Live
- RG Kar protest: Junior doctors to render medical services, carry out hunger strike in parallel
- Traffic Violators Counseled by Nagarkurnool Police
- Bathukamma Celebrations at Government Boys Junior College
- I Will Stand by the Mudiraj Community - MLA Dr. Rajesh Reddy
- Mission Bhagiratha DEE Hemalatha Distributes Certificates to Water Assistants in Achampet
- Elderly Man Dies Suddenly at Bus Stand
- DMK MP Wilson's conduct a threat to judicial impartiality and independence: BJP
- Lightning strikes claim nearly 300 lives in Bangladesh
- Haryana polls: Sohna records highest voting at 68.6 pc, Gurgaon registers lowest turnout
- Multiple attacks in Syria result in casualties
Rights panel slams dilution of forest rights law
Human Rights Forum HRF rejected the February 13 order of the Supreme Court that calls for eviction in a summary and timebound manner of those whose claims for forest rights under The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers Recognition of Forest Rights Act FRA have been rejected
Visakhapatnam: Human Rights Forum (HRF) rejected the February 13 order of the Supreme Court that calls for eviction in a summary and time-bound manner of those whose claims for forest rights under The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act (FRA) have been rejected.
It said that the order amounts to an attack on the rights of adivasis and other forest dwellers, some of the poorest people in the land. If carried out, it will lead to mass-scale evictions and forced dispossession of over a staggering 20 lakh adivasi and other forest-dwelling households, the forum said.
“We are shocked at the manner in which the apex court has approached a historic and landmark legislation in such a cavalier and unjust manner. The FRA was enacted in 2006 to remedy historical injustice to adivasis, who were treated both during colonial and post-Independence times as encroachers on their own land.
The Supreme Court, in its majesty, ought to have chided and pulled up Central and the state governments for tardy and improper implementation of the FRA. Instead, it has issued orders that have the potential of trampling upon the livelihood and cultural rights of adivasis,” HRF AP and TS coordination committee members V S Krishna said in a release here on Sunday.
Why did the Supreme Court see it fit to swallow the vacuous and factually and legally unsound contentions of petitioners in the instant case , wildlife enthusiasts, ex-officials of the forest department and some former zamindars, rather than uphold Constitutional values and stand by the adivasis, he said while adding that the adivasis were now to be dispossessed from land that they have historically resided in, and contained in the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution.
Krishna pointed out that the tribal affairs ministry had on occasion even admitted that many rejections of claims were flawed and require review. However, these important facts were not brought to the notice of the court by the government. Despite its assertion to the contrary, the ministry of tribal affairs has failed to uphold and defend the Constitutional validity of the FRA, he pointed out.
Rejection of claims, according to the FRA, does not lead to automatic evictions by the state. “To do so would not be in consonance with the law. In its enthusiasm to evict, the court has ignored the centrality of the gram sabha and its Constitutional agency in all matters related to forest rights recognition, which also includes rejection of claims. This slur on the FRA is another instance where a good law is systematically beaten down,” the HRF said.
Describing the apex court’s order as “retrograde”, HRF AP and TS coordination committee member Jeevan Kumar said that orders affecting the marginalised were becoming frequent and cited last year’s verdict of the Supreme Court diluting critical provisions of the SC, ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The HRF called upon all democratic forces in the country to oppose the attack on the FRA and demanded that the Central and the state governments take immediate steps to ensure that the forest department does not proceed with evictions in light of the court’s order.
