Maharashtra preparing to relocate people
but without groundwork.
“We were threatened that if we did not sign the consent notes
for relocation, our names would be struck out of the rehabilitation
list,” said Yamunabai Khadke, a resident of Vairat village in Melghat
tiger reserve in Maharashtra. Melghat along with Pench and Tadoba
Andhari were notified critical tiger habitats in December 2007 by the
state ministry of environment and forests.
The notification meant relocating 69 villages from the three tiger
reserves.
Baburao Pachpute, the state minister of environment and forests, had
claimed after the notification of the reserves that relocation would be
done on a “war footing” and the process of identification of families
eligible for relocation would be completed by July 31. Of late, he has
been emphasizing that villagers are more than willing to relocate and
the Centre’s “handsome compensation package of Rs 10 lakh per family”
had proved to be an incentive. But Khadke’s statement does not reflect
that. She and other villagers claim that notifying the reserves as
critical tiger habitats was done without consulting them. Experts add
that it is illegal.
A K Saxena, chief conservator of forests, Nagpur division, agrees that
villagers were not consulted. The reason, he says, is that the
notification was done according to the Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972,
which does not require people’s consent.
Forest rights activists counter the argument saying an amendment to the
act in 2006 laid down that: “No Scheduled Tribes or other forest
dwellers shall be resettled or have their rights adversely
affected...for tiger conservation unless…agencies of the State
Government…establishes…that the activities of the Scheduled Tribes and
other forest dwellers is sufficient to cause irreversible damage and
threaten the existence of tigers and their habitat…”
Also, under the Guidelines to Notify Critical Wildlife Habitats issued
by the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests in October 2007,
notifying requires a resolution from the gram sabhas concerned that the
recognition and vesting of rights in the affected area is completed.
The guidelines also suggest that the expert committee should conduct
public hearings in the area with a quorum of at least two-thirds
members of the population to be affected. “None of the above processes
were carried out,” says Mohan Kothekar, steering committee member of
the National Forum of Forest People and Forest Workers. “It is a clear
case of the government violating regulations.” Until such procedures
are carried out, no attempt should be made towards relocating the
affected populations, he added.
Colin Gonzalves, a human rights lawyer, says: “Failure to follow legal
provisions makes the notification illegal and it can be challenged
legally.” But forest officials have already started the process of
filling consent notes for relocation. In Melghat, residents of villages
Vairat, Churni and Pastalai report largescale irregularities in the
process of filling individual consent notes. Force, threats and
opacity, all appear to be part of the game.
Alleges Namdeo Khadke, a Vairat resident: “Forest officials do not give
us prior notices. They come at any given time of the day or night, grab
hold of whoever they find, and try to get them to sign the note. Once
we had asked the range forest officer of Chikhaldara for photocopies of
the notes we had filled up but that demand led to the abrupt
cancellation of the meeting.”
In Pastalai village, almost everyone signed the consent notes after
forest officials dug demarcation trenches next to the boundary of the
villagers’ agricultural land, cutting off forest access.
“The range forest officer got the village elders together and said that
if we did not sign notes, we would be arrested if we crossed the
boundary. It was not possible to resist after that, since we need to go
into the forest daily, at least for firewood,” says resident Jasu
Dhikar.
Village Churni is split in two factions. Officials have informally
allotted half the villagers plots and the remaining villagers have been
asked to take Rs 10 lakh and clear out. Says resident Devkabai Yeole:
“We want rehabilitation, not Rs 10 lakh, but no one is listening to
us.” Most villagers are sceptical of the Rs 10 lakh promise. “It is a
trap,” says Thakuji Khadke of Vairat. “We need land to cultivate, wood
to make our houses and forests close by to meet our daily needs,” he
adds.
Malay Kasdekar of Pastalai is sure they will be “forced out with
nothing. “Why are the forest officials harassing us so much if they
intend to give us so much money?” she asks. In Makhala village, the
sarpanch told Down To Earth (DTE), “Each time forest officials come to
the village, they come with a new threat. We have told them that we
will not sign the notes even if they kill us.”
No relocation till rights settled
Prem Singh Meena, secretary, Maharashtra State Tribal Development
Department, and member of the expert committee for the notification of
critical wildlife habitats, admitted the irregularity in proceedings
saying he had no idea why relocation consent notes were being filled up
before rights of villagers could be recorded.
“Nothing is final yet. Even the Rs 10-lakh package is not final as the
cabinet is yet to approve it. Filling consent notes at this juncture is
certainly not proper,” he said. Meena told DTE that a case-by-case
recording of rights procedure under the Forest Rights Act, 2006 will be
carried out in the affected villages first.
“The government of India has given a deadline of January 31, 2009 for
the completion of the rights recording process. Unless this process is
completed, no relocation activity can be undertaken,” he adds. B K
Majumdar, chief wildlife warden and chairman of the expert committee
refused to comment.
Pachpute was not available for comments to explain how he was so sure
that villagers were ready to relocate. Nitin Kakodkar, deputy
secretary, environment and forests, said that the department “must
have” received consent letters but later admitted that he “did not
know”. Kakodkar heads a committee appointed to determine the number of
families eligible for relocation and to expedite the work.
There is much confusion among officials themselves. Three officials
this DTE correspondent spoke to were not even aware of the critical
tiger habitat notification status. Says Kusum Karnik, forest rights
activist, who has been studying the rights situation in the three
protected areas, “There is very little legal awareness among government
officials. No one is serious about protecting the rights of the
affected people. The need of the hour is to stay the relocation process
till the situation has been clarified and the affected people supplied
all requisite information.”
Caught up in the middle are people who feel they have little hope.
Fakirji Khadke, a Vairat resident, says, “It is not a question of if we
want to go. The forest department is determined to drive us out. We
have struggled for long. We will succumb finally. The only question is
when.”
http://www.downtoearth.org.in/full6.asp?foldername=20080815&filename=news&sec_id=50&sid=37
Copyright
© Society for Environmental Communications