[Reader-list] The Peasant Mutiny Of 2009

[Jeebesh]

The Peasant Mutiny Of 2009

Raigad’s poor farmers have stalled the might of Reliance. Now, can  
they impact the SEZ Act itself?

ASEEM SHRIVASTAVA
Development Writer

THE FARMERS of Maharashtra’s Raigad district are waiting with a  
restless enthusiasm. After endless hunger strikes and people’s  
protests, they had tried something new. Rarely has an anti-sez  
people’s movement reached the halls of the Supreme Court. Sometime  
this month the court is expected to hold a final hearing that will  
determine the fate of over one lakh farmers in Raigad – whether their  
paddy fields will be converted into the world’s largest privately  
developed SEZ, or whether they will be allowed to retain their land.

In 2003, Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries Ltd had submitted a  
proposal for setting up a multi-product SEZ in Raigad across 14,000  
hectares of Maharashtra land (an area the size of Chandigarh) in 45  
villages in Pen, Panvel and Uran tehsils. An investment of Rs 40,000  
crore and jobs for 20 lakh people were promised. Reliance also claimed  
its package (Rs 10 lakh per acre and training for a possible job in  
the factory) for the affected farmers was the best across the country.  
(A simple survey of other SEZs and industrial projects, though, shows  
that these promises of employment are rarely met.) As the project  
gained momentum, the anti-SEZ committee in the area launched a massive  
agitation, prompting a historic farmers’ referendum in September 2008.  
It was the first time that a public vote of this kind was sought and  
taken on an industrial/infrastructure/mining project anywhere in the  
country. Regardless of its outcome, it set a valuable precedent on  
ways of seeking consensus on the usage of land being taken over on the  
pretext of public interest.

According to activists, over 85 percent of the voters in 22 villages  
where the referendum was held voted against the project, refusing to  
part with their lands. Perhaps this is the reason why the Maharashtra  
government has still not disclosed the results officially. Also why  
democracy is seen as such an inconvenience by governments and the  
business elite.

Since June 2005, when the government gave its approval for the  
project, only 13 percent of the desired land has been acquired by  
Reliance despite six years of negotiations with farmers. The Supreme  
Court had already awarded Reliance two extensions to complete their  
negotiations. But last month, things began to shift in favour of the  
farmers. There is a legal stipulation that companies must acquire land  
within two years of getting a project approved. On June 5, the Supreme  
Court refused to give Reliance any more time to complete their  
negotiation.

As these developments indicate, local activists in Raigad have worked  
very hard over the past few years to inform and organise farmers in  
the area to defend their lands and livelihoods against the project. In  
an ambitious public interest litigation, the MahaMumbai Shetkari  
Sangharsh Samiti (MMSSS), a farmers’ activist group from Raigad, has  
recently taken bold steps to question the constitutional validity of  
the SEZ Act itself. Last year, the SC had transferred over half a  
dozen SEZ cases from various high courts around the country to itself,  
so it could hear the issue in its entirety. It is soon expected to  
undertake hearings on these cases collectively, including the PIL from  
Raigad. The judgement on these hearings will prove crucial to the  
existence and form of the SEZ Act itself.

With over 300 SEZs already functional and over 560 approved (the  
number of SEZs in India outstrip the number anywhere else in the  
world), the struggles against land acquisition continue around the  
country. If we chalked an SEZ resistance timeline, it would begin in  
2007 with Nandigram, where the West Bengal government’s attempt to  
hand over fertile cultivated land to Indonesia’s Salim group was  
foiled by a courageous defence put up by farmers, led by their women.  
Infamously, 14 people were killed by security forces on March 14,  
2007. Next would be the Goa struggle in 2008. Massive public protests  
over the past few years have led the government to withdraw the SEZ  
policy in Goa altogether. Twelve of the 15 proposed SEZs have been  
scrapped. Three SEZs that had been notified await a decision from the  
Central government. Next, there is the story of the huge POSCO steel  
project in Orissa, meant to bring in a record foreign investment of Rs  
50,000 crore. That India’s largest FDI is being stalled continually  
since 2006 because of massive public opposition, is in itself notable.  
The latest addition to the timeline has been the Mahamumbai SEZ in  
Raigad, Maharashtra.

DOZENS OF stories emerging from different regions of the country are  
slowly suggesting that peoples’ struggles in defence of their land,  
water, forests and livelihood have started to have a profound impact  
on the viability of a model of ‘development’. The process of  
industrialisation routinely transfers assets and opportunities from  
marginalised social groups in the countryside to those of us in the  
cities, already thriving under a thick canopy of privilege. Even where  
protests have failed to stop the project (as for instance in the case  
of the Mihan airport SEZ project near Nagpur, where in the village of  
Shipnagaon, women shaved off their heads in protest against the  
government’s landgrab), peoples’ movements have been successful at  
drawing attention to the obvious injustice of the SEZ policy.
A farmers’ activist group from Raigad has boldly questioned the  
constitutional validity of the SEZ Act

The battle over land for SEZs demonstrates the power of peoples’  
movements. But why do they suddenly seem to be more effective?  
Nandigram, although it occured two years ago, continues to be an  
inspiration to peoples’ struggles across the country. It showed that  
if people are willing to pay the price, even a corrupt and  
criminalised State ultimately has to back down instead of forcing  
through “development” projects.

The effectiveness of peoples’ struggles is based on the cumulative  
impact of resistance over time. It is a battle of patience between the  
State and the people. And sometimes, people do hold out longer than  
the state expects them to, as evidenced in both Raigad and Goa. But  
most importantly, the Raigad story shows that a skilful combination of  
political and judicial activism is more likely to work in peoples’  
favour. Court cases take a while to get sorted out, especially when  
there is a provision in the statutes for the developer of an SEZ to  
acquire land within two years of the approval from the government.  
Given that the SEZ law came into force only in 2006, it is not  
surprising if in some places the court decision over the land happens  
only now. But while courts deliberate, the fire has to be kept going  
by a vigorous peoples’ resistance, constantly highlighting the issue  
in the media, as much as discussing and sharing information among the  
people themselves. Reliance is probably the toughest corporate on the  
block. But the Raigad struggle shows what lok shakti can do if it is  
determined. That finally, the poor peasant can bring the country’s  
most powerful corporate down on its knees, creating strong hopes of  
victory even where the battle is yet undecided. The SC ruling next  
month will have a decisive effect. Will it weigh in on the side of  
justice?

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main42.asp?filename=cr180709the_peasant.asp