The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Amendment) Bill, 2015 has attracted a lot of criticism from various political parties. It has soon become the incumbent NDA Government’s Achilles’ heel.As apprehended by many which has materialised, it was always going to be a difficult task for the NDA Government to implement its socioeconomic policy, since it is a minority in the Rajya Sabha.
There are multiple clauses in the bill which are tagged as ‘anti-poor’. This has provided the requisite fodder for the opposition parties to come out with all guns blazing at the Modi Sarkar. The biggest bone of contention has been section 10(A) of the lARR Act 2013 to expand to sectors where assessment and consent will not be required. For five sectors (defence, rural infrastructure, industrial corridors, affordable housing, infrastructure projects including PPP projects), the consent clause has been removed. So the Government or private individuals/companies will no longer need mandatory 80 per cent consent for land acquisition in these five sectors.
The whole rationale behind such a step is that the Government wants to send a signal to the foreign investors to invest in the infrastructure projects, much in sync with the ‘Make in India’ initiative. Globally, Modi is seen as a ‘pro-growth leader’, but the NDA should be aware of the ‘India Shining’ campaign. Nobody had ever imagined that NDA would lose the 2004 general elections. So the Government shouldn’t lose touch with the grass root reality. In the recent past, there have been incidents which have portrayed a rather conflicting nexus between the State and its subjects. Singur, Kudankulam, Polavaram, Bhatta Parsaul are proof of this.
Although laws are made by the Centre, the onus of implementing them falls on the State Government. Hence it should be made a State subject and issues should be examined with respect to State specific situation.Coming to Odisha, the Vedanta and the Posco issues have drawn maximum attention. Odisha is a special case, a State with abundance of natural resources but still one of the poorest in the country. A lack of media attention has failed to accentuate the ‘real’ issues on the national stage.
It is quite amazing to find why the issue of Neelachal Ispat Nigam limited (NINl) is not coming into the foray! It was in the year 1982, during the reign of then Chief Minister J B Patnaik that the NINl was set up in Kalinganagar near Duburi in Jajpur district. The then Government had to go through the same ordeal. The dynamic ability and governing competence of then Chief Secretary of State, Sudhansu Bhusan Mishra, solved the issue amicably. The NINl required a huge plot of land acquired by the tribal people. In order to make the indigenous people realize the importance of industrialization in the State, and in their pursuit to pacify the local inhabitants, the Government built well furnished, attractive houses in order to lure the villagers.
Hence, the villagers magnanimously offered their lands to the Government in exchange of the houses. Hence the issue of land acquisition was scuttled into oblivion unlike the present precarious situation, where land acquisition is done forcefully, or the villagers are paid a meagre amount for their lands. Even a few people were killed in their resistance to the Government’s bullying attitude.In 1983, the Government of JB Patnaik proposed a second dam on the Mahanadi river at Manibhadra. Odisha had been marred by incessant floods, but there were massive protests in western Odisha possessed by motives of regionalism. The project had to be relinquished.
The second major project that had to be abandoned was the National Missile Test Range in 54 villages of Baliapal and Bhograi blocks in Baleswar districts. This was in 1986. There was immense support from the Centre, both in terms of funds and human resources. But the villagers huddled together in protest. The villagers erected barricades which prevented the sleuths to enter the area, and finally the project had to be given up to gain political brownie points. The national security argument and the call for patriotism made no headway.
We have seen similar resistance movements in Gandhamardan, and more recently, in Niyamgiri, which brought the State into limelight. After seeing the resilience of Odisha's people belonging to the bottom of the pyramid (farmers, adivasis and Dalits) it is accepted that any attempt at forcible land acquisition in Odisha for large projects will fail unless people can become partners in the growth process.
Why has land acquisition become such an ordealIJ Post independence, the State could acquire vast acres of land to set up large industries, roads, bridges, dams, etc. Whenever the displacement occurred, the people were promised high compensation, a share in the incurred benefits, and a brighter future for themselves and their children. But eventually, people found that the growth harnessed at their cost, did not trickle down and become inclusive. People no longer trust the State represented by a politico-bureaucratic combine and deeply resent displacement.
Most people affected by land acquisition happen to be small and marginal farmers, who didn’t own any land and landless people. A majority of these people are from other socio-economically backward communities. These are the people who live in the hills and forests and face the maximum displacement. In earlier times, they succumbed to the State and clung to the hope of fair compensation. But today they have nothing but a small patch of land that they propose to bequeath to the next generation as the only source of income and livelihood.
Unlike Punjab and Haryana, Odisha didn’t enjoy the nuances of the green revolution. Because of poor investment in the social sector, people have very little education and requisite skills in today’s modern industrial economy. They will retaliate to any form of land acquisition unless they are on board and can foresee a long-term interest in allowing land acquisition.Political commentators argue that the catastrophic rise of an ‘authoritative China’ on the global stage is mainly due to their ability to acquire land without facing any resilience from the people, while a ‘democratic India’ has to face such a predicament.Today, if you visit the IDCO (Odisha Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation) website, you will get a list of both completed as well as ongoing land acquisition projects. The website also highlights the various Government infrastructure development initiatives like industrial estates, themeparks, etc. But the important aspect is to make the people a stakeholder and beneficiary, both in the policy making process and in the implementation process. The ‘Make in India ‘campaign will never be a success unless the riddle of acquiring land is solved.