Judicial Justice for Special Economic Zone Land Resistance

Bibliographic Data

ID3985723
AuthorsHeather P Bedi (0000-0002-1803-9267, Dickinson College, corresponding author)
Year2015
Volume45
Issue4
Pages596-617
Publication date2015-10-02
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Contemporary Asia (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0047-2336 • E-ISSN: 1752-7554
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/00472336.2015.1048406
OpenAlexW1630354523
LanguageEN
Citations received14
References cited21

The context for land resistance in liberalising India is dynamic. As the state promotes capital investment, lines between public and private are blurred. Land is central to these efforts, as new industries, mines, large-scale agricultural projects and infrastructure initiatives all require vast amounts of land. The introduction of Special Economic Zones (SEZ) in the Indian state of Goa highlight land deal tensions. Following protests rallying thousands and widespread public mistrust of land and regional planning processes, the state’s chief minister halted the zones. This action mollified public unrest and temporarily appeased anti-SEZ social movements. However, scepticism arose as the chief minister failed to legally de-register the zones and return SEZ lands to original owners or collectives. Amidst state inaction, movement members sought judicial justice. Protest and corruption theories are integrated with political interpretations of liminality in this article to frame how social movements shift their patterns of intervention in response to or in anticipation of inaction. Enhanced opportunities for corruption, exemplified by the SEZ model, lead movements to adapt strategies of resistance beyond state-oriented protest. The interventions discussed represent a shift in the ritual form of protest and the degree of political engagement with the judiciary. The multi-faceted contestation altered power structure, while politicising and scrutinising land deals.Key Words: Land conflictjusticeSpecial Economic Zonesresistanceliminalitycorruptionpublic interest litigation AcknowledgementsThe author thanks the many people interviewed in India, who remain anonymous in this article. She is particularly grateful to those who granted access to the RTI and court case documents. The guest editors, Uday Chandra, Kenneth Bo Nielsen and Judy Whitehead, the anonymous reviewers and Bhaskar Vira provided insightful comments, which strengthened and clarified the arguments. The Cambridge Political Economy Trust generously funded the represented research. Any errors or omissions are solely the author’s responsibility

Context (archaeology · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Resistance (ecology · Sociology · State (computer science · Law · Social and Economic Development in India · Urban and Rural Development Challenges · Water Governance and Infrastructure