[Reader-list] Rationale of Political Action in Singur

[srirang jha]

*Rationale of Political Action in Singur*

* *

*Srirang Jha*



So many columns and editorials in business dailies have been devoted to
condemn the political action spearheaded by Trinamool Congress in Singur.
Political action and farmers struggle are viewed as a nuisance for
industrialization of West Bengal in particular and image of India in
general. People tend to see the impact of Singur impass on the industry
while ignoring the genuine concerns of the farmers. They also do not care to
examine the underlying causes as to why there is always a strong opposition
by the community in case of land acquisition by the State for industries or
infrastructure development. Hence it is imperative to educate and sensitize
the industrialists as well as the State governments hell bent on giving a
fillip to industrial development rather than denigrating the local
communities who are struggling for their livelihood and survival.



First of all, let us understand the concept of political action, which
comprises of

all the tools to attain valued things. In the Singur case, land is the most
valued thing that the people are struggling for. And Trinamool Congress as a
political party is merely articulating and aggregating the interests of the
peasants. By espousing the cause of the peasants, the party may get good
number of seats in the forthcoming elections and may eventually wrest power
in West Bengal from the Left Parties. So what is wrong with the policies of
the Trinamool Congress? Being the leading opposition party, it has the moral
obligation to struggle for the rights of the people and subsequently oust
the existing government by democratic process. So the Trinamool Congress is
doing nothing that can be defined as 'immoral', 'unethical' or 'anarchist'.



Now the problem revolves around the rights of the people to hold land and
right of the State to acquire land on the bases of the principles of eminent
domain (the State has over-riding authority over its territory) and public
good (the State can take harsh actions in the interest of larger good even
if it amounts to hardship for a few). The rights of the people are further
jeopardized by the Land Acquisition Act 1894, which vests absolute powers in
the hands of the District Collectors (representing the State) so far as land
acquisition and disbursement of compensation are concerned. Compensation is
invariably based on discretionary powers of the District Collector who is
not obliged to look at the going rate in settling the issue.



The Land Acquisition Act 1894 does not provide for any rehabilitation or
guarantee regarding restoration of lost source of livelihood. As a result,
the victims cannot approach a court of law in case he is not satisfied with
the resettlement package and compensation provided by the State. Moreover,
the landless peasants are outside the ambit of any rehabilitation package,
as they do not have any title of a landholding. Although the Government of
India has announced a National Rehabilitation Policy for the victims of
development-induced displacement or involuntary displacement, it fails to
guarantee any entitlement of reconstruction of the source of livelihood.
Non-implementation of the National Rehabilitation Policy can be challenged
in the court of law.



Hence there is an urgent need to amend the land acquisition law so as to
make restoration of livelihood an entitlement. Moreover, social cost of
development-induced displacement such as unemployment, disarticulation,
morbidity, loss of commons, etc must also be compensated as entitlements to
the project-affected people. Then probably the political action such as one
spearheaded by Trinamool Congress would become irrelevant. So taking a view
that politics is retarding development is absolutely out of sync in the
context of Singur impasse.

-- 
Srirang K Jha, Ph D
Assistant Professor,
Apeejay School of Management
Dwarka, Sector 8
New Delhi 110075