·
The objective of the new bill is to
make the process of land acquisition easy, transparent, and fair for
both sides
·
Land alienation is a matter of
concern for the MNCs and quite rightly external agencies like world bank have
been dictating terms to government on land policy
·
World bank in a report in 2007 suggested
following
1.
make
leasing legal where it is currently prohibited…
2.
drop restrictions on sale of land to
non-agriculturists
3.
review legislation on compulsory land
acquisition
4.
allow
farmers or their representatives to negotiate with and if desired transfer land
directly to investors rather than having to go through government and often
receive only very limited compensation
·
This Bill facilitates acquiring land, including commons, presently in
the hands of small and marginal farmers from tribal, SC and backward
communities under the pretext of an unstated ‘public purpose' for
“infrastructure development”
·
In urban areas it is very clear that
it is connected to real estate development in return for crumbs such as
‘housing for the urban poor' schemes.
·
for the SIA (Social Impact
Assessment), there is mention of “Two non-official social scientists, two
experts in the area relating to the project.” Women, senior citizens and
children are not part of this exercise. The affected people are not to select
this group.
1.
Most ‘experts' come from sections
not directly displaced/dispossessed.
·
The bill stresses on minimum
disturbance to infrastructure, ecology and minimum adverse impact on
individuals during acqusition
1.
this is highly subjective and left
open-ended without defining the “minimum” displacement (in forests, for instance;
or damage to rivers, for instance — how much is ‘minimum”?)
·
also the onus will be on people to
enter into litigation to reclaim their land from the government
·
the bill has a provision of “One
acre of land to each family in the command area if land is acquired for
irrigation project”
·
this seems foolhardy if it plans to
cover entire populations displaced by irrigation projects . Where is this kind
of land available in the proposed command area?
·
Tribal communities
1.
Preference in relocation and
resettlement in area in same compact block
2.
But many questions remain unanswered
i.
How does the Bill compute the ‘economic worth'
of tribal, Dalit or BC communities, women's work, to be dispossessed of a
permanent asset — land/river?
No comments:
Post a Comment