The Union Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) released a consultation paper on October 2, 2021 and proposed 14 amendments in the Forest Conservation Act, 1980 with reference to the amendments made in 1988 in this Act.
The move has become a cause of concern for several environmental experts as the Union government has often been criticised for its covert efforts towards providing ¡®ease of doing business¡¯ to its cronies in the grab of 'development'. This latest move is also seen in the same context.
The Forest (Conservation) Act (FCA) was promulgated in 1980 to address deforestation. Though the Indian Forest Act has been in force since 1927, it was geared to allow the colonial British administration to control the extraction of timber and not aimed at preserving forests or addressing deforestation.
While States had already notified forest land, the FCA made it necessary to get the Centre¡¯s permission for using such forest land for ¡°non forestry purposes¡± and the creation of an advisory committee to recommend such re-classification.
It is not the first time that the act is being amended. The FCA was previously amended in 1988 and 1996. Before 1996, the State Governments, Union Territory Administrations and Central Government used to apply the provisions of the Act only to the forests notified under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 or any other local law, and to forests which were under the management or control of the Forest Department. In simple words, the Act was largely applied to reserve forests and national parks only.
However, in 1996, in T N Godavarman Thirumulpad v Union of India case, the Supreme Court expanded the definition and scope of forest land to include all areas recorded as forest in any government record, irrespective of ownership, recognition and classification. The order was also interpreted to presume that the Act is applicable over plantations in non-forest land.
The latest amendment is viewed as the follow up of the FCA draft which was presented by the Centre for the first time in March in order to update the FCA. And it wasn¡¯t made public, only portions of it were reported in some newspapers.?
Ministry officials have said the current definition of forests has locked land across the country; even private owners cannot utilise their own property for non-forestry purposes. Under the Act, any diversion of any forest land for any purpose, including assignment of leases, needs prior approval of the Centre.
Now, with the latest amendment proposal, Ministry officials have reasoned that the amendments proposed to "streamline provisions of the Act". It has said the identification of forest land is subjective and arbitrary and that the ¡°ambiguity¡± has ¡°resulted in a lot of resentment and resistance particularly from private individuals and organisations¡±. The Ministry has also cited ¡°strong resentment in the Ministry of Railways, Ministry of Road, Transport & Highways¡±, which too require forest clearance. Officials said these clearances usually take several years, in turn delaying infrastructure projects.
The Ministry has proposed that all land acquired by the Railways and Roads Ministries prior to 1980 be exempted from the Act. It says these lands had been acquired for expansion, but subsequently forests have grown in these areas, and the government is no longer able to use the land for expansion.?
If the amendment is brought in, these Ministries will no longer need clearance for their projects, nor pay compensatory levies to build there.
For individuals whose lands fall within a state-specific Private Forests Act or come within the dictionary meaning of forest as specified in the 1996 Supreme Court order, the government proposes to allow ¡°construction of structures for bona fide purposes¡¯¡¯ including residential units up to 250 sq m as a one-time relaxation.
Moreover, defence projects near international borders will also be exempted from forest clearance. Oil and natural gas extraction from forested lands will be permitted. But strip plantations alongside roads will be exempted.
Simultaneously, the Ministry has also proposed doing away with levies for non-forestry purposes during the renewal of a lease, saying the double levy at the time of awarding of the lease and the renewal is ¡°not rational¡±.
To begin with, the proposal evidently seems to? exempt certain categories of infrastructure project developers from approaching the Centre for permission to use forest land for non-forestry purposes which will certainly lead to facilitating corporate ownership and the disappearance of large tracts of forests.
Environmentalists point out that exemption for Roads and Railways on forest land acquired prior to 1980 will be detrimental to forests as well as wildlife ¨C especially elephants, tigers and leopards.
Apart from it, the proposal which has been made public this time, has invited comments and feedback within a month of its release. And this one-month time limit is again a breach of pre-legislative consultation policy.?
Besides, several High Courts have also directed to publish such notifications in local languages as well, but the Ministry has only published it in English so far.?
For more on news and current affairs from around the world please visit Indiatimes News.