As the Supreme Court prepares to hear the landmark case challenging the constitutionality and implementation of the Forest Rights Act (FRA), 2006 on April 2, tribal communities and forest rights organisations across India are mobilising to defend one of the country’s most significant pro-people legislations. Over 100 civil society groups, including the Campaign for Survival and Dignity (CSD), have urged the government to uphold the law and ensure due process in the recognition and review of forest claims.

Background: The Origin of FRA and Its Objectives

The FRA was enacted in 2006 to correct a “historic injustice” committed against Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (OTFDs), whose rights over forest land were never recognised during colonial and post-colonial forest governance. The law came into effect after a prolonged people’s movement and parliamentary consensus. It provides legal recognition to 13 types of forest rights, including land tenure, access to minor forest produce, grazing, and community rights to protect and manage forests.

Wildlife First Case and 2019 Eviction Order

The ongoing legal battle stems from a petition filed in 2008 by Wildlife First and other conservationist groups, who challenged the FRA on the grounds that it promoted encroachments in forest areas. In 2019, the Supreme Court, after what rights groups termed a “one-sided hearing,” ordered the eviction of 1.7 million families whose FRA claims had been rejected. This sparked nationwide protests, forcing the Ministry of Tribal Affairs (MoTA) to intervene and highlight serious procedural lapses in the claim rejection process. The court stayed the eviction and directed states to review the claims afresh.

The Core Issues Before the Court

1. Procedural Lapses in Review of Claims: Rights organisations argue that state governments have not complied with the Supreme Court’s directions in good faith. Reviews of rejected claims have either been bypassed or carried out arbitrarily. For instance, satellite imagery, which is not recognised under FRA rules, has been used to reject claims without field verification, as seen in Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh.

2. Gram Sabha Undermined: The FRA empowers Gram Sabhas as the central authority in claim verification. However, digitisation, bureaucratic overreach, and top-down interference have undermined the statutory role of these local bodies, with decisions increasingly made by officials at district or state levels.

3. Forced Evictions Despite Pending Claims: Reports from Madhya Pradesh indicate that forest officials have forcibly evicted cultivators from lands where claims are either under review or not yet processed. MoTA data indicates over 1.8 million claims have been rejected, with rights groups questioning the integrity of this process.

4. Dilution of FRA through Forest Conservation Rules (FCR) 2022: Activists argue that recent amendments to the FCR have bypassed the FRA’s requirement for free, prior, and informed consent of Gram Sabhas for forest diversion. This has opened the door for large-scale corporate access to forest lands, further marginalising forest dwellers.

Conservation vs Community Rights Debate

The FRA was designed to foster a model of conservation that is community-centric rather than exclusionary. Yet, wildlife-focused groups have continued to push for evictions from protected areas, such as tiger reserves. Notably, the National Tiger Conservation Authority has called for expedited relocation of nearly 65,000 people from core tiger habitats, despite FRA protections being in place.

Rights advocates argue that real conservation success lies in recognising community-managed forests, not in criminalising forest dwellers. Empirical studies have shown that community forest governance leads to better forest health and biodiversity outcomes.

The Stakes Ahead of April 2 Hearing

The April 2 hearing in the Supreme Court will decide the fate of millions of tribal and forest-dwelling families. Rights groups demand:

• The FRA be upheld in its entirety as constitutional.

• No evictions from forest land until all claims and appeals are processed.

• Review of rejections be done transparently, with Gram Sabhas playing their mandated role.

• Strict accountability for violations of FRA and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

• Withdrawal of recent FCR amendments that bypass consent requirements.

Failure to protect the FRA, they argue, will not only mean dispossession for India’s most marginalised people but also the undoing of a progressive law that integrates justice, livelihood security, and conservation.