Govt Dismissed Tribal Concerns in Forest Law Revisions
Amendments to Forest Laws Were Criticised for Corporate Bias
Newsreel Asia Insight #117
Jan. 30, 2024
A Newslaundry exclusive reveals that Harsh Chouhan, ex-chairman of the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST), voiced serious concerns about recent changes to India’s forest laws. These amendments, made by the Union environment ministry in June 2022 and December 2023, have been slammed for leaning towards corporate interests at the expense of forest communities.
Chouhan, in his communication with Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav, warned that the new rules could exacerbate historical injustices and weaken the Forest Rights Act (FRA), according to Newslaundry, which says he highlighted the ministry’s failure to consult the NCST on these changes, which deeply affect the lives and rights of Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers.
Despite Chouhan’s detailed objections, Yadav’s response was curt and dismissive, insisting the amendments didn’t interfere with the FRA. Following this exchange, Chouhan resigned in June 2023, eight months before his term was due to end, amid apparent disagreements with the ministry over these regulations.
Forest Conservation Rules
The June 2022 amendment to the Forest Conservation Rules faced wide criticism for its environmental and social implications.
Critics feared that allowing plantations on non-forest land could weaken natural forest protections, potentially making it easier to convert forest land for other uses.
The amendment also raised alarms about the rights of indigenous and forest-dwelling communities, who rely on forests for their livelihoods and cultural heritage. Changes in forest conservation policies could significantly affect them.
The amendment’s provision for swapping plantation land for future compensatory afforestation was also heavily criticised. There were concerns that this could result in the destruction of real forest land, with the vague promise of future afforestation failing to compensate for the loss of mature, biodiverse forests.
Forest Conservation Act
Amid these concerns over the rule changes, the Forest Conservation (Amendment) Act, 2023 (FCAA), operational from Dec. 1, 2023, brought significant changes to India’s forest governance.
It allows state governments to sanction forest diversions previously illegal under the original Forest Conservation Act, 1980 (FCA). This shift could legitimise past violations and weaken legal protections. Forest diversion refers to the process where forest land is repurposed for non-forest activities. This can include a range of developments such as mining, construction of roads, railways, dams, industrial projects, or any other infrastructure development that necessitates the use of forested land for purposes other than forest conservation or forestry.
The FCAA subverts two key Supreme Court judgments – T.N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad vs Union Of India & Ors. (1996) and Lafarge Umiam Mining Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and Ors. (2011). These rulings required states to identify unclassified forest areas and create geo-referenced district forest maps. These measures were intended to clearly demarcate forest areas, ensuring that any forest land diversion or use is properly documented and monitored. The FCAA, by potentially bypassing these requirements, could lead to a situation where forest lands are diverted or used without proper documentation and oversight, reducing the transparency of such actions.
Further, the FCAA exempts various infrastructural projects in forest areas from environmental checks. This includes mining, road and railway expansion, and mineral surveys, which previously needed central clearance but can now be approved at the state level.
The FCAA also exempts several forest types from environmental scrutiny, regardless of ownership – including by private entities. This exemption is significant because it potentially allows for various development or commercial activities to take place in these forests without the need for detailed environmental evaluations or adherence to the stringent regulations that usually govern the use of forest land.
The FCAA permits “ex post facto” approval of projects – legalising or regularising them after they have already been initiated or completed – like a private university in Haryana built on Aravalli forestland. This sets a dangerous precedent for legalising illegal encroachments and diversions of forestlands.
Furthermore, the FCAA exempts forestland within 100 km of India’s border for “strategic linear project of national importance and concerning national security” from environmental safeguards. It also exempts forestland up to 10 hectares for security-related infrastructure from environmental checks.
Additionally, the FCAA categorises activities like zoos, safari tourism and ecotourism as “forestry” activities, potentially leading to environmentally harmful practices being labelled as forest conservation.
These amendments have sparked fears of widespread deforestation, escalating human-wildlife conflicts, and threats to endangered species.
Critics argue that the FCAA, rather than conserving, actually facilitates corporate and infrastructural interests, leading to significant environmental harm.
