New Delhi: The
urgency with which the Narendra Modi government has gone about
initiating the process of watering-down the Land Acquisition Act has
surprised many, who less than a year ago witnessed the BJP lend its
whole-hearted support to ensure the very same Act was passed in
Parliament.
The Rural Development Ministry, in a
note submitted to the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), is reported to have
suggested a series of amendments to the Land Acquisition Act that seek
to dilute provisions such as the mandatory consent of 70 percent of
those affected in case of public-private partnership (PPP) projects and
the requirement for a time-bound Social Impact Assessment for all land
acquisitions.
“I am surprised by this because when I
organised the long march many BJP leaders supported me and said they
agreed with my demands. I am waiting to see what kind of opposition will
come from within the BJP to the amendments to the Land Acquisition Act.
We wish that within BJP a large number of people will oppose this move.
If that doesn’t happen, I will be very surprised. That would mean that
it was all Opposition politics and it had nothing to do with reality,”
said Ekta Parishad’s P V Rajagopal whose year-long ‘Freedom march’ of
landless farmers and adivasis demanding land reforms made headlines last year.
The final march to Delhi was called off
after then Rural Development minister Jairam Ramesh signed an agreement
with Ekta Parishad promising to address their key demand of ‘land for
the landless and shelter to the homeless’.
“Now,
I want to see what position the Congress is going take on this. They
had promised that they would be bring an Act in parliament to give
shelter and land to everyone but they didn’t do that…We have reached a
situation where all political parties are the same. They want to give
land to the corporate houses and make India a ‘super power’ by pushing
millions and millions of people into super poverty. I am very
concerned,” said Rajagopal, who was also part of the task force that was
set up by the previous government, as part of the agreement with Ekta
Parishad, to draft a national land reforms policy.
Expressing his concern over the
proposal to dilute the ‘consent clause’, Rajagopal said, “According to
me, there should be 100 percent consent because landless people depend
on the land and their consent is important. Now if the government is
trying to dilute it further by saying that consent is not important and
that the majority should say ‘yes’, this is going to be a big change
because with money power and muscle power you can get majority. Powerful
people, by using alcohol and money, will get the majority that they
need. So majority clauses are not acceptable and it is going to be very
dangerous.”
Social activists who were involved in
the drafting of the national land reforms policy have also raised
concerns over the lack of public discussion on the review of the Land
Acquisition Act.
“Firstly, one doesn’t know the exact
formulations. They should be put in the public domain before they go to
the Cabinet. If it has gone from the ministry to the PMO, the ministry
should have put that on its website…No matter what laws the government
passes or what amendments it suggests, it is vital to discuss it with
the public, to know what people think about it. Secondly, people cannot
be coerced against their will, finally people in those areas will stand
up. It is better that we are wiser about the law,” said social activist
Nikhil Dey.
Proposals such as restricting the
Social Impact Assessment (SIA) to large/PPP projects have raised
concerns of the Act losing its thrust for transparency and
accountability in land acquisitions.
“The Act did introduce some
transparency measures and how those can be argued against, I don’t
understand. If you don’t have these processes or allow these public
platforms to be able to look at it, you are only postponing to a later
day a much worse process of conflict,” said Dey, who is co-convenor,
National Campaign for Peoples’ Right to Information (NCPRI).
Explaining the rationale behind the
SIA, Dey said, “The SIA gives you a chance to know those who are
landless, about what is going to happen to their lives, what is going
happen to the community, in a particular community if you are not giving
land for land what does it mean for the farming community. People get
an opportunity through the SIA to feed back into the system if the
initial evaluations were correct or not. It allows for much greater
transparency in the process.”
Echoing Rajagopal’s fears on the
implications of reducing mandatory consent from 70 to 50 percent for PPP
projects, Dey said, “If you bring it down to 50 percent, given our
manipulative framework and society, it will be a disaster.”
While the government is reported to
have started consultations with political parties to build consensus on
the amendments, land rights activists like Rajagopal have also decided
to raise their concerns with political leaders.
“I am going to take it up immediately. I
will write to leaders of political parties saying that this is
unacceptable and see what their reaction is. It will be too late if we
don’t start moving in that direction. There is no point protesting after
everything has happened. We have to protest now,” said Rajagopal.
Deutsch
Español