The Forest Rights Act (FRA) of 2006 aimed to address historical injustices in Indian forest governance, recognizing individual and community rights.

December 18, 2023

General Studies Paper – 2

However, implementation challenges, political opportunism, and bureaucratic resistance hinder its transformative potential, limiting its impact.

Background: Historic Injustices in Forest Governance
Pre-Colonial Era: Local communities had customary rights over forests.
Colonial Takeover (1878): Indian Forest Act disrupted traditions, prioritizing timber resources.
Post-Independence Injustices: Forest lands declared state property, displacements, exploitation continued.
Acts Contributing to Injustice: Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972, Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 exacerbated injustices.
The Forest Rights Act (FRA): A Revolutionary Approach
Enactment (2006): Rajya Sabha endorsed FRA, aimed at addressing historical injustices.
Three Forms of Redress:
Individual Forest Rights (IFRs): Recognition of habitation, cultivation, or activities pre-December 2005.
Conversion of Forest Villages: Transforming them into revenue villages after full rights recognition.
Community Rights: Recognizing village communities’ rights to access, use, and manage forests.
Challenges in FRA Implementation
Political Opportunism: Some states focused only on individual rights, framing it as an ‘encroachment regularisation’ scheme.
Shabby Implementation of IFRs: Compromised by Forest Department resistance, apathy, and misuse of technology.
Incomplete Recognition of Community Rights (CFRs): Forest bureaucracy vehemently opposes, leading to slow and incomplete recognition.
Lacuna in Addressing ‘Forest Villages’: Many states have not adequately addressed the issue.
Distortions and Lacunae
Faulty Recognition Processes: Arbitrary rejections and partial recognition, imposing digital processes in areas with poor connectivity.
Resistance to CFRs: Forest bureaucracy opposes community forest rights, hindering decentralized forest governance.
Selective State Recognition: Maharashtra, Odisha, and Chhattisgarh recognized CFRs, but Maharashtra alone enabled activation.
Convenient Non-Recognition of Community Rights
Convenient for Conservationists and Development Lobby: Non-recognition of community rights makes communities vulnerable for rehabilitation and allows forest handovers for mining without consent.
Call for Understanding FRA’s Intent
Emerging Calls for Shutdown: With changing political regimes, calls to shut down FRA implementation have emerged.
Mission Mode Implementation: In some states, mission mode implementation led to distorted rights recognition and technocratic control.
Conclusion:
Need for Appreciation: Political leaders, bureaucrats, and environmentalists need to appreciate the spirit and intent of the FRA for addressing historical injustices and realizing the potential for community-led forest conservation and sustainable livelihoods.