The Union government recently amended the much-welcomed Land Acquisition Act passed by the UPA government, through its usual ordinance route. The most contentious of these amendments include no Social Impact Assessment for PPP projects and those that fall under special categories under the larger ambit of “public purpose”.
This discussion is on the current ordinance passed by the Narendra Modi government amending the Land Acquisition Act that is extremely draconian and basically gives wide ranging powers to State governments and the Centre to acquire land without taking people into confidence.
Sujay: Your thoughts on the new Land Acquisition Act and what it means to the people of Goa.
Joao Philip Pereira: My most important concern about this act is for the farmers of Goa. Our living in most of the villages was under the community or comunidade land. With the barter system in operation, the land was being given for cultivation and the comunidade used to get some income and people were living in harmony. Now with the Ordinance which has come through the back door, it is a concern as the farmers are going to be very much affected. Without any public and private participation and without consulting, the local bodies such as the panchayats, this ordinance will give sweeping powers to the government to do what it wants. With land being scarce in Goa, there is no way the State can get more land.
Sujay: The flipside is if there are so many road blocks, how will the State progress?
Yatish Naik: These are no roadblocks. If you see Section 2 of the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act of 2013, it said if private companies want to acquire land, consent of 80 per cent of those affected is required while in case of public-private venture prior consent of 30 per cent of land holders is required. When Manohar Parrikar presented his first budget in his second stint in 2012, Para 152 of his budget speech said: Land being a very scarce commodity, my government is very sensitive in acquiring the land belonging to farmers, land owners and more particularly small and marginal farmers and land owners. As a matter of fact land acquisition deprives the owners from their only source of livelihood. Importantly the acquisition for private companies, including PPP projects will not be resorted to unless interested PP parties have purchased 80 per cent of the land from the land owners wherever required, depending on the nature.
BJP which was propounding some sort of a concept on land acquisition has now done a U-turn. They want to bring in the Gujarat model in Goa. In Gujarat, land has been acquired for peanuts and given to favourites and corporates. That model in not suitable to any other State. The Ordinance is only aimed to favour corporates and certain lobbies which are good to the government. Parrikar didn’t walk his budget talk.
Sujay: Taking into account that the Regional Plan is also hanging in the air, there seems to be no land planning. Will this draconian act drive a further nail into the coffin of people who want to preserve Goa’s land?
Dr Oscar Rebello: Of course yes. That’s a no brainer. I’ll quote from a Land Acquisition debate in Parliament in 2013, “Land is just not a commodity and it’s just not about economic activity. The issue of land is associated with the culture and emotion of farmers. One should never take hasty decision in land acquisition matters. For all land acquisitions, the social impact assessment and environmental impact assessment should be made mandatory and should be made before the acquisition is made and not after. Unless the farmer gives his consent, arable land is not required. If still, acquisition happens we will have a huge food security problem. If the farmer objects to the land acquisition despite government moves, the farmer should be able to go to court and appeal against the move.” Who said this? Rajnath Singh
Sushma Swaraj also made similar comments in August 2013. The point is that AAP and a large section of society is saying exactly that and clearly the voiceless farmers who hold small holdings are saying is reflected in the statements made by the stalwarts of the BJP. But now BJP seems to ride this fast track to development and pay lip service to actual land acquisition problem.
Sujay: The Mopa land acquisition has not been complete in a way. Government was holding back on these acquisitions as they didn’t want to pay compensation as per UPA dictated land acquisition bill. What is going to happen to those acquisitions?
Joao Philip: Back door entry. It’s simple! With the new ordinance they will have the powers to do what they want.
Sujay: There are no signs of outrage or anger on the streets yet. As activists have, you got together and debated on this? Will they allow this to happen?
Joao Philip: We won’t allow this to happen. Very soon there will be a public hearing by the first week of February.
Sujay: There is no opposition to these kind of decrees. At the end of the day everybody benefits from these kinds of acquisitions. The Congress party is equally guilty. How many Congressmen have opposed to the manner in which land acquisition was done?
Yatish Naik: The Congress party has to be given the credit, because it was the party that brought the Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act. (The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement)
The Act was an excellent piece of legislation welcomed by all, including the BJP. Congress has respected the sentiment of the locals.
Oscar Rebello: Since the Anna Hazare movement, the Congress has sensed this big rage against this arbitrary decision of giving away. What India is asking for is a level playing field. Transparency.
Sujay: The government has brought in an Investment Policy where it planned to bring in around Rs 25,000 cr investment in the next five year. Don’t you see this as a positive? How can we balance this on one hand against that of people’s need to preserve land?
Joao Philip: Who is getting the benefits of this industrialization? Take the example of Verna Industrial Estate. How many jobs are there for Goans? Not even 5 per cent. The moot question is who is benefiting from these industries, if not the son of the soil. There are 80 per cent migrants in neighbouring villages. There is an infrastructure burden on the Goans.
Sujay: What could be the solutions vis-à-vis the Land Acquisition Ordinance?
Oscar Rebello: This Ordinance is terrible. We also need to balance this concept of development and land acquisition. The common man on the road is interested in jobs, prices of petrol and prices of food. You need to strike a balance. Study on the land data available to us. Everyone has to get together and decide what is the kind of economic model that we want to go with, and everyone has to stand by it. For this the political class has to have an honesty of purpose as how to go about the issue.
Yatish Naik: It is wrong to perceive the act per se as anti development. The party has already expressed its viewpoint on the points of law encapsulated in the Ordinance. The party is in the mode of reconciling and strategizing how to oppose it. Now things will follow.
Joao Philip: My concern is towards the farmers. We should scrutinize the act in toto. Consent of the people and panchayat involvement is paramount.
Sujay: While each of the concerns is important, it needs a people’s movement to bring back the focus on the loss of land which belongs to the people of Goa. That is our biggest concern
