Himanshu Kumar speaking in the midst of his 3 month long cycle yatra, explains why the nation should support the tribals in their resistance against the govt.
He says that if the govt. wins this battle, it will drive them to winning the war and grabbing land from people illegally and unconstitutionally will become the order of the day.
He urges the activists across the country to get off the net and go amidst the people. That simply by sitting and writing on the internet, one cannot create pressure on the govt. Till such time we don't go amongst the masses we won't be able to awaken them or pressure the govt. to deliver justice to all its citizens.
He urges the people to go to the masses and learn about the grassroot resistance across the country and to support them.
The YouTube Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?
Monday, July 26, 2010
Himanshu Kumar on why Indians should support Tribals in their resistance...
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Land Grabbing by MOEF?
The press is filled with debates about Operation Green Hunt, corporate resource grabbing and displacement issues. But there's an elephant in the room, a larger process of seizing lands, forests and resources on a huge scale, that has so far been totally ignored. Behind this process lies one Central government agency: the Environment Ministry. Most people associate displacement with land acquisition, but that is only one way of displacing people. The Environment Ministry's control over forest land gives it far more power over people's homes, livelihoods and lives – and lakhs are facing brutality, impoverishment and injustice as a result. Consider this:
Under the Forest (Conservation) Act of 1980, the Environment Ministry has the final say over the use of 23% of India's land area – areas recorded as forest land in government records. From 2006 (when the Forest Rights Act was passed) till date, in MP and Chhattisgarh alone, the Ministry has illegally handed over (through “in principle” and final clearances) 15,411 hectares of forest land to various projects. The Ministry did not consult or even inform the people who lived on, used and depended on this huge area of land. And that’s just in two States. On August 3rd, 2009, the Ministry admitted this was illegal and issued a circular ostensibly to stop it – but has gone on in the same fashion since.
But the land grab doesn’t stop with forest diversion. Under the FC Act, for every hectare diverted, one hectare of revenue land or two hectares of degraded forest land has to be planted with trees. While this looks good on paper, it makes no environmental sense – a tree plantation is no replacement for a natural forest and often results in biodiversity loss and damage to water tables. But plantations do allow for yet more land grabbing – this time by the Forest Department rather than by projects. The plantations take place on lands that often actually belong to individual forest dwellers or that are village common lands. Thus people lose their lands at both ends – to the projects at the diversion site and to plantations at the afforestation site. The intentions are made clear by a 2003 circular of the Ministry, which explicitly recommends that various types of community forest lands be used for compensatory afforestation. It then requires them to be notified as reserved or protected forests and transferred to the Forest Department – meaning people lose all rights to cultivate, collect firewood or forest produce, or graze their livestock in lands that were in fact their own 1. Between 1980 and 2009, such 'compensatory' plantations took place on 11,83,472 hectares of land – of which 5,54,635 hectares was revenue land which was now brought under Forest Department control.2 If the compensatory afforestation required for the illegal diversion in MP and Chhattisgarh were to take place on degraded forest land, the diversion and the afforestation together would require 46,235 hectares of land – larger than the area of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation, all illegally grabbed in the space of three years and in just two States.
More land grabbing goes on through plantation programmes and “Joint Forest Management”(JFM). JFM has become a way for the Forest Department to extend its control over more lands and to divide villages in the process. The village committees set up under JFM are controlled by the forest guard, who is their member secretary / joint account holder. Their “participatory” plans for forest protection have to fit entirely within existing Forest Department plans. They are not given any rights but instead promised a share in timber and other revenues in exchange for free labour; and the share is often never paid. As a result, JFM Committees often consist entirely of contractors, traders, elites and others close to the Forest Department, and function as proxies for the Department, to the extent of attacking and evicting other members of villages on the Department's instructions. Enormous sums of money are then pumped into these “participatory” committees by the National Afforestation Programme (Rs. 1056.74 crores was given between 2008 and 20103). The money is routed through Forest Development Agencies, which once again have forest officials in all key positions. In 2008, the Standing Committee on Environment and Forests condemned the current form of afforestation policies as“afforestation ... deprives forest dwellers and tribals / adivasis of some or all of their lands and adversely impact their livelihoods and basic needs – for which they are neither informed, nor consulted, nor compensated.”
And this is not the end. Even as illegal diversion continues, even more money is being funnelled into plantation and afforesation programs:
5,000 crores of international loans were taken by State governments in 2009 for forestry projects, mostly to be implemented through JFM.
More than 11,000 crores of compensatory afforestation funds are being gradually released for spending in the same manner since July 2009 – despite an explicit recommendation from the Parliamentary Standing Committee to overhaul the entire structure.
Another 44,000 crores has now been proposed to be allocated to the supposed afforestation of a staggering 10 million hectares of land under the Green India Mission. Internationally, the government is seeking even more money under the climate change agreement REDD – Reducing Emissions from Degradation and Deforestation – once again in the name of plantations and JFM; private companies may also get involved in more plantation activities.
We call upon the government to respect the law and justice and halt the Environment Ministry's land grabbing. We demand:
Full implementation and respect for the provisions of the Forest Rights Act
An end to Joint Forest Management
Afforestation programmes to be under the transparent control of the gram sabha and not under the Forest Department
Full respect for the democratic and legal rights of communities to protect and manage their forests
1.See MoEF letter F.No.2-l/2003-FC dated 20.10.2003.
2. Answer to Unstarred Question No. 2494 to Ministry of Environment and Forests, Lok Sabha, on 22.07.2009.
3. Answer to Unstarred Question No. 4221 to Ministry of Environment and Forests, Lok Sabha, on 21.04.2010.
Campaign for Survival and Dignity
www.forestrightsact.com, 9873657844
Monday, June 28, 2010
Farmers protest land aquisitions in Goa
We therefore resolve that no agricultural lands in our villages shall be acquired / allowed to be acquired. If the state government does not stop the ongoing acquisitions, we shall take all necessary measures to protect our motherland.
The Salpem - Tollem Xetkarancho Ekvott had organised a meeting at Rosary School Hall in Navelim to protest acquisition of fields 2,72,000 sq mts.
The PWD is acquiring fields for expansion of Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) and a buffer zone for STP. Total agricultural land required is 272000 sq.mts. As per common knowledge expansion of STP can be done in their existing land which is more than sufficient and also confirmed by Chief Minister Mr. Digambar Kamat, said Jose Paul Coutinho, he said further that the STP is having capacity of 7.5 MLD and the sewage entering STP is 1.5 MLD, then why acquire land when it is under capacity.
1. George Barreto spoke on forcible land grabbing for Sinquetim bridge.
2. Melwyn Pereira spoke on pollution of Salpem Lake and how the farmers had to stop farming due to pollution, how development of Margao destroyed Salpem lake, is that the real development?
3. Sidharth Karapurkar spoke that land acquisition act 1894 was a British act designed to grab land from Indians for the East India Company, so why is Goa government using this British act to grab land from its own people, they are acting like the British. He also mentioned that the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has written a reply to GXE and Goa government asking the Goa government not to acquire agricultural land.
4. Cruz Rodrigues spoke that Communidade land is thousand years old and that government has no right to acquire it.
5. Claudias Dias from Rawanfond spoke how the government robbed their fields and now they don’t have anything for livelihood and have to depend on petty jobs.
6. Sandeep Kambli from Mopa spoke on how government is acquiring land when there exists a airport in Goa, also Goa being small state it does not require 2 airports, and the government will close Dabolim airport after commencing airport at Mopa. The runway of Dabolim is enough to land A 380 which requires 3200mts length and Dabolim can be expanded to 4000 mts as per google earth images.
Sidharth Karapurkar
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
At home in Goa
http://www.hindustantimes.com/At-home-in-Goa/Article1-547294.aspx
The summer holidays are here and it’s time once again for a bit of frolicking on palm-fringed beaches. Unfortunately, I have, as usual, put off planning for the vacation till the last moment and now have no option but to go to Goa.
My usual procedure in Goa is to make a mandatory tour of the north and south Goa tourist hotspots and then settle down for some serious gorging and swilling, interspersed with periodic bouts of hard jostling at overcrowded beaches. After all you need to get your money’s worth and it simply wouldn’t do if Mr Sharma of flat 14 C enjoyed himself more than I did.
Thankfully, though, times have changed and I’ve been told that a trip to Goa these days offers a completely different itinerary. Here it is:
Day 1: Visit to the Russian mafia. This is a great opportunity to meet the dreaded Russian mafia right on our doorstep. You will be introduced to their great gang leaders Vladimir Ilyich and Josef Vissarionovich. Warning: Do not carry cash, credit cards or jewellery. Tour operators will provide full security, including bullet-proof vehicle, flak jackets, helmets and security guards with AK-47s. If you desire the experience, however, the Mafia will arrange to kidnap you, on payment of a small fee, so that you could write a short story on ‘I was a hostage of the Russian Mafia’.
Day 2: Visit to the mining mafia. This tour will take you to the hills of Goa, or what remains of them. Do not worry about the dust and the foul air, your operator will provide you with gas masks at no extra charge. You will be taken to the river near the camp, where you can see the amazing sight of the water turning red. You can then experience the thrill of travelling in one of the trucks carrying ore to an artificial mountain made entirely from waste ejected from the mine. You could climb the waste mountain and plant a flag at the top. Or alternatively, you could ski down it. The possibilities are endless.
Day 3: Visit to a restaurant off-limits to Indians. Those with a historical bent of mind wanting to sample conditions that existed during the British Raj will be taken to one of the several areas where Indian tourists are not welcome. Refugees from South Africa pining for the return of apartheid and masochists are welcome. Later on, a night tour of the beaches is perfect for those in search of material for writing crime novels.
Day 4: While the fish in Goa’s rivers may be dying, one particular species is flourishing — the land shark. This trip will take you to some of the biggest of them. Visitors are advised to wave their cheque books and discuss land prices when in the presence of land sharks. That makes them rise to the bait. But remember they are dangerous, apart from being related to the big fish in Panaji.
Day 5: Visit to the jungle. No, we do not mean the forests that used to cover so much of Goa, but to the concrete jungle. If tourists are lucky, they will be able to see real forests being cut down to make way for the concrete jungle or for mines. Who knows, you might even get to see an entire hill being levelled to make way for concrete blocks. Land sharks roam freely in the new jungle.
Best of all, all these familiar things will make you feel completely at home.
Manas Chakravarty is Consulting Editor, Mint
Saturday, February 6, 2010
No to Jobs! No to Airport! Yes to Land!
They declared their opposition to the proposed International Airport in Mopa. They declared that land acquisition process has been initiated by the Goa Government is another form of land grab to be converted into Special Economic Zone (SEZ). Economic elites are involved in buying up of land in Pernen in anticipation of airport project. Land by itself has become business.
Kambli disclosed that over 40 lakh trees from the 5 villages are directly facing the threat along with all the people from the 5 villages. With current state of affairs where is with the price hike the cost of gas cylinder is to touch Rs.500/- it is wiser option to protect the tress as they fetch fire wood. The decision to impose airport in Mopa is irrational. All the water bodies in Pernem within proposed airport jurisdiction are endangered.
Kambli mocked at the claims of the promoters that the locals would be employed at the airport. He questioned as to how many locals from Goa are employed at the existing airport at Dabolim. Kambli disclosed that project report declares that 25,000 people would be required to work at the Mopa airport. Kambli informed that that total population of the all the 5 affected villages amounts to 30,000.
Kambli said that during the entire process of Airport proposal none of the affected villagers are taken into consideration. Local people are dependent upon agriculture, horticulture and cashew plantations.
Kambli gave strong signal to the State against bulldozing airport on them and warned that State will be responsible for the consequences. He shared that 500 people from the locality opposed to the airport had submitted the memorandum to the various authorities and MLA but none has responded. “Is this a democracy?” Kambli questioned calmly.
Airport proposal includes 190 meters wide tarred road. Kambli said this is a huge scam of land grab and need to be fought. Pernem citizens has declared the fight against the airport and urged people across the State of Goa to join their fight. “We say NO to Jobs. NO to Airport. Yes to Land.”
The five villages have nearly 10 waddos each and every waddo has around 70 families each. None has been consulted on airport. The airport proposal has given rise to land mafia consisting of MLAs and Ministers.
Mining is destroying major part of Goa. The airport at Mopa is a guarantee to destroy the remaining part.
Dr. Rupesh Patkar addressing the press conference disclosed that there is no ecological study conducted on Mopa airport, nor there is any displacement study undertaken by the State. “Mopa airport is imperialist model of development.”
Sebastian Rodrigues
Sunday, January 24, 2010
IS GOA DAMAN AND DIU AGRICULTURE TENANCY ACT 1964 A BENEFICIAL LEGISLATION?
The Goa government, as part of the agricultural reforms, to curb exploitation of poor farmers by the landlord and to safeguard the rights of the tenants to the agricultural land which they are in cultivatory possession, in short one can say for the benefit of farmers, brought out a legislation called “Goa, Damnan and Diu Agricutural tenancy Act 1964”.
That in 1972 to fortify or to give more teeth to the Agriculture Tenancy Act or in short to make the tenant owner of the land which they are/were in cultivatory possession and enjoyment, the Goa Government made an amendment to the act called 5th amendment to the Agricultural Tenancy Act, which came into force on 14/10/1976. The 5th amendment to the Agricultural Tenancy Act became famous as “Tillers’ day” . By way of the 5th amendment a new chapter “Chapter IIA” was introduce to the principal act by which special rights and privileges of tenants in the form of section 18A to 18L were inserted. The Agricultural Tenancy Act being beneficial legislation meant to help the poor farming community who were part of oppression and suppression for ages is also given special protection by including it into the IXth schedule of the constitution of
The agricultural Tenancy Act 1964 is also known as Beneficial legislation. Is it a beneficial legislation or is it any other civil legislation. If it is a beneficial legislation whether the benefits of the legislation has been down pour to the poorest of the poor, to the most needy one. My answer is no. The benefit of the beneficial legislation is yet to get large section of the poor farming community of
That section 18A of the Agricultural Tenancy act which is introduced by the 5th amendment reads as under “18A. Tenants deemed to have purchased lands on tillers day: (1) On the tillers’ day, every tenant shall subject to the other provisions of this Act, be deemed to have purchased from his landlord the land held by him as a tenant and such land shall vest in him free from all encumbrances subsisting on the said day.”
Section 18C of the said act reads as under “18C. Mamlatdar to issue notices and determine price of land to be paid by the tenants.”
That to give effect to the 5th amendment to the agricultural tenancy act the respective taluka mamlatdars since the year 1995 used to issue suo-moto notices to the tenants under section 18C of agricultural tenancy act whose names are recorded in the survey records, which survey is maintained by the Government under the Land Revenue Code 1968 and large number of tenants taken the benefit of it as they have paid the purchase price of their tenanted land and obtained Sanad. However in some cases in Quepem taluka though the tenants have paid the purchase price, the concerned mamlatdat like Vanancio Furtado who is presently the Dy-Collector of Quepem did not signed the copy of the judgement as a result some of the tenants are denied the right of ownership due to the willful negligence of the mamlatdar. They are still facing litigation under the Tenancy Act. Now in respect of the same cases the successive mamlatdar has put an endorsement on the file which states that “since suo moto cases cannot be initiated now u/s.18C as per the Judgement of administrative, this case filed”
That in the year 1999 the Administrative Tribunal Panaji in ten Revision application being Revision Application No.71/96 to 80/96 file by Rui Tito vaz against the tenants from Betul , passed a judgment over the 18-C issue which held that mere recording name in survey record maintain under Land Revenue Code 1968 does not entitled one to be a tenant under the Agricultural Tenancy Act. That in order to claim under the Agricultural tenancy Act one has to first get himself declared as tenant. That after the judgment passed by the Administrative Tribunal, Panaji in revision application 71/96 to 80/96 all the 18-C cases in which su-moto notices were initiated by the respective mamlatdars under the agricultural tenancy Act 1964 and which were pending kept in abeyance or the proceedings closed and since then no further 18-C notices have been issued to the tenant.
That after the judgment all the ten revision applications were remanded back to the Quepem Mamlatdar by the Administrative Tribunal with a direction to first conduct an inquiry under section 7 of the Said Agricultural Tenancy Act and thereafter decide the proceedings under section 18C a fresh. The ten cases which were remanded back to the Mamlatdar by the Administrative Tribunal in 1999 are coming up for the final hearing in October 2009 that is after a long battle by the poor tenants for 10 years. This inspite of the fact that rule 10(14) provide for disposal of Tenancy application within one years. To fought the battle for ten years under the beneficial legislation the poor tenants might have invested in lakhs.
My argument is that, if a tenant who is tilling the land for generations together, who has been exploited for generation by their landlord and inspite of the fact that his/her name is recorded in the survey record as tenant, has to fight cases like any other Civil case for decades together to get declared himself/herself as tenant What is the use of beneficial legislation? In such circumstance can the Agriculture Tenancy Act 1964 is worthy to call as beneficial legislation? Or it can be termed as any other civil legislation?
What is the use of 5th Amendment to the Agriculture Tenancy Act which was enacted with a motive to make the tenants owner of the land which they are in cultivatory possession ? What is the use of including the Agricultural Tenancy act in the IXth Schedule of the constitution?
In a judgment passed by the administrative Tribual Panaji being Tenancy Revision case No.21/94 court (on pg.7) made a mention that survey under the Agriculture Tenancy Act was initiated at list in one taluka that is in Salcete however as the survey under land revenue code came into operation the survey initiated under the Agriculture tenancy act was abandoned. This was done in order to avoid duplicity of work. Which mean the government has indirectly adopted the survey conducted under Land Revenue Code 1968 to the Agricultural Tenancy Act. This is so as there is no separate survey record with the Government conducted under Agricultural Tenancy Act 1964.
That due to the Judgment passed in revision application 71/96 to 80/96 by the Administrative Tribunal Panaji most of the genuine tenants have been denied their right to purchase under 18-C. Now they have to file tenancy cases which they hardly win due to lack of written evidence as the transaction between the tenant and the Bhatkar are oral. After the administrative Tribunal judgement there is a tendency developed among the landlord to file eviction cases against the tenant whose names are recorded as tenants, which most tenant are compelled to compromise or forgo their right due to weak financial position or due to ignorance of law . Only those tenants who had paid the purchase price under 18-C prior to 1999 and those who have obtained Sanad are safe.
Under such circumstance the agricultural tenancy act cannot be termed as beneficial legislation but like any other civil legislation.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Objections to proposed amendments to Land Revenue Code
Goenchea Xetkarancho Ekvott
Letter no. /2009
To
The Secretary Legislature,
The Secretariat,
Porvorim, Bardez, Goa
SUB: OBJECTIONS TO BILL NO. 21 OF 2009
Dear Sir,
This is a submission of our objections to the Bill no. 21 of 2009. The changes proposed to the procedural law are acceptable. However, the changes proposed to the substantive law are strongly objected to for the following reasons:
- The new section 32A proposed to be inserted in the Goa Land Revenue Code, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as “the Code”) blatantly violates the objects of the existing provisions of the Code and shall cause large-scale unrestricted conversion of agricultural and eco-sensitive lands, thereby bringing misery and destruction upon the population and land of the State of Goa.
- The proposed section 32A violates the Constitution of India and various statutes such as Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, The Land Use (Regulation) Act, 1991, The Goa Daman And Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964, The Environment Protection Act, 1986, The Command Area Development Act, 1997 and The Town & Country Planning Act, 1974, and therefore must be dropped entirely.
- The proposed new section 32A shall render the existing provisions of law under sections 32 and 33 of the Code, which impose restrictions on the change in the use of land, redundant and meaningless. These proposed changes shall cause unprecedented and irreversible damage to the highly sensitive environment of the State of Goa.
- The removal of the existing restrictions on the change in use of agricultural lands shall cause large scale economic and social destruction within the State of Goa. The existing sustainable economies shall be ruthlessly destroyed leaving the State completely dependent on external sources for its basic needs. The ramifications of such a relaxation of land laws shall be disastrous to the State and shall expose the residents of the State to social and economic disaster as never seen in the recorded history of Goa.
- The statements of objects and reasons do not provide any meaningful objects or reasons for the removal of the statutory restrictions on change in use of land. The reference to “facilitate housing in settlement areas” is misleading. Under the guise of “facilitating housing in settlement areas”, the new provisions allow houses to be constructed in lands which are presently not allowed for non-agricultural use. Thus, the effect of the new provision is to render the existing provisions of the Code ineffective and redundant.
- The changes proposed directly violate provisions of the various laws mentioned in paragraph 1) above, and allow constructions in settlement zones without any inquiry or verification whether the land is forest land, or falls in the command area, or is tenanted agricultural land, or is within the purview of other laws such as the EIA and the CRZ Notifications.
- The RP2001 as well as the RP2021 are not based on physical surveys, even though such a requirement is statutory under the TCP Act, 1974. This is admitted by the Task Force, which was constituted for the preparation of the draft RP 2021, in the policy document of the draft RP 2021. In this same document, the Tack Force has also highlighted major inadequacies and defects in the data used for the preparation of the draft RP 2021. For example, the forests in the State of Goa are not yet surveyed by the Forest Department beyond the ocular estimates conducted by the Sawant and Karapurkar Committees. In these circumstances, the zones demarcated in the Regional Plan are nothing more than broad demarcations, which cannot ensure compliance with the statutory regulations restricting non-agricultural use of land.
In the view of the:
- the unique microscopic and extremely sensitive topography of the State of Goa;
- the critical importance of Goa to the health of the Western ghats – a World Heritage Site and a source of floral diversity of astounding proportions;
- global insecurity regarding the environment, food and water;
- the ongoing displacement of the Goan agricultural tenants, many of whom are still to receive their Constitutional Rights as members of backward classes;
- and a number of other equally compelling reasons;
we sincerely hope that you shall give this petition due consideration.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully
Shri Dilip Hegde
President
CC: 1) The Governor of Goa
2) The Chief Minister of Goa
3) The Revenue Minister of Goa
Monday, November 30, 2009
Communidades: How they exploit Goa's tribal people
The below are deposition on various communidades in Goa and how they are exploiting Goa's tribal people. These depositions took place on May 30-31, 2009 at People's Tribunal headed by Justice Suresh Hosbet, a retired High Court Judge of Bombay High Court.
Mahesh Vittal Gawde, Bandora, Ponda:
Land occupied by tribal people are not recorded in official land documents. In 1971 survey, people who are not the residents of concerned villages recorded as owners and people who are cultivating are excluded from entering their names in land records. Financial position is weak so cannot afford costly litigation to get the names in land records. Ragi, Cereals and other cultivations are carried on by tribal people. How even after generations of cultivation of land tribal people is not yet recorded on I&XIV form. Now forest department has planted trees on our land. Due to this fear is prevalent that
Government is acquiring communidade lands for military camp in Durbat and Bandora villages. These lands are tribal lands. Communidades office bearers do not entertain tribal people’s requests to include their names as title holders of land. All the office bearers of Communidade are Saraswat Brahmins. This community is carrying on the tyranny over tribal people.
Advocate John Fenandes, member, Expert panel:
Communidade of Rivona had donated the land to forest department for the purpose of plantation of trees. This land however is now used for dumping of mining rejections.
Shailesh Uttam Gawde, Dutel Wada, Madkai:
Purchased land in 1943 when
Devidas Babuso Gawde, Laxmi K Gawde, Naresh Naik, and Prahavati P. Gawde, all residents of Nagueshi, Bandora, Ponda:
80 years ago their ancestors in Farmagudi cultivated ‘Mollo’ on top of the hill in Bandora village survey numbers 228, 274, 275, 276, 278, 277 etc. 44 families are involved in cultivation. Nachno, Varai, Chibdam, Bhende, Mullo, Padvallah, Tambdi bhaji etc were cultivated on a hill top. The land is divided amongst cultivators and they put up hut to guard their vegetables etc. They stay there during cultivation period.
The cultivators names are not included in the land survey records. Recently they have organized themselves into Srikrishna Bhajipala Lagvad Society to strengthen their unity.
Cultivators collect money and pay to the Communidade of Bandora. But Communidade accepts money but does not issue receipts. This was a practice before 1980. After 1980 cultivators formed committee and paid rend to the Communidade. Communidade issued some receipts which cultivators are in possession of.
Cultivators filed case in Mamlatdar’s Court in Ponda but Mamlatdar did not take any action. The case is pending for the past 15 years. Now the cultivators are told that their file is lost.
The absence of land records creates lots of problems for these cultivators. Recently when the road – highway connecting Ponda to Margao was constructed some cultivators lost their land. Due to absence of their names in the official land records none of them was entitled to receive compensation.
Then another project is coming up in the plantation
Water connection is denied to the cultivators as Communidade refuses to issue No Objection Certificate (NOC) to the cultivators. NOC of the owner is mandatory and on record Communidade of Bandora holds legal title as owner. Communidade officials has been discouraging the cultivators from getting names on the land records and counsel the cultivators “cultivate as you’ll have been cultivating before – without legal land titles.”
Laxmi Keshav Gawde from the same group of cultivators in Bandora: Four years ago the cultivators’ huts on hill top got burnt when fire broke out. They then went to the Panchayat to claim compensation. Panchayat asked them to prove that they have title over the land over which huts existed. Cultivators could not produce any papers of evidence in this aspect. Due to absence of land titles they are not able to avail of Electricity connection and Public Water supply connection.
Cultivators are engaged in growing of Touxim, Moghim, Bhende as a source of income. They do not have any other source of income.
Prabhavati Prabhakar Gawde from the same group of cultivators in Bandora: Since there is no water at the cultivation site they walk for half an hour to fetch water for their plantations. They grow Bananas, Papayas and Coconut throughout the year. They grow Touxim in rainy season. They also grow flowers for local market.
Discussion with Jury and Expert panel on the above case:
- They stay on the hill to guard their plots of plantations. If they do not stay on the hill top then they cannot get agriculture produce as their produce may be robbed.
- Panchayat refused water connection since their huts are not registered.
- Communidade is exerting pressure on cultivators to give up cultivation but cultivators are helpless as they cannot go in any any other occupation other than cultivating. For daily expenses selling of cultivated flowers is their only source of income.
- Cultivators want to retain the land they are cultivating as the source of livelihood.
- Cultivators are facing the tyranny of Bandora communidade.
- While fetching water for plantations cultivators particularly women – has to climb steep slopes on foot.
- In order to implement vermicullture scheme of the
Disha Deepak Karmalkar, Mollar, Corlim, Tiswadi:
Disha has fields near
Second reason is the lying down of irrigation pipeline has blocked access of the farmers to their fields. Pipeline has created elevation thereby obstructing the smooth traditional passage of the farmers to and from their agricultural fields. Due to this farmers are unable to enter fields and sow their seedlings. Pipeline of one meter diameter laid over the elevation needed a use of ladder when the paddy was cultivated last.
All the farmers here are registered as tenants and legal owner of this land is Communidade of Carambolim. Disha questioned “Can’t Communidade of Carambolim give this land to the farmers?” She expressed that all the Communidade land where farmers are cultivating must be legally transferred to them (farmers) as owners.
Disha pointed out that some land of the Carambolim Communidade has been earmarked for industry. “Now if Communidade can give land for industry then why the same can’t be given to farmers for agriculture? Why farmers’ rights are denied?”
Ulhas Kakode from Agriculture department who was present on the occasion responded to some aspects of Disha’s quaries. He said that problem regarding tractor from agriculture department, he will sort out the problem and see to that Disha’s fields are ploughed during oncoming monsoons with the help of agriculture department’s tractor. He also agreed that punitive action will be taken against concerned person responsible to withdraw agriculture department tractor from entering into Disha’s fields in Carambolim.
Mohandas Pandu Gawde, Kavlem, Bandora:
His land where he cultivates is very high on the top of the hill. There is no access road to reach there hence one has to walk and carry all the materials to and from the hill on head. All together there are 9 families cultivate in 33,000 square meters of land.
Kavlem Bandora Communidade desires to give this land to film city.
Lots of portion of this land is rocky so cultivation is not undertaken. Cultivation is undertaken only on land where there is soil. So the cultivators told Communidade that it can go ahead and do whatever they want to do on this land and leave the land with soil to the cultivators for cultivation purpose.
Mohandas expressed surprise “Bandora Communidade is selling land to various private parties but why it is not giving to us farmers?
In Durbhat plots for film city are earmarked they can be seen. Only land where farmers are cultivating is remaining to be marked for film city. Survey number of this area is 80/0.
Communidade used to be paid rent by the farmers but land records do not show farmers’ names.
Cultivators do not have money to invest in litigations.
Discussions initiated by Jury and Expert panel members:
Cultivation is undertaken at the height of over 500 meters on the top of the hill. Farmers get the cultivation produce only what is left over by wild animals.
Farmers are deliberately harassed so that they give up cultivation.
Tribals in
Santosh Antu Gawde, Arla, Keri, Ponda:
He had applied for declaration as Mundcar in 1992 but still has not happened. He is unaware of current status of the matter. He has a plot of 400 square meters in his possession. The property is owned by Communidade of Keri.
Justice Hosbet Suresh’s concluding speech at Peoples' Tribunal on May 31, 2009
For two days 60 people came and spoke about land, Homelands; what is happening there.
As I saw their faces – a sense of desperation – nobody is there to do justice.
People’s Tribunal is meant to uphold right to live with dignity. Constitution of
Constitution guarantees right to speech but no right to food. It guarantees right to Occupation and Business but no right to work and livelihood. It guarantees right to Travel but when tribals are displaced from their own homeland they have no right to stay in your own homeland.
Now whether communidade can give land to cultivators or to outsiders, this is Disha’s question. Basic question is who gets right to have the land? Who gets right to sky, right to Sea? It is a People who get the right.
We People of India made Sovereignity. People have right over above the State.
1970s, 1980s were golden period of the Constitution. Right to life was interpreted to include right to livelihood. Right to Food, Right to Education, Right to Environment, Right to Shelter is included in Right to life. Supreme Court interpreted right to Life as Right to Live with Dignity.
What is a Right and Role of communidade when it says it won’t give land to community? Communidade has trusteeship, People has Right to Communidade land.
Communidade land for industrial purpose? This trend has come from British Colonial times. Land Acquisition Act has been used for this purpose in Nandigram, Singur for Special Economic Zone (SEZ). Agriculture is not public purpose? Agriculture produces food. Without food who can live in this country?
There are higher principles – Human Rights are Fundamental Rights. Judges in past understood. Not sure if today’s Judges understood. There are large scale Human Rights violations in
Your Chief Minister talks about development. Development does not mean Industry, Buildings and Mining. Development means respect to Tribals.
There should be complete stop to harassment to Tribals by
All the mining leases affecting people must be cancelled. It causes Human Rights violations and environmental right violations.
I add my voice to People’s Tribunal, to what you said. Report will be prepared. You must always fight, must never stop crying. Protest, exercise your right to dissent. Struggle has to go on.
