“The draft hasn’t been published in our mother tongue. Most of us who’d be affected by the amendments have no idea what it is exactly about,” Lalitha tells TNM. A nurse who works among tribals in Kerala’s Wayanad, she is referring to the draft notification of the Environmental Assessment Impact (EIA), which she fears would in effect nullify the Forest Rights Act. The 2006 Act – the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) – had aptly recognised the rights and occupation of forest-dwelling tribal people. Lalitha also belongs to a tribal community and is an active voice for tribal rights.
The draft notification has been widely criticised for diluting the existing environmental protections.
Chithra in Malappuram’s Nilambur, a tribal herself and an activist, echoes Lalitha’s sentiment. “We’re worried that the developmental activities that the draft would facilitate will have a huge impact on the tribals. Those in power would be able to make crores by allowing development works, but in effect would eliminate the real owners of the forest,” Chithra tells TNM.
India notified its first EIA norms in 1994 under the Environment (Protection) Act 1986. This set in place a legal framework for regulating activities that access, utilise and affect natural resources. With this, every developmental project had to go through the EIA process for obtaining prior environmental clearance.
However, Dr Amitabh Bachan, a forest rights expert, says that even the original EIA is not a fully comprehensive tool, not strong as a study that minimises environmental impact. “Developmental projects try to acquire land mostly from the poor people living in rural areas and near forests. The projects are proposed mostly in coastal regions, around wetlands, rivers and forest areas. More capital investment is pumped in, paving the way for the opening of more projects without any safeguards to the interests of the people living there,” he tells TNM.
“Examining where the landslides occurred in Kerala in the past couple of years, we find that they happened in the regions where forest dwellers and ordinary people lived. They were a repercussion of the ecologically harmful actions like giving permission to quarries. With this draft EIA, the habitat of tribal people will become even more vulnerable,” Chithra notes.
As many as 4,726 landslides occurred in Kerala in 2018, of which 800 happened in forests.
While the FRA recognised the right to livelihood from the forest for tribals and forest dwellers, activists are concerned that the EIA draft notification would weaken it.
“For example, under the FRA mangroves in Kannur come under the definition of forest and it’s technically possible for the local communities to do fishing in the mangroves. They also have the right to protect the mangroves. But in Kerala, the FRA hasn’t been implemented effectively yet. And so, the EIA draft could put the rights of the tribals at stake again,” says Dr Amitabh, who is also a member of species conservation status organisation International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
“Also, the FRA permits tribal grama sabhas many powers; for example, if a project needs to be passed, it needs the consent of the grama sabhas, which was recognised for the first time as a statutory body for land resource management in the FRA. Tribal hamlets were also redefined as villages. But this has not been incorporated in the yearly amendments in the Panchayati Raj Act that came into force in 1993 in the state though the Act was amended seven times after the FRA came to force,” he says.
The EIA has degraded 70% of the gist of the Forest Rights Act, Dr Amitabh says, adding, “The EIA draft is at odds with the clauses of the FRA that recognise the rights of tribals to management of forest resources. It’s not in compliance with the FRA but it’s proposed in a way that FRA would be neglected, particularly in a state like Kerala. In the case of minor forest produce and resources, the management rights haven’t been vested with the grama sabhas, as stipulated by the FRA, by removing the orders that empower government bodies to manage them. As the role of the grama sabhas is not specifically mentioned in the draft, that can lead to larger conflicts,” he says.
Geethanandan, a Wayanad based tribal activist, also fears that apart from diluting the FRA, the EIA would cause tribals to be evicted from the forests.
“The EIA draft will lead to the eviction of tribals who depend on the forest for their livelihood. It will also take away the provisions of the FRA and topple the rights of the Adivasi grama sabhas under Provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) (PESA) Act, 1996.
“It should be remembered that the forest policies of the colonial era and the developmental activities carried out in post-Independence India had led to the eviction of millions of tribals,” he tells TNM.
Both Geethanandan and Dr Amitabh argue that the EIA draft will also intensify the process of forceful eviction that is happening under the cover of voluntary relocation.
“It was the Forest Conservation Act of 1980, the Environment (Protection) Act 1986, along with PESA and FRA that helped prevent their eviction to an extent. The FRA gave tribals the rights to minor forest produce along with the responsibility of conserving forests. Both PESA and FRA have played a major role in opposing anti-tribal projects. This in turn has recognised the rights of local communities in conserving the forests,” Geethanandan says.
Dr Amitabh says that the pressure of the draft also falls on the tribal people who are evicted from their land as part of mining and other industrialisation projects.
“Close to one million people have been displaced in the country, who later became migrant workers or even refugees. With this EIA draft, that displacement will be intensified. People will be displaced again and again; their livelihood will be lost, leading to more social conflicts. We’re in the fringe of forest and non-forest areas. Bringing in more investment will make tribals more vulnerable as the government is bound to neglect the interests of the weaker sections of society,” he says.
“By doing away with the provision of seeking prior consent for projects, local communities and grama sabhas will not be able to register their dissent. Since the mineral-rich regions in India are mostly in tribal and forest areas, the enforcement of EIA will lead to eviction of tribals from the forest land, both directly and indirectly. Though the draft notification has been set aside owing to protests, it will not do much good if it’s not cancelled fully. Instead, implementation of the Environment (Protection) Act of 1986 and the 2006 draft EIA should be made more effective,” Geethanandan says.
He also slams the state government, saying that letter it sent to the Centre on the EIA draft is a weak one.
“Protection of tribals means protection of the forest too. Protecting forests through tribal people has never been seriously discussed. In most of the other states, the tribals are more organised, they fight for their rights. The proposed amendment of the FRA had to be held back owing to protests from tribals from across the country. Here in Kerala, such a power or political group is not there among tribes nor do they have access to power,” he laments.
“Even the rights of tribals on forest land is not recognised yet. If they’re given documents to legally entitle them to be owners of the land, that is only for a few cents of land. By giving them three or four cents of land outside the forest area, they are in effect evicted from their original habitat,” Chithra says.
Dr TV Sajeev, a scientist at the Kerala Forest Research Institute, adds to Chithra’s opinion. “Community forest rights are never given to the tribals in Kerala despite the FRA. With the EIA draft facilitating big projects, it’d be easier to evict the tribals unlike other people who have legal ownership on the land,” Sajeev tells TNM.