The electoral outcome in nearly three in ten of India’s Parliamentary constituencies could be influenced by issues surrounding the implementation of the Forest Rights Act, says an analysis by independent researchers.
The Forest Rights Act (FRA), officially known as the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006, is a piece of legislation that enables tribal communities and forest-dwelling citizens to claim legal rights over the forest land they have occupied for generations but in many cases, denied a say or authority in its management or free access to forest produce.
It gives gram sabhas, or village councils, the right to decide on how best their forest land can be used. Any transfer of forest land for non-forestry use now requires their consent. However the implementation of the FRA has been controversial. While several have been granted titles under its provisions, hundreds of thousands of tribals have seen their claim to titles rejected. The FRA lays down criteria under which tribal inhabitants can claim title to their land. However, the exclusions it imposes, impediments by the forest bureaucracy, and provisions of other acts such as Forest Conservation Act and Wildlife Protection Act has, in the eyes of analysts and researchers, posed hurdles to the proper implementation of the FRA.
Also Read: The government has trapped Project Tiger, now 50, in a tough spot | Explained
Estimates suggest that at least 30 million hectares of forest land, comprising more than 40% of the total forest area, could be vested as Community Forest Rights with gram sabhas. This has the potential to secure the rights and livelihoods of at least 200 million people, including nearly 90 million tribals.
The latest estimates from the Centre say that as of October 2023, 2.2 million individual land titles and 1.1 lakh community titles - all in all 2.3 million titles - have been accorded to tribal and forest dwellers across the country. Until the same period, 4.5 million claims to title have been received, the Ministry of Tribal Affairs noted.
For their analysis, the researchers estimated the percentage of the electorate in each constituency that would be eligible for titles under the provisions of the FRA. They did this by calculating the population in each constituency (2011 Census) and among them, the proportion of potential voters who lived in villages that fell in notified forest areas.
Also Read: An uphill struggle to grow the Forest Rights Act
There are 153 constituencies where the settling of rights could be a key issue affecting their voting decisions. There were 45 constituencies (Reserved and unreserved), that the researchers classified as ‘critical’ or where FRA issues could be most significant. These were unreserved constituencies where over 60% of the electorate were potential rights holders or reserved (Scheduled Tribes) ones with more than 10% as rights holders. There were 97 constituencies where 20%-50% of the electorate were rights holders.
In the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, the BJP won 103 of these constituencies, with Congress (INC) winning only 11 of these seats. ‘Others’ won 39 seats in Andhra Pradesh (5), Maharashtra (10), Odisha (11), Telangana (5).
In 42 constituencies seats reserved for ST, the BJP won 31 (73.81%), and INC won only 3 (7.14%).
Also Read: Community rights and forest conservation | Explained
“In PCs reserved for STs, issues of rights of the Adivasi communities become central in election campaigns for political representatives for both – the current dispensation as well as the Opposition,” the authors Soz, and Tushar Dash state in the study. Both are researchers on issues surrounding forest-rights implementation. “In a democratic framework, pre-electoral periods have thus been an opportunity for people’s movements to highlight and advance issues to build a political discourse around rights-based movements,” they add.
In 2019, just ahead of the election, the Supreme Court passed an order that asked States to ensure eviction of tribals and forest dwellers whose claims to forest land were rejected. Impacting nearly 1.6 million citizens, this led to widespread uproar, after which the Union government agreed to “review” the conditions of rejection. The SC later on put its order on hold.
