Odisha govt allows ST people to sell their land to non-tribals

Context: The Odisha government has permitted Scheduled Tribe (ST) individuals to sell their land to non-tribals and mortgage it for non-agricultural purposes under the Odisha Scheduled Areas Transfer of Immovable Property (by STs) Regulation (OSATIP), 1956. However, the implementation of this legislation has currently been put on hold.

Other amended provision of the OSATIP

• The ST people, will have to obtain written permission from the sub-collector to sell their land. If the sub-collector does not grant permission for transfer, sell or mortgage of such land, then the person can appeal to the respective district collector within six months, whose decision will be final in this regard.
• The permission for transferring land from tribals to non-tribals was granted with a rider that after such a transfer, the tribal seller or mortgagor should not be landless or homestead-less.
• The OSATIP includes strict provisions that not only prohibit the transfer of tribal lands but also criminalise any forced alienation. Additionally, it delineates mechanisms for eviction and the restoration of tribal land.

Advantages of this amendment:

• Allowing the sale of land to non-tribals can foster social integration and harmony between different communities. It may break down traditional barriers and create a more inclusive and diverse society.
• Selling land could provide tribal communities with immediate financial resources as significant economic disparities persist in Scheduled Areas, capital can be invested in income-generating activities, education, healthcare, and other avenues that contribute to economic empowerment.
• Access to funds from land sales might enable tribal individuals to explore alternative livelihood options beyond agriculture, can contribute to economic resilience and reduce dependency on a single source of income.
• Increased economic activity resulting from land sales could attract investments and contribute to the development of infrastructure in tribal areas, include roads, schools, healthcare facilities, and other essential social services.
• The infusion of capital into tribal communities can lead to an improved standard of living.
• In some cases, non-tribal buyers might bring advanced agricultural practices and technologies to tribal lands, potentially leading to increased productivity and improved farming methods.

Challenges posed by this amendment:

• Land is often deeply tied to the cultural and social identity of tribal communities. Allowing the sale of tribal land to non-tribals may result in the erosion of traditional practices and ways of life.
• The incursion of the market economy into tribal areas may lead to the risk of economic exploitation, wherein non-tribals with more resources could take advantage of the situation, potentially leading to the dispossession of tribal communities from their valuable lands.
• If tribal communities sell their land and are unable to manage the funds effectively, there is a risk of displacement and migration, might lose their connection to their ancestral land.
• Tribal communities often have a symbiotic relationship with their land, practicing sustainable and traditional methods of agriculture. If non-tribals exploit the land for commercial purposes, it could lead to environmental degradation.
• Allowing the sale of tribal land to non-tribals might lead to social tensions and conflicts between different communities, could have broader implications for the social harmony of the region.
• Tribal lands often contain valuable natural resources. If non-tribals exploit these resources without proper regulation, it could lead to depletion, affecting not only the tribal communities but also the overall ecosystem.
• The proposed amendment could potentially altering the demographic landscape of Scheduled Areas. The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) of India, which carried out the random study, found that land held by tribals in Odisha had decreased by 12% in the decade between 2005-06 and 2015-16. 
• The terms ‘landless’ or ‘homestead-less’ were not clearly defined. This lack of clarity could potentially allow a tribal individual to sell all of their land while retaining a small token piece, thus avoiding classification as landless.

Way forward

• It is crucial to conduct a thorough social impact assessment such as such as displacement, cultural impact, to understand the potential consequences on the tribal communities.
• The government should develop a comprehensive land use planning strategy like zoning regulations and restrictions on certain types of development  to ensure that the land sold by tribal communities is used in a manner that benefits both the tribal and non-tribal populations.
• Engaging in meaningful consultation with tribal communities is essential. The government should involve tribal representatives in the decision-making process, ensuring that their perspectives, concerns, and aspirations are taken into account.
• Conducting awareness campaigns access about alternative livelihood opportunities and educational programs like providing financial literacy programs, skill development initiatives, to ensure that tribal communities are well-informed about the implications of selling their land.
• Formation of self-help groups, seed- banks, and various other institutions should be encouraged in the tribal areas to fulfil short term credit needs which in turn can be helpful for tribes to prevent mortgages and alienation of land.