letter

Ever since first issue in 1966,

EPW has been India’s premier journal for
comment on current affairs
Forest Rights Act – a struggle involving some of the
and research in social sciences. biggest popular mobilisations in forest

M
It succeeded Economic Weekly (1949-1965),
which was launched and shepherded adhu Ramnath’s ‘Surviving the For- areas in recent history – was not based on
by Sachin Chaudhuri,
who was also the founder-editor of EPW.
est Rights Act’ (March 1) is a good romantic visions of an ideal tribal commu-
As editor for thirty-five years (1969-2004) survey of the debate around the Forest nity. Rather, at stake was a far more con-
Krishna Raj
gave EPW the reputation it now enjoys. Rights Act. However, some facts may need crete question of resource control. The
editor
clarification or correction. autocratic, colonial laws that control “forest
C Rammanohar Reddy Ramnath appears to confuse the gram land” essentially convert these vast lands
Deputy Editor sabha and the gram panchayat (hence the (many of which are not and never were
Bernard D’Mello
Senior Assistant Editors
references to sarpanch raj, etc). The pan- forest) into a commodity, valued only for
Lina Mathias chayat has no role in the Forest Rights Act their timber or their minerals (and, in the
Bharati Bhargava
Assistant Editors
or Rules, aside from calling the initial absence of both, occasionally for their
Srinivasan ramani gram sabha meeting. wildlife). One symptom of this is the rapid
rama sampath kumar
Editorial Staff
The 75 years residence requirement diversion of forest land for other purposes,
Prabha Pillai applies only to non-scheduled tribes as Ramnath points out. But this is not an
Editorial Assistants
P S Leela (non-STs) claiming “other traditional aberration; it reflects the very structure of
neha batura forest dweller” status – ST’s need only Indian forest law, built around the “man-
Editorial Consultant
Gautam Navlakha show occupation prior to the cut-off date. agement”, domination and control of a
Circulation As Ramnath implies but does not clearly single centralised government agency.
Gauraang Pradhan Manager
B S Sharma point out, the issue of handing out forest This law is the first challenge to this struc-
Advertisement Manager land or gifting land (whether it be 2.5 ha ture. The challenge had to emerge through
Kamal G Fanibanda
or 4 ha) to people does not arise – the issue a democratic process – the gram sabha –
General Manager & Publisher
K Vijayakumar is of recognising people’s rights to their not through yet one more “settlement”
editorial existing lands that they are cultivating, with process controlled by a few officials.
epw.mumbai@gmail.com,  edit@epw.org.in
Circulation the 4 ha limit being a ceiling on the area that Readers interested in the Act and
circulation@epw.org.in
can be claimed. Those cultivating 0.5 ha will some   of the issues around it may wish to
Advertising
advt@epw.org.in,  advt.epw@gmail.com get title to that 0.5 ha; those cultivating 8 con­sult the web site made by the Cam­
Economic and Political Weekly ha to only 4 ha and those cultivating no paign for Survival and Dignity at http://
320-321, A to Z Industrial Estate
Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel
forest land will not get title to any land. forestrightsact.awardspace.com
Mumbai 400 013 Contrary to Ramnath’s postscript, tiger Shankar Gopalakrishnan
Phones: (022) 4063 8282
FAX: (022) 2493 4515
reserves have not been excluded from the new delhi

Act. The law clearly states that it applies to

EPW Research Foundation
EPW Research Foundation, established in 1993, conducts all forest areas of all kinds. The notification Communists and Capitalism
research on financial and macro-economic issues in India.
of “critical tiger habitats”, itself illegal for

M
Director
S L Shetty other reasons, creates a legal avenue for any thanks to Prabhat Patnaik for
C 212, Akurli Industrial Estate
Kandivali (East), Mumbai 400 101
resettlement of people. However, this applies clarifying the agenda of the two
Phones: (022) 2887 3038/41 | Fax: (022) 2887 3038 only after all rights have been recognised communist parties of India (February 2,
epwrf@vsnl.com
under the Act. Both the amended Wild Life 2008). People’s democratic revolution is
Subscription Rates (Protection) Act and the Forest Rights Act an old objective of the undivided Commu-
Inland Subscription (Rs) Six One Three are very clear on this point. nist Party of India (CPI) and after its split
months year years
Institutions – 1650 4400 The gram sabha does not have the over- the CPI(M) has also adopted it. For sup-
Individuals 650 1250 3200 all power to make decisions regarding porting the thesis, Patnaik cites Lenin’s
Teachers/Researchers – 900 2400
Students – 600 – conservation in forest areas (other than “Two Tactics”. Lenin had advocated in
Concessional rates are restricted to students, teachers and researchers in critical wildlife habitats). Rather, as spelled 1905 a democratic revolution in Russia to
India, Nepal and Bhutan. To subscribe at concessional rates, please submit
proof of eligibility from an institution. Remittance by money order/bank draft out in section 13 and as would in any case sweep away the “survivals of the past”, the
preferred. Please add Rs 35 to cheques drawn on banks outside Mumbai.
be true, the existing laws and management remnants of serfdom (which includes not
Overseas Subscription ($US) Air Mail Surface Mail systems will still apply. The community’s only autocracy, but monarchy as well) and
One Three One Three
Institutional Rates year years year years powers do not displace the forest authori- most fully guarantees the broadest, freest
Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh  80 200 65 175 ties – they are merely a further authority. and most rapid development of capitalism.
Rest of the world 200 500 120 300
The relationship between them will be Mao Tse-Dong had also pleaded in his
Individual Rates
Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh   50 125 30 75 worked out on the ground and in legal “On Coalition Government” for a bour-
Rest of the world 120 300 75 200
contestation. This is indeed problematic, geois democratic revolution against
Web subscription (one year)
India Individuals Rs 800 Institutions Rs 1400 but not in the sense argued by Ramnath. foreign (Japanese), feudal and fascist
Foreign Individuals US $ 60 Institutions US $ 110 Finally, I differ with Ramnath on one
All remittances to Economic & Political Weekly.
For online credit card payment for subscription log on to www.epw.in
point. The struggle for the Forest Rights (Continued on p 90)
4 april 12, 2008  EPW   Economic & Political Weekly
Letter
(Continued from p 4)
oppression with a view to freely develop-
ing personal initiative, state, private capi-
talist and cooperative sectors. This pro-
posed new democracy based on an alli-
ance of several democratic classes was
different from Bolshevism. And in 1949
the Chinese Communist Party could cap-
ture state power.
Patnaik, however, does not explain if the
Russian or Chinese conditions of those days
are prevailing in India after 60 years of
82
independence. Nor does he explain what
he means by “most thoroughgoing capital-
ism” that the Indian communists desire to
establish and how far this communist capi-
talism would differ from “Nehruvian capi-
talism” of public and private sector enter-
prises or “neoliberal capitalism” since 1991.
That the communist must live and work
within the capitalist system and economic
development cannot wait till the estab-
lishment of socialism are stern realities.
Apart from the question of consolidating
power by the left, there are chances of
leading a gradual and peaceful transition
to socialism through parliamentary means
in alliance with other like-minded parties.
But the call for a democratic revolution
now under a Constitution enshrining the
goal of a “socialist” democracy is a retro-
grade step and it reminds us of the historic
blunders committed by the Indian com-
munists from time to time in analysing the
Indian conditions and in adapting Marx-
ism to Indian culture.
Prabin Baishya
guwahati
march 15, 2008  EPW   Economic & Political Weekly