The February 13 Supreme Court order to evict a million or more forest-dwellers has shocked grassroots communities, rights activists and environmentalists. The court has been hearing petitions that challenge the “constitutional validity” of the Forest Rights Act (FRA) of 2006, and “questions pertaining to the preservation of forests in the context of [the FRA]”. Its order is based on a seemingly simple logic: if a claim over forest land has been rejected, then the claimant cannot be a right-holder and, therefore, must be evicted as an ‘encroacher’. Unfortunately, this approach is based on a topsy-turvy framing of the problem.

The FRA recognises the rights of forest dwelling communities (Adivasis and others) to reside in and use traditional cultivated lands, to manage forests collectively, and to have a say when forests are proposed to be diverted for development projects or declared as conservation priority areas. Those who qualify as ‘forest-dwellers’ can submit individual/ collective claims, along with necessary evidence showing they were using the lands before a cutoff date. The petitioners argue the FRA will lead to indiscriminate distribution of forested land, and hence harms our fundamental right to a healthy environment.