House panel highlights forest law conflicts

NEW DELHI: How can a right given under one Act be a criminal offence under another, members of a Parliamentary standing committee have asked officials from the Union environment ministry, raising concern about conflict between the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006, and the Indian Forest Act (IFA), 1927.

The House panel on science and technology and environment and forests headed by T Subbarami Reddy of Congress was gathering evidence on the amendments proposed to the IFA when panel members quizzed the officials how one law gives tribal rights over forest produce but another criminalizes it.

DMK’s T M Selvaganapthi asked the ministry officials for clarifications on the criminalization of forest rights under the IFA.

The green ministry officials took a dim view of the FRA — the flagship scheme of the UPA government handing back rights over forest resources to tribals. The director general (DG), forests — the highest forest official in the country — told the committee that responsibilities were not clearly demarcated between the forest bureaucracy and tribals under the FRA. He suggested that either gram sabhas should be entrusted with the complete responsibility for conserving forests or the forest bureaucracy should take over the onerous task.

The DG, forests, also warned that withdrawing government from forests could lead to “anti-national, communal, anti-social and extremist forces” making jungles their happy hunting ground, and government losing control.

His argument comes against the backdrop of reservations within the highest echelons of forest bureaucracy against the FRA since its inception.

Sources told TOI that the DG, forests, reiterated that if the gram sabhas were to be made ‘malik’ of forests, then the forest service should be shut down.

He also informed the committee that bamboo continued to be classified as ‘timber’ under the IFA, giving the forest officials control over its movement and harvesting. Differing from the public views expressed by the environment minister and the tribal affairs minister, he suggested that the FRA should be amended to align it with the older law.

Sources said that the environment secretary recommended that gram sabhas should be handed over forests and powers to regulate it, but it was too big a step and should not be implemented immediately.

The environment secretary advised that it be done in a “phased manner” after capacity building and training. He suggested that the parliamentary comnmittee should not look into the difference between the two legislations as it was a “very big issue”.