FE Editorial : Do tribals need schools?

Comments print
The Financial Express:  Feb 22 2013, 02:14 IST
While the battle over whether the Vedanta Group will finally get to mine bauxite in the Niyamgiri hills for its Lanjigarh plant plays itself out in the Supreme Court—the central government is opposing the Orissa government’s plan to mine the hills—the Supreme Court has asked the central government some interesting questions. Are tribal people, the bench asked the Solicitor General, to be allowed the choice to decide whether they want modern-day benefits like roads, schools, electricity and hospitals, among others. “Have you found out”, the Court asked, “will they not accept?” The tribal people, the Court said, had to be given the option of making a choice. Mining in the area is not possible since the environment ministry has not given it Stage 2 clearance on grounds it violated the religious and cultural rights of tribal people under the Forest Rights Act.

Eventually, it may turn out, the Court’s decision may not be based on these oral remarks, but on the larger question of whether or not the gram sabha has the right to decide on whether mining should be allowed. While the Centre argues the gram sabha has this right, the Orissa government has argued that since there is no habitation on the top of the mountain—where the mining is to take place—no gram sabha clearance is required.

The questions raised, however, are important and, in the long run, need to be answered in order to get a fix on what India’s policy is going to be towards improving the living

... contd.

Ads by Google
   1 | 2 | Next
Previous Story  Game Changers Next Story  Column : Re-imagining trade unions
Reader's Comments (2)| Post a Comment

Fe Comment

Freddie W | 22-Feb-2013Reply | Forward
The best way to make sure that "modern-day benefits" remain a choice to tribal communities, as opposed to ill-informed and harmful impositions, is to respect and uphold the Forest Rights Act. The recent dilution of the FRA is unacceptable.

Fe Comment

Vidhya Das | 22-Feb-2013Reply | Forward
This editorial and the Supreme Court bench it has quoted seem to have confused development with modern-day benefits, provision of education and hospitals with mining and industrialisation, and income with quality of life. The central Government has refused Stage 2 environmental clearance to Vedanta for mining on the Niyamgiri Hills on the grounds that it violates the cultural and religious rights of the tribal communities living there. These hills, also known as ‘Niyam Raja’ are home to the Primitive tribes, the Dongaria Kondhs, and are socio-culturally and geographically extremely significant, giving rise to the Vamsadhara, and having some of the most pristine wildlife reserves in the area. The edit asks what is India’s policy going to be on improving living standards of the tribal communities. And then provides its own answers by sighting NCAER survey reports on rising income of tribal households, as they moved towards small towns, and cities, pointing out that salaries doubled for those doing manual work as they moved from villages to big cities. This is a simplistic and reductionist reading. First, increased income in cities goes hand in hand with decreased purchasing power. This goes for almost all basic things, from housing to fuel to cost of grain and vegetables. Second, most tribals who migrate to the cities do so only to return to the villages in an annual cycle. Very few people do migrate, preferring, the meagre comforts of their rural homes to the miserable conditions in the cities. It is not industrial development that will help tribal people benefit from ‘what is available to other citizens’. Industrial development anywhere in this country has rendered tribal communities poorer than ever. All over the tribal belt in this country, huge power cables snake over remote tribal hamlets, which huddle in complete darkness, even as they have given up their villages, lands, forests, places of worship, Panchayats, and schools for these hydro power projects. This however is the lesser of their worries, as huge bodies of water cut them off from their Block, Panchayat and district headquarters, and even relatives in many cases. The more crucial question before is – will the Government own responsibility for development of its poorest and most vulnerable communities?

Post your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Name *
Email *
Message *
 
captcha
please enter the above characters in the box below