Search

Begin New Search Author Debayan Gupta

1. Making the Law Count: Environment justice stories on community paralegal work in India (Version 2)

Author:
Vimal Kalavadiya, Vinod Patgar, Vijay Rathod, Mahabaleshwar Hegde, Manju Menon, Krithika A. Dinesh, Hasmukh Dhumadiya, Bharat Patel, Tania Devaiah, Jayendrasinh Ker, Harapriya Nayak, Santosh Dora, Vimal Kalavadiya, Sandeep Patel, Debayan Gupta, Bipasha Paul, and Kanchi Kohli
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Centre for Policy Research, India
Abstract:
The Centre for Policy Research-Namati Environmental Justice Program trains and supports a network of community paralegals or grassroots legal advocates who work with communities affected by pollution, water contamination and other environmental challenges. They use the legal empowerment approach to make communities aware of laws and regulations that can help secure much needed remedies for these problems that often arise out of noncompliance or violation of environmental regulations. As part of their work, the community paralegals write about their cases to create public awareness on the use of law outside of courts as well as engage the readers in these issues. This is an updated collection of published stories written by paralegals and their team members working in coastal Gujarat, Northern Karnataka, Chhattisgarh and Keonjhar, Odisha. These are a combination of case stories and opinion pieces on issues of industrial non-compliance that have adversely affected many local communities. Each article tries to highlight the gap between the law on paper and its implementation in reality, while putting forth the conviction that putting law in the hands of ordinary people can shift the balance of power in support of justice.
Topic:
Civil Society, Environment, Law, and Justice
Political Geography:
South Asia, India, and Asia

2. Mapping Dilutions in a Central Law

Author:
Kanchi Kohli and Debayan Gupta
Publication Date:
09-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for Policy Research, India
Abstract:
Even as the Joint Parliamentary Committee’s report on the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (RFCTLARR) is awaited, several states have already brought about changes that severely compromise the scope of clauses related to consent, Social Impact Assessment (SIA), food security and higher compensations. These changes also restrict the applicability of the 2013 law at state level. States have executed these changes through Rules under Section 109 of the Act, or have enacted their own state level land acquisition legislations using Article 254(2) of the Constitution of India. States, which have exercised the latter option, have managed to override the provisions of the central law. In the present case this has meant doing away with the provisions of consent and Social Impact Assessment. This paper traces how, and to what extent, the provisions of the central law have been diluted by the states.
Topic:
Security, Constitution, Land Law, and Legislation
Political Geography:
South Asia, India, and Asia

3. Mapping Dilutions in a Central Law

Author:
Kanchi Kohli and Debayan Gupta
Publication Date:
08-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for Policy Research, India
Abstract:
For the last two years, the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 has been in the eye of debate and discussed for the controversial changes the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government had sought to bring about through ordinances. Even though fate of the amendments rests currently with the Joint Parliamentary Committee report, several states have already brought about changes through Rules under Section 109 of the Act. An examination of these state specific Rules reveals they are headed towards: Adopting the changes proposed in the ordinances amending the central law; Diluting the applicability of the progressive clauses like consent or SIA; Clarifying procedures for implementation at the state level. The United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government had replaced the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with the newly enacted RFCLARR Act, 2013. Though critiqued for expanding the definition of public purpose to include the private sector, the new legislations had been welcomed by social movements, farmers groups and NGOs. This is primarily for the need for a Social Impact Assessment (SIA), the requirement for prior consent, food security provisions and clear compensation related provisions. What was also central to this discussion were the clauses which allow for unused land to be returned to original owners. The Rules framed by the States aim to make the process of land acquisition much simpler for investors. While certain States reduce the time period for the conducting of the SIA process or do away with it in its entirety, there are others who make reductions in the compensation award or modify the applicability of the retrospective clause. There are also States which directly adopt the provisions in the ordinance that aim to remove the requirement for consent from the land acquisition procedure. This working paper paper attempts to trace and analyse how the state governments have modified and built upon the central Act. It also looks briefly at litigation that has emerged especially around the applicability of the retrospective clause of the law, ie. which requires the return of unused land to original owners or reinitiating processes under the 2013 law.
Topic:
Development, Government, Law, Food Security, Land Law, and Social Policy
Political Geography:
South Asia, India, and Asia