The Ministry of Tribal Development for all India and Tribal Department of a particular state is the nodal agency for the implementation of the FRA. Under the Tribal Department comes the State Level Monitoring Committee (SLMC) as the name suggests, it monitors the recognition and vesting of Forest Rights. Under the SLMC the act mandates the formation of the District Level Committee (DLC) which is the apex authority according to the act for the approval of the rights by the State. The Sub-Divisional Committee falls below the DLC. It examines the resolution passed by the Gram Sabha and prepares the record of rights. If the Sub-divisional committee accepts the claims then they are passed to DLC for the approval. Gram Sabha\u2019s are responsible for initiating the process for determining the extent and nature of the rights to be claimed under the FRA. The Gram Sabha has to elect a separate Forest Rights Committee which looks after the procedural and legal matters of the FRA. So, to summarize the implementation mechanism for FRA is as follows-<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is important to analyze the implementation at each stage.\nLets start with from SLMC as the decision made by SLMC have impact on entire\nstate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1. The State\nLevel Monitoring Committee (SLMC)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n As mentioned earlier The State Level Monitoring\nCommittee looks after the monitoring of the entire rights and claims in a\nparticular State. Analysis of the minutes of the meetings of the meeting,\nthrows light on the implementation of the FRA act. SLMC Meeting 22nd July 2008\nsays – \u201cThe Committee decided that the Act may be implemented in the Tribal\nAreas in the first phase and keeping in view the experience. The Act may be\nimplemented in the rest of the State.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n The Section 1 (2) of FRA says \u201cIt extends to the whole\nof India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir.\u201d Act says it applies to whole India form its\ndate of implementation regardless of the tribal area or non-tribal area. In\nthis backdrop, the approach of the SLMC clearly takes a diversion from the FRA.\nBut in the case of Himachal Pradesh due to the decision by the SLMC, the FRA\nwas implemented only in the tribal areas. This approach was continued from 2008\nto 2013. SLMC Meeting 22nd May 2013 notes \u201cThe Scheduled Tribes and Other\nTraditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 is to be\nimplemented throughout the State.\u201d <\/em>The act came into force in 2008 it took\nfive years for the SLMC to implement act throughout the state. This decision of\nnon-implementation of FRA in non-tribal areas kept 57% of Himachal Pradesh\noutside the ambit of the act. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to the FRA, the main role of SLMC is to \u201cdevise\ncriteria and indicators for monitoring the process of recognition and vesting\nof forest rights\u201d. The role of SLMC is to monitor and it does not have the\nauthority to decide where to or where not to implement the Act. Clearly, the\nSLMC was overreaching its jurisdiction by interfering in the implementation\nmatters. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Role of District Level Committee and Sub-Divisional\nCommittee-<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Though the Gram Sabha is the main entity which is\nresponsible for the implementation of the FRA. Lower level bureaucracy, Revenue\nOfficer come into the picture for verifying the rights. Not only this\nSub-divisional committee and District Level Committee have a significant\nproportion of the bureaucrats. Deputy Commissioner\/Magistrate, is the head of\nDLC who passes the final order for the claims and rights. In this context,\nthese bureaucrats are the major stakeholders having a high level of influence\nfor the implementation of the FRA. So, their interest and approach are\ndefinitely going to influence the implementation of the act. In the span of my\nfieldwork, I was interacting with Deputy Commissioner of Mandi district when a\ndelegation of \u2018Himachal Van Adhikar Manch\u2019 was meeting him for delay in the\napproval of FRA rights. The Manch argued that there claims for the forest\nrights are pending at the DLC level and neither the claims are accepted nor\nrejected. He assured people that he will look into the matter a standard\nbureaucratic answer. In the unofficial talks, the Commissioner said \u201cActually\nthe claims are legally sound to be accepted but I have pressure from above to\nnot accept the claims as more and more people will start to approach. This will\ncreate a hurdle for the development projects carried out by the government.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n Naturally the question in my mind was what hurdle the Deputy\nCommissioner was talking about? To answer the above question, we need to dig\ndeeper into the act. The FRA rules says \u201cThe Ministry of Environment &\nForests, vide their letter No.11-9\/1998-FC(pt.) dated 30.07.2009, as modified\nby their subsequent letter of the same number dated 03.08.2009, has issued\ndirections, requiring the State\/UT Governments to enclose certain evidences relating\nto completion of the process of settlement of rights under the Scheduled Tribes\nand other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006,\nwhile formulating unconditional proposals for diversion of forest land for\nnon-forest purposes under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.<\/strong> The State\nGovernment should ensure that all diversions of forest land for non-forest\npurposes under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 take place in compliance\nwith the instructions contained in the Ministry of Environment & Forest\u2019s\nletter dated 30.07.2009, as modified on 03.08.2009.<\/strong>\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n Now the\nquestion arises what the letter has to say about the compliance and how it\naffects the development? For this let us see two important clauses of the\nletter- <\/p>\n\n\n\n The letter clearly empowers and vests rights in the\nhands of the Gram Sabha. Now let us see how it affects the \u201cdevelopment\u201d-\nSuppose a hydel project is being carried out by the State government with the\nhelp of the private company under PPP model and it is going to affect say one\nthousand villages. The government has to take written consent from all the 1000\ngram sabhas with minimum fifty percent quorum. In contrast, if the act is not\nimplemented it has to take just the permission of the Forest Department and\nother government agencies and it is easier to obtain rather than going to the\npeople. The voice-forms the grassroots can also be easily curbed. But if\nimplemented the voice of grassroots will get legal backing. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Due to the above reason the collector was having the\npressure for not passing the Forest Rights claims as it goes against the\n\u2018development agenda\u2019 of the state government. The District Level Committee\n(DLC) headed by the collector is the supreme authority for the recognition of\nthe rights according to the act. If the\nrights are not recognized by the DLC who is a supreme authority due to the\n\u2018pressure\u2019 then the intentions of the act get fundamentally challenged. The Act\nthen just becomes a piece of paper. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Role of Forest Rights Committee (FRC) and Gram Sabhas-<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The FRA mandates formation of FRC at every village level\nand not at the Panchayat level through electing the members from Gram Sabha. To\nelaborate, if there is a Panchayat for three villages. Then each village will\nhave a Gram Sabha and will elect its own FRC. So, the Panchayat will now have\nthree FRCs. But In the context of Himachal Pradesh, the FRCs were formed at\nPanchayat level which goes against the FRA act. Due to this formation of FRCs\nwas delayed which further delayed the implementation of the Act. According to\nthe official data in 2015 that is after seven years when the act came into\nbeing, the FRCs were not formed in 28% of villages in Himachal Pradesh. The\nareas in which FRCs were formed also needs to be looked into. I was having a\nconversation with a few men and women who were members of FRCs. It was\nsurprising to find that many men and women were not knowing that they are part\nof FRC\u2019s and there exists an act named FRA. \nTo understand the scenario in detailed I interviewed vice-president of a\nPanchayat in Kangra district who was also FRC head of his village about the\nformation of FRC. I asked him \u201cIf people don\u2019t know about FRA and FRC, how they\nare a member of it?\u201d to which he replied \u201cOur Panchayat got a government order\nfor the formation of FRC in the village. Also, I received a call from bureaucrat\nto complete the procedure of formation. We were not having enough time to call\na Gram Sabha. So, I picked certain names and made them members of FRC. Later I\ncollected the signatures.\u201d If FRCs are created in such a way then they are just\ngoing to serve the paper rather than on the ground. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n I have shown how at each level of the governance\nmechanism starting from the State Level Monitoring Committee which stopped the\nimplementation of Act in non-tribal areas. On top of this comes District Level\nCommittee who are reluctant to pass the claims due to the \u2018pressure\u2019 from\nabove. Then at village level the FRCs are formed in many villages just on\npaper. FRA is one of the rare policy documents which has tried to address all\nthe issues arising at the implementation level in the policy document itself.\nThough the policy document states clear cut agenda of the act when it comes to\nthe implementation the ethos and spirit of the act are ignored form lower level\nbureaucracy to the state level bureaucracy including the courts. It is just a\nperception created by the State that FRA gives power to the people, if you\ndon\u2019t question fundamentally its implementation. The time has come to question\nthe judgement and the State for the proper implementation of the FRA and give\nreal power in the hands of people. <\/p>\n\n\n\n If we see the implementation at the district level,\nwhere the act is finally going to get approved the non-compliance due to the\n\u2018pressure\u2019 by the State government in the name of development questions the\nvery fundamental idea of \u2018development, where people are not empowered to have\nlegal backing for there voice when the same voice is going to challenge the so\ncalled development discourse of the state. To amplify the matter further, the\npower to the voice of people is now curbed by the Supreme Court which halts the\nimplementation of FRA. The same supreme court which is the guardian of the\nvoice. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" If we see the implementation at the district level, where the act is finally going to get approved the non-compliance due to the \u2018pressure\u2019 by the State government in the name of development questions the very fundamental idea of \u2018development, where people are not empowered to have legal backing for there voice when the same voice is going to challenge the so called development discourse of the state.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":45,"featured_media":70648,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[3,92],"tags":[247,248,249,250],"class_list":["post-70643","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-indian-economy","category-social","tag-forest-rights-act","tag-fra","tag-the-scheduled-tribes-and-other-traditional-forest-dwellers-recognition-of-forest-rights-act","tag-tribal-development-in-himachal"],"yoast_head":"\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/thepubliceconomist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/12\/image.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n