NEW DELHI: The Congress on Wednesday alleged that the manner in which the forest bill has been "bulldozed" in Parliament reflects the Modi government's mindset and the "vast gap that exists between its global talk and domestic walk" on issues of environment, forests and tribal rights.
The Rajya Sabha passed The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill, 2023, after a brief debate, amid protests by opposition members and a walkout by them over the Manipur issue.
The bill seeks to exempt land within 100 kilometres of the country's borders from the purview of conservation laws and permit the setting up of zoos, safaris and eco-tourism facilities in forest areas.
It amends The Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, and was passed by Lok Sabha on July 26 in the ongoing Monsoon session of Parliament.
Congress general secretary and chief whip of the party in Rajya Sabha Jairam Ramesh said the bill was first introduced in Lok Sabha on March 29 (during the Budget session) and it makes several "far-reaching and radical" amendments to the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
"The journey of the bill to soon becoming a law is a case study on how to completely subvert the legislative process," he said in a statement.
Ramesh said the bill should have been referred to the Standing Committee on Science and Technology, Environment, Forests and Climate Change, which he chairs.
"I had taken serious objections to this (bill not being sent to the committee) and put them on record as well, not once but twice. Instead, a Joint Committee of Parliament (JCP) was set up with a ruling party MP as its chair," the Congress leader said.
"Be that as it may, the JCP submitted its report on July 20, 2023. Extraordinarily and perhaps in an unprecedented move, the report suggested no changes whatsoever to the bill as introduced by the government," he said.
However, Ramesh said, six MPs submitted detailed notes of dissent and he associated fully.
In a tweet, in which he shared the statement, Ramesh said The Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill, 2023, which makes "several far-reaching and radical amendments to the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, has just passed in Rajya Sabha now in the absence of the opposition that is being silenced on Manipur".
Lok Sabha passed the bill on July 27 and "today it has been bulldozed in Rajya Sabha in din, without any meaningful debate", he said.
"Thus, both the substance of the amendments and the manner they have been bulldozed through in Parliament reflects the mindset of the Modi government, and the vast gap that exists between its global talk and domestic walk on the environment, forests and the rights of Adivasis and other forest-dwelling communities," Ramesh said.
He said the bill has drawn widespread criticisms over the past few months and continues to evoke great concern.
Ramesh listed out the substantive objections to the amendments to the bill and said the very name of the law is being changed.
"For the first time, a law passed by Parliament will have its short title entirely in Hindi without an official English equivalent. This does injustice to non-Hindi speaking states," the former Environment minister said.
Besides the change in language, the title of the law itself is being amended which when translated into English will read as Forest (Conservation and Augmentation) Act, he claimed.
"This is based on the assumption that plantations can compensate for loss of natural forests.
This notion is completely faulty.
The two are ecologically very different.
Natural forests can be regenerated but not augmented as seems to be the mindset governing the amendments," he claimed.
The Rajya Sabha member said "forest-like areas" such as tracts of land that have the characteristics of forests but have not been notified under the law or recorded as "Forest" in any government records, would be exempted under the amendment.
This includes traditionally conserved lands and other unrecorded forest areas which are supposed to be identified as "deemed forests" as well as areas intended to be notified as "Forest", but notification for these under Section 4 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, (or other equivalent state law) has not even begun, he claimed in his statement.
Also, forest lands diverted by the State before 1996 are completely exempted under the proposed amendment, he claimed.
"Such blanket exemptions will threaten all such forests by diluting the category of 'forest lands' which were brought under the mandate of approval in the landmark 1996 T N Godavarman judgment of the Supreme Court," Ramesh said.
"Exact estimates of all these categories of forests are not easily available. But it appears that anywhere between 20 per cent-25 per cent of the country's forests could end up losing legal protection and thereby ecological protection as well," he said.
These "forest-like areas" can now be cleared, diverted, exploited, and sold for non-forestry purposes, the Congress leader claimed.
Ramesh also alleged that time and again the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change has ignored the Forest Rights Act, 2006, which was enacted to protect the interests of 'Adivasis' and other traditional forest-dwellers.
"The settlement of their occupancy and livelihood rights no longer matters in the matter of forest clearances for projects. Even the Ministry of Tribal Affairs and the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes, a constitutional body, had taken serious objection to the Forest Conservation Rules, 2022, which do away with the need for approval by the gram sabha when diversion of forest land becomes inevitable," he said.
"The new amendments continue with this policy of non-compliance with the Forest Rights Act, 2006, by the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change. Not only individual but also community forest rights (CFRs) will be under severe threat with these amendments," Ramesh said.
He alleged that in the name of national security, which undoubtedly is essential, a complete clean chit is being provided to clear forests and alter biodiverse and geologically sensitive regions near the country's borders.
One of the amendments exempts lands, "situated within a distance of 100 km along international borders or Line of Control or Line of Actual Control", for "construction of strategic linear projects of national importance and concerning national security" from obtaining any clearance, he said.
"This not only affects the ecology in the Himalayan and north-eastern regions but also the livelihoods of those communities living at the margins. It can only be hoped that such projects will be planned and executed in an ecologically balanced manner," the former Union minister said.