State initially tried to ward off petition to grant habitat rights to community by saying there is no ministry-prescribed format
Photo: Vikas Choudhary / CSE The habitat rights under section 3(1) (e) — rights including community tenures of habitat and habitation for primitive tribal groups and pre-agricultural communities — of The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 are given to the Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups (PVTG).
According to Section 2(h) of FRA, “Habitat includes the area comprising the customary habitat and such other habitats in reserved forests and protected forests of primitive tribal groups and pre-agricultural communities and other forest dwelling Scheduled Tribes.”
The section on habitat rights not only recognises their collective rights and acknowledges the legitimacy of Baiga institutions, but also bridges the cultural role and capacity of forest management these institutions can play.
Habitat rights recognition provides the community concerned rights over their customary territory of habitation, socio-cultural practices, economic and livelihood means, intellectual knowledge of biodiversity and ecology, traditional knowledge of use of natural resources, as well as protection and conservation of their natural and cultural heritage.
Habitat rights safeguard and promote traditional livelihoods and ecological knowledge passed down through generations. They also help the convergence of different government schemes and initiatives from various departments to empower PVTGs to develop their habitats.
As per habitat rights, the district collector should take cognisance of rights of the PVTGs in their district and initiate the process of habitat rights on priority basis. The Baiga community primarily resides mostly in the protected areas of Rajnandgaon, Kawardha, Mungeli, Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, Manendragarh Bharatpur-Chirmiri and Bilaspur districts of Chhattisgarh.
The Baigas made the claim of habitat rights in the year 2017. This is the first claim in the state, where the Gram Sabha passed the resolution and sent it to district-level committee, as envisaged under habitat rights.
The claim of habitat rights made in 2017 in the then Bilaspur district of Chhattisgarh mapped the clan-wise rituals, culture, forest resources, other all-natural resources in form “B” and form “C” as used for CFR claim. This was later justified by the Union Minister of Tribal Affairs as one of the claim processes, due to lack of any publicised claim format.
The district of Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi was created bifurcating Bilaspur district and incorporated into Chhattisgarh in 2022. The district with a high population of PVTGs was still not taken into consideration by the government for PVTG habitat rights.
Finally, the Baiga people from these PVTG villages decided to appeal in the High Court of Chhattisgarh. People united themselves under the banner of ‘Akhil Bhartiya Jungal Andolan Manch’, a mass organisation (called in the area, part of AIFFM), and decided to file a case in the High Court of Chhattisgarh.
The writ petition in April 2022 in Chhattisgarh High Court by AIIFM asked the Chhattisgarh government to take cognisance of habitat rights of PVTGs in the state towards proper implementation of FRA.
The petition also stated that the PVTGs inside the Protected Areas of Chhattisgarh, particularly Achanakmar Wildlife Sanctuary, should not be evicted till the implementation of habitat rights have been completed.
Moreover, the petition demanded that the Baigas in the Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi district of the state who made habitat rights claims in 2017 be granted the titles. The notices were issued to 17 district collectors, the state tribal department and the Union Ministry of Tribal Affairs.
The state initially tried to ward off the petition by saying that since there are no guidelines and prescribed format by the ministry on the habitat rights, it is not possible to give them the same.
Since MoTA was also a party to this petition, they issued an order citing that there is no need for any guidelines and forms “B” and “C” can be used for claim making, which was done as in case of the claim filed in 2017.
Then the state government said they have initiated a process of understanding habitat rights with a pilot project among Kamar PVTGs in Dhamtari district. But since the process is very tedious and lengthy it is taking time, it added.
Finally on August 9, 2023, the Chhattisgarh government conferred the entitlement to the Kamar PVTGs in 22 villages of Magarlod block of Dhamtari district.
The process of conferring the habitat rights by the United Nations Development Programme-government initiatives is again an issue of discontent for the recognition of rights, as the process of discussing with the traditional leaders is questionable.
From July 17-20, 2023 all the villages which had made the claims passed a resolution in the Gram Sabha along with forest rights committees. The traditional leaders endorsed the statement demanding the district collector of Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi to provide entitlement to the habitat claims.
In another hearing on August 18 in the court, the state government noted that they have initiated the process of granting habitat rights, to which the petitioner demanded about resolving the pending cases in the district.
On August 29, 2023 the tribal ministry of Chhattisgarh issued a letter to all collectors in these 17 districts to expeditiously resolve the pending habitat rights claims. On October 6, the district administration of Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi gave the entitlement.
A total of 19 Baiga villages with a population of 6,483 people (2,085 families) have been given the habitat rights. These Gram Sabhas of Gaurela block received the rights in a special event organised by the district administration. So this was a victory for the Baiga people after seven years of struggle.
With successful struggle to get their due rights, many questions still loom large for the Baiga community:
Poverty among the PVTGs have taken many forms which can be classified by the problems faced by the tribal community, majorly by militarisation of the area, plundering of resources, mining, forced relocation and cultural genocide.
Recently another major problem which adds to the list post-COVID is the forced integration of tribal communities into the market economics. The PVTG communities live in areas rich in resources having abundant biodiversity, water and minerals, which result in their removal from the dwellings.
The state would look to enforce such policies through their co-opted existing institutions like Baiga Pradhikaran (Baiga Development Authority), in their own way of pushing conservation within the habitat.
The Baiga communities still have their Gotra (clan)-wise cultural, patterns, social institutions and decision-making process.
Will the state look forward to building a relationship with the community to recognise their initiatives?
The habitat rights, which provide collective rights to the institutions of the communities have, over the years, ceased to exist. This is mainly because the tribal panchayats have been weakened with community leaders slowly moving to the Panchayat Raj institutions.
The culture and customs of the institutions have paved the way to the welfare schemes of the Panchayat due to high incidences of poverty, beneficiary nature of welfare schemes and being under control of the district administration. It has taken liberal roots and is ill-equipped to deal with the protection of their collective rights.
Will the habitat rights entail self-determining power to the Baigas to control the resources within their agreed habitat? It would require the Baiga community to formally design their traditional institutions and take more control of their own governing institutions and decision making processes, rather than leaving the control in the hands of district administration.
The self-determination in the habitat area would also mean guaranteed rights to land and its protection of outside influence. But the real challenge still remains with the forest department being the main opposition, whether the traditional knowledge would be respected in forest conservation and management. Over the years, this has been disarraying due to hardships to meet their livelihood needs. But the differences with the dominant societies still exist.
The mainstream culture propagated by the state and its paraphernalia should be taught to value the needs of Baigas and strengthen the organisation. Developing such a relationship would be a real challenge.
Devjit Nandi is associated with the Baiga Shakti Sangathan, Chhattisgarh.
Views expressed are the author’s own and don’t necessarily reflect those of Down To Earth.
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
.png)
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.