Incorporating Stakeholder Perceptions in Participatory Forest

1.2 Context and Rationale
eldf/camb Harda-framework/final-03-05
In the context of the present study and a review of the various reactions on the alleged
conflict situation in Harda, several legal phrases have been used by various stakeholders.
It is pertinent to clarify these legal terms so that a common understanding is developed
which minimises interpretations, which may be biased due to discipline loyalties. The
concept of nistar or distinction between ‘forest villages’ and ‘village forests’ sometimes
escape attention. The laws relating to minor forest produce, the implications of JFM
orders, the agreements, if signed, and their validity as true contracts are all matters of
strict legal scrutiny. The issue of forest tenure as well ancestral domain or property rights
are critical to understand if perceptions have to be placed in the correct legal
understanding. Similarly the distinction between rights and concessions especially in
Reserve Forests also needs to be understood.
Perhaps the most important development in the polity of Madhya Pradesh is the evolution
of the Panchayati Raj especially the new Gram Swaraj Act of 2001. There is a constant
linkage of various user groups including JFMCs with lowest tiers of the Panchayati Raj
system, the Gram Sabha. A number of Rules under the Gram Swaraj Act have also been
enacted to operationalise the Gram Sabha in a true democratic spirit. The specialised
Committees on Forests under it cannot be undermined as it will take a prime position
once functions, functionaries and funds are devolved to these basic units of governance.
This is coupled with the fact that Forest Fringe Development Agencies are also taking
root at the same time and their linkage cannot be missed as such agencies have to operate
within the overall framework of the Gram Sabha. The Lok Vaniki on non- forestlands
presents a new legal challenge. The distinction between non-forest land and revenue land
has to be made or at least the scope of such non- forestland has to be determined.
Finally, another important component that is often overlooked but which can be effective
in conflict problem solving are the interpretations of the Courts on all the issues that have
been illustrated above. The Role of the Supreme Court especially in the context of
Madhya Pradesh has been very significant in the recent times. Also the role of High
Court of Madhya Pradesh needs to be taken into account to give the latest position of
judicial thinking on various laws on forestry and related subjects operating in Madhya
Pradesh so as to facilitate the legal mapping in its most recent form.
Such a legal mapping as would be demonstrated in the report would be significant in this
research in two ways:
Firstly, it informs and clarifies the legal complexity that exists in all stakeholders after a
rigorous legal analysis. This would in turn help understand their viewpoint from the
correct legal standpoint. Secondly, a field based legal analysis of this nature then takes
each conflict situation or perspective of each stakeholder to fit into the nature and legal
validity of the perception. This would be instrumental in resolving the conflicting
perceptions in case the research project includes conflict resolution within its mandate at
a later stage.
14