For A Few Acres More

The government has initiated a move, albeit secretly, to dereserve scheduled tribal land, opening up tribal-owned properties for acquisition and commercial exploitation. The Union ministry of mines has put up a note marked 'secret'—No 16/48/97-M. VI—for the committee of secretaries to push for an amendment of the Constitution's Fifth Schedule, which covers tribal land. This initiative is meant to circumvent a Supreme Court ruling of 1997: any lease or licence to non-tribals as "absolutely void and impermissible."

The move has already sparked off angry reactions. Says N.E. Horo, a pioneer of the Jharkhand movement: "We will oppose this tooth and nail. The Jharkhand Party will not only oppose the selling of tribal land to appease some big houses in the name of industrialisation but we will also come out on the streets to protest against it with all our might and force." Jharkhand is one of the states which will be affected and its bjp chief minister Babulal Marandi was emphatic when he told Outlook that his "government is not going to make even a single change in the existing Chotanagpur and Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act which makes it clear that a non-tribal should not buy a plot of tribal land". Marandi further said that his government would "plug lacunae in the existing laws to prevent such acquisitions".

Similar voices are being heard from Chhattisgarh. Activists of the Chhattisgarh Mukti Morcha point out that the state government will have no other option but to oppose the amendment should it finally be cleared by the Centre. But chief minister Ajit Jogi does not agree. Says he: "Development work has to happen if the tribals have to join the mainstream. Of course it's very important to ensure that the tribals are rehabilitated and get their share of development. They can't continue to remain museum pieces."

Dereservation of tribal land and rehabilitation of those displaced has always been tricky issues. Even going by official estimates, of the 85.39 lakh tribals displaced between 1951 and 1990, only 21.16 lakh have been resettled. And this acquisition of land was for government projects in "national interest". It's now being feared that once tribal land is opened up to mining companies, there will be large-scale exploitation of those displaced.

Says Rajya Sabha MP Kuldip Nayar, who is on the Parliamentary Committee on the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill: "As many as 7,000 people displaced by the Bhakra Nangal dam have not been rehabilitated even after 40 years. If tribal land is opened to all and sundry, then relocating the affected will be virtually impossible."

Extrapolating from the 1991 census, which put the tribal population at 8 per cent of the total population, the current strength of tribals is about 8 crore. Of these, approximately 4.5 crore live on scheduled land. It is these tribals who are threatened with displacement. There are as many as 350 identified tribes in the country. Studies conducted by researchers at the Indian Social Institute, Delhi, point to the fact that tribals constituted 40 per cent of those displaced till 1990 and 50 per cent of those displaced since.

Those who are opposed to any dereservation move point out that any rehabilitation programme would involve alienating the tribals and all previous attempts at relocation have failed, leading to the displacement and neglect of lakhs of people. Those who support such a move see an infusion of foreign capital and consequent development of the area which will bring tribals into the mainstream.However, the Orissa and Andhra Pradesh experiments, where land has been given for mining, have proved that this is far from true.

Evaluation of rehabilitation programmes indicate that only a small percentage gain from any rehabilitation package. For example, only 15.4 per cent of the tribals benefited from Maharashtra's "land-for-land" scheme after the state acquired land for various irrigation projects. The stories from Orissa and Andhra Pradesh are similar. Once pushed to leave their land, the tribals are denied or get delayed compensation.

Says Congress MP Eduardo Faleiro, who has been monitoring attempts to take over tribal land: "Dereserving tribal land will only open the floodgates of a thousand Narmadas. Such a move will dispossess the tribals of their ancestral land and there is no talk of resettlement. All this is similar to what the Canadians and the white settlers in the US did to the native Americans."

The Land Acquisition Amendment Bill, seen as a precursor to any amendment for the Fifth Schedule, was to come up in Parliament this session but may not eventually be taken up. This is being seen as the first step to opening up tribal land. The bill seeks to make the acquisition of all properties (other than scheduled tribal land) by Indian and foreign investors easier than ever before by relaxing earlier curbs. Thus, the definition of public interest has been redefined to include private enterprise and the pursuance of business. The move to ammend the Fifth Schedule to dereserve tribal land is seen as the next step once the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill is passed. The former would enable the government to denotify tribal land and offer it for commercial use.

Waiting in the wings are several mncs who have made it conditional that their investment in mining was subject to their acquiring the land to be prospected. Huge tracts of tribal land in Jharkhand, Orissa, Andhra Pradesh and Chhattisgarh are rich in bauxite, mica, coal and lignite, among other natural resources.

But it is not merely for mining that tribal land is being targeted. According to Ravi Pragada, who runs the ngo Mines, Mineral and People, prospective investors are also eyeing tribal land to set up five-star resorts. "Since most of the tribal land is within forests, they are scenic. So there are those who see a good opportunity in acquiring property and developing it." He cites the example of a proposal to set up a golf course in a scheduled area in Andhra Pradesh. Other such scenic spots have also attracted investors.

It is primarily to facilitate the entry of foreign investors that the Union ministry of mines has been pushing the case for an amendment of the Fifth Scedule. The 1997 Supreme Court ruling in the Samatha case, relating to tribal land in Andhra Pradesh, had made commercial exploitation of tribal land by non-tribals illegal. The ruling was binding to all notified tribal land in the country. The ministry of mines filed a review petition in the apex court on February 4, 1999. But that was dismissed. Later, it filed for the modification of the 1997 order. This too was dismissed in February this year by a Supreme Court bench.

Attorney general Soli Sorbajee in his advice to the mines ministry has pointed out that "it is not feasible to move an application before the Supreme Court in vacuo for reference to a constitutional bench". The attorney general also advised that the "other course open to Parliament is to effect necessary amendments so as to overcome the said Supreme Court judgement by removing its legal basis".

According to the ministry, the Constitution allows for minor changes and, therefore, the amendment need not be a total change of the schedule but a few alterations which will allow for denotification. So, the changes can be technically brought about with a simple majority.

But can the government push through with the changes? The issue is a political minefield and will be opposed from virtually every quarter. Tribal interests will certainly dominate in states like Jharkhand, Andhra Pradesh, Orissa and parts of Gujarat and Maharashtra. Says RJD leader Laloo Prasad Yadav: "From the beginning, we knew it and that is why I have been opposing the formation of Jharkhand. It's a deep-rooted conspiracy by the bjp. It has succumbed to the self-interest of its constituency. If dereservation happens, we won't sit idle." Shorn of Laloo's self-interest, this appears to be a valid objection.