, the Union Government is deliberately by-passing the Standing Committee which would have subjected the legislation to detailed examination with the full participation of all stakeholders,” Ramesh wrote to the Rajya Sabha Chairman, Jagdeep Dhankar. He pointed out that no opposition members from any prominent party like Congress were included in the select committee.

The Godavarman case reference

The Bill in its ‘Statement of Objects and Reasons’ states that the judgement in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India and others (1997) 2 SCC 267 (dated December 12, 1996) led to some misinterpretation of the Act and hence to remove these ambiguities, the amendment was being made. The bill dilutes the provisions of ‘deemed forest’ as described in the Godavarman case, where any land which is recorded as forest in govt record required ‘Forest Clearance’. As per the bill, only those lands which as recorded as forests on or after October 25, 1980 will be considered as requiring forest clearance. This case defined forest as all those areas that were recorded as a forest on in area irrespective of ownership, recognition and classification.

Exemptions under the Bill

The proposed amendment states:

                ‘1A. (1) The following land shall be covered under the provisions of this Act,

namely:—

(a) the land that has been declared or notified as a forest in accordance

with the provisions of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 or under any other law for the time being in force;

(b) the land that is not covered under clause (a), but has been recorded in Government record as forest, as on or after the 25th October, 1980

Debatiyo Sinha, an ecologist working on environment policies, pointed out that this meant that this means a large chunk of forest land is exempted from the Act effectively exposing it for government use and non-forest use. “This is major exemption & threaten a significant area of forest land in the country, especially because majority of such recorded forest lands were originally transferred to forest dept during abolishment of Zamindari system,” he said.

He said that while the Godavarman judgment safeguarded such ‘recorded forests’, the bill seeks to dilute this definition by freeing up more forest land so that it can be exempted from the purview of the Act. It also exempts such forest land which is proposed for ‘public utility projects’.

Public utility services include public transport services, postal services, telephone services, power facilities, lighting services, water facilities, insurance services.

Forest clearance

Next comes the issue of forest clearance. The bill further exempts the following categories of land from the purview of the Act:

(a) such forest land situated alongside a rail line or a public road maintained by the Government, which provides access to a habitation, or to a rail, and roadside amenity up to a maximum size of 0.10 hectare in each case;

(b) such tree, tree plantation or reafforestation raised on lands that are not specified in clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1); and

(c) such forest land,—

(i) as is situated within a distance of one hundred kilometres along international borders or Line of Control or Line of Actual Control, as the case may be, proposed to be used for construction of strategic linear project of national importance and concerning national security; or

ii) up to ten hectares, proposed to be used for construction of security related infrastructure; or

(iii) as is proposed to be used for construction of defence related project or a camp for paramilitary forces or public utility projects, as may be specified by the Central Government, the extent of which does not exceed five hectares in a Left Wing Extremism affected area as may be notified by the Central Government.

It is clear from the provision above that the government has conveniently exempted all kinds of land that it has found suitable for use an exempted it form requiring forest clearance.

More exemptions

Further exemptions also include ‘silviculture’, establishment of zoo/safari, ecotourism facilities included in Management Plan; ‘any other like purposes’ ordered/ specified by the Centre. The last clause which states “any other like purposes, which the Central Government may, by order, specify”  gives wide powers to the Central government to tweak these exemptions as and when necessary without having to go through the legislative route and simply handing over such an important decision to delegated legislation.

“This promotes commercialisation of Reserve Forests & irreversible disturbance to wildlife,” said Sinha.

In the first section itself, the bill name is changed to ‘Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam, 1980’ making the name vernacular, accessible to mainly the northern part of India. While the Act and the content are completely in English the bid to change the name into Hindi is unnecessary and a bid towards imposing the Hindi language on the entire country.

Constitutional duty to safeguard forests

It is the constitutional guideline under the Directive principles of State policy (DPSP) that the government is required to protect the environment and the forests. The Constitution has deemed the government to the be the guardian of forests and through this proposed bill, the government seeks to misuse this guardianship and this massive responsibility. Arguably DPSP are not enforceable however they aare the guiding principles and have been utilised so by former governments to formulate laws relating to land reforms, minimum wages, right to education and so on.

Article 48A of the Constitution states:

48A. Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forests and wild life The State shall endeavour to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life of the country

“Forest” was enumerated in the State list under the Constitution but the 42^nd Amendment Act brought it under the Concurrent list making it the joint responsibility of the State and Centre to make laws on forests. The Forest Conservation Act, 1980 was enacted to prevent indiscriminate deforestation, which was a major concern.

Forest cover in India

During the period 1951-52 to 1979-80, 4.3 million hectares of forest land was officially diverted to non-forest purposes. During the seven years, 1975-82. about nine million hectares of forests were lost.

As per Global Forest Watch, India lost 127 Kilo hectares of land in 2021

Source: Global Forest Watch

Source: Global Forest Watch

The proposed Bill may be read here:

Related:

Illegal mining: Only 6% cases ended up as FIRs in 2022

Adivasi and other farmers under the AIKS bring Maharashtra govt to its feet

35 Adivasis arrested after face-off with Forest Department

Minister inquires about implementation of FRA in states, MoTA dodges any accountability

The post Forest Conservation Bill 2023: too many exemptions, discretion to Centre appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Kolkata: Tapan Kumar Sardar, a school teacher in Bankura in West Bengal, is from the Bhumij community. Growing up, he had little idea of what that meant. But once he entered college, he read about the community’s identity, rich history, and own language and realised how most people in this community do not even use their constitutional rights, such as reservation, mandated for the Scheduled Tribes. 

So, right after college, Sardar decided that he was going to work on this. For over a decade now, he has been working on the Bhumij language and making people of the community aware of their constitutional rights.

But last week, the school teacher was leading an awareness rally that was different from his usual campaigns. The focus was single this time and comparatively new for the Bhumij villages of Bankura – to make people aware of their rights mandated by the 2006 Forest Rights Act (FRA).

This Act recognises the forest rights of the Scheduled Tribes and traditional forest dwellers and aims to protect the culture of the communities in these areas. This became an important intervention in a system where the forest dwellers have been displaced for big government or private projects in huge numbers. 

Like in Bankura, similar awareness campaigns and marches were taking place across the state in more than 12 districts last week led by the newly formed organisation, Banadhikar O Prakriti Bachao Adivasi Mahasabha. 

“Though many people were really interested to know more, the extent of lack of awareness about one of the most empowering Acts for the tribal community was overwhelming,” says Sardar. 

What was also new is a larger collaboration of members of indigenous communities across the state.  “Though multiple organisations of the Adivasi communities have been working in the state for many years, I haven’t ever heard of a collaboration that spread so wide,” says Sundarsing Rava, who belongs to the Rava community of North Bengal and is a convener of Uttarbanga Banjan Shramajibi Mancha, a north Bengal-based rights group. 

While there were many marches of hundreds of people in the bigger centres like Alipurduar city in North Bengal or Bankura in the West, an important achievement was to reach out to several villages in these districts, feels Rava.

The root of this unique large-scale campaign and a state-wide adivasi organisation lies in the long protests in Purulia’s Ayodhya Hills for the last four years. This ongoing protest is against the Turga pumped storage project which is feared to endanger the ecosystem of the hills and according to the agitators violates the FRA. 

“At that time we had more than 11 adivasi organisations coming under a platform, Prakriti Bachao Adibasi Bachao Mancha, which was spearheading the movement. This was an important phase in the realisation of forest rights in the state as people were experiencing for the first time how they could use the law to assert their rights in this case,” says Saurav, an environmental activist, who was a key campaigner in the Ayodhya Hills protests and is also associated with the state-wide campaign. 

Saurav says that apart from the Sundarban Delta, there has been no campaign for the 2006 FRA in South Bengal. This is because it is hard to find people who would understand that law and are willing to come and work in these regions. 

“There have been many attempts at consolidation and campaigns since 2006 to make people aware of their forest rights. But none of them really worked or could spread. This changed during the protests at Ayodhya Hills. What started with only the locals slowly saw people from much further in the Jangalmahal area of West Bengal, that spans across the districts of Bankura, Purulia and Jhargram and other neighbouring districts, take part,” he says.  

During their participation in the agitations and campaigns of Prakriti Bachao Adibasi Bachao Mancha, the people from these districts and other places were witness to the assertion of the forest rights and rights of the tribal community in action. 

“This has led to a new political consciousness and we started discussing a larger organisation. Apart from this, there has also been a rise in discussions in different gram sabhas about rights in the districts of Jhargram and Purulia. A part of this is because of the fact that the FRA empowers the gram sabha as a very important body when it comes to taking administrative decisions about the village,” says Rajen Tudu, an activist and a resident of Purulia.

When the dialogues started, major developments at the national level started having an impact here too. In 2019, there was a proposal to amend the colonial Forest Act which was later turned down, then came the controversial 2022 Forest Conservation Rules, which people fear made it easier for private concerns to take over forests without informing the villages. 

“Now, when the state wanted to start a coal mining project at Deocha Pachami in Birbhum, the collaboration between these movements became stronger. With the experience of the agitation and the constitutional rights that they exercised in Ayodhya Hills, the village leaders there helped villages in Deocha Pachami to form gram sabhas in accordance with the FRA so that they could channelise their protests in the right direction,” says Saurav.  

But they realised that activists from one end of the state travelling to other parts to share information and awareness only when there is a major event, is not a great model.

“So this year, we decided to come together to form an organisation with a single plan. This does not mean that the other issues of the people in different parts will not be taken up, just that, as of now, we will be focussing on empowering the people with forest rights as much as possible,” says Saurav.

The author is a freelance journalist based in Kolkata.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post West Bengal: Awareness of Rights Under FRA Brings Tribal, Forest Communities Closer appeared first on SabrangIndia.

During the Monsoon session of the Parliament, Bhupendra Yadav who is the Minister for Environment, Forests and Climate Change, submitted in his written statement, that they have not measured the forest area under dispute.

His answer read, “The disputes regarding forest lands are variable in nature and keep changing depending upon the pace of settlement process, recording of new disputes, demarcation/survey on case-to-case basis etc., by the respective State/UT authorities as per due process of law applicable to the area. As such, the forest area under dispute for the country has not been quantified by the Ministry.”

He also stated that India has a total of 7,67,419 square kilometers of forest land, as surveyed by the India State of Forest Report, 2019. Bhupendra Yadav said that of the recorded forest area in the country, 4,34,853 square kilometer fall under the Reserved Forests category, 2,18,924 square kilometer under the Protected Forests category, and 1,13,642 square kilometer are of unclassed forests.

Reserved Forests are under the direct supervision of the government of India and Protected Forests are looked after by the government, but the forest dwelling communities have limited access to some resources. Unclassed forests are those owned both by the government and the local communities.

The minister also informed the Rajya Sabha that the term ‘forest’ has not been defined by the Centre yet. “The word “forest” is not defined in any Central Forest Act, namely, the Indian Forest Act 1927 (IFA 1927), or the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. The Central Government has not laid down any criterion to define forest”, read his answer.

As per the Wasteland Atlas, 2019, published by the Ministry of Rural Development, the total wasteland in the country is 5,57,665.51 square kilometers, the Rajya Sabha was apprised.

While the Centre continues skirting the issue of disputes, at least 212 Adivasis of Khandwa in Madhya Pradesh were attacked and evicted from their homes by a mob that destroyed and stole their property, allegedly with the complicity of the police and local forest authorities. These residents of the Negaon- Jamniya village now live in the open in makeshift tents with no protection against the rain or Covid-19.

The districts of Burhanpur and Khandwa, have in recent years seen a number of instances where Adivasi women and men have been assaulted, forcibly kidnapped and locked up, jailed and brutalized by the Forest Department of the Madhya Pradesh government. These cases are not merely isolated incidents, but a result of the systematic denial of legal and constitutional rights of Adivasis and the consent of the State government in the trampling of the same.

A press conference was co-organised by the Jagruk Adivasi Dalit Sangathan (JADS), Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) and the All India Union of Forest Working People (AIUFWP) on Monday, July 26 to discuss these issues, and raise their voice against just injustices. These are just one of many instances across the country.

In the past, CJP along with AIUFWP has complained to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) about the several atrocities meted out against tribals and forest dwelling communities fighting for their forest rights. For instance, in June last year, the two organisations had approached NHRC against the blatant violation of legal as well as human rights of Van Gujjars of Dehradun at the hands of police and forest officials, who were not only physically assaulted, but also had their shelters destroyed and tortured in custody.

The answer may be read here:

Related:

Organised violence against Adivasis, denial of Forest Rights
MP: 40 Adivasi families illegally evicted amidst a pandemic!
Van Gujjars assaulted by police and forest officials, CJP moves NHRC demanding justice

The post No data on forest area under dispute: Centre in RS appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Ministry of Coal plans to acquire 1,760 hectares of protected forested land in Sarguja, Chhattisgarh for mining, said a Daily Chhattisgarh report on October 15, 2020.

The report, which was the first public announcement of such a project, said the notification was issued on May 11 for the Hasdeo Arand area, one of the largest contiguous stretches of dense forest in central India spanning 170,000 hectares with 22 coal blocks. According to the Coal Ministry, the Kente extension coal block there has total coal resources estimated at 200 million tonnes.

Noting the resistance from the state government, Union Minister of Coal and Mines Pralhad Joshi, accepted a proposal to exclude five coal blocks in the area – Morga -2, Morga (south), Madanpur (north), Shyang, and Fathehpur (east) – that were among 41 coal mines being auctioned.

The government plans to acquire the land under the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act provides land ownership to the centre within two years of notification provided it is satisfied that coal is extractable from whole or part of a tract of land.

However, convener of the Chhattisgarh Bachao Andolan Alok Shukla, argued that there should be no mining in the area because it is proximity to dense forests. He said the state government should have notified Gram Sabhas to seek people’s opinion first because the decision “devastate the lives of local people.” This claim also goes in line with the rights given to indigenous people under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006.

Similarly, environmental lawyer Sudiep Shrivastava said the decision went against the Supreme Court’s observation on September 30 that neither the centre nor the state has the right to mine an area if it falls in an eco-sensitive zone.

This decision is based on a plea by the Jharkhand government that challenged the Centre’s plan to auction coal blocks for commercial mining. Chief Justice of India S. A. Bobde had asked the Centre to file an affidavit on whether the coal blocks being auctioned are in eco-sensitive zones or not.

The Hasdeo Arand area, being the catchment area of River Hasdeo, has very high crown density. Moreover, the Coal Bearing Areas Act cannot grant land ownership to a state PSU which has a mine developer and operator (MDO) agreement with a private company, although attempts are being made to bring such an amendment.

In 2009, the Environment Ministry categorised Hasdeo Arand stretch as a “No-Go” zone for mining. However, it was opened to mining again because the policy wasn’t finalized. A senior official from the Ministry said that coal mining is impossible without environmental clearance and forest clearance. The specifics of this case would be known to Coal India Limited.

Much like the Coal Bearing Areas Act, the government has made many changes to environment and natural resource laws. The notification of the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) 2020 has relaxed the approvals required by corporates to undertake construction projects. Similarly, the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015 increases the limits for mining. Moreover, it creates a new category of mining license for undertaking prospecting operations such as exploring or proving mineral deposits, followed by mining operations. Further, a Mineral Laws (Amendment) Ordinance, 2020 will remove the eligibility restriction prescribed in the Coal Mine (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 that only let companies engaged in a ‘specified end-use’ bid in the auction of Mining Concessions.

These amendments are likely to change the state of natural resources in the country. At the same time, adivasis, forest-dwellers, fishermen and other communities directly engaged with nature are becoming more aware about these laws. Tribals in certain areas have also begun to voice their voice against these legislations.

Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) has actively worked with such communities and recently conducted a training programme where forest-dwellers were sensitised about various legal provisions relating to the environment.

Related:

No auctioning yet: Madras HC stays state tenders for mining in Dharmapuri
वनाधिकार क़ानून २००६ प्रशिक्षण भाग १
Adivasis protest Deocha-Pachami coal mining project
Is Adani enterprises illegally acquiring land for coal mining in Chhattisgarh?

The post Chhattisgarh: Ministry of Coal plan to acquire nearly 2000 hectares of protected forest land appeared first on SabrangIndia.

40,000 trees have been cut in the Talabira village of Odisha’s Sambalpur district to make way for a coal mine, Down to Earth (DTE) reported.

The Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF & CC) gave Stage II clearance to divert 1,038.187 hectares of forest land for the project that is steered by the Neyveli Lignite Corporation (NLC) India Ltd in Jharsguda and Sambalpur on March 28, which involved the felling of 1,30,721 trees.

This is again a violation of forest rights of the village residents by NLC India Ltd which had signed a mine development and operator contract with the Adani Group in 2018. The forest has been protected by forest dwellers in the Talabira village, along with five other hamlets in the area. The residents had formed the Talabira Gramya Jungle Committee had appointed a guard to protect these forests and used to pay him three kilograms of rice per family.

“We have protected this forest for more than 50 years. Around 3,000 people are dependent on this forest which is around 970 hectares in area. Now, these trees are being cut down by the government for coal,” Hemant Kumar Raut, a resident of Khinda hamlet, told DTE.

No titles have been granted to people these forest dwellers under the FRA 2006 and this has proved to be the bane of their existence. The villagers who have been protecting this forest, have now been told that it belongs to the government and they will have no say in matters of what the government is going to do with it because they did not file for titles. Almost 60% of the population affected belongs to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

Despite it being the duty of FRA officials to create awareness among the people with regards to their rights, they have not completed their responsibility and this lack of legal recognition has led to the forest land being diverted. This, in spite of the government officials having given Rs. 74 lakh and Rs. 14 lakh to the Sambalpur and Jharsguda forest departments.

Kanchi Koli, senior researcher, Namati Environmental Justice Programme, Centre for Policy Research told the publication, “The FRA rules, 2012, require that the concerned officials raise awareness about the Act and its provisions. This is especially important if no claims are forthcoming and can enable the process of filing claims.”

Also, just like in Chhattisgarh where the government run Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation (CMDC) obtained fake no objection certificates from the Gram Sabha to grab land for bauxite mining, villagers in Odisha claim that the district officials acquired a fake Gram Sabha letter indicating that the Gram Sabha had given its consent for the diversion of land.

Although the villagers had written to the collector and the secretary, there has been no action taken yet. A report by Counterview states that the region where the trees are going under the axe is one of the last big forest patches in an area surrounded by industries and mines and has the oldest and most established community forest protection.

The illegal deforestation carried out at Talabari was without the consent of the villagers saw the complicity of 10 platoons of police. They have now proceeded to the Patrapalli village and tree felling is expected to start there soon. The villagers in Patrapalli have been imprisoned in their own homes as the police has surrounded the area and cordoned it off barring any activity.

Earlier as well, the Supreme Court had cancelled the forest right titles of 13,851 families including 6,313 of the Ganjam tribals.

At a time where world leaders are discussing the repercussions of climate change at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP25) and at a time when India must rethink its approach to sustainable development, it is busy chopping trees, whether it be in Odisha, Jharkhand, Kashmir or Mumbai.

Related:

Chhattisgarh HC orders PSU to stop all mining activity
Thousands of Adivasis demand the implementation of FRA 2006
Compilation of Forest Rights Act, Rules, and Guidelines
Odisha govt cancels forest applications of over 6000 tribal families
In Jharkhand, Forest Rights Could Decide Votes In 77% Assembly Seats
Odisha govt cancels forest applications of over 6000 tribal families
Aarey: Trees Felled in the Dead of the Night

The post 40,000 trees cut in Odisha! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Since August 5, the day Article 370 was abrogated in the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir, the Forest Advisory Committee (FAC) of the state has cleared 125 projects on forest land in just three meetings. Was this the hidden agenda, then of the Modi regime?

Down to Earth reports that the FAC of J&K actually gave clearances to 125 projects involving diversion of forest land between August and October 2019.

At its 117^th meeting, the FAC cleared 41 projects. This was also the last meeting of the body, before the forest clearance process shifted to Chandigarh, the regional office of the Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) after October 31, when the presidential order abrogating Article 370 will come into force.

“In the 117^th meeting held on October 17, 2019, 41 projects were cleared. In the 116^th meeting, 54 projects were cleared and in the 115^th meeting, 30 projects were cleared by the FAC,”  Manoj Kr Dwivedi, commissioner secretary to the forest, environment and ecology department of the state of J&K, told  DTE. “These clearance recommendations will be sent to the J&K cabinet and then finalised,” he added.

J&K has its own FAC, under the Jammu & Kashmir Forest (Conservation) Act, 1997. The committee is headed by the chief secretary of the J&K government as the chairman, with officials of departments like forest, revenue, finance, soil and water conservation as members.

The committee makes recommendations, which are then purportedly accepted by the J&K cabinet. However, while Dwivedi declined to share the details of the area of forest land diverted or the nature of projects, media reports have said that around 271 hectares of forest land was diverted in the 117^th meeting for various development projects like laying of transmission lines, drilling of tube wells and others. It will be curious to see if the regime’s favourite corporate honchos, the Ambanis and Adanis will be the major beneficiaries.

The speed of the clearances is staggering: the total number of clearances given in these last three meeting of the FAC are more than the total number of clearances given in 2018. In the eight meetings of the FAC held in 2018, the body approved the forest clearance of 97 projects, as opposed to the 125 clearances approved in just three meetings since August.

Under the provisions of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, any diversion of forest land for non-forestry purposes like building infrastructure or mining has to be pre-approved by the FAC set up under the MoEF&CC. In J&K, the law governing diversion of forest land is the J&K Forest (Conservation) Act, 1997. Under it, forest land diversion takes place on the resolution of the cabinet, based on the recommendation of the state FAC.  

Now, objections are being raised to the diversions in the absence of the application of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 in the state. “Diversion of forest land without the consent of local communities and gram sabhas cause violation of their forest rights. This move comes at a time when there is a larger concern among the local communities over withdrawal of the constitutional protection of democratic rights including special protection to their land rights,” Tushar Dash of Community Forest Rights-Learning and Advocacy (CFR-LA), a forest rights advocacy platform of activists and experts, told DTE.

The post Post 370 Abrogation, August 5, the Forest Advisory Committee of J & K has cleared 125 projects on forest land appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Representational image: Protesters stage a demonstration at the Amchang Wildlife Sanctuary in Assam.

Just days before, the government had invited the private sector to participate in reclaiming land and thereby, “make money”. Of the 320 million hectares area of the country, about 30% or 90 million hectares is wasteland, and should “immediately” be put to economic use, as per Anil Kumar Jain, special secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MOEFCC).

Nearly 30% of India’s land area–as much as the area of Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra put together–has degraded due to deforestation, over-cultivation, soil erosion and depletion of wetlands. This land loss is not only whittling away India’s gross domestic product by 2.5% every year and affecting its crop yield, but is also exacerbating climate change events in the country which, in turn, are causing even greater degradation, as IndiaSpend reported on September 2, 2019.

However, the two statements have revived the controversy over the involvement of private players in land restoration in India, with activists warning that without involving local communities and legally recognising their tenurial rights over forest resources, private participation would fuel conflict. Private participation must be allowed only outside forests and in agroforestry, some experts told IndiaSpend, while others emphasised the need to ensure local communities’ involvement.

Reclaiming 26 million hectares (mha) of degraded land would also require an integrated national policy, and massive resource allocation, experts said.

A need to safeguard local community rights
Since private players bring in both investment and trade in forest produce, it could lead to conflicts in Indian forests, undermining the livelihood of forest communities, said Souparna Lahiri, climate campaigner and advisor for Global Forest Coalition, a non-profit for forest-related policy debates. He warned against disenfranchising local communities while bringing in the private sector.

Already, the country’s top court is reviewing state governments’ rejection of two million forest-dweller families’ claims over forest land they have traditionally inhabited, after having stayed its own order to evict these families.

Involvement of private players is ideal only outside forest areas and in agroforestry, opined Pia Sethi, senior fellow and area convener of the centre for biodiversity and ecosystem services at The Energy and Resource Institute (TERI), a think-tank.

Of the 26 mha degraded land that India has promised to restore, 21 mha (about 81%) is forest land, and 5 mha lies outside forests.

Private players could help create additional tree cover outside the forest area through agroforestry (a practice where farmers plant trees along with other crops for selling wood), which will not only help India achieve its restoration target, but also help achieve its climate pledge of creating an additional carbon sink (a natural reservoir that stores carbon) of 2.5-3 billion tonnes, Sethi said.

“Within forest areas, one can look at a PPP [public-private partnership] model, but it will then require a lot of safeguards to make sure the rights of people are not affected,” Sethi said, adding that, “third party monitoring will also be required to make sure the benefits like forest produce are equitably shared and natural forest areas with high biodiversity are not targeted.”

Where private players are invited to manage forests, the communities should be protected by first settling their community forest resource (CFR) rights under the Forest Rights Act of 2006, said Yogesh Gokhle, fellow and area convener of the centre for biodiversity and ecosystem services at New Delhi-based research group TERI.

CFR rights enable the Gram Sabha (village council) to actively manage forests in collaboration with the forest department, Gokhle said, warning against denying forest dwellers’ rights over resources in the name of generating employment.

In fact, any private organisations that choose to get involved must ensure local communities’ participation in restoring degraded land and forest cover. Only then would they be seen as “neighbours of choice”, said Mukund Ranjan, chairperson of the environment committee at industry association FICCI.

Private businesses can safeguard community rights and encourage their participation by sharing profits with the locals, involving them through the various phases of restoration work, and encouraging them to take ownership of reclaimed lands that become productive assets.

IndiaSpend sought comment from Anil Kumar Jain, special secretary, MOEFCC, over email and on the phone, over three days. This story will be updated when he responds.

A coherent approach
The government’s promise to restore 26 mha of degraded land is not only economically crucial, but will also help the country support the global fight against climate change by creating an additional carbon sink. Degraded land loses its capacity to absorb carbon dioxide (CO2)–the greenhouse gas (GHG) that is the biggest factor in global warming.

However, the country’s approach to dealing with land degradation has been scattered, experts said, and needs greater fund allocation.

The first thing that India needs to do is to create an integrated land-use policy. Currently, all measures are being taken in silos, said Sethi. While separate policies for agriculture and forests are present, what is needed is an all-encompassing land-use policy. All activities to reclaim degraded agricultural or forest land should be connected to a nodal department that monitors and addresses these issues and ensures synergy.

Currently, India has no such policy. The Union Ministry of Rural Development, however, attempted to bring a land-use policy in 2013 but failed to operationalise it. According to the draft, this policy aimed to demarcate the country’s land into zones based on predominant land use. For example, if a land zone has been used for agriculture, the policy would insure against diversion of that land for any other use, preventing even the government from acquiring agricultural land for industrial or any other activities. Similar was the case with land zones that were ecologically important, such as forests.

“This policy could not see the light of the day due to political reasons as land is a state subject,” a researcher with expertise in the field, who does not wish to be named, told IndiaSpend.

The Integrated Watershed Management Programme (IWMP) of the Department of Land Resources of the Ministry of Rural Development, which aims to conserve and develop natural resources such as water and soil to protect regions against land degradation and droughts, has an annual target of 5 million hectares. However, allocation of funds to these programmes is dismal, said Gokhle. There are no data available on how far these yearly targets have been fulfilled.

While the IWMP was launched in 2009, the Modi government, in a policy change, made it a part of its Pradhan Mantri Krishi Sinchayi Yojana (Prime Minister’s Agriculture Irrigation Scheme) in 2015; after that the budget allocation to IWMP shrank by 19% to Rs 1,841 crore in 2018-19, against Rs 2,284 crore in 2014-15.

While watershed programmes have been in place for more than 50 years, the IWMP was a notch above because it had a proper mechanism to restore degraded land. It should be bolstered and allocated sufficient funds, Gokhle said.

“Beyond merely offering financial support, private players can play a direct role in the redevelopment of degraded or wasted land,” Rajan of FICCI said, citing some examples. The private sector has been responsible for the restoration of depleted mine sites to revive the traditional flora and fauna; the Tata Steel mines in Noamundi, Jharkhand, are an example.

Similarly, wastelands have been utilised by private players for various agricultural activities, including plantations. JK Paper, for instance, started massive farm forestry and agroforestry plantations in its paper mill catchment area in 1990. It invested significantly in research and development for disease-resistant, high-yielding varieties of eucalyptus, subabul and casuarina, and offered farmers subsidised seedlings and clonal plants, as well as financial support through banks, technical guidance for pulpwood farming, harvesting support and buy-back assurance for wood.

Public-private partnerships, including the leverage of corporate social responsibility funds (whereby corporates are required to invest some share of their profits in social welfare activities), could further help a range of land reclamation and anti-desertification activities, including the creation of green belts, water conservation, forestry projects, and so on, Rajan said.

(Tripathi is an IndiaSpend reporting fellow.)

Courtesy: India Spend
 

The post India’s Pledge To Restore 26 Mn Hectare Degraded Land Could Fuel Land Conflicts appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 
National Consultation on Forest and Land Rights has declared protest actions across India on July 22, which is tentatively the date for the next hearing in the case of the recent Supreme Court order on eviction of forest dwelling communities. The Consultation decided that several organisations across the country, working on rights of forest dwellers and land rights, will hold programmes and protest actions on July 22 at the village, block, district and state level, condemning various government actions like amendments to the Indian Forest Act, 1927, etc.
 
BhumiAdhikarAndolan, a platform working for the land rights of forest dwelling communities,had called for a two day National Consultation on “Land and Forest Rights Movements and the Way Forward” on Monday.Various organisations like AdivasiAdhikarRashtriyaManch (AARM), BhumiAdhikarAndolan (BAA), All India Union of Forest Working People (AIUFWP), National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM), Delhi Solidarity Group (DSG) and Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), among many others, participated in the consultation.More than 200 representatives of the various community organisations from 12 states of the country took part in the National Consultation and .forest movement leaders from the far flung corners of the country travelled to Delhi to present their points of view.
 
SC order and the threat of eviction of forest dwelling communities
The movements present in the Consultation deliberated upon the imminent danger of eviction of millions of forest dwelling people and communities, posed by the recent Supreme Court judgement.
 
On February 13, 2019, the Supreme Court of India, hearing a petition filed by wildlife conservationists and former forest department officials, directed the state governments to evict “encroachers” or “illegal forest dwellers”. The official defender in the case, the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA), was conspicuous by its absence in the courtroom.
 
The order had sent shockwaves across the country’s forests, home to eight percent of the population. It was met with stiff resistance and was called “unconstitutional” by several groups, especially those which had been struggling for forest rights for decades. The order was criticised for “violating” schedules V, VI and IX of the Constitution and also for turning established jurisprudence on its head. A week later, the order was temporarily stayed after the Central government, under pressure from several quarters and forest rights groups, was compelled to move the same bench for review.
 
Significantly, the case in question, a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by wildlife conservancy groups regarding the validity of the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act (FRA, 2006), had been going on for many years. The FRA, 13 years ago, for the first time, recognised the individual and community rights of the forest dwellers over the forest land. It recognised the “historical injustice” done to these communities and helped remove the stigma of “encroachers”, a term pregnant with colonial prejudice and popularised in the last few centuries by the English mainstream media favouring elite notions of conservation.
 
Most of the people classified as forest-dwellers in India belong to the Schedules Tribes (ST), non-notified Adivasis, Dalits and vulnerable poor communities, who are occupationally dependent on sustainable agriculture, cattle rearing, fisheries and collection of other forest-produce and therefore, rely on land and forest for their livelihood.
 
Many forest-dwelling communities in India believe that forests are better preserved where the communities are closely connected to the forests by means of their traditional customs. The states however continue to displace people in the name of preserving the forests, which affects the biodiversity of the area and takes away the livelihoods of the forest dwellers.
 
Lack of political will in implementing the pro-people FRA
The National Consultation observed that the amendments proposed to the Indian Forest Act, 1927, strengthened the efforts being made to weaken the FRA, 2006 and to capture the forests lands that rightfully belong to the forest dwelling communities. It noted that there has been a lack of political will in implementing the provisions of the Act.
 
The Consultation expressed concern that in the coming days, the corporate attacks on water, forests and land were going to become even more frequent. It noted, “The slogan of ‘Land to the tillers’ has now changed to ‘Land to the corporations’. The whole focus of the government is on robbing off the wealth from the hands of the people and transferring it to the capitalists. The industrial corridors, Sagarmala, Bharatmala, Bullet Train, Smart Cities, large ports, expressways, and highways are some examples where all measures have been adopted to transfer their whole profit to the capitalist class”
 
Forest rights organisations fight back
The organisations present in the National Consultation collectively “rejected the proposed amendments to the Indian Forest Act, 1927” and demanded that the Forest Rights Act, 2006 be enforced effectively. They observed that since the Gram Sabha was the strongest “weapon” in the hands of the community, there was an attempt to “take its powers away in a strategic manner”.
 
As per the FRA, 2006, the Gram Sabha has been assigned a substantial role in the implementation of the Act. Not only has the Gram Sabhabeen entrusted with initiating the process of identifying the nature of individual and community rights of the forest dwelling communities, especially Adivasis, Dalits and other forest dwellers, but it also has the right to approve or reject government projects. Its other responsibilities include resettlement under alternative packages prepared by State Governments for providing a secure livelihood to the communities and protection of the wild life, forests, biodiversity, adjoining catchment areas, water sources and more.
 
The Consultation noted that there was a need to strengthen the Gram Sabhas, which was also observed in the recent struggle against Adani group in Bastar, where as many as 10,000 Adivasis protested against the allotment of iron ore mines in Bailadilla hills of Chhattisgarh.
 
CJP Secretary TeestaSetalvad tweeted live from the consultation:

हमे ग्राम सभा को और मज़बूत करना चाहिए. यह बात अभी अडानी के खिलाफ बस्तर में हुए संघर्ष से खुल कर सामने आता है. @aiufwp @cjpindia @NandiNkhi pic.twitter.com/ZYih8yowvR

— Teesta Setalvad (@TeestaSetalvad) July 2, 2019

Issue of rejected claims
The Consultation also brought to the fore, the issue of rejected claims and said that this was done in various ways “in a planned manner”.
 
Despite the enactment of the FRA in 2006, most states have failed to implement it in its true spirit. Since the enactment, 4.22 million claims have been filed. While the total forest land under occupation prior to 2005 was 112,000 sq km., only 54,591.07 sq. km. has been recognised. States like Maharashtra, which have stood out in terms of recognizing Community Forest Rights (CFRs), have also only achieved about 15 percent of their full potential in terms of implementation of FRA.
 
Despite the enactment of FRA in 2006, the government and various state authorities along with forest bureaucracy have made use of the provisions of the colonial Indian Forest Act, 1927 and Wildlife Protection Act, and other Acts and provisions in order to deny the communities their rights and harass them. To this extent, the Consultation observed that this has created a “situation of confusion” due to “separate parallel processes of land and forests rights settlements by the government since 1996.” It demanded more clarity from the government and courts on this aspect.
 
Repression on Forest dwelling communities and advocates of forest rights
Highlighting the unprecedented attack on Adivasis and forest dwelling communities, the Consultation observed that, “Today, the largest threat to the Adivasis dwelling in the forests of the country is from state violence because the people fighting for their rights under FRA, from Kerala to Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Jharkhand and many other states, are being labelled as Maoists and are being arrested and tortured. The House saluted the struggle of the comrades locked in jails and condemned the government oppressions.”
 
Proposed Action 
It made a proposition that the groups will appearin court, in person or by letter, to present the case in favour of the FRA, 2006 and the concerns of forest dwelling communities. Moreover, the groups will intervene collectively in the ongoing case related to the eviction of communities, in the Supreme Court.
 
The consultation said that there was a need to “intensify solidarity among the ongoing struggles on the ground and facilitate exchange and learnings from each other’s struggles.” It decided to reach out to those progressive MPs from the ruling party and the opposition, who come from oppressed backgrounds, so that they could be informed about the FRA and other laws and the approach of the group to the issue.
 
A committee was formed to monitor new measures, tactics employed, changes in the laws and other issues regarding the loot of the resources, which would then disseminate this information to the grassroots movements in simple language.
 
It was decided that a large scale demonstration, jointly organised by land and forest rights movement in Delhi, will be organised on Sansad Marg on November 28.
 
 
Preliminary meeting of Forest Rights groups
An initial meeting of the various movements, held on December 11, 2018 in Delhi, had resolved the following
 
1. Forest Rights Act, 2006 must be implemented effectively and unconditionally in all forest regions including the Critical Forest Areas;
2. A united struggle will be launched with the collective initiative of diverse forest rights organisations / groups and supporters in different walks of life including journalists, lawyers, researchers, social action groups and others;
3. A dialogue will be initiated with political parties to bring Forest Rights Act into the mainstream political discourse, so that this historic act can become an important political issue during and after the electoral process;
4. An All India level alliance be formed with organisations / groups, actively engaged in forest rights movement to represent the collective voice and to take forward the task. FOREST RIGHTS ALLIANCE was the proposed name.
 
 

The post July 22- Action day for Forest and Land Rights appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Cartoon: Karnika Kahen

Undettered by voices advising caution against the uncontrolled depletion of Indian forests caused by unfettered mining, Hindustan Times reports that the Union environment ministry has given environmental clearance for open cast coal mining in Parsa in Chhattisgarh’s dense Hasdeo Arand forests, in a decision that could have far-reaching consequences for forest cover conservation in India. The Adani group is the beneficiary.

The Union environment ministry has given environmental clearance for open cast coal mining in Parsa in Chhattisgarh’s dense Hasdeo Arand forests, in a decision that could have far-reaching consequences for forest cover conservation in India.Hasdeo Arand is one of the largest contiguous stretches of very dense forest in central India, spanning about 170,000 hectares. Parsa is one of the 30 coal blocks in Hasdeo Arand and is owned by the Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd (RVUNL).

“Apart from pending legal issues and procedural lapses, the grant of approval [for open cast mining at Parsa] completely goes against the precautionary principle that is the need of the hour. Initiating mining will fragment one of the last remaining contiguous forest patches in central India, violate forest rights and increase human-wildlife conflict,” said Kanchi Kohli, a legal researcher at the Centre for Policy Research (CPR) in Delhi.

In 2009, the environment ministry categorised Hasdeo Arand as a “no-go” area for mining for its rich, unfragmented forest cover. Environment activists fear the approval for mining will likely be detrimental to forest conservation.

“Environmental clearance issued to Parsa mine is illegal because the forest advisory committee had earlier held that Hasdeo Arand cannot be opened up for mining. The Forest Survey of India, in a 2014 report, had recommended that Hasdeo Arand should be inviolate for mining” said Shrivastava, the lawyer who has moved court for de-allocation of a coal block adjacent to Parsa. RVUNL, which owns Parsa, said it has all necessary permissions. “We have received all permissions except a final forest clearance, which will come through anytime. The cases pending in the Supreme Court are related to other coal blocks, so they will not affect this project,” said SS Meena, director (technical) at RVUNL.

The mine, which has a capacity of 5 metric tonnes per annum (MPTA), will be operated by Rajasthan Collieries Limited (RCL), a unit of Adani Enterprises Limited. It received stage 1 forest clearance in February this year, but the minutes of the forest advisory committee’s meeting highlighted that a section of the 841 hectares to be diverted for the mine lies in very dense forest.

The Parsa mine – open cast mining involves digging for coal after removing all the vegetation and soil from the area — came up for consideration of the environment ministry’s expert appraisal committee (EAC) thrice before clearance was finally granted on February 21, 2019.
 
Earlier, in its February 15, 2018 meeting, the EAC had sought the State Tribal Welfare Department’s comments on the status of gram sabha consent for the project and the impact on tribal populations. It also sought the state wildlife board’s opinion on the impact of mining on the elephant corridor that runs through the forest.

In its July 24, 2018 meeting, the EAC again sought the same clarifications. The minutes of the meeting suggest the RVUNL submitted information on these two queries in September 2018 but there are no details on whether gram sabha consent was taken. The EAC also enquired whether there were pending legal cases related to coal mining in Hasdeo Arand.

There are two cases pending in the Supreme Court — a petition by Chhattisgarh-based lawyer Sudiep Shrivastava seeking de-allocation of RVUNL’s Parsa-Kente Extension coal block (adjoining Parsa open cast mine) in Chhattisgarh and cancellation of the joint venture and coal delivery agreement with Adani Enterprises Limited; and another petition by RVUNL seeking relaxation of the National Green Tribunal’s direction restricting mining in certain forest areas of Chhattisgarh.

The forest advisory committee sought the opinion of the additional solicitor general (ASG) on considering clearance for Parsa mine in view of these pending cases. After the ASG observed that “the pending case has no bearing with the Parsa coal block as such,” the forest advisory committee went ahead with giving in-principle forest clearance to the mine.

The minutes of the EAC’s February 21 meeting, however, states that environmental clearance granted to Parsa mine is subject to pending matters in the Supreme Court and Chhattisgarh high court on coal mining in the state.

The EAC has laid down other conditions too, such as a third-party assessment (by a technical institution or agency) of environmental compliance once every three years.

On February 20, the Chhattisgarh Bachao Andolan wrote to the EAC on environmental and legal concerns related to the project. In a letter, it suggested that two villages in north Chhattisgarh’s Surguja district complained to the district collector that gram sabha consent was allegedly forged.

Another issue raised by activists and legal experts is that forest clearance to an adjoining mine on the Hasdeo Arand fringe — Parsa East and Kete Basao captive coal block — was granted on condition that the Chhattisgarh government would not allow opening up of the main Hasdeo Arand area. However, the Parsa open cast mine that was granted clearance last month is in the core Hasdeo Arand forests.

An Adani Group spokesperson said: “The Adani Group is a responsible corporate citizen and it is evident from our care for the environment and communities. Besides mining responsibly, Adani Group has interests in solar power, city gas distribution and road construction, among others, in the state of Chhattisgarh. We are committed to the people and ecology of Chhattisgarh and the country’s energy security in all our endeavours.
 
 

The post Modi Regime’s nod for mining in 170,000 hectares of forest in Chhattisgarh appeared first on SabrangIndia.