Jan Sansad 2012
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Friday, November 30, 2012
Press Release
Jan Sansad released its Manifesto highlighting key demands
of people’s movements and organizations
New Delhi, 30 Jan 2012: The focus on the concluding day of the five day Jan Sansad, at Jantar Mantar, was on Dalit and tribal issues and gender inequalities. It also saw the release of the People’s Manifesto highlighting the key demands of various people’s movements and organizations that were participating in the Jan Sansad, as a countdown to the 2014 elections. The manifesto included resolutions on anti-corruption legislation like the Lokpal Bill, Grievance Redressal Bill and the Whistle Blower Bill. The Jan Sansad also unanimously opposed the government’s move to implement the cash transfer scheme in lieu of various social policies and demanded that Parliament function and immediately pass pro-people legislation.
Speakers included Baba Adhav, Ms. Aruna Roy, Ms. Subhashini Ali, AIDWA, Ms. Annie Raja, NFIW, Mr. Mungekar, Congress MP Rajya Sabha, Mr. Manik Tagore, MP and a host of other activists.
During the morning session activists and members of the audience spoke of the atrocities that continue to be directed against Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes. Their children were being segregated in schools, even made to wash vessels used for the mid day meals, adults are forced to scavenge for a living, and families are deprived of a place to stay; the irony being that while they construct houses for others they themselves don’t have land or a place to stay. Similarly nomadic tribes, suffer exclusion from society and even the Census. They have no ration cards or ID cards or a place to sleep as highlighted by Paras Ram Banjara, MKSS when he said “Our Constitution bestows upon all the right to dignity but even after 65 years of independence this remains a dream and a struggle for the nomadic tribes.” He added that they have no ration cards, no land, no homes, and no documentation as proof of their citizenship. They are branded as criminals and are refused treatment by hospitals. He illustrated the sorry plight of these tribes when he spoke about an incident where a man from the Kalbeliya community of Rajasthan was buried in his own hut because he was denied a place in the burial ground on account of his low caste status. He also brought to light the lack of a legislation to prevent atrocities against the nomadic tribes as there is in the case of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
Baba Adav spoke about caste branding and the evolution of untouchability which is taken to the extent of Mantras which are discriminatory against lower castes but blindly followed by all of us. He also spoke of a particular forest dwelling tribe in Maharashtra who are constantly branded as criminals. He said, “Nomadic tribes have a culture that they don’t stay anywhere for more than three days so how will the government accommodate them under the right to vote? These tribes are also demanding that they be included in the Scheduled Tribes category.”
Shankar Singh, MKSS speaking on the issue of manual scavenging said that even today Dalits were doing it for as little as Rs. 2 a day and opined that politicians should apologize that such a practice is still prevalent after 65 years of independence. Why, he asked, were Dalit children not being taught computers like other children? He opined that part of the problem lies with the
community itself which seldom seeks to break free from their traditional forms of livelihood. The road ahead, according to him, is a change in the mindset of the scavengers.
Shiv, who works with Adivasis in Rajasthan said that the government’s solution of providing loans and reservations will not suffice. The need of the hour is for the government to increase its involvement with this issue. Last year 2 lakh government jobs reserved for them were not availed because they lack requisite educational qualifications. He suggested that employment guarantees be provided to Dalit workers in the Nagar Pallikas.
In the second session the atrocities and problems against women were highlighted through street plays, songs and the sharing of experiences by women from various parts of the country.
Annie Raja of NFIW spoke of how, “women in various parts of the country are being branded as witches and killed by elements who want to take away their houses or the small bits of land that they hold.”
Subhashini Ali, AIDWA and former MP, said that globalization and privatization is depriving women who are dependent on common lands for their means of livelihood. This is forcing many of them to go into lowly paid jobs like anganwadi workers who get as little as Rs. 1,100/- a month. She spoke of how the media is promoting stereotypical roles of women by portraying them as second grade citizens and word play is being used to trap them into conservative roles. “Domestic violence, female foeticide and rape have now become tools to suppress women and establish male dominance”, she added.
Mr. Mungekar, MP Congress, Rajya Sabha questioned the legitimacy of Khap Panchayats which are not recognized by the Constitution, Supreme Court or High Courts. He said, “Khap Panchayats are anti-democracy, anti-women and anti-social. Honour killings have no place in a civilized society and these, along with Khap Panchayats, need to be banned.”
Mr. Manik Tagore, MP from Tamil Nadu pledged that when he and other Lok Sabha members meet the Prime Minister next week they will take up the issues that have been raised this morning, specifically the issue of right to pension.
Gargi Chakravarty, NFIW, said that sexual assault has increased manifold in the last couple of years. The reasons being: consumerism, the portrayal of women as objects by the media. “Children who witness violence against their mothers see it as a norm rather than as a violation of their rights. Even educated men continue to perpetrate violence against women which is why the education system must change to sensitize people to women’s issues.”
Aruna Roy, MKSS, introduced Vimla Bhen for Hissar, Haryana who shared the story of how her daughter’s rape had led to the destruction of her family life and led resulted in her husband killing himself. She said, “My husband won’t get peace till the criminals are hung.”
Taking this forward, Ms. Aruna Roy said, “Being born a woman in this world is a curse and being born a Dalit woman is an even bigger curse. Women, irrespective of their class and caste are easy targets of violence. Even the agencies responsible for protecting women are violating their rights. Though the status of women in society has improved, inequality persists within the four walls of people’s houses, which should be safe havens.” She took the example of the State of Haryana and blamed the increase of instances of violence on the declining sex ratio.
The broad resolutions that emerged from this session are:
1. Stringent punishment for perpetrators of sexual assault, child sexual abuse, rape whether it happens in police custody, prisons, shelter homes and orphanages.
2. A demand for the release of all human rights activists who have been arrested while struggling for social and political justice on behalf of the marginalized.
3. A demand for appointment of required judges for speedy disposal of cases of atrocities against women.
4. Reservation for Dalit women in executive judiciary and media so that they can adequately represent women’s issues.
5. A demand for social security benefits for Dalit women like education, insurance, housing, food security, safe drinking water, housing and medical care. Also, the right to gainful employment and land rights.
6. A demand that national and regional media agencies report incidents of atrocities and also engage the public in debates on the larger issue of caste systems.
7. A demand for banning Caste Panchayats.
8. Budgetary allocations to public health be atleast 3% of the GDP.
9. Passing of the Bill on women’s reservation without any dilution in the 33% reservation for women.
10. Immediate legal and punitive action in cases of violence under the Armed Forces Special Powers Act.
Justice Puttaswamy, a retired judge of the Karnataka High Court, has submitted a petition to Chief Justice Altamas Kabir and Justice Chalameswar, Supreme Court asking why the government was going ahead with the implementation of the UID Project when the Parliamentary Sub-Committee had rejected the Bill. Advocate Anil Divan who is appearing for the Petitioner at the Supreme Court has issued a notice on both the writ petition and the stay application, according to Bharat Kumar, the lawyer for the Petitioner.
Jan Sansad Manifesto - 30 Nov 12
Peoples’
Manifesto
Resolutions
adopted at the Jan Sansad
Jantar Mantar, 26th-30th
November 2012
Pledge
taken on the 26th of November 2012 at the Jan Sansad
And thereby resolve to rededicate ourselves
to the full realisation of the ideals of a
Sovereign, Secular, Democratic,
Socialist Republic,
And to secure for all its citizens the
as-yet-unfinished-task of guaranteeing the right to
JUSTICE, social, economic and
political;
LIBERTY of thought, expression,
belief, faith and worship;
EQUALITY of status and of opportunity;
And to promote among ourselves
FRATERNITY affirming the right of the
individual to lead a life of dignity and fostering harmony between diverse
social and linguistic groups, religious faiths and different regions of the
country
For this purpose, we the people of India, pledge to
exercise and uphold all the fundamental rights of life, liberty, equality, and
protection against discrimination (on the grounds of gender, race, religion and
caste) and exploitation as enshrined in our constitution;
And we resolve to exercise the sovereignty bestowed by
this Constitution on the people of India. We will use all democratic and
peaceful means at our disposal to fulfil its obligations under the directive
principles of the Indian Constitution of universal livelihood, employment,
social security and welfare, freedom from hunger and malnutrition, education
and health facilities, living wages and equal opportunities irrespective of
gender, ethnicities, religious faith and caste.
We believe that the sovereignty of the people of India
extends to control over natural resources within the domain of India. We will resolutely fight their uncontrolled
exploitation through the agencies of the State, and profit driven National and
Transnational corporations. We pledge to
stand up for the sanctity of people’s
rights over these resources, and their judicious use for the welfare of the
community and for future generations.
Pledge taken by:
Justice JS Verma, Justice Leela Seth, Justice Sachchar,
Justice Mudgal, Wajahat Habibullah, Ashok Chaudhary, Harsh Mander, Kamla
Bhasin, Ashok Bharati, OP Jain, Binayak Sen, , Soli Sorabjee, , Kuldeep Nayar,
Pramila, Praveen Jha, Shanta Sinha, Vrinda Grover, Dr. Syeda Hameed, alongside
the following organisations-
1.
Act
Now for Harmony And Democracy (ANHAD),
2.
Aman
Biradri,
3.
All
India Mazdoor Kisan Sangharsh Samiti (AIMKSS),
4.
All
India Network of Sex Workers (AINSW),
5.
Alliance
of Indian Waste pickers,
6.
Alliance
for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture (ASHA),
7.
Alternative
Development and Research Center,(ADC) Jaipur,
8.
ASHA
Parivar,
9.
Association
for Democratic Reform (ADR),
10.
Bharat
Gyan Vigyan Samiti,
11.
Bihar
MGNREGA Watch (BMW),
12.
Centre
For Advocacy Research (CFAR),
13.
Centre
for Health and Resource Management (CHARM),
14.
Coalition
for a GM-Free India,
15.
Global
Human Rights Communication,
16.
Greenpeace
India,
17.
Ekta
Parishad,
18.
Hamal
Panchayat,
19.
Inclusive
Media for Change,
20.
Indian
Community Activists Network (ICAN),
21.
Jagori,
22.
Jan
Jagran Shakti Sangathan (JJSS),
23.
Jhuggi
Jhopari Sangharsh Morcha, Bihar
24.
Joint
Organization for Self Help (JOSH),
25.
Kachra
Kamgar Union Bharat,
26.
Kagad
Kanch Patra Kamgar Saghatana (KKPKS), Aurangabad,
27.
Khana
( Khaadhya Nyaya Abhiyan)
28.
Khudai
Khidmatgar,
29.
Manzil,
30.
Maharastra
Rajya Hamal Mapadi Mahamandal, Pune
31.
Mazdoor
Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS),
32.
Mission
Bhartiyam,
33.
Molrarni
Va Gharelu Kamgar Sanghatana (Domestic workers Union), Aurangabad
34.
National
Alliance of Peoples Movments (NAPM),
35.
National
Campaign Committee for Rural Workers (NCCRW),
36.
National
Campaign for People’s Right to Information (NCPRI),
37.
National
Campaign on Dalit Human Rights (NCDHR)
38.
National
Federation for Indian Women (NFIW),
39.
Pardarshita,
40.
Peoples
Action for Employment Guarantee (PAEG),
41.
Pension
Parishad,
42.
Right
to Food Campaign,
43.
Rajasthan
Adivasi Adhikar Manch,
44.
Rajasthan
Mazdoor Kisan Union,
45.
Right
to Water Campaign,
46.
RTI
Manch, Rajasthan ,
47.
Sangath,
48.
Satark
Nagrik Sangathan (SNS),
49.
Soochna
Evum Rozgar Abhiyan (SR Abhiyan)
50.
Voluntary
Forum of Education, Bihar
51. Womens’ Voice
Resolutions
adopted on the 27th of November 2012 at the Jan Sansad held at
Jantar Mantar
Resolution on the Lokpal and Lokayukta
Bill 2011
The Jan Sansad
believes that the Lokpal legislation is a key measure for fighting corruption
and in conjuction with other anti-corruption and grievance redress legislations
like the Whistle Blower protection bill and the Grievance Redress bill will
ensure better governance. We feel that the Lokpal and Lokayukta Bill 2011 must
be debated in the Parliament and passed immediately.
The Jan Sansad believes that the
following salient features must be included in the Lokpal and Lokayukta bill to ensure a robust anti-corruption regime.
·
Much of the corruption that affects the common
person, especially the poor and marginalised, is in state government agencies.
It would be meaningless to create an anti-corruption agency that leaves out the
majority of Indians, especially those who are most in need of its intervention.
The Lokpal Bill should therefore provide for setting up Lokayuktas in states on
the same pattern as the Lokpal at the centre. Some matters of rule may be left
to the States. As the Prevention of Corruption Act is a central Act it is essential
that the same procedures of dealing with corruption be followed across the
country.
·
We feel that the Lokpal and Lokayuktas should be:
·
Adequately independent of the government and others
whom they are mandated to scrutinise, so that they can function without
interference, pressure, and conflict of interest;
·
Adequately empowered to detect, investigate and
prosecute cases of corruption;
·
With adequate jurisdiction, so that no category of
public servant is exempt from effective scrutiny; Adequately accountable to the
people of India;
·
And, yet, practical and realistically workable.
·
The selection committee should not have a
preponderance of government nominees but could well be the Prime Minister/Chief
Minster, Leader of the Opposition, and a judge of the Supreme Court/ High
Court, nominated by the Chief Justice.
·
The Delhi Special Police Establishment should be
independent of the government and the Lokpal should have administrative control
over the Delhi Special Police Establishment. All appointments, transfers and
removal of group A and B staff of the Delhi Special Police Establishment should
only be done with the concurrence of the Lokpal, and the Chairperson or the
concerned member of the Lokpal should be the accepting authority for the annual
confidential reports of all those Group A and B officers who have directly or
indirectly been involved in any case under the jurisdiction of the Lokpal.
·
The
Lokpal should be made accountable to Parliament for the maintenance of ethical
standards within the institutions, specifically maintaining impartiality in
functioning, especially the absence of political, caste, class, gender and
religious bias, the prevention of victimization, and the avoidance of conflict
of interests.
Resolution on the
Right of Citizens for Time Bound Delivery of Goods and Services and Redressal
of their Grievances Bill, 2011
The Jan Sansad welcomes the introduction of a separate
Grievance Redressal Bill in the parliament. We believe that the Right of
Citizens for Time Bound Delivery of Goods and Services and Redressal of their
Grievances Bill, 2011 is critical for providing an accessible, decentralized,
and responsive system for time-bound redressal of citizens’ grievances.
The Jan Sansad believes that the following salient features
must be included in any grievance redress legislation to ensure that peoples’
grievances are redressed in a time-bound and effective manner.
1. Grievance redress mechanism for both the central
government and state governments- The bill should provide for setting up a
grievance redress mechanism for both the central government and state
governments. Many grievances which affect the common person, especially the
poor and marginalised, are in state government agencies and departments. It
would be meaningless to create a grievance redress mechanism at the centre
which would leave out the majority of Indians, especially those who are most in
need of its intervention. Therefore, we feel that it is crucial that the same
law provide for setting up Central and State Grievance Redress Commissions with
similar powers, structures and functions.
2. Development of citizen charter in a participatory and
transparent manner - the citizen charter which would enumerate the
services, goods and obligations of a public authority must be comprehensive and
include all the goods, services, entitlements and obligations of a particular
public authority alongwith relevant timelines, norms and standards. The citizen
charter must be developed in a participatory and consultative manner.
Appropriate mechanisms for seeking feedback of the public during the process of
formulating the charter must be adopted by public authorities. Further, the citizen
charter must be periodically updated to reflect changes, if any.
3. Definition of grievance- violation of the
provisions of the citizen charter would constitute a grievance.
4. Time bound grievance
redress- The legislation must provide for specific and mandatory time lines
for redress of grievances and appeals. A specific time limit for disposal of
grievances by the GRO and HoD and specific time limits for disposal of appeals
by the designated authority at the district level and the State/Central Grievance
Redressal Commissions must be included in the legislation.
5. Information and
facilitation centre- In order to facilitate registration, follow-up, and
tracking of grievances, the legislation must provide for Information and Facilitation
centres at the block/municipal ward level. These centres should proactively
provide information to citizens about the schemes and programs of the
government and assist citizens in filing grievances and in tracking their
applications and entitlements. These centres could be set up as a single
window/common centre at the block/municipal ward level, outside any specific
department.
6. Decentralised grievance
redress mechanism- Every public authority/office should have a designated
Grievance Redress Officer (GRO) at the Panchayat/Municipal ward level for
receiving and disposing of complaints about any deficiency by an
officer/functionary, in a specified timeframe. The GRO should have adequate
authority and power to ensure that:
a.
the deficiency is redressed in a reasonable timeframe
b.
responsibility is fixed for the deficiency occurring in
the first place and, where thought necessary, the errant functionary is
reprimanded or punished
7. Independent Grievance
Redress Authority at the District level- We feel that it is essential that
the bill provide for an independent authority at the district level with powers
to penalise GROs and other erring officials and also order compensation to the
complainant. In case the GRO and Head of the Department at the district level
do not redress the grievance of a complainant satisfactorily and the
complainant appeals to the district designated authority or if an ATR is not
received in time by the designated authority at the district level, then the
designated authority at the district level will initiate the process of inquiry
and order where appropriate, redress of grievance, and impose penalty
(including on the HOD) and award compensation in a timeframe prescribed by the
Act.
8. Penalty- The bill must
empower the district designated authority, state grievance redressal commission
and central grievance redressal commission with powers to penalise GROs and
other erring officials. There should be mandatory penalty on GROs and other
erring officials unless the officer can show beyond reasonable doubt that the
officer made all possible efforts to redress the grievance. Mandatory penalty
also needs to be specified in relation to some categories of impugned
administrative action such as mala fide action of the officials, repetitive
violations etc.
9. Compensation- The bill
must include provisions for compensating complainants incase of non-redress of
grievances. the Bill should provide for mandatory compensation for certain
classes of grievances and this compensation should be paid for by the public
authority and then recovered from the salary of the erring officials.
Compensation for entitlements
delayed/denied as a reparative measure is critical to encourage people to file
complaints to promote systemic accountability. Further, providing
compensation to complainants should not be made conditional on imposition and
recovery of penalty.
10. Territorial jurisdiction of the designated authority,
the State and Central Grievance Redressal Commissions- The Jan Sansad
suggests that the designated authority at the district level should have
territorial jurisdiction over all public servants/public authorities within the
district, irrespective of whether they are offices/employees of the state
government, central government, or any other public authority.
The State Public Grievance
Redressal Commissions should have jurisdiction over all public servants/public
authorities within the state, irrespective of whether they are
offices/employees of the state government, central government or belonging to
any public authority as defined under this Bill.
Similarly, the Central Public
Grievance Redressal Commission should have jurisdiction over all public
servants/public authorities falling within the centrally administered areas,
irrespective of whether they are offices/employees of the state government,
central government, or belonging to a public authority as defined in this Bill.
Resolution on the Whistle Blower Protection Bill, 2011
We welcome the passage of the
Whistle Blowers Protection Bill, 2011 by the Lok Sabha. We believe that this
legislation is a key measure for fighting corruption and in conjuction with
other anti-corruption and grievance redress legislations like the Lokpal bill
and the Grievance Redress bill will ensure better governance.
The following are our suggestions to strengthen the Whistle
Blowers Protection Bill, 2011 and ensure
a robust mechanism for protection of whistleblowers and to promote an
environment to encourage people to blow the whistle about wrongdoings/corruption.
1. Jurisdiction of the Act-
the whistleblower protection bill must extend to all public servants and
functionaries of a public authority in the centre and the states, corporate
bodies, firms or other association of individuals. No arbitrary exemptions
should be extended to any organization or public authority such as the armed
forces, security forces, the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers or the judiciary
etc. Incase any public authority is exempt from the Act, alternative mechanisms
to protect whistle blowers, which meet the standard of this Act, must be
implemented in the authority.
2. Identity of the complainant- there should be adequate provisions in the
act to protect the identity of the whistle blower and any other person who
provides any material, information or document relevant to the complaint. The
competent authority and any persons who get to know the identity of the
complainant (or any associated person) should be obligated by law to protect
the identity of the complainant (and any associated person).
3. Penalty for malafide revelation of identity of whistle blower- The bill should provide for imprisonment
and penalty of any person who reveals the identity of the complainant. Further,
where the revelation is malafide, the person shall also be charged with
abetment if the revelation of identity resulted in the commission of a crime.
4. Dismissal of complaint-
the act should not empower the competent authority to dismiss/reject/close a
complaint on the grounds that it is found to be frivolous or vexatious. The
terms frivolous or vexatious are impossible to define objectively and would
likely to be misused. It may lead to a situation where most complaints would be
routinely rejected as being frivolous or vexatious.
5. Time limit for complaints- there should be no time limit (like 7 years) for making complaints
regarding offences. Many corruption cases/scams are complex and large and take
many years to unravel.
6. Scope of offences- The
bill should cover not just offences related to corruption, criminal
actions and/or misuse of powers or discretion etc. but also to other actions
which have an impact on society (for example environmental destruction, threats
to public safety or health).
7. Anonymous
complaints- The bill should provide for acting upon anonymous complaints if it is
accompanied with adequate supporting documents which reveal a prima facie case.
The competent authority should not reject the complaint merely on the basis
that it is anonymous. Further, a website which encrypts the data and the
identity of the person uploading the data should be provided for people to
securely make disclosures without fear of the data being intercepted or the
identity of the person being reveals (if the person seeks to remain anonymous).
8. Victimisation of
complainant- the bill must clearly define what constitutes
vicitimisation/harassment of the complainant and must provide for protection
against vicitimisation/harassment of the complainant. Further, the bill must
provide for punitive action against any person who victimizes/harasses the
complainant.
9. Competent Authority- any public authority that is authorised
to receive complaints on any of the matters specified in the bill shall also be
obliged to accept a complaint under this Act for the matters over which they
have such jurisdiction. For example- the National Human Rights Commission
should be the competent authority to accept complaints by whistle blowers under
this Act regarding human rights violation.
Resolution on the Right to Information Act, 2005
The following resolutions were adopted to
strengthen the RTI Act without making any amendments to the Act:
1. To deal with
the increasing pendency in Information Commissions, norms and standards of
functioning should be adopted and a time-bound mechanism for disposal of
appeals and complaints should be evolved. There must be norms for disposal of
cases by individual Commissioners also, with accountability for failures to
meet norms and standards. The number of Commissioners appointed in the
Commission should be determined in relation to pendency levels so that cases
may be disposed of in a timely manner. Commissioners must be given adequate and
competent support staff.
2. We welcome the Government’s move to seek a
review of the Supreme Court judgement of September 13, 2012 in the Namit Sharma
case since:
·
the judgement requires the Commissions to
function in two member benches thereby effectively halving the number of benches
in each Commission. We believe that two-member benches will only slow down the
work of Information Commissions and are not necessary. This requirement will
greatly increase the already unacceptable levels of pendency in the Commissions
and render the RTI Act ineffective and impede peoples’ fundamental right to
information.
·
the judgement will, in our opinion, reduce the diversity in the
information commissions. It was Parliament’s intent to keep the Commissions
multidisciplinary and have Information Commissioners from diverse backgrounds
and experience. We believe that diversity in the composition of Information
Commissions is key for ensuring effective realisation of peoples’ fundamental
right to information.
·
the
judgement will reduce the informality and people friendliness of procedure of
disposal of cases in the Information Commissions. It must be ensured that the
procedure of submitting appeals and complaints to the commissions is simple and
people friendly and there is no insistence on lawyers for arguing on behalf of
the appellant. The RTI Act is most widely used by common people for accessing
their fundamental rights and entitlements from the government and any
formalization/complexities in the procedures of the information commission
would hinder peoples’ abilities to use the RTI Act.
·
the judgement is ambiguous on the status of existing Information
Commissions and whether these can continue to function till such time that the
stipulated number of judicial members are appointed as Information Commissioners.
The result is that several Information Commissions are not functioning since
the judgment thereby totally impeding people’s right to information.
·
there is no justification in restricting the position of Chief
Information Commissioners
to only a person who is, or has been, a Chief Justice of the High Court
or a judge of the Supreme Court of India, as laid down in the SC judgement. We
feel that the eligibility
criteria for the Chief Information Commissioners should be widened, as provided for in the
RTI Act.
3. We urge all Information Commissions to evolve
mechanisms for ensuring compliance with Section 4 of the RTI Act. All
Information Commissions must evolve a template/model for section 4 disclosures,
through their websites and also through other means of communication and adopt
these at the earliest. We urge the Information Commissions to become model
public authorities and adopt the highest standards of transparency in keeping
with the letter and spirit of the RTI Act 2005.
A proper system for displaying the list of appeals and
complaints made in Commissions and pending cases must be made proactively made
available through the website and the telephone by each Information Commission
in the country.
We urge the Information Commissions to adopt a system for
uploading all the orders issued by them on their website. Further, a single
website linking and providing access to orders by all the Information
Commissions should be evolved. We urge the government to provide necessary
funds in this regard.
4. There must be time limits for disposal of
cases in which show cause notices are issued by the Information Commissions. In
cases where show cause notices are served, the case should not be disposed and
closed in the Commissions until either a penalty is levied and recovered or a
satisfactory response is given by the PIO to the show cause notice. In either
case, complete information to the appellant must be provided. Information
Commissioners should ensure that penalties imposed by them are recovered and are
entered into the ACR/service record of the concerned official.
The annual report of each Information Commission, including
details on penalties imposed and recovered, should be placed in the public
domain.
5. We urge the state Information Commissions to
adopt mechanisms to hold hearings across the state and not just at one location
within the Commission. We urge Commissioners to go out amongst people, as far as possible, and
hold appeals and complaints disposal camps.
6. It is the responsibility of the government to
protect RTI activists and users, and take swift legal action against the
attackers. It is also the obligation of governments and Information Commissions
to ensure that, if a RTI user is attacked, the information that was being
sought by the assaulted user is urgently and on a priority basis, put in the
public domain and followed up. We welcome the resolution of the CIC in this
regard and urge other commissions to adopt similar measures.
7. For implementation of Section 4 of the RTI
Act, state/central governments should undertake periodic audits and Information
Commissions should take suomotu cognizance of violations of section 4
and issue appropriate orders after holding open sittings.
8. We are deeply
suspicious of any PPP that does not make it explicitly clear that it will be
covered under the purview of the RTI Act. We are also disappointed by judgement
of the courts in which indefinite stays have been granted in cases related to
transparency of PPPs and private bodies performing public functions. We urge
the Commissions to ensure that all private bodies providing public functions
are transparent in their functioning and are treated as being within the
purview of the RTI Act.
9. Illegal
exemptions given under Section 24 to government agencies are irrational and
contrary to national interest, these must be immediately reviewed and
exemptions must be withdrawn.
10. Central and
state RTI rules and rules made by ‘appropriate governments’ and ‘competent
authorities’ which do not follow a single standard, many of which are ultra vires of the Act itself and which
generally make it difficult for people to use the Act, must be immediately
modified. DOPT should urgently undertake a review of the rules and persuade the
state governments to appropriately modify the rules. We urge the appropriate
governments and ‘competent authorities’ to frame simple, people friendly RTI
rules.
Resolution on private sector corruption
1. Strengthening PC Act to
include private sector companies: The PC Act does not expressly seek to punish
corrupt acts of private parties, except to a limited extent through Section 9
(dealing with persons accepting gratification to use their influence to influence
a public servant in the conduct of an official act) and Section 12 (dealing
with abetment, pursuant to which a person offering a bribe could be punished.)
However, there is not direct provision prohibiting a private person from
offering a bribe or engaging in other corrupt practices. Such a provision is
required to ensure that all parties to a corrupt are dealt with adequately and
is especially important in cases of “collusive corruption” where the private
person may be the initiator and where the public servant may even have rejected
the bribe.
2. Whistleblower protection
act should extend to private sector
3. Setting up CVC like body
to deal with private companies
Resolution on Police Reform
RESOLVED THAT Police reforms
are too important to neglect and too urgent to delay. Governments in the states
and at the Centre must not avoid providing the people of India with reformed
and improved policing that is fully accountable for better every day
performance and for its all too common wrongdoing
RESOLVED THAT present
policing is unresponsive oppressive and too often illegal in its actions. The
police must be reformed to be an essential service not a force. The vision and
model of policing has to change to serve the ends of democracy and cannot remain
modelled of a colonial militaristic police aimed at supressing the population
at large.
RESOLVED THAT the role of
the police in our democracy must go beyond enforcing the law to upholding the
law. Policing must go beyond mere
“maintenance of law and order” to protecting life, property and most
importantly, providing an environment within which everyone - and especially
the vulnerable - can enjoy to the fullest, the freedoms and liberties
guaranteed by our Constitution.
RESOLVED THAT recent
government initiatives particularly new police laws go against ensuring greater
accountability and do not reduce illegitimate political influence and
interference.
RESOLVED THAT improving the
police and making it fit for purpose requires that while always remaining
answerable to the political executive the police leadership must enjoy
operational and administrative autonomy; be free from unwarranted and
illegitimate political interference; be assured of a management and
infrastructure that is adequate to achieve its purpose as a service; and most
importantly the police must at all times be answerable for both performance and
wrong doing via accountability mechanisms at multiple levels including
specialised and independent police complaints commissions.
Resolution on Electoral and Political Reforms
·
Candidates with
Criminal antecedents should be debarred from contesting elections.
·
Immediate steps
should be taken to reduce the menace of money power in elections, viz. control
of illegal money used above and beyond the expense limits, transparent
distribution of tickets in elections, etc.
·
The candidates whose
asset declarations show disproportionate increase in assets between two
elections should be enquired into by Income Tax Authorities and action taken
against them in time bound fashion on being found guilty.
·
There is an
urgent need for a comprehensive Bill to regulate the functioning of Political
Parties to ensure inner party democracy and financial transparency within the
political parties.
·
The internal
elections for the offices of political parties should be done using secret
ballot and the culture of unanimous selection of the office bearers must stop.
·
The ticket
distribution process of the political parties should be made transparent and
should be decided by the registered members of political parties.
·
The accounts of the
political parties should be audited by the CAG appointed auditors.
·
The Election
Commission should be empowered to regulate registration and deregistration of
political parties.
·
The Political Parties
should be declared as Public Authorities so that their functioning could be
transparent and be made more accountable.
·
Strict Laws should
be passed to punish candidates involved in Electoral malpractices, particularly
for buying of votes.
·
Fast track courts
should be set up to expedite criminal cases against MPs/MLAs.
·
Implement ceiling on
expenses of Political Parties during election period.
·
Strict Action
against candidates who fail to file their election expenses.
·
There should be a
provision for independent verification of information provided by candidates in
affidavits.
·
There should be a
cooling off period of 5 years before which bureaucrats or people who have
changed their parties are allowed to contest elections on tickets of a political
party.
·
State funding of
elections should come into effect only after checks and balances are in place
to ensure financial transparency in the functioning of political parties.
·
Voting machines
should have the option of “None of the above”. If the election in a
constituency results in “None of the above” getting the maximum number of
votes, there should be a re-poll.
·
Political parties
should give one-third tickets to women as per their state objective
Resolutions
adopted on the 28th of November 2012 at the Jan Sansad held at
Jantar Mantar
Resolutions on
Education
Education Budget
to be made
6% of GDP as long, long recommended
by Kothari Commission in 1966! Centre-State distribution of financial shares
for RTE to be revised so as to enable States to meet Constitution obligation of
86th Amendment. A finance note detailing the allocations for all
aspects of the RTE needs to be prepared. State,
district and school level allocations should be determined through need based
decentralized planning rather than be determined on the basis standardized
norms.
·
No extension of deadlines in RTE
·
Capacities
– human and financial - of local authorities [Panchayat and urban
bodies] to be increased so as to enable them to perform the roles mandated to
them under RTE.
·
Institutionalize social audits that will be
conducted at least once a year. Social audits will be part of the overall
process and performance audit of all programmes under the RTE. Social audits to
be part of the larger grievance redress architecture and mechanisms.
·
Community led monitoring of school to be
strengthened through SMCs and panchayats. Concurrent monitoring mechanisms to
be put in place. Increase per school allocation for monitoring from the current
RS 50/school/annum.
·
Grievance Redress [architecture and mechanism] to be
put into place
and budgets to be allocated accordingly; Accountability for provision of all
legal entitlements under the Act to be fixed within Education Department for
this purpose.
·
A Framework for Equity to be devised with precise
programmatic and budgetary allocations that are tracked and monitored by an
independent agency; Under RTE detailed Guidelines for Discrimination to be
framed.
·
All
the adult education programmes are implemented in the project mode and there is
no systematic investment in developing the infrastructure or institutions for
sustained efforts. Thus increased resources allocations and their
utilization is an urgent need to make adult education sustainable and
meaningful for people.
Continuing
education
in tune of lifelong learning has to be
planned and implemented across country without the boundaries of time and
region.
·
Pre-schooling [3-6 years age group] to be included
under RTE.
·
Governments’
responsibility towards education to be realized fully. Attempts at
privatization to be desisted; Regulation of norms, quality and compliance
with 25% reservation under RTE to be strictly followed.
Resolutions on NREGA
Bank accounts must not be made mandatory
for getting NREGA employment
Workers must not be denied employment
under the NREGA if they do not possess a post office or bank account. States
like Bihar have issued instructions making bank accounts mandatory to seeking
employment under NREGA. In states where banking infrastructure is poor, this
will only create another hurdle in programme implementation and deny workers of
their entitlements under the Act. While the opening of bank accounts may be
prioritized it must not be made mandatory.
Keep UID out of NREGA
If the issue of new job
cards is linked to UID enrolment,
there is a danger of creating a jam that would disrupt the programme. The
process of job cards renewal, in any case a slow process, will be further
slowed down. Many people are likely to be denied their entitlement to 100 days
of work as they will be without a job card. Further, in spite of the
hiring of "service providers", the entire administrative machinery is
likely to be diverted into capturing of biometrics or supervising "service
providers". The scale of MGNREGA works is bound to suffer. This would be a
gross injustice to NREGA workers,
who are already deprived of their basic entitlements. The proposal of
"biometric attendance at the worksite with GPS coordinates" is
completely impractical - many NREGA
worksites are in remote areas with poor or no connectivity.
Wages
paid under NREGA to be linked to minimum wages and adjusted to the inflation
rate
Paying less than minimum wages to NREGA
workers is a violation of the constitutional rights of poor workers and the
Minimum Wages Act of 1940 and amounts to forced labour. Section 6(1) and 6(2)
of the NREGA must be amended to ensure there is no conflict with the Minimum
Wages Act.
Further, minimum wages under NREGA must
be linked to the Consumer Price Index of Agricultural Labourers (CPI-AL)
Extend minimum guarantee of 100 days of
employment to every worker
The current guarantee of 100 days per
household is inadequate to provide livelihood security to the rural poor. The
guarantee must shift from a family based entitlement to an individual
entitlement.
All states must notify rules for section
25 of the Act
Section 25 of the NREGA for imposing
fines on implementation authorities for non-compliance must be immediately
notified. In the absence of such rules accountability for designated
responsibilities under the act is being circumvented. Also in the absence of rules for imposing
fines, state government are only able to take steps such as suspension or FIRs
which prove counterproductive to the implementation of the programme.
Safeguard basic provisions of the Act
The problem of unmet demand is rampant
in the poorest states of the country which need employment under the programme
the most. This coupled with delayed payments where employment has been provided
is crippling the NREGA. Basic provisions of the Act are being flouted across
states such as non-payment of unemployment allowance against unmet demand and
payment of delayed wage payment compensation. Rules to implement basic
provisions of the Act such as payment of unemployment allowance on not meeting
work demand and delayed wage payment compensation must be notified.
States to take immediate steps on
implementing NREGA Social Audit Rules
Social Audit rules approved by the CAG
are not being implemented in most states. The first step in operationalising
its provisions is the setting up of an independent social audit directorate.
All states must set up directorates and bring social audit rules into effect
immediately.
Protection of whistleblowers
With numerous cases of repression of and
violence against NREGA activists trying to secure the basic rights of workers
under the programme, there is an urgent need to pass the whistleblower
protection Bill.
Resolutions on
Pensions
Universal pensions with exclusions
·
Pension should
be an individual entitlement for all citizens of India
·
Universal
and non contributory old age pension not less than Rs.2000 per month or 50% of
the minimum age,whichever is higher should be paid out of the national budget
·
Indexation
of pensions so that the amount increases proportionate to inflation
·
Eligibility
for pension to be reduced to 55 years for men and 50 years for women and 45
years for highly vulnerable groups (Vulnerable Tribal Groups, Transgender,
Women Compelled to become Sex Workers, PWDs)
·
A
single window system for Old Age Pensions and a separate ministry for issues of
the Elderly
·
Freedom
to continue working even after attaining the age of eligibility for universal
old age pension
·
Pension
is the only benefit that we accept as a cash transfer
·
Income
tax payees and government employees should be excluded from universal pensions
Resolutions on
health
·
Contractors must be eliminated from ICDS and the food
served in ICDS centres must be of good quality, based on locally grown foods
including nutritious millets and be produced by local groups such as mahila
mandals, SHGs, co-operatives etc.
·
Triple public expenditure on health. For too long
India has had the lowest levels of expenditure on healthcare in the world.
Financial allocations should increase to at least 5% of GDP.
·
Deploy health personnel to meet the
severe lack of skilled human resources in the public health system. All health
personnel along with AWWs must be regularized. Investment in human resources
for health must be increased.
·
No to health insurance packages like RSBY which are
inimical to the development and sustenance of a robust health care system.
Under the current health insurance model, malpractices have increased as
private hospitals seek to capture patients that are able to provide the highest
returns and turn away others. On the other hand government hospitals suffer due
to decline in public investment. Chronic diseases are not covered under the
current insurance models and these models take the focus away from primary
level, curative, preventive and promotive services.
·
Universal access to free health care with an
emphasis on quality. Good quality and free health service (including free
medicines) must be made available for all through the public health system. Quality
Assurance Schemes need to cover all public facilities to ensure optimal use of
resources and so that health outcomes are achieved.
·
Social audits and community based monitoring
processes
to be integrated into NRHM
·
Comprehensive legal regulation of the private
medical sector is essential. Standardisation of structures and human
resources to ensure quality of care, equal access, rationalizing cost of care
etc should form part of the regulatory framework.
Resolution on
cash transfers, Aadhaar and NFSA
Welfare schemes should not be linked to aadhaar.
There are several dangers to doing so - the most serious
being that it will eventually end up being an additional eligibility
requirement, leading to the exclusion of more people. The limited advantages of
aadhaar (weeding out duplicates and ghost beneficiaries) are better served by
other technology, primarily the computerization of records. This will enable
better monitoring and administration in these schemes. This has already begun
to happen in many states and this trend should be encouraged, rather than
derailed by diverting scare administrative resources towards aadhaar enrolment
and integration.
Enact the National Food Security Act immediately
The NFSA was tabled in Parliament on 22 December, 2011. This
should be enacted immediately. The distinction between APL and BPL for
eligibility should be abolished in the Food Security Act. The provisions
enabling a transition to cash transfers in lieu of food transfers should be
removed. In the case of food, there are several reasons for staying away from
cash: markets in rural areas are poorly developed, banks are distant and
overcrowded, inflation can erode purchasing power. While indexation appears to
provide a solution to this, in practice it is not easy to do. In fact, given
the poor nutritional levels in India, the Public Distribution System should
include pulses and oil.
Cash transfers: Under what conditions are they welcome.
As long as cash transfers are provided in addition to public
services, as has been done in Brazil, cash transfers will be welcome. Thus, as
long as maternity entitlements should come along with the whole range of public
health services, old age and widow pensions should be given along with other
support such as the Annapoorna rations for the elderly. Cash transfers cannot
not be treated as a substitute for the state's welfare responsibilities.
Resolution on
privatisation of water
No to privatisation of water- The right to
water is a fundamental right to life. Privatisation of water distribution is an
attack on our fundamental rights. While private companies are benefitting from
the privatisation of water citizens suffer.
Resolutions
adopted on the 29th of November 2012 at the Jan Sansad held at
Jantar Mantar
Community Rights on Land, Water, Forest
and Mineral Resources and Right to Participate in Development Plans
1. Our
country is gifted with abundant natural resources such as land, water, forests,
minerals etc. According to our constitution, the people have the primary right
on these resources. The main objective of development is to fulfill the basic
needs of people living in the villages, cities and slums using these resources.
Therefore the people of the villages and cities, the democratic unit should
have the primary right in establishing developmental planning.
2. Today,
in the name of development, plans for improving the lifestyle of the upper
class are being put into implementation
without considering the opinion of the local self-governmental units. This is
undemocratic and unconstitutional and is unacceptable to us. Any action in the
interest of development or public interest should only be performed with the
participation and consent of the people living in villages and slums. If any
such action is performed without the consent of these people, we will not
consider it in the interest of development and will oppose it.
3. The
displacement, which is indiscriminately being carried out for development, is
unacceptable to us. In the name of development, water, irrigation, power, roads
(highways, seaports, airports etc.), mines, farms, forests or other public and
private properties are being demolished. Even small villages and slums are
being demolished. This injustice in not only illegal but also inhuman.
Development free from demolishment is important and possible. But this form of
development is only possible by implementation of democratic and decentralized
employment of people.
4. Natural
resources are the basis for our life and livelihood. Whether it is groundwater
or greenery, these resources have been serving as the basis for livelihood for
generations over the years. The human community is consuming these resources at
a very fast rate. Inequitable environmental destruction is unacceptable to us. Any action in the
interest of development cannot be given consent without consultation with the
local communities.
5. Nowadays,
the need for electricity is greatly exaggerated by a nexus of the rich-
capitalists, politicians, officials and companies. On the basis of these
exaggerated figures, schemes are being formulated over harnessing rivers,
mountains, fields etc. through large dams, thermal power stations, nuclear
power plants in a way that is destructive to the human life. All these are
symbols of a destructiveness under the pretence of progress or development.
Such schemes should not be permitted without the consent of the local people.
6. Since
independence, the various schemes for development have displaced over 10 crore
people Out of these, only 17 % have been rehabilitated by the government.
Facilities like alternate livelihood and money should also be made available to
the devastated people. Until the process of rehabilitation for the displaced
people is not completed, any further displacement will not be given consent,
and action on any such steps will be immediately halted.
7. The
policies of liberalization and privatization will bring about changes in the
projects of development that will prove to be beneficiary in the development of
water, industrialization, mineral exploitation and farming. There should be
discussion on these policies and every area should be reviewed state wise.
Whether these matters are discussed in the parliament or not, they will be
discussed in the Jan Sansad conventions to ensure changes to improve the lives
of the people.
8. The
transfer of farmlands to builders for industrialization should be immediately
stopped. To prevent unnecessary non-farming practices, the transferred land
should be used prior to the fallow land. Ceiling of land in cities and villages
should be applied as it was applied before. The landless people, peasants and
homeless people should have primary right over their lands. The land should be
acquired from the capitalists, builders and politicians and should be
distributed amongst the needful people. The common people should have primary
right over the industrial production and the secondary right should be of the
home industries i.e. village industries, cooperative industries, small scale
industries and only a few selected large scale industries. Industries based on
human resources should be given priority over capital based industries that
rely mostly on water and power.
9. The
SEZ law will help the industrialists and the capitalists to acquire land
indefensibly and will not help in providing livelihood to the poor. It will
only increase the inequality between the rich and the poor. Therefore, the SEZ
law should be abandoned. Basic housing rights should be provided to the
labourers living in urban slums who help in running the country. Their slums
should not be demolished and they should be given housing rights wherever they
are settled and cooperative groups should provide them with settlement rights.
10. While
developing cities, the larger part of the land should be reserved for housing.
Similarly, the tribal people and other backward classes, who have been doing
forest farming for years, should be given the ownership rights of the land
being used by them. That land should not be desolated and distributed to the
companies. The common people should be given legal land rights. In accordance
with the Forest Rights Law passed by the parliament in 2006, the tribal people
and other traditional forest communities should acquire right over the forests
and forest resources.
11. The land
and resources belonging to the public (barn, river, character of pasteurized
land or destroyed forestland) should be reserved for the landless and homeless
people and then distributed among them primarily.
12. The natural
resources of our country should be conserved, because they are the basis of our
livelihood. We make a resolution that we will try our best to conserve them for
the coming generations. To do so, we need to put forward a constant struggle
against the destruction of these resources using the effective techniques. We are
also committed towards leading our lives in the right direction.
13. A bill
supporting national development planning, displacement and rehabilitation
should be passed. Nobody should be displaced against his/her will. A law of
decentralized development planning based on the principles of section 243 of
the constitution, 1996 PESA act and forest rights act 2006 should be passed. It
should also include the progressive elements of the Standing Committee of Rural
Development, which are minimum displacement and just rehabilitation. It should
be discussed amongst the affected communities, groups of farmers and movements.
14. Only
extremely important governmental purposes should demand donations from the
public. Public should not donate any money for private purposes. Forced land
acquisitions should be banned. Any plan for personal benefit termed as
beneficiary to the public is unjust and unacceptable to the people of India.
15. Our country
in full of geographical and geo-cultural variations, and every area has its own
needs for development, therefore it is important for us to have a
democratically planned land usage policy that takes care of all the variations
and needs.
16. Today, the
government has the ownership rights of the acquired lands. We believe that only
farmers should have the ownership rights over such lands and the land should be
returned to their owner after the completion of the purpose for which it was
acquired. The unused, acquired land should be distributed by the government to
the displaced families.
17. The rivers
and valleys in our country have kept the human culture and civilization alive.
Several dams are being built on these rivers in the name of power generation
projects which are being opposed by many public organizations. Recently, after
the decision of the Supreme Court of India, the government has planned the
interlinking of rivers in India. This project will destroy the rivers and river
valleys and large numbers of people will be displaced to vacate lacs of acres
of land. The project is being planned without due consideration to the
environmental problem caused apart from the economic profit and loss. Such
projects are illegal and should be immediately halted.
18. On one
hand, the backward classes are facing problem water shortage and on the other
hand the middle and upper class people are getting enormous quantities of
water. In such a situation, the government is supporting the private companies
in and helping them to get privatized, in the name of providing better
facilities to the backward class. We believe that it is the government’s moral
duty to provide physical facilities to the people, and a profiteering private
company cannot do such a job.
19. If the
purchasing of land and other resources is being done in favour of the builders’
profit, then it is the government’s responsibility to provide the same to the
neglected class for their livelihood and decide the market value of these
resources in consideration with the condition of the neglected class. The
government and the private sectors should be bound to obey the rehabilitation
that includes market justice and the principle of competition.
20. The
framework of market valuation of land has to be negated. If it is not done, the
tribal people and the lower classes will suffer. Therefore, without any
hesitation, alternative livelihood or employment should be provided to the
people affected.
21. Without
proper consultation with people, eviction is inhuman and unconstitutional and
against the right to life and livelihood of the people. Use of police force
against the people for eviction is totally inhuman. There is no place for it in
the largest democracy in the world.
Agriculture
(1)
The 2.7 lakh farmer suicides in the past 17 years are a
blot on the conscience of the nation. They are cruel reminders that several
crores of families in the farming community are in severe distress. This crisis
is being driven by the anti-farmer policies and neglect of the government. We
demand that the governments at the Centre and states address the agrarian
crisis with the highest urgency and priority, and make that the basis of
sustainable renewal of rural economy.
(2) We
demand a Farmers’ Policy with a comprehensive framework that (a) ensures
dignified livelihood for all sections of the farming community, (b) ensures
people’s rights over agricultural resources, (c) promotes ecological
sustainability, and (d) ensures safe, nutritious food for all.
(3) The
government policy should assure a minimum level of income and dignified
livelihood for all sections of farming community. We demand a statutory
permanent Farmers Income Commission with the mandate of implementing an income
assurance for all farming households – including small farmers, tenants,
agricultural workers. This is necessary for ensuring true Food Security and
Food Sovereignty.
(4)
Natural resources including Land, Water, Forest
and Seed – Jal, Jangal, Beej, Zameen – should be firmly under the
control of the people who derive sustainable livelihoods from them. We oppose
corporate control of these resources and the trampling of people’s rights.
(5)
We demand comprehensive land reform that gives land to
the landless. The people who are directly engaged in agriculture should have
control over land. Tenant farmers’ rights should be fully established.
Non-farmers should not be allowed to purchase agricultural land.
(6)
We oppose exclusive rights and IPRs in any form on life
forms – including plants, seed, genes and particular traits. The Seeds Bill
should provide for regulation of prices, profits and royalties in the seed
sector, with powers delegated to the state governments.
(7) We
oppose Genetically Modified crops which are risky and unsafe to health and
environment and pave the way for corporate control of agriculture. We assert
that India’s food security can be ensured without dependence on GM crops. The
government should implement the unanimous recommendations of the Parliamentary
Standing Committee on Agriculture.
(8) The
Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India Bill that is before the Parliament
should be withdrawn. A National Biosafety Law should be put in place
immediately, which should govern all research and commercial activity involving
Genetic Engineering.
(9) We
strongly assert that FDI in Retail and promotion of big retail is not in the
interests of the farming community. We reject this model which promotes the
control of the supply chain by a few big corporations – ultimately displacing
small and medium farmers. The government should strengthen the hands of farmers
and farmer collectives with storage, credit and market facilities.
(10)
Ecologically Sustainable agriculture is the future of
Indian farming – not only to reverse the damage to soil, water, farm ecology
and food system caused by the high-input chemical technologies of the Green
Revolution, but also to move away from high-cost, high-risk agriculture that is
unviable especially for small farmers.
(11)
The government should implement a complete time-bound
transition to ecologically sustainable agriculture targeting the next 10 years.
Toxic agri-chemicals should be phased out, with the most hazardous pesticides
being banned immediately. Rainfed agriculture, which forms 60% of cultivated
but faces severe crisis due to government neglect, should receive special
focus, giving incentives for dryland crops such as millets, pulses and
oilseeds, and establishing support systems for livestock and protective
irrigation.
Food
Security and Agricultural Land Acquisition
22. No
forcible acquisition of agricultural land, for non-agricultural purpose
including single crop and multi crop land.
·
Ministry says only multiple crop land can be
excluded.
How can
the in-between farms that may be unirrigated, rain fed, single crop be left
out, we ask. India has 75% of the agricultural land as rain fed and most of it
single cropped. Such land is mostly held by Dalits, Adivasis and marginal
farms. Protecting them and all farm land for food security, which comes not
from PDS but self sufficient agriculture, is a must!
Acquisition
for Private and PPP Projects
23. No
forcible acquisition for private projects, or for PPP, which can not to be
categorized as public purpose projects.
·
Ministry has rejected this and justified this
with a provision that consent of 80% of project affected People will be sought
before acquisition for any private projects
In this
era of neo-liberal economic reforms, private projects with corporate investment
and interests are taking a much larger toll of land and other rich natural
resources as also uprooting by killing communities which are generations old.
This must come to an end and the same can happen only with stopping the State
playing a role of facilitator and land dealer. At the cost of the livelihood of
the nature based sections and working class section of society, the state can't
transfer the most valuable livelihood resources such as land, water to the
profiteering bodies in the garb of 'public interest' and 'public
purpose'.
Bringing
16 Central Acts Under Purview of this Bill
24. The
standing committee has recommended that all 16 central acts should be brought
under the purview of the new act, to make all equal before law (Article 14 of
the Constitution).
·
Ministry of Rural Development wants to exclude
13 out of 16 Acts including Industrial Development Act, Land Acquisition
(Mines) Act, National Highways Act and others from the purview of the new act.
This means that 90% of the land acquired as on today will continue with injustice
and force used, with no change at all.
The
standing committee recommendations must be upheld to end brutal unjust
acquisition for all projects.
Role and
Consent of Gram and Basti Sabha
25.
The Committee asks
that all studies - SIA, EIA, expert committee appraisal be done in consultation
with the gram sabhas and the corresponding reports be made available to the
gram sabhas.
·
Ministry emphasises
that 80% consent of land loosers is there in case of acquisition for PPP and
private sector projects.
Consent and
direct involvement of majority of the Gram Sabhas must be there in each and
every project, including public projects for public purpose. 80% consent of the
land losers for the public - private
projects alone is not sufficient. Also, why should the linear projects be
left out? If it’s consent of 80% affected, there are to be a number of
manipulations that people will have to face. Experiences of 70% consent in Slum
Rehabilitation Scheme in Mumbai are quite telling.
Return of
Unutilised Land to farmers and Land Bank
26. The Committee recommended that
the land, if not used till 5 years, should be returned after 5 years from the
date of possession to the land owners.
·
Ministry
accepts the reduced five years time period but opposes its return to the
landowner and suggests it to go to State Land Bank.
The
ownership over the land is of those who till it and if not used and unutilized
then it must be returned to the owners or distributed amongst the project
affected people. We oppose any such feature which will promote land bank, since
it has promoted large scale acquisition in the past and later illegally
transferred the same land to corporations for real estate and other purposes.
Retrospective
Application of the Law
27. On the question of retrospective
application of the R&R provisions Committee has suggested to Ministry to
re-examine the issue and incorporate necessary provisions
·
Ministry
has not accepted it and refused to do so.
It needs to be noted that nearly
100 million people have been displaced since independence and with a dismal
17-20 percent rate of resettlement and rehabilitation we had suggested that not
only the retrospective application of the provisions of the new act but a National
Resettlement and Rehabilitation Commission be established to deal with the
claims of the projected affected people from various projects.
Resettlement and Rehabilitation
Benefits
In terms of the resettlement and
rehabilitation benefits Committee apart from suggesting some cosmetic changes
have accepted the provisions of the Bill, we think this is unfortunate since
provisions don't stand up to livelihood based R&R, it merely promotes the
principle of cash compensation. It will be a retrogressive step since it
negates the land and employment based R&R as mandated in the Narmada Water
Dispute Tribunal Award, and various other projects. The proposed provisions
of compensating employment with money and high rates for land acquired will
only lead to speculative land market and will destroy the fragile economy of
the rural hinterland which will lead to further urban migration.
Urban Eviction
The Bill and the comments by
both, Standing Committee as well as MoRD almost totally excludes and have
unaddressed the situation in the urban areas, where there is no land
acquisition, but eviction, brutal and unjust, for any and every elitist real
estate development to infrastructure without guaranteeing right to shelter,
right to life and livelihood.
The only provision is to compensate with 20% of developed land for land owning
families in urbanisation projects, which is not with regard to the cases where
land belongs to the government or private entities but people are evicted. We
demand a separate section or a separate act for the millions of the urban
persons and urban land from getting misappropriated. The Bill with the
presently proposed content need to be called only “Rural Bill”.
The rapacious use of Land
Acquisition Act 1894 by the government to secure land for ‘development’
projects has caused over 100 million people to be displaced from their land,
livelihoods and shelters. The country is dotted with communities resisting
State sponsored land grab which resonate the demand for a just law to ensure
that there is no forced acquisition of land and resources, including minerals
and ground water. The government must
respond to the voices from movements across places such as Narmada, Koel Karo,
Singur, Nandigram, Sonbhadra, Chindwara, Bhavnagarm, Kalinga Nagar, Kashipur,
Raigarh, Srikakulam and mining areas in central India with genuine efforts to
address the longstanding crisis concerning land Acquisition and resettlement
& rehabilitation.
If the UPA government is serious
about addressing the conflicts over the land and other natural resources then
it must listen to the voices of those struggling or else it will only aggravate
these conflicts all across the country. The need of growth, infrastructure and
urbanisation can’t be fulfilled on the graveyard of millions. A
pro-people Development Planning Bill with complete participation of the Gram
Sabha will go a long way in stopping the massive corporate corruption
and lead to decentralization of power having an overall impact on the
politics of the country.
Resolutions Specific to Right to Fair Compensation,
Resettlement, Rehabilitation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, 2012
A new Bill replacing the age old Land Acquisition Act is
under consideration by the UPA government. National Alliance of People's
Movements have been struggling for repeal of the colonial Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 and enactment of a Development Planning, Land Use Management,
No Enforced Displacement, and Just Resettlement and Rehabilitation Act. In
this respect Jan Sansad adopts the following resolutions :
·
We urge UPA government to respect the
recommendations of the Parliamentary Standing Committee, which heard all stake
holders including the people’s movements like ours as well as the corporate
bodies and others. They recommended that :
·
No agricultural
land, whether single crop or multiple
crops, should be forcibly acquired keeping in view the food security of the
country.
·
In the name of Public
Purpose, the State should not be forcibly acquiring any land for the private
corporation or their PPP project.
·
Consent by majority of Gram Sabha
members (or equivalent body in urban areas
where these have been constituted) should be obtained in all matters pertaining
to the Bill.
·
There is no need to exempt any of
the Central Acts used for land acquisition from the purview of the Bill and
to bring those at par with the Bill, Government should carry required
amendments.
·
Any unutilsied land shall return to
the land owners. 'Land Bank of un-fertile, waste-lands' for use by the
industry or infrastructure projects should be prepared by the government not
with the land remaining unutilised.
In addition to endorsing the
recommendations of the PSC Jan Sansad also recommendations the following with
respect to the Bill :
·
REPEAL Land
Acquisition Act and ENACT a
Comprehensive National Legislation on
Development Planning inclusive of just and fair, livelihood-based
rehabilitation of the minimally affected people and enunciating the principle
of least displacement, just rehabilitation and a decentralized development
planning based on Article 243 of the Constitution, PESA 1996 and Forest Rights
Act, 2006. Incorporate the progressive elements of the Standing Committee on
Rural Development (2007-08)
·
ENSURE that the urban
poor who are unprotected workers receive their due right to land and shelter,
related to livelihood bases, with strict ceiling on urban lands and STOP displacement and rehabilitation
through a nexus of builders-politicians-bureaucrats. Promote self-reliant, affordable housing
through the State and co-operatives for the needy population. We demand a
separate enactement for addressing the problems of evictions, securing land
rights and address resettlement and rehabilitation issues of the urban poor.
IMPLEMENT:
·
PESA Act, 1996,
scrupulously following the principle of free, prior and informed consent of the
adivasi communities and extend it to all other Gram Sabhas before any
development Plan or Project, whether public or private is planned and finalized,
involving use and change in use of the resources within the domain of a
community.
·
Forest Rights Act, 2006
in all forest areas of the country and any change in the land use in any forest
area and any land acquisition be subject to settlement of claims and
entitlements under Forest Rights Act.
·
ISSUE a White Paper on
all the land acquisition, displacement caused and rehabilitation completed
since independence. The White Paper must also make public the extent of land
utilized, unutilized and land acquired for public purpose but remains occupied
by sick and non-functional industries and other infrastructure projects.
·
ENSURE that minimum and just rehabilitation for all
project-affected people in all sectors should be declared as National Policy,
leaving scope for finalization by the communities as their right to planning as
per the Development Planning Act. Given the fact that nearly 10 crore people
have been displaced, it is pertinent to address the concerns of the displaced
people since independence and for that a NATIONAL RESETTLEMENT AND
REHABILITATION COMMISSION must be established.
Resolutions
adopted on the 30th of November 2012 at the Jan Sansad held at
Jantar Mantar
Resolutions to Eliminate Violence Against Women
The elimination of violence against women and girls is key
to the achievement of gender equality, peace and development. We reaffirm democratic values that ensure justice and equity for all
peoples, where adivasi, dalit and
working class women and youth can live a life free of violence. We
underline that all people be allowed to exercise their right to live their
lives with dignity and freedom, regardless of their gender, caste, class,
ethnicity or sexual orientation.
Action against
perpetrators of violence against women
1. Stringent
punishment to be enforced in cases of rape, sexual assault, gang rape and child
sexual abuse, as also in cases of custodial rape, whether it happens in police
stations, shelter homes (like nari
niketans) or orphanages. We demand that the government take immediate legal and punitive action
against all accused and perpetrators of sexual assaults against women and
girls.
2.
We observe that the
threat of sexual assault against women multiplies as army and paramilitary
forces move into an area to flush it clean from those that the state find
“undesirable”. We demand that women be supported by the state to get justice.
3.
We oppose outfits
like Salwa Judum, Special Protection Officers and other state or private sponsored
militia, which have directly or indirectly been involved in sexual assaults
against women and/or terrorised within communities.
4.
We oppose the witch-hunt
of individuals, jan sanghatans, human rights defenders, whistle blowers
and other activists fighting against unfair polices of the government. We
demand the release of all political prisoners and activists who have been
arrested while struggling for social and political justice on behalf of the
marginalised.
Caste-based violence
5.
We call upon the state to take speedy and
effective steps to annihilate caste in all its forms and expressions. We demand
that the Prevention of Atrocities Act (PoA) Act & its rules be urgently
amended in order to make it a more comprehensive and powerful deterrent law
against any form of atrocities against SCs and STs.
6.
The state should ensure the strict
implementation of the PoA Act so that victims secure full justice, adequate
compensation and comprehensive rehabilitation.
7.
We call upon all the MPs and MLAs and their
political parties to fulfil their Constitutional obligation to safeguard and
protect the right to life and security of dalits
and adivasis as full-fledged citizens
of this country.
8.
We want the national and regional media agencies
not only to report incidents of atrocities, but also to engage the public in
debates on larger issues of caste confederations, caste communal clashes, caste
movements and caste vote bases as threats to national integration and to
initiate a discourse on the annihilation of caste.
9.
Khap panchayats must be banned and immediate
punitive action taken against perpetrators of atrocities encouraged by such
bodies.
Sexuality rights
10.
The law should forbid non-consensual surgical and
psychiatric medical interventions to alter sex, gender or sexual orientation.
11. Legal
action should be taken against policemen and others who commit violence against
queer and trans people.
12. The
government should allow people to record the gender category of their choice in
the National Census, Voter IDs and all other government documents.
13. We
demand that the government extend anti-discrimination laws to ensure no
discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity in schools,
workplaces and public and private spaces.
14. We
want efforts to be made to provide sex education and counselling facilities in
schools so that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex
(LGBTQI) youth and their parents can access them.
Legislations
1.
There are many cases
pending and require action that deal with custodial sexual violence. We demand
that immediate legal and punitive action be taken in cases already
registered in the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) zones, under the
Prevention of Atrocities against Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe Act 1989
or under Indian Penal Code Sections 376(A) and 376(B), including against those in the government and the judiciary as
co-perpetrators of crimes against women. Each state government should also issue orders to ensure the
safety and security of victims during the pendency of the cases.
2.
We demand the repeal
of all draconian laws that perpetrate violence on women with impunity,
including the AFSPA, the Chhattisgarh Special Public Security Act (CSPSA) and
the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). We demand that armed
offensives against the people in North East, Kashmir and adivasi areas be stopped and this be replaced with political
initiatives and peace dialogues between local communities, activists, civil
society and the state. We demand that there be equal representation and
participation of women in these peace-building initiatives.
3.
We strongly affirm women’s ‘right to choice’ but at the
same time condemn sex selective elimination and elimination because of sex. We
recognise these practices as a symptom of a certain societal factors,
discrimination and patriarchy. We see discrimination as standing against the
principle of equality as upheld in the Constitution of India and as put forth
in CEDAW.
4.
We strongly stand for the state taking a proactive role
in implementation of the PC&PNDT Act, that in no way undermines the
importance of the MTP Act. The government should
not just focus on the rhetoric of ‘save the girl child’. We demand that, apart
from raids on ultrasound clinics that are violating the law, each state
institutes medical audits that would help check the trend of sex selection.
5.
State parties to
CEDAW have an obligation to ensure that legal and systemic mechanisms be
created and followed to ensure a zero tolerance policy towards domestic
violence by the state.
6.
In spite of the Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, according
to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) 2011, there were 8618 dowry-related
deaths in the country. Conviction rates have reduced from 37% in 2000 to 34% in
2010. We oppose the dominant thinking of women as property who can be traded as
commodities in the marriage market. We demand that the police be more vigilant
in registering and act upon dowry-related cases, on a priority basis.
7.
In spite of being a rights-based law, the
Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA) 2005 has failed to
bring down the cases of domestic violence; this has increased by 5.4% in 2011
over the previous year. Lacunae in the implementation of Act must be addressed
by the state on an urgent basis.
8.
States
must appoint and link Service Providers
(SPs), Protection Officers (POs) and the police, so their services can be used
if counselling is required under the PWDVA. There must be a standard operating
protocol for SPs across the state on the action to be taken when a woman
approaches them for help.
9.
The PWDVA
spells out the role of Medical
Facilities (MFs) and Shelter
Homes (SHs). The nodal department must increase the number of shelter
homes; a gender sensitive approach towards survivors of domestic violence and
effective processes of coordinating with stakeholders such as POs, SPs and the
police.
10.
It is
essential for stakeholders like the
judiciary, police and the Legal Services Authority to develop a
comprehensive understanding of notions such as live-in relationships and the
right to residence. All stakeholders must receive gender sensitisation training
and be oriented towards dealing with cases of gender-based violence.
11. Monitoring and evaluation under the PWDVA are
essential tools to ensure accountability of the state for the effective
implementation of the law. They are also needed to assess that the mechanisms
provided by the state in dealing with domestic violence meet international
standards required by treaty mechanisms under CEDAW. Monitoring and evaluation
are the only ways to ensure that proper reporting standards are followed by the
state.
Resolutions about Women and Work
Women’s work is taken for granted as being only a secondary
contribution to the family, community and the nation. Their contribution to
domestic and household work is totally overlooked, in both social and economic
terms.
1.
We demand recognition for women’s work, both inside and
outside the domestic space.
2.
We demand equal pay for equal and similar work as per the Equal
Remuneration Act, as well as universal entitlements of maternity benefits to
all women workers of the unorganised sector.
3.
About 60-70% of labour input is provided by women in agricultural
production, processing and storage of foodgrains. However, they are not
entitled to any of the rights of working women. We demand that the state give
them this recognition, as well as their entitlements.
4.
We further demand that women get ownership of land.
5.
The state should stop the exploitation of women workers under the
MGNREGA. The state should ensure that women are paid the minimum wages and that
they get benefits including medical care and crèches at work sites, and toilet
facilities.
6.
These benefits should also extend to migrant women workers working in
unorganised work sites like brick kilns and construction sites.
7.
We call upon the state to recognise domestic work as work. The state
should speed up the adoption of the draft bill with the National Commission of
Women (NCW). We ask for the establishment of Domestic Workers Welfare Boards to
ensure desired benefits for domestic workers.
8.
The state should recognise women workers employed under government
schemes as ‘government employees’ and ensure that they get social security
benefits. These would include Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHA) workers
as well as women working under the Integrated Child Development Scheme (ICDS)
in aanganwadi centres.
9.
Prevent exploitation in the name of contractual and casual labour and
ensure that they receive all welfare benefits.
10. We demand ratification
of the Home Based Convention to ensure better payments on piece rate work and
social security to these workers.
11. There should be a
universal pension entitlement to all women employees, both in the organised as
well as the unorganised sector.
12. The state should invest in training institutes and
polytechnics to provide opportunities for women in non-traditional and
innovative livelihoods.
Legislation
1.
In the
context of the Sexual Harassment at the Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and
Redressal) Bill that has been passed by the Lok Sabha, we demand a review of the bill by a Rajya Sabha Select
Committee.
2.
The definition of
workplace [(o) from (i)-(vi) and (p)
of the Bill] needs to be extended to bring in its purview migrant women
labourers, women agriculture labourers and forest dwellers.
3.
The function of f
Local Complaint Committee (Chapter III) needs to be reworked and tailored in
accordance to the needs and requirement for women in the unorganised sector.
4.
We oppose Clause
14(1) of the Bill related to punishment for false and malicious complaint and
false evidence. We strongly believe that this could prove to be a deterrent for
any woman seeking redress for any harassment she is facing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)