After Giving A Nail Biting Fight Against capitalistic Approcah By BJP, We Again Need To Stand Together More United To Safeguard Our Existence. An Assesment By An IPS Officer Against Reason Behind Cupid Approach Of BJP In Ammendment Of Land Aquisition Act 2013... Kindly Share As Much As Possible To Create Awareness Amongst The Victims, The Adivasis... Sanjiv Bhatt Five reasons to oppose Govt. Ordinance to Amend the Land Acquisitions Act 2013. 1. The Amendment will nullify the hard earned gains of movements against forced acquisition and displacement. After a long struggle and negotiation, these movements had forced the government to agree to some basics: * that the land acquisition must not take place without consent * that land acquisition must not be permitted in multi-crop land where it goes against food security * that acquisition must be preceded by an assessment of its impact not just on land owners but on the society as a whole The governments amendment would mean that now social Impact assessment, food security assessment & consent of 70% of land owners will not be required before acquiring land for five broad categories that the government has specified (more on these categories in point 2). Thus for all practical purposes, we are back to the draconian 1894 Act which peoples movements had fought to change. 2.Govt. proposes to exempt five categories of Acquisitions from the procedural requirements of the 2013 Act. These five categories are: defence, industrial corridors, rural infrastructure,affordable housing including housing for the poor and any infrastructure including social infrastructure in PPP mode where the land is owned by the government. Just look at these four categories and imagine what greedy builders, politicians and bureaucrats can do with these five categories. Basically they would be able to fit every acquisition under one of these five categories. so, in effect the Amendment annuls the Act itself. 3. The Ordinance violates the basic spirit of why ordinance is needed. Ordinance route has been provided for in order to meet an emergency situation in-between two sessions of parliament. What was the emergency in this case? The next session is in the third week of February. Why could the government not wait till then? 4. The Act of 2013 was passed with support from most political parties including the BJP. The parliamentary Committee that cleared the bill was headed by Ms. Sumitra Mahajan, the current speaker. What has changed since then? 5. The Act has not got a fair chance so far. Most states have not framed Rules necessary for its implementation.How come it has been found to be impractical without even a trial? The simple truth is that the BJP has decided to favour big business and industry in the hope that the farmers will not understand or challenge its move. The onus now is on the farmers to prove this government wrong.
Posted on: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 16:52:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015