GAPS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF FOREST RIGHTS ACT- 2006

Transcription

1 GAPS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF FOREST RIGHTS ACT SANJAY KUMAR SUMAN, I.F.S, DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, DUMKA FOREST DIVISION, JHARKHAND. Abstract- The Scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers (recognition of forest rights) Act, 2006 has been enacted by the Central Govt to undo the historical injustice committed against the forest dwelling scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers who have been living in and around the forests for centuries. This is a new Act and its implementation is initiated by the Gram Sabha and Forest Rights Committee, mostly comprising of tribals, therfore some difficulties are faced in the implementation of this Act in the field. Further, the implementation of the Act in recognition of rights involves many departments, such as revenue department, tribal welfare department & forest department, so it becomes more difficult to have desired result in time. There are some gaps at policy level too, making the implementation even more difficult. It is due to these gaps at policy and implementation levels that the Central Govt. has to issue several guidelines for interpretation of the provisions of the Act. Many of these guidelines and interpretations, have not even reached at the implementing authorities level thereby creating 1

2 confusions at ground level. In view of these difficulties even the rules i.e. Forest Dwelling (Recognition of Forest Rights) Rules, 2008 has been amended in 2012 as Forest dwelling (Recognition of Forest Rights) Amendment Rules, In the light of the above, a study has been carried out to identify the important gaps in the implementation of Forest Rights Act, 2006 based on the field experience and the participation in different meetings attended at various levels. Key words- Scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers, Forest Rights Committee, Individual Forest Rights, Community forest Rights, Community forest resource, Bona fide livelihood, Primarily reside in. Introduction- A large number of people especially the scheduled tribes are living in and around forests for a long period in symbiotic relationship. They are partly or totally dependent on forest for their existence. In some areas they had some kinds of rights which they are exercising for a very long period. The Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers communities living in and around forests in India have had a history of conserving and using the forests resource sustainably, arising from their dependence on the same. This relationship has led to formalized or informal customary rules of use and extraction, often governed by ethical beliefs and practices that have ensured that forests are not too degraded. They were completely or partly dependent on the forest for their daily needs and thus they were dependent on the forest for their existence. However, in modern era the focus shifted from the forests being used as a resource base for sustenance of local communities to a State resource for commercial interests and development of land for agriculture. Several Acts and policies such as the 2

3 Indian Forest Act of 1865, 1894 and 1927 of Central Govt and some state forest Acts curtailed centuries old, customary use rights of local communities and consolidated the government's control over all forests. The Post Independence forest policies and laws like the Forest Policy of 1952, Wild Life (Protection) Act of 1972, the Forest (Conservation) Act of 1980, National Forest Policy 1988, further added to the problems of the forest dependent tribals and their communities. Local uses were further curtailed; thereby further alienating the Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers from their age old, symbiotic relationship with forest. After independence the economic policies led to increase in industries like mining and other development activities like construction of various roads, dams, hydro electric projects, factories, establishment of industries etc, caused large scale displacement. Consequently, over the last couple of decades several people's movements have emerged against the process of rights deprivation and marginalization of forest communities. The PESA Act of 1996 was introduced to ensure some right to tribal communities through decentralization of governance, with bottom top approach but it could not bring much justice to the tribals and their communities. In view of this situation the Central Govt. enacted the scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers (recognition of forest rights) Act,2006,which came into force in 2008 through scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers (recognition of forest rights) rules 2008 to give the rights of scheduled tribes and their communities. This Act aspires to undo years of historic injustice to these scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers by recognizing and vesting the rights to use, manage and conserve forest resources and to legally hold rights on forest lands that they have been residing in and cultivating since long. Apart from it, by recognizing community rights over forest resources, it 3

4 attempts to ensure livelihood and food security while empowering them to use biodiversity sustainably and conserve it to maintain ecological balance. These forest rights have been described in chapter II of forest rights Act 2006 which reads as follow:- 3.(1) For the purpose of this Act, the following rights, which secure individual or community tenure or both, shall be the forest rights of forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes and other traditional forest dwellers on all forest lands namely:- (a) rights to hold and live in the forest land under the individuals or common occupation for habitation or for self-cultivation for livelihood by a member or members of a forest dwelling Scheduled tribes or other traditional forest dwellers. (b) community rights such as nistar, by whatever name called, including those used in erstwhile princely states, Zamindari or such intermediary regimes; (c) rights of ownership, access to collect, use, and dispose of minor forest produce which has been traditionally collected within or outside village boundaries; (d) other community rights of user or entitlement such as fish and other products of water bodies, grazing (both settled or transhumant) and traditional seasonal resource access of nomadic or pastoralist communities; (e) rights including communities tenures of habitat and habitation for primitive tribal groups and pre-agricultural communities; (f) rights in or over disputed lands under any nomenclature in any states where claims are disputed; (g) rights for conversion of pattas or leaves or grants issued by any local authority or any states Government on forest lands to titles; 4

5 (h) rights of settlement and conversion of all forest village, old habitation, unsureyed villages and other villages in forest, whether recorded, notified or not into revenue villages; (i) right to protect, regenerate or conserve or manage any community forest resource which they have been traditionally protecting and conserving for sustainable use; (j) rights which are recognised under any states law or laws of any Autonomous District 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 states; (k) right of access to biodiversity and community right to intellectual property and traditional knowledge related to biodiversity and cultural diversity; (l) any other traditional rights customarily enjoyed by the forest dwelling scheduled tribes or other traditional forest dwellers, as the case may be, which are not mentioned in clauses (a) to (k) but excluding the traditional rights of hunting or trapping or extracting a part of the body of any species of wild animal; (m) rights to in situ rehabilitation including alternative land in cases where the scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers have been illegally evicted or displaced from forest land of any description without receiving their legal entitled to rehabilitation prior to the 13 th day of December, These rights can be claimed both as individual and as a community. In case of individual, the scheduled tribes who primarily reside in and who depends on the forests or forest lands for bona fide livelihood needs were given rights to hold and live in the forest land for self-cultivation for livelihood. 5

6 These rights when claimed as a community are referred to as community forest rights and were recognised such as nistar by Zamindari or such intermediaries regimes rights of ownership i.e. access, use and disposal of Non timber forest produce (NTFP), rights over the product of water bodies and grazing grounds etc. The section 3(2) of the forest rights Act, 2006 provides for diversion of forest land up to one hectare with some conditions for thirteen type of facilities such as school, dispensary etc. for common use. The Act has particular significance in taking a historic step in providing for community rights to protect, regenerate, conserve and manage any community resource for sustainable use. The provisions of section 3(1) I and section 5 of the Act together with Rule 4e give rights and responsibility to the Gram sabha for sustainable use, conservation of biodiversity & wildlife, ensuring that internal and external factors do not destroy their community forests and maintenance of ecological balance. The Community Forest Rights provisions are crucial for changing the manner in which forest have been viewed and governed thus far. These have a potential to change the top down centralized governance of forests towards greater decentralization and site specificity, and for providing collective livelihood security to communities. This, however is a process which essentially faces a number of challenges. Certain systems, processes support structures will thus need to be in place for these provisions to realize their full potential. The Act gives community forest Rights Act in :- Sec 3(1) (i) provide the right to protect, regenerate, conserve or manage any community forest resource which they have been traditionally protecting and conserving for sustainable use. Section 5 of Forest Rights Act, 2006 provides rights to the title holders, gram sabhas and village level institutions to protect the wildlife, 6

7 forest and biodiversity and to access to community forest resources and to manage and protect the same. Rule 4e under the Act states that communities which claim rights under the Act have a rights to constitute committees for the protection of wildlife, forest and biodiversity, from amongst its members, in order to carry out the provisions of section 5 of the Act. It has been noticed that there has been an emphasis on implementation of only a few provisions of the Act rather than the whole Act in complete sense. The thrust of the implementation in most parts of the country has been on claiming individual rights over the forest lands while rights over community forest resource have been largely ignored. Over the last two years this lacuna has been recognized by many government and non government agencies. However, the actual step of communities claiming these rights is easier said than done. For a number of reasons such claims are not being made across the country. It is very difficult to get a national picture on status of Community Forest Resource rights since little disaggregated data is available even with the Ministry of Tribal Affairs for making proper assessments at State level. Even where titles have been issued, there have been confusions and problems in some areas regarding the conditions and restrictions mentioned in the titles. Further the provision of chapter III of the Act regarding the recognition, restoration and vesting of forest rights are also not implemented in most of the parts of the country. In the Act there are some duties of the holders of forest rights described in chapter III(5) which reads as follow:- The holders of any forest rights, Gram sabha and villages level institution in areas where there are holders of any forest rights under this Act are empowered to- (a) protect the wild life, forest and biodiversity; 7

8 (b) ensure that adjoining catchment areas, water sources and other ecological sensitive areas are adequately protected; (c) ensure that the habited of forest dwelling scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers is preserved from any form of destructive practice affecting their cultural and natural heritage; (d) ensure that the decision taken in the Gram Sabha to regulate access to community forest resources and stop any activity which adversely affects the wild animal, forest and the biodiversity are complied with; The rights holders both as individual or community are not willing to perform these duties in most of the areas. In majority of cases the right holders are not even aware of the provisions of these duties given to them by the Act. Material and Methods The area of study is the whole country especially the state of Jharkhand. The study is qualitative in nature and most of the informations have been gathered by attending various meetings at local, district & state level and some reputed institutes. To identify the implementation level implication data has been collected through indirect interviews from various stakeholders such as individuals, community, members of Sub divisional level committee and District level committee. The secondary data has been collected to study the existing policy level implication and the debate going over it through various research reports, state level and district level consultation or Community forest resource and Community forest resource learning group. This study used a combination of different research approaches and sources such as:- (1) field visits and interviews 8

9 (2) Review of secondary sources like ministry of tribal affairs website, joint ministry of tribal affairs-ministry of environment and forest committee report 2010, NAC. (3) Recommendation report collection of regional information from members of the CFRLAP. Results and Discussion The forest right Act 2006 provides immense possibilities for the scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers both as individual and as community to gain individual & community rights, to get their livelihood along with the right to govern and manage their forest resources. However, the practical efficiency of the legal framework of rights depends largely on how the provision of the Act is perceived and implemented in the field in different parts of the country. The Tribal Department has been notified as the nodal department for implementation of this Act. The provision of the Act has to be implemented by these four main stages:- 1. Meeting of Gram Sabha and formation of forest rights committee. 2. Submission of claims to the Gram Sabha. 3. Verification of the claims. 4. Recognition of rights. These stages has to be implemented in the field according to the procedure given in the Forest rights Act, 2006 and Rules The Act provides for three field level committees i.e. Forest rights committee (FRC), Sub-divisional level committee (SDLC) and District level committee (DLC) to ensure proper implementation of Act. The duties and functions of the committee have been described in detail in the Act and Rule. 9

10 Based on the field experience and informations gathered from different levels in states a few important lacunae had been identified in each of the four steps creating gaps in implementation of the forest Rights Act, As per the Act, the states had to create four types of committee for the implementation namely State level monitoring Committee (SLMC), District level committee (DLC), Sub-divisional level committee and forest rights committee (FRC). The first three committees could be formed rapidly with administrative officers but, the last one, the Forest Rights Committee is actually the key to the implementation of the Act, and has to be formed within the community members. The important gaps in implementation of Forest Rights Act are:- 1. A lot of ambiguity had been observed in the formation of Forest Rights Committee. In many states the panchayat system is not very strong and in some cases the panchayat elections are not held regularly. In that case the Gram panchayats are not operational up to the desired level necessary for implementation of the Act. The target people are primarily tribal and the Gram panchayat responsible for the formation of Forest Rights Committee comprising of these people are not efficient enough to implement the Act in letter and spirit. 2. The Gram Sabha/ Forest Rights Committee have to receive all types of claims of rights and document it with proper receiving, but in most of the states the Gram Sabha/ FRC do not have desired infrastructure and technical know how to keep these records. 3. The main target group of this Act are mostly illiterate and therefore filling and submission of forms regarding the claims becomes very difficult. In this situation many middleman and some bad elements starts operating with vested interest. 10

11 4. There is lack of awareness about Community Forest Resource provisions among local communities as well as government officials. The act provides right on thirteen different types of community rights but only two or three rights are often seen to be claimed and without proper corroboration, which often led to rejection of claim. 5. Community Forest Resource claiming process is complex and several evidences are often asked to be filled by officials. The evidences are needed to be collected from Revenue Department and forest department. In most cases information are not available for public domain and need to be collected through Right To Information Act. These procedures are difficult for the communities to handle. Therefore most of the time the claims are found pending because of lack of evidences. 6. As per the provision in Act it s the responsibilities of the government department to provide required documents to the individual & communities as evidence but it is not taken up by the concerned departments. The person seeking rights individual or community have to struggle hard to get a piece of evidence. 7. In absence of authentic records of evidence in situation discussed above the role of revenue and forest departments becomes very important and the actual eligible people also have to face serious problems in claiming rights for them. 8. The tribal department has been declared as the nodal department for enactment of this Act, but the records for the forest lands are in possession of either forest department or the revenue department. In view of this situation it is really very difficult to have a good liasioning between all three departments i.e. the tribal welfare department, the revenue department and the forest department. 11

12 9. In most of the cases the meeting of Gram Sabha is not organised in accordance with the requirements of the Act, again attracting the role of the middle man or official of revenue or tribal welfare department. 10. Receiving the claims and its verification needs involvement of the Forest Rights Committee, the claimant, revenue official and forest officials. The liasioning among all these stakeholders is an extremely difficult task. In fact this is the most difficult activity as far as the implementation of Forest Rights Act is concerned since none of the above departments work together. One very importants activity at this stage is the preparation of map for which technical expertise is a must. Thus the verification of claims and preparation of maps in the most serious bottleneck in implementation of this Act. The authentic maps are also not available in many cases again attracting the intervention of revenues or forest department. 11. It is also very difficult for villagers (Forest Rights Committee) from remote areas to travel large distance to submit the claims to the Sub-divisional level Committee. In such cases the district collectors and sub-divisional officers have to authorise the official of welfare department to receive the claims from the Forest Rights Committee but then it is difficult to track the station of those claims as in most cases the officials are ignorant and claims are not forwarded in time. 12. In most of the states the authentic data regarding the occupation of land before the cut off date i.e such as remote sensing maps etc. are not available for whole area thereby creating a major problem in ascertaining the claims for rights over the land. 12

13 13. In protected areas, the process of claiming right is continuing but due to lack of organization, there are efforts to illegally relocate them. 14. In some cases sub-divisional level committee arbitrarily rejects claims on the basis of superfluous criteria and lack of evidences. At this stages also there are some confusions regarding the acceptance of the evidence for recognition of rights. 15. Even at the district level committee there has been cases of serious violation such as. (a)the titles were distributed with reduction in extent of resources claimed, moreover the rights were granted on very few common property like grazing land, water bodies and Non Timber Forest Produce. Habitation rights and other such important rights are ignored. (b)the customary rights and traditional boundary are ignored in provided titles for unilateral reduction in size of land. (c) GPS technologies are abused to manipulate maps and areas for which titles are being given. (d) It is also seen that few cases are hanged between Forest Rights Act, 2006 and Sub Divisional Level Committee and are not taken to District Level Committee for further action. (e) Both IR and CFR rights are denied to Other Traditional Forest dwellers community. 16.As regards maintenance of records of rights, rule 12A of the amendment rules 2012 dt provides that on completion of the process of recognition of rights and issuance of titles under the rules. The revenue and the forest departments shall prepare a final map of forest land so vested and the concerned authorities shall incorporate the forest rights so vested in the revenue and forest records within the specified period of 13

14 record updation under the relevant state laws or within a period of three months, whichever is earlier. This provision is not followed properly in majority of cases throughout the country Gaps at Policy Level There are some important issues and ambiguities at the policy level also, besides the large fraction of the problems in the poor implementation of Forest Rights Act, The important gaps at policy level are:- 1. The terms primarily resides in and bona fide livelihood have not been quantified and explained in detail in the Act. Hence, there are serious confusion during field work in implementation of the Act. The members of Forest Rights Acts, 2006 and the officials are not clear about the extent and permissible limits in many cases. 2. The responsibility of verification of claims has not been given to the department who is in possession of the land and its document with time limits to complete the process of verification in accordance with the Act and the Rules. 3. Problems in exercise of rights and management of community forest resources, even where the titles were given, there lie numerous issues with Gram Sabha in excreting the rights. This is mostly due to lack of clarity regarding post title governance and management in granted common resources. 4. Ambiguity regarding role of forest department and other government agencies in Community Forest Resource received areas. This is relevant in view of continued operation of forest department through working plan activities. Lack of clarity on 14

15 integration of CFRe management plan with working plan and management plan of Forest Department. 5. In Forest Rights Act,2006 amended rule 2012, it is mentioned that, in rule 4 after clauses (e) which talks about constitution of committee by the Gram sabha for management of CFRe, the following clause shall be inserted, it reads as under:(f) monitor and control the committee constituted under clause (e) which shall prepare a conservation and management plan for community forest resources in order to sustainably and equitably manage such community forest resources for the benefit of forest dwelling scheduled tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers and integrate such conservation and management plan with the micro plans or working plans or management plans of the forest department with such modifications as may be considered necessary by the committee. 6. Forest Rights Act, 2006 did not specify how villages would manage forest after Community Forest Resource is granted. It was observed that the community is facing lot of challenges in selling of Non Timber Forest Produce and bamboo procured by them under Community Forest Resource. The major challenge is to look for captive market, secondly communities which have no government support are not well equipped to handle this new business and thirdly they have to stay careful from stake holder ready to manipulate the market. 7. Continued operation of the government, in diverting forest lands for non forest purposes. There is apprehension that proposed Land Acquisition bill and Mines and Mineral development bill will make it possible for the government to take away rights given under Forest Rights Act, Forest diversion are taking place in large 15

16 scale (with about 2 lakhs hectare diverted since Forest Rights Act,2006 came into operation) are taking place without compliance to forest right act and Ministry of Environment and Forest circular of 30 July Further lease and contracts in forest and continued work of plantation by forest department continue without consultation or consent of gram sabha. 8. The existing law like Forest conservation Act, 1980 and Wild life protection Act, 1972 as well as other policies and programme particularly in forest and MFPs need to be reviewed in view to facilitate exercises of the right and community management of Community Forest Resource. 9. Claims from Other Traditional Forest Dwellers are not recognized in most states, partly due to wrong interpretation that they required to have occupied land for three generation. There is also difficulty in providing evidences. No documentary evidences are available to prove that they are living in the area for 75 years. Special attention should be provided to give justice to these communities under Forest Rights Act, The provision for community / habitat right of Primitive Tribal Group, pre agricultural communities is not implemented properly so far. There is lack of clarity on mechanism for claiming right. Such communities are mostly interested for habitats right as its gives them a permanent settlement. 11. Awareness about Community Forest Resource provision in Forest Rights Act, 2006, under protected areas is very low. Community Forest Resource have been recognized in only few protected area like Simlipal tiger reserve in Orissa. Recognition of right in protected area and tiger reserve are continued to be major concern with relocation and eviction by forest department. It has 16

17 also been noticed that the relocation is simply involves including a monetary settlement of right. The protocol released by National Tiger Conservation Authority on relocation from tiger reserve is not in conformity with the Forest Rights Act, 2006 and is apprehended to lead to more violation of forest right in tiger reserves. It is due to these gaps at policy and implementation level there has been a very high rate of rejection of claims submitted under the Forest Rights Act. As per the information available with the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, as of 31 January 2012, a total of 31,68,478 claims have been received across the country. Of these, a total of 27,24,162 claims (85.98% of the total received) has been disposed of, out of which 12,51,490 titles (45.94%) were distributed and 14,72,672 claims (54%) were rejected. State- wise data showing distribution and rejection of claims under FRA as on (source: Ministry of Tribal Affairs) State No. of claims received Total No. of Claims Disposed off 1% in respect of claims received No. of titles distributed No. of claims rejected % of claims rejected w.r.t claims disposed off Andhra 3,30,479 3,21,235 1,67,797 1,53, Pradesh (3,23,765 individual and 6,714 (97.20%) (1,65,691 1individual and 2,106 Arunachal NIL (The state govt NIL NIL NIL - 17

18 Pradesh claims that land and forest are communally owned; therefore FRA has little relevance) Assam 1,31,911 73,936(56.04% 36,267 37, (1,26,718 individual and 5,193 ) (35,407 individual and 860 Bihar 2,343 1,173(50.06%) 22 1, Chhattisga 4,92,068 4,88,107 2,15,443 2,72, rh (4,87,332 Individual and 4,736 (99.19%) (2,14,668 individual and 775 Goa NIL NIL NIL NIL - Gujarat 1,91,592 57,624 39,784 17, (1,82,869 individual and 8,723 (30.07%) (38,176 Individual and 1,608 Haryana The state Govt. Has Nil NIL NIL - informed that there are no forest dwelling STs and OTFDs Himachal 5,635 1, , Pradesh (33.30%) Jharkhand 34,936 28,500 13,357 15, (81.57%) Karnataka 1,63,090 91,60,305 individual 1,50,348 (92.18%) 6,523 (6,522 1,43,

19 and 2,785 individual and 1 community Kerala 37,509 25,073 20,821 4, (36,140 individual and 1,369 (66.84%) Madhya 4,49,561 4,24,102 1,55,542 2,68, Pradesh (4,40,644 individual and 8,917 (994.33%) Maharasht 3,39,689 3,26,562 1,04,767 2,21, ra (3,35,701 individual and 3,988 (96.13%) (1,04,344 individual and 423 community0 (2,20,523 individua l and 423 communi ty) Manipur NIL NIL NIL NIL - Meghalaya NIL (The state govt. NIL NIL NIL - Claims that 96% of forest land is owned by clan /community/ individual; hence, FRA has limited scope). Mizoram NIL NIL NIL NIL - Nagaland NIL (The state govt claimed that FRA does not apply since there are no forest dwelling STs or OTFDs) Orissa 4,93,522 4,25,454 2,94,623 1,30,

20 (4,91,203 Individual and 2,319 Rajasthan 64,844 (64,510 individual and 334 Sikkim Stated that there are no forest dwelling STs and OTFDs Tamil 21,781 Nadu (18,420 individual and 3,361 Tripura 1,79,639 (1,79,362 individual and ,384 Uttar 92,406 Pradesh (91,271 Individual and 1,135 (86.20%) Distributed (2,93,825 Individual and ,475 30,325 30, (93.26%) (30,280 individual and Could not - - distribute titles due to a restrictive order from High Court of Madras (3,723 titles are ready for distribution) 1,41,821 1,19,437 73, (78.39%) (1,19,382 individual and 55 17,705( ,706 Individual (98.16%) and

21 Uttarakhan d West Bengal A&N Islands Daman & Diu (0.54%) NIL ,37,278 1,08,169 29,070 79, (1,29,454 individual (78.79%) (28,962 and 7,824 individual and 108 NIL (The NIL NIL NIL - Administration has claimed that FRA does not apply). NIL (no forest NIL NIL NIL - villages) Dadra & Nagar Haveli NIL NIL NIL NIL - Lakshadwe NIL NIL NIL - NIL ep (The Administration stated that there are no forest tribes or OTFDs) Total 31,68,478 27,24,162 12,51,490 14,72, (85.98%) 2 Conclusion and Recommendation:- Based on the above discussion and field experience it may be concluded that this is a comparatively new Act and the most important steps are to be started by forest rights committee comprising of mostly tribals 21

22 having low literacy rate, sincere efforts are required to be taken for capacity building to enhance awareness. This may be done by regular training of the stakeholders. Besides this all government officials of all concerned departments are also required to be trained regularly for better implementation. Some responsible officials may be assigned duties to help the stakeholders to fill up the forms and submit their claims properly. The relevant maps and documents should be made available to the Forest rights committee and claimants at easy approach. Steps should be taken for better liasioning between revenues department and forest department officials to facilitate the verification of claims within a time frame. This is the most difficult and important step in the whole process of implementation of this Act and it also requires the maximum technical expertise along with involvement of all stakeholders and hence sincere efforts are required at this stage. The meeting at Sub divisional level committee and District level committee level should be conducted on regular basis to take decision at the earliest. The most important action after the final decision of the District level committee is the delineation (marking the boundary) of the land and its incorporation in the revenue and forest maps after which the area should be excluded as per the provisions of the Act. In fact this is the most neglected part of the implementation of Act in many states and in future it may create very serious problems for all concerned including forests. In most of the states this action is not being done despite several reminders by Govt. of India. The tribal department with the help of forest department and revenue department should try to convince the Scheduled tribes and other traditional forest dwellers (recognition of forest rights) Act, 2006 regarding the 22

23 conservation of forest, community forest reserve and also regarding the duties described in the Act. The conclusions based on the above observation and discussion can be summarized as follows:- 1) This Act is a recently enforced Act therefore proper care has to be taken at all levels for effective and correct implementation of the Act. 2) A mass awareness programme for FRC/SDLC/DLC and community members should be conducted at regular interval by Ministry of Tribal Affairs. It will help to bring clarity as well as foster the implementation process. The nodal agencies or state government should take care of production and distribution of simple accurate guide material for FRC/SDLC/DLC. Field visit should be organised for communities to learn from one another experiences in forest governance. 3) Strengthening gram sabha : Although instruction have been given by Ministry of Tribal Affairs through states to revenue and forest departments to provide all necessary records and evidences to gram sabha, to facilitate Community Forest Resource claims but for most cases it is unnecessarily delayed by the govt official. Therefore strict steps should be taken to ensure that the instruction is followed. The officials should also focus on explaining and clarifying the differences between Community Forest Resource claims under section 3(1) and diversion of forest land for public utilities under section 3(2) to avoid confusion in claim filing. 4) Particular attention is needed to Community Forest Resource and habitat rights for disprivileged group such as Primitive tribal group, nomads and shift cultivators. Special process is needed in case of 23

24 nomads as it is difficult for them to make claim all along their route. Rights of Primitive tribal group should be pro actively recognised and declared using the same criteria that had been used to declare them as Primitive tribal group. 5) Ensuring customary boundaries: All states should ensure that Community Forest Resource claims and titles follow customary boundaries and are not artificially restricted by consideration such as Joint Forest Management, Van Surakshya Samiti etc. Or other such boundaries set by government. 6) Compliance of Forest Rights Act, 2006 in forest land diversion: In July 2009, Ministry of Environment and Forest, made a circular saying Gram sabha consent is compulsory before granting clearance for diversion of land, now it should be expanded for forest land uses such as plantation and be made legally binding through rules under Forest Rights Act, ) Transparency building mechanism Minutes of the meeting of Sub Divisional Level Committee and District Level Committee should be put in to public domain, as it will communicate status of Implementation. Regular public hearing should be done to hear the grievances. 8) Particular attention is needed for protected areas to implement Forest Rights Act, 2006 particularly Community Forest Resource. The ongoing relocation from tiger reserve must be stopped. The protocol released by National Tiger Conservation Authority on relocation need to be withdrawn as it hinders Forest Rights Act, 2006 implementation. The communities should be allowed to stay in their own habitat and cash compensation option should be withdrawn. The process of recognition of right should be strictly monitored and it should also be monitored that conservation 24

25 outcomes are also achieved. We need to understand that forest is habitat both for man and animal and right for both should be ensured. All possibilities of co existence within such habitat should found out through consultation with local communities. 9) Post title support for management and conservation: Under section 3(1) I and section 5, the hamlet will have committees to conserve and manage the forest resources. Government should ensure membership of women in these committees and should capacitate the committees. There should be appropriate Forest Rights Act,2006 rules or Forest Rights Act,2006 amendment to provide clear cut powers and authority to institution to carry out the role described in section 3(1)(i) and section 5. The relationship of the gram sabha and its committee with the forest department needs to be clarified. 10) Community Forest Resource titles: Ministry of Tribal Affairs should issue clarification to states that titles cannot be issued with any condition and all such titles issued in past must be rectified. Titles should be given on all rights claimed and over full area claimed by Gram sabha as per customary boundaries. 11) The role of forest department needs to undergo gradual transformation from that of regulation and control on forest to that of service agency which monitors forest management and conservation and provides technical guidance and capacity building to local communities for better forest governance. 12) Funding schemes that are proposed by Ministry of Environment and Forest relating to natural resources should be channelized through Gram sabha and PRI. Various programmes like Green India Mission, bio fuel plantation, CAMPA and so on are currently being processed without having much control of gram sabha. All 25

26 these should be channelized through gram sabha for decentralized governance and also it will support the grass root level institution. 13) Review needs to be carried out of environment related programmes and laws to bring it in consonance with Forest Rights Act, References