Tribal Protests Over Forest Rights Act | 18 Feb 2026

Source: TH 

Why in News? 

Recently, tribal farmers in Maharashtra held long marches demanding effective Forest Rights Act implementation, land titles, irrigation, jobs and education reforms. 

What are the Issues Faced by the Forest Dweller Communities? 

• Pre Colonial Era: Before colonialism, local communities had traditional rights over forests in their area or even a wider region. Even if kings or chieftains claimed hunting rights in specific forests, local communities still had access to all other benefits from the forests. 
• Colonial Era: The colonial government introduced Indian Forest Act, 1878 which was based on the idea  of ‘eminent domain’ (that the ruler always owns all property),. 
  • The Imperial Forest Department was established to harvest and transform the forest to maximise timber and revenue. 
    • It was also tasked with protecting ‘state’ property against local communities, now deemed trespassers. 
  • The injustices imposed by this colonial forest policy took multiple forms: 
    • Now that forests were seen as primarily a timber resource, shifting cultivation was banned.  
    • The so-called survey and settlement of agricultural lands was incomplete and biased in favour of the state.  
    •  ‘Forest Villages’ were created to ensure labour for forestry operations , wherein forest land was leased for agriculture to households (mostly Adivasis) in return for compulsory labour (virtually bonded). 
    • Since forests were now state property, all access to forest produce was limited, temporary and chargeable, and always at the mercy of the forest bureaucracy that was armed with police powers.  
      • Any concessions to local livelihood needs were termed ‘privileges’ that could be modified or withdrawn any time.  
    • Even where access was permitted, the local community had no right to manage the forest, as the state logged valuable forests and made heavily used forest de facto open-access. 
• Post Independence Era:  
  • After Independence, things didn’t change much. When the government hurriedly brought princely States and zamindari estates into the Union, they declared their forest areas as state property without checking who was living there.  
  • People who had been living there for generations suddenly became 'encroachers.'  
  • The government then leased out forest lands under various campaigns, such as ‘Grow More Food’, to meet the needs of a growing population, but they were never properly regulated.  
  • People displaced by dams were not given alternative lands and ended up 'encroaching' on forest land elsewhere. 
  • The Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 and the Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 (FCA), again conceived within the framework of eminent domain.  
    • Many communities were forcefully moved to establish sanctuaries and national parks.  
  • When using forests for development, the opinions of local people were not considered, and despite charging significant fees, they were not adequately compensated for the impact on their lives. 
  • The prolonged non-recognition of cultivated forest land has led to recurring mass mobilisations and long marches by tribal communities.

What are the Issues in Implementation of the Forest Rights Act? 

• Individual Rights vs. Community Rights: Politicians in some states have predominantly focused on individual rights, turning the Act into an 'encroachment regularization' scheme. This approach neglects the recognition and protection of community rights, which are essential for sustainable forest management. 
• Poor Recognition of Individual Forest Rights (IFRs): The recognition of Individual Forest Rights has been done poorly, often compromised by resistance from the Forest Department, apathy from other departments, and misuse of technology. 
  • In some regions, more than 45% of claims have reportedly been rejected, and many approved claims provide smaller land areas than actually cultivated. 
• Digital Processes in Areas with Poor Connectivity: Implementation of digital processes, such as the VanMitra software in Madhya Pradesh, has posed challenges in areas with poor connectivity and low literacy rates. This exacerbates existing injustices and hinders the effective filing and processing of claims. 
• Incomplete Recognition of Community Forest Rights (CFRs): The slow and incomplete recognition of community rights to access and manage forests (CFRs) is a significant lacuna in FRA implementation. The forest bureaucracy is resistant to these rights, potentially impeding the empowerment of local communities in managing their forests. 
• Forest Villages Not Addressed: The issue of 'forest villages' has not been adequately addressed in most states, indicating a lack of comprehensive implementation. 
  • Despite statutory authority under the Forest Rights Act and PESA, Gram Sabhas are often sidelined during claim verification and approval. 

What Steps Are Needed to Address Issues in FRA Implementation? 

• Empowerment of Gram Sabha: Ensure that the Gram Sabha, the local self-government in villages, is actively involved in decision-making processes related to forest management. 
• Inclusive Decision Making: Encourage the inclusion of rights holders in the decision-making processes to ensure that their perspectives and needs are considered. 
• Accountability Measures: Implement accountability measures for any violations or non-compliance with the FRA, ensuring that responsible authorities are held accountable. 
• Integrated Planning: Develop integrated plans that consider both the development and conservation needs of forests while respecting the rights and interests of forest dwellers. 
• Strengthen PESA Implementation: Enhance tribal self-governance in Scheduled Areas and expand employment opportunities for educated tribal youth. 
• Link Livelihood Support with Land Rights: Integrate irrigation, MSP access and rural infrastructure support with forest rights recognition for socio-economic empowerment. 
• Convergence-Based Development Planning: Combine forest rights recognition with agriculture, water management and education interventions in tribal regions. 

Conclusion 

The tribal protests in Maharashtra highlight structural failures in land governance, welfare delivery, and rights recognition in Scheduled Areas. Weak implementation of the Forest Rights Act, livelihood insecurity, and administrative bottlenecks have sustained tribal distress, necessitating a rights-based approach that balances conservation with community participation, corrects land records, and strengthens local self-governance.