{"title":"Undoing historical injustice: the role of the Forest Rights Act and the Supreme Court in departing from colonial forest laws","authors":"Deirdre N. Dlugoleski","doi":"10.1080/24730580.2020.1783941","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In terms of land tenure security, forest dwellers in India, who own and manage less than 3% of forested land nationwide, are among the worst off in the world. Vulnerable to forced eviction at any point, they stand at risk of losing their homes and means of survival with little legal redress. The Forest Rights Act of 2006, an attempt to increase their security, recognizes both individual and community land claims and mandates a uniform process for granting legal title. Greater recognition of forest rights, however, implicates the interests of powerful extractive industries also seeking control over forest land. In the Niyamgiri case, the Indian Supreme Court defended an indigenous claim against a multinational corporation by tying cultural rights to land. This reasoning pushed Indian jurisprudence closer to developing international law on indigenous land rights, particularly that of the Interamerican system, which can offer guidance for building on this precedent.","PeriodicalId":13511,"journal":{"name":"Indian Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24730580.2020.1783941","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
ABSTRACT In terms of land tenure security, forest dwellers in India, who own and manage less than 3% of forested land nationwide, are among the worst off in the world. Vulnerable to forced eviction at any point, they stand at risk of losing their homes and means of survival with little legal redress. The Forest Rights Act of 2006, an attempt to increase their security, recognizes both individual and community land claims and mandates a uniform process for granting legal title. Greater recognition of forest rights, however, implicates the interests of powerful extractive industries also seeking control over forest land. In the Niyamgiri case, the Indian Supreme Court defended an indigenous claim against a multinational corporation by tying cultural rights to land. This reasoning pushed Indian jurisprudence closer to developing international law on indigenous land rights, particularly that of the Interamerican system, which can offer guidance for building on this precedent.
在土地所有权保障方面,印度的森林居民拥有和管理的森林土地不到全国的3%,是世界上最糟糕的。他们在任何时候都很容易被强迫驱逐,面临着失去家园和生存手段的风险,几乎得不到法律补救。2006年的《森林权利法案》(Forest Rights Act)旨在加强森林的安全,承认个人和社区对土地的所有权要求,并规定了授予合法所有权的统一程序。然而,更大程度地承认森林权利意味着也寻求控制森林土地的强大采掘业的利益。在Niyamgiri案中,印度最高法院通过将文化权利与土地联系起来,为土著人对跨国公司的索赔进行了辩护。这一推理使印度法理学更接近于发展关于土著土地权利的国际法,特别是美洲体系的国际法,这可以为在这一先例的基础上建立法律提供指导。