New Delhi
The Union Environment Ministry has termed the concerns raised by the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) over the provisions of the contentious Forest Conservation Rules, 2022, as legally not tenable. This, in effect, also means the Ministry has refused to put the Rules on hold as demanded by the NCST.
Media reports now have quoted NCST Chairman Harsh Chouhan as saying that the Commission’s position on the issue remains the same and a dialogue with the Union Environment Ministry on the matter will continue.
The Environment Ministry had notified the new rules under the Forest Conservation Act on June 28 to replace the earlier rules notified in 2003.
The Forest Conservation Act, 1980, was enacted to help conserve the country’s forests. It strictly restricts and regulates the de-reservation of forests or use of forest land for non-forest purposes without the prior approval of the Centre.
Chouhan had in September last year written to the Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav over the Rules saying it would have serious impacts on the rights of Scheduled Tribes (ST) and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (OTFD).
“The current Rules have done away with the requirement of seeking consent altogether and have left the process of recognition of rights to be carried out after Stage I clearance or even Stage II clearance,” Chouhan had stated in his letter.
In such a scenario, project proponents, having received partial clearance, will be pushing State and Union Territory governments for diversion at the earliest, which would be seriously impacting the process of recognition of rights under the FRA, he pointed out. The Commission had recommended that the Rules be put on hold immediately.
The NCST had pointed out that between 2009 and 2018, of the 128 applications for forest diversion for mining, 74 were cleared at the Stage 2 and 46 at the Stage 1 and none of the rejections were based on FRA non-compliance.
It further said that in a subset of 14 cases, all post-2014) certificates showing the completion of the FRA process were issued in violation of ground realities and no CFR (Community Forest Resources) process had been completed anywhere. The new Rules will only increase such violations, the Commission contended.
“The requirement for consent and recognition of rights prior to Stage I clearance in 2014 and 2017 Rules at least provided a legal space for ensuring completion of the processes for recognition and vesting of rights under the FRA in areas where forests are being diverted,” it said adding this is why the two processes cannot be seen as separate, parallel ones.
The Environment Minister responded to the NSCT Chairman’s letter in November last year asserting that the Rules were framed under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 and that the NCST’s apprehension of these rules being in violation of the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 was not legally tenable and the two statutory processes were parallel and not dependent on each other.
Citing Rule 9(6)(b)(ii), he said the 2022 Rules already provides for diversion of forest land only after fulfilment and compliance of all provisions, including settlement of rights under the Forest Rights Act and also does not bar or infringe upon the operation of other laws mandating consent of Gram Sabhas.
Yadav also asserted that the new Rules mandated State governments and Union Territory administrations to issue orders for diversion of forest land only after fulfilment and compliance of all provisions, including settlements of rights under FRA.
The Opposition too has claimed that the new Rules will sideline the gram sabhas and allow private developers to cut down forests without getting the consent of the forest-dwellers, in complete violation of the provisions of the Forest Rights Act.
It pointed out that the new Rules also put the onus or burden of ensuring forest rights of forest dwellers on the State governments, after the Centre has already given its ‘final’ approval to the project. In other words, the responsibility for obtaining consent from STs and OTFDs have now been shifted from the Centre to the State government.
