_page-0001.jpg)
What's the article about?
- It examines the criminal legal framework adopted in the Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Bill, 2021.
Relevance:
- GS3: Conservation, Environmental Pollution and Degradation, Environmental Impact Assessment;
- Prelims
|
What is Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Bill, 2021?
|
Analysis:
- Wildlife Protection Act (WPA), 1972 has safeguarded numerous species of wild animals and plants by prohibiting all forms of hunting and, by creating a network of protected areas (PAs).
- The amendment further invests in this conception of protected areas and species by bringing in newer species to be protected, augmenting the penal repercussions.
- While the aspects of protecting species from the wildlife trade, in line with international standards, have received thoughtful scrutiny by civil society, Members of Parliament and the
- Parliamentary Standing Committee, the impact of the criminal legal framework adopted by the WPA is less known.
- The need for criminal laws to assist wildlife conservation has remained unchallenged since its conception.
- From past experience it is evident that conservation would not have been possible without criminal law.
- The recent move to increase penalties by four times for general violations (from ₹25,000 to ₹1,00,000) and from ₹10,000 to ₹25,000 for animals receiving the most protection should raise questions about the nature of policing that the WPA engenders.
- A study by the Criminal Justice and Police Accountability Project found that persons from oppressed caste communities such as Scheduled Tribes and other forest-dwelling communities form the majority of accused persons in wildlife-related crimes.
- The Forest Department was found to use the threat of criminalisation to force cooperation, apart from devising a system of using community members as informants and drawing on their loyalty by employing them on a daily wage basis. Cases that were filed under the WPA did not pertain solely to the comparatively serious offence of hunting; collecting wood, honey, and even mushrooms formed the bulk of prosecution in PAs.
- Over 95% of the cases filed by the Forest Department are still pending.
- The natural overlap of recognising forest rights in intended-as-inviolate PAs was quickly resolved by making the Forest Rights Act (FRA) subservient to the WPA, thereby impeding its implementation.
Way Forward:
- Criminal cases filed by the department are rarely compounded since they are meant to create a ‘deterrent effect’ by instilling fear in communities.
- Fear is a crucial way in which the department mediates governance in protected areas, and its officials are rarely checked for their power.
- Unchecked discretionary policing allowed by the WPA and other forest legislations have stunted the emancipatory potential of the FRA.
- Any further amendments must take stock of wrongful cases (as in the case of fishing) and resultant criminalisation of rights and lives of forest dwelling communities.
Learn more about the Forest Rights @ Forest Rights Act, 2006- What has been achieved so far?
