The State, Tribals and Law
The Politics behind the Enactment of Pesa and FRA
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10939748 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kamal Nayan Choubey (Department of Political Science, Dyal Singh College, Delhi University Nagar, Delhi, India., corresponding author) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 46 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 355-370 |
| Publication date | 2016-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Social Change (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0049-0857 • E-ISSN: 0976-3538 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0049085716654812 |
| OpenAlex | W2492746786 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 4 |
This article attempts to present a comparative study of experiences involved in the passing of two laws, the Panchayat Extension to Scheduled Areas Act (PESA) 1996 and Forest Rights Act (FRA) 2006—both the result of lengthy struggles carried out by marginalised sections of society. PESA, enacted to implement the Panchayati Raj system in Schedule V areas, was trigged by large-scale mass mobilisation in these regions, organised by the Bharat Jan Andolan and other people’s organisations. The FRA, on the other hand, focused on giving Adivasis rights on forestland and its resources, both in terms of private property rights and common property rights. The legislation was driven by the Campaign for Survival and Dignity—a collective of Adivasi groups and other like-minded organisations from different states. It can be argued therefore that such people’s movements have played an important role in creating these laws and helping them to become more ‘progressive’. Nevertheless, several questions can be asked about these laws. For instance, to what extent was such legislation the result of such movements? More specifically, to what degree did these laws cater to the demands made by such movements? Did the increasing influence of Maoists groups compel the Indian state to enact these laws? Through these legislations, has the state simply created a new weapon for determining illegality, or, has it, merely invented a ‘new weapon for informal violence’? By studying the background, debates and movements for the enactment of both PESA and FRA, the article seeks to address these questions. It also proposes a concept of a ‘marginal society’ to understand the politics of forest-dwelling tribal groups
Dignity · Legislation · Panchayati raj · Political science · Politics · Private property · Sociology · State (computer science · Cambodian History and Society · Law · Public Administration · South Asian Studies and Conflicts · Southeast Asian Sociopolitical Studies
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,5 |
| Citation span | 2022 - 2023 (2) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |