By IANS,
New Delhi : Trinamool Congress chief Mamata Banerjee might be protesting the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill and the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill, but experts believe these address several concerns raised recently during acquisitions.
“Both the Land Acquisition Amendment and the related Bill on Rehabilitation and Resettlement address several concerns that have been raised in relation to recent project related acquisitions. However, there are various issues that remain,” said PRS Legislative Research, an initiative that aims to strengthen legislative debate.
“These include the differentiation of resettlement benefits between projects that displace a large number of families and those in which fewer families are displaced. Also, while several benefits are listed, it is not mandatory for the authorities to provide some of these,” PRS added.
According to PRS’ analysis of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, “The amendment bill places several restrictions to deter acquisition of land unless it is needed for a genuine public purpose. It also provides for better compensation and quicker dispute resolution.”
“However, some issues still need to be examined. The mode of compensation needs to be re-examined, urgency is not defined, the treatment of unused land acquired by the government is unclear,” the analysis added.
In the context of the Rehabilitation and Resettlement (R&R), it says that till 2003 there was no national policy on rehabilitating and resettling people who had been displaced due to land acquisition.
“The National Rehabilitation and Resettlement policy was framed in 2003 and revised in 2007. The R&R bill 2007 seeks to convert the policy into a statute, so that any aggrieved person is entitled to judicial remedy,” it added.
“The bill has specified minimum benefits for those affected and also has a provision of ombudsman for grievance redressal. However, there are some important issues like several benefits listed are not mandatory, lower benefits if less than 400 families are displaced and it bars civil courts from entertaining any suits on several issues,” the analysis further said.
The ruling Congress party, which is in favour of both bills, is in a quandary over introducing them in parliament as it faces stiff opposition by ally Mamata Banerjee.
The government intended to introduce the two bills during the budget session of parliament, but the move was scuttled by Banerjee when she reportedly threatened to walk out if the legislations were approved.
“The government may introduce them in the winter session now,” an informed source said.
Banerjee is opposed to a clause that empowers private players to acquire up to 70 percent land directly from farmers and land owners. The remaining 30 percent is to be acquired by the state government, the bill proposes. The Trinamool Congress feels that it may be tantamount to forceful acquisition.
Banerjee wants private players to be responsible for 100 percent of the purchase instead.
According to sources, the Trinamool Congress doesn’t want to be seen as part of anything that is in favour of land acquisition ahead of the 2011 assembly elections in West Bengal.
The party’s constant agitation had forced the Tata group to move its small car project out of Singur and the Left Front government in West Bengal was also forced to halt land acquisition for a special economic zone in Nandigram.