A conservation Bill that endangers forest rights – Examining the criminal legal framework adopted in the Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Bill, 2021 | 14th December 2022 | UPSC Daily Editorial Analysis

Please Share with maximum friends to support the Initiative.





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?

  • It seeks to amend the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.
  • It aims to implement CITES and expand the number of species that are legally protected.
  • The Bill provides for the central government to designate a Management Authority & a Scientific Authority.
  • Currently, the Act has six schedules for specially protected plants (one), specially protected animals (four), and vermin species (one).
    • The Bill reduces the total number of schedules to four.
  • It empowers the central government to regulate or prohibit the import, trade, possession or proliferation of invasive alien species.
  • The Act entrusts the Chief Wildlife Warden to control, manage and maintain all sanctuaries in a state.
    • The Chief Wildlife Warden is appointed by the state government.
  • The WPA Act 1972 prescribes imprisonment terms and fines for violating the provisions of the Act. In this article, this provision is explored.
    • The Bill increases these fines.
    • Type of Violation 1972 Act 2021 Bill
      General violation      Up to Rs 25,000 Up to Rs 1,00,000
      Specially protected animals      At least Rs 10,000 At least Rs 25,000

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?



Please Share with maximum friends to support the Initiative.

Download the Samajho App

Join 5 lakh+ students in downloading PDF Notes for 2000+ Topics relevant for UPSC Civil Services Exam. &nbsp Samajho Android App: https://bit.ly/3H9hva1 Samajho iOS App: https://apple.co/3H8ZJE2 &nbsp Samajho IAS Youtube Channel (300K+ Subscribers): https://www.youtube.com/@SamajhoIAS