Group Presentation Industrial

Relations

SEZ region and Human

Violations
Group 9
Ashish Jain, 211
Ayush Poddar, 313
Shashank Khanwalkar, 344
Siddharth Kaushal, 345
INTRODUCTION
History Objectives
Generation of additional economic
activity
Promotion of Creation of
exports of goods employment
and services opportunities
Promotion of Development
investment from of
domestic and infrastructura
foreign sources l facilities

Positives Negatives

Demarcated area of land owned and operated by
private companies for the purpose of trade, duties and
tariffs
SEZs enjoy exemptions from customs duties, income
tax, sales tax, service tax, etc
State government acquires the land for the private SEZ
developers
Exports from the operational SEZs have been rising
consistently over the past decade
Significant reduction in the farmlands in the affected
villages resulting in loss of employment, livelihoods and
food security
Lot of legal violations such as infringement of the
fundamental rights of the citizens guaranteed in Part III
of the constitution
Environment Act is inapplicable to SEZs and hence no
environment clearance is required
No data is provided on the number of jobs lost but
focus is only on number of jobs created
Huge loss of public revenue because of exemptions
SINGUR CASE
Background Violations
Government of West Bengal chose Singur for Process of selection of the site was quite controversial and
developing automobile manufacturing unit of Tata's marked with blatant violations of human rights
Lands acquired by the state were multi-cropping Eviction of peasants was violation of ECOSOC (United Nations
Economic and Social Council) and state should have refrained
agricultural lands with a cropping density of 220% and
from destruction of livelihoods of 30,000 people in Singur.
established system of irrigation Acquisition process was anti-farmer and in violation of
Land grabbing took place despite unwillingness of the individuals right to property
majority of landowners to give up their lands
livelihoods of 30,000 people in Singur was affected
interventions
July 2006:Mamata Banerjee opposes the plant on fertile land
December 2006:Mamata Banerjee holds26-day hunger strikeagainst the land acquisition
Corporate bigwigs ranging from Reliance Industries chairman Mukesh Ambani to Bharti chief Sunil Bharti Mittal
extended support to Ratan Tata
International Fact Finding Mission was organized by IMSE and PCFS in Singur in 2006 which included prominent
delegates from Nepal, Bangladesh, Malaysia and India
Landmark Judgements
January 18, 2008:Calcutta High Court upholds Singur land acquisition, following which farmers and NGO moved the
Supreme Court challenging the HC order
May 20, 2011:Mamata Banerjeesworn in as Chief Ministerof West Bengal, announces first Cabinet decision to
return 400 acres of land to unwilling Singur farmers
June 14, 2011:Singur Land Rehabilitation and Development Bill, 2011passedin West Bengal Assembly.
June 22, 2011:Tata Motors moves Calcutta High Court challenging the Bill.
September 28, 2011:Calcutta High Court single bench upholds the Singur Land Rehabilitation and Development
Act, 2011.
June 22, 2012:A division bench of Calcutta High Courtstrikes down the Billon an appeal by Tata Motors.
August 31, 2016:Supreme Courtsets aside January 18, 2008 order of Calcutta High Court, allows appeals filed by
NANDIGRAM CASE
Brief
The CPI(M)s West Bengal government had decided to set up a SEZ for petroleum and
chemical manufacturing at Nandigram
It was decided that Salim Group of Indonesia would set up a chemical hub under the
SEZ policy at Nandigram
To provide land, the government decided to acquire the farmland belonging to the
villages of the area
As a reaction to it, the villages protested
Violent clashes, between police and villagers
Governments View Villagers View
The government tried to acquire the land under the The villagers realised that the government was just
eminent domain clause favouring the private company.
The SEZ and FDI investment would provide much The compensation provided was not sufficient as per
revenue and create jobs the villagers viewpoint.
It was necessary to attract foreign investment, since Displacing them and acquiring their lands would affect
these companies could easily have chosen any other their livelihoods
country They wished to stay in their home place as there was
The government was ready to provide compensation no guarantee when and where will they be resettled
for the land, as per the government decided value and if they would find land to farm or not.
As per the legal obligations, the government had not So they saw this as a threat to their livelihood.
broken any law
Aftermath and Reactions
As villagers protested, clashes between villages and police got violent
Maoists got involved and firings occurred, reportedly killing 50 people over three months
Many other parties, most notably Trinamool Congress, and many activists voiced their dissent
against the project
Realising that the party would lose support, the government cancelled the Nandigram project,
and proposed shifting it to Nayachar
CONCLUSION
View Point
Every state is acquiring land in order to encourage private investment but fails to
face the issues of people's impoverishment, food security and the right to a life with
dignity
An effect of increasing commercial pressures on land, in whatever context, if often
that the state acts as an agent to facilitate to acquisition of land resources by private
or state-backed enterprises.
Forcible acquisition of land should be done away with
Decisions that involve displacement of people should not be taken without prior
consultation with the local communities
Alternative livelihood does not grow automatically out of compensation money, it has
to evolve in coordination with local production relation
In a democratic society like ours, the primary requirement of good governance is to
provide opportunities for genuine public consultation
Recommendations
Models of development with minimal dislocation need to be adopted in preference to
those that indiscriminately displace people
The government should recognise the inherent rights of the local communities to
resources such as land, water, minerals, forest wealth, etc.
Considering the steadily declining per capita availability of land, the emerging land
use patterns in the country need to be examined and a sustainable land use strategy
should be evolved
References

Help the Rich, Hurt the Poor: Case of Special Economic Zones Author(s): E. A. S. Sarma Source: Economic and Political
Weekly, Vol. 42, No. 21 (May 26 - Jun. 1, 2007), pp. 1900- 1902
Nandigram and the Question of Development Author(s): Malini Bhattacharya Source: Economic and Political Weekly,
Vol. 42, No. 21 (May 26 - Jun. 1, 2007), pp. 1895- 1899
In the Aftermath of Nandigram Author(s): Prabhat Patnaik Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 42, No. 21 (May
26 - Jun. 1, 2007), pp. 1893- 1895
Singur and the Displacement Scenario Author(s): Walter Fernandes Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 42,
No. 3 (Jan. 20-26, 2007), pp. 203-206
Fernandes, Walter, Shanti Chhetri, Sherry Joseph and Satyen Lama (2006): Development- Induced
DisplacementandDeprivation in West Bengal 1947-2000: A Quantitative and Qualitative Database on Its Extent and
Impact, North Eastern Social Research Centre, Guwahati
Development of Special Economic Zones (SEZ) and Peoples' Movement against Land Alienations In West Bengal,A
West Bengal State Social Watch Report, 2009
Human Rights in India, Status Report, 2012
SEZ Act 2005, MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE(Legislative Department), 2005
Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement: Law, Politics and the Elusive Search for Balance, Amlanjyoti
Goswami, 2016
The meaning of Nandigram: Corporate land invasion, peoples power, and the Left in India, Tanika Sarkar and Sumit
Chowdhury, 2009
Thank You