A knee-jerk reaction

On February 13 this year, the Supreme Court (SC) passed an order to evict over 11,00,000 people from 17 states, whose claims were rejected under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (FRA). 

This has stirred a hornet’s nest as the word ‘eviction’ seems to have been misconstrued. A few human rights activists and media friends, who are perhaps oblivious to the ground realities and the real issues faced by tribal and forest-dwelling communities, have pressed the panic button. 

However, in the interest of sustainable coexistence of forest-dwelling people, this SC order must be viewed in the larger perspective of protecting forests in letter and spirit of this Act. 

It must be noted that along with the rejection of many claims, the SC order has also upheld claims of around 18,00,000 titles under FRA covering around 72,000 sq km of forest land – equivalent to all 50 tiger reserves of India. 

People, whose false FRA claims have been rejected, have legitimate homes and have extended their agricultural fields on forest land. 

So although their illegal claims over forest land are rejected, they would still retain their legal land ownership. So the perception that lakhs of people would become ‘homeless’, is unfounded.

The FRA came into force in 2006, essentially to recognise and protect the traditional rights of Scheduled Tribes and other forest-dwelling people, who have been residing in forests for many generations. 

This Act also highlights the sustainable use of forests by those benefiting from its provisions to ensure conservation of biodiversity and maintain ecological balance thereby strengthening the conservation regime of the forests, while ensuring livelihood and food security of the traditional forest dwellers. 

The FRA is a law meant for recognising pre-existing (traditional) forest rights of people, who were occupants of forest land as on December 13, 2005. A total of 42 lakh claims over forest lands, including within National Parks and wildlife sanctuaries, were filed under FRA, post-2006. 

The forest land title claims under FRA have to go through a three-tier robust appellate system of gram sabha, sub-division level committee and district level committee that gives enough opportunities to forest dwellers to prove the genuineness of their claims. 

After due diligence by these appellate bodies, around 19,00,000 claims were rejected, out of which over 14,00,000 claims were set aside by gram sabhas that function democratically. 

This rejection shows the ire of a majority of villagers against encroachments and illegal claims made by few, who considered this as a land-grabbing opportunity. Many of these false claimants have their legitimate homes outside forest areas, but have produced fake claims of owning agricultural land inside forests. 

Assessments by independent agencies and analysis of satellite imagery clearly show forest losses after the 2005 cut-off date. Also, possibilities of few genuine claims being rejected during the assessment stages cannot be ruled out due to lack of credible evidence provided by the claimant. These should be addressed immediately by concerned authorities to prevent injustice to rightful claimants.

The National Forest Policy of India envisages 33 per cent of its geographical area under forest and tree cover. However, in reality, the total forest and tree cover of the country is only 24.4 per cent, as per assessments done in 2017.

Roughly, 275 million rural people in India depend on forests for at least part of their subsistence and livelihood. With such large-scale dependence on our forest areas, it is a huge challenge to safeguard these ecosystems from pressures of firewood, timber and non-timber forest products collection, hunting, poaching and retaliatory killing of wild animals, grazing of livestock, unsustainable agricultural practices and deliberately-lit forest fires. 

Use of natural resources and land-use changes by forest-dwelling communities, whether under FRA or otherwise, is often on the wrong side of being sustainable and results in human-wildlife conflict. 

Land title claims under FRA, whether genuine or fake, have fragmented and will continue to fragment not just the reserve forest areas, but also protected areas spelling doom for our threatened species. 

India cannot afford to lose any more forest land. Therefore, it is essential that these illegally-occupied forest areas be freed from encroachments and restored. 

Life of people living in forests is anything but easy. Forest dwellers often live miles away from the nearest primary health centre, a school or the nearest road. Many of these areas are cut-off during monsoon months, making their life extremely difficult. 

Apart from monsoon-based agriculture, these people may have no other means of income. High school drop-out rates, ever growing population, blind faith and meager family income has pushed these people into a vicious cycle of poverty. 

Therefore they are drawn to forests for sustenance. And with very limited forest cover remaining, it is important to ensure that these people’s dependency on forests is minimised as much as possible and with a humane approach.

This presents an opportunity for the well-meaning conservation and the human rights organisations to address these issues together with a holistic view and devise schemes that create win-win situations for forest dwellers and the forest ecosystem. Coexistence of people within forests may sound idealistic, but it is indeed possible provided forest-dwellers use the natural resources responsibly, sustainably and within the purview of law. 

Receiving forests ‘right’ is an entitlement under FRA, but it comes with the responsibility of ‘duty’ towards conservation of forests and preservation of its natural resources.

Author is Director of The Corbett Foundation and a conservationist with over two decades of experience in biodiversity conservation and human-wildlife conflict mitigation