Before the monsoon session, a final meeting on the draught forest bill is held in parliament

At least four opposition lawmakers are expected to voice their concerns at the joint committee of Parliament’s last meeting on Tuesday to adopt its report on a draught bill intended to change India’s forest protection law.

During the monsoon session, which starts on July 20, it is anticipated that the controversial Forest (Conservation) Amendment Bill, 2023, would be introduced in Parliament.

“Tomorrow is the last meeting before the report is approved. We have heard concerns expressed and recommendations made from numerous sources, said Rajendra Agarwal, the Bharatiya Janata Party’s Lok Sabha MP who is in charge of the parliamentary group. “No committee proceedings may be disclosed until the report is approved and laid before the committee.”

According to a working group report from the independent think tank Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, the changes to the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, could endanger large tracts of ecologically significant forests and leave out several so-called deemed forests that make up about 15% of India’s total green cover.

Some of the draught legislation’s provisions are reportedly opposed by a number of state governments, environmental organisations, and opposition parties because they would, in their opinion, weaken protections for the nation’s forests.

“Four opposition MPs have sent dissenting notes. On condition of anonymity, a lawmaker from an opposition party indicated that other people had vocally voiced their concerns during the previous meeting on June 26. “We must handle this at the meeting tomorrow. The primary issues with the bill remain, notwithstanding the acceptance of certain modest adjustments.

The committee met informally in June with the governments of Himachal Pradesh, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Tripura, Sikkim, Nagaland, Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Odisha, and Andhra Pradesh, as well as the Union territories of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. It also spoke with representatives from the Border Roads Organisation, the Border Security Force, the Defence Research and Development Organisation, the Army Northern Command, and the Director

The measure raises two significant issues. One of the proposed sections exempts prior approval for strategically important national development projects on forest area within 100 km of international boundaries. This applies throughout almost the whole Northeast. The Indian Forest Act of 1927 or any other law would only apply to territory that has been designated or notified as a forest under the proposed legislation. Additionally, it aims to only identify forest areas that were designated as such on or after October 25, 1980.

Any easing of the Forest Conservation Act would make it easier to use forests more. Another opposition MP who wished to remain anonymous stated last week that the amended bill has multiple articles that give the Centre the authority to make decisions. “Forests are listed concurrently, and our government is federal in nature. Therefore, we requested that this problem be addressed in the Act as well as when the regulations are created. Finally, a lot of us disagree with the Act’s new name, Van (Sanrakshan Evam Samvardhan) Adhiniyam.

“The law aims to radically alter forest governance. It would fundamentally change which woods are to be preserved and which may be diverted, according to another MP who wished to remain anonymous on Monday. “It also modifies the rules on the plantations. The prologue itself is the issue for me. Naturally, these inquiries have arisen.

According to legal and policy analyst Kanchi Kohli, the proposed changes reflect the federal government’s prioritisation process of balancing the effects of economic objectives with forest-based carbon sinks. She said that the parliamentary panel had to reconcile a wide range of changes and perspectives.

The joint parliamentary committee’s reaction to comments that questioned the constitutionality, social emancipation, and ecological blindness of the proposed revisions, Kohli said, would be vital in determining whether any caveats have been included.