Man’s attachment to land is primordial. So it is no wonder that land acquisition debates take on emotive overtones. The rising tide of urbanisation may have dulled this attachment, but the gathering storm against Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ordinance on land acquisition shows the complex challenges ahead. That old war horse, Anna Hazare, is on the move again and the Congress party has jumped in, terming the ordinance “anti-farmer”.
Amartya Sen, the Nobel laureate economist, has weighed in on this issue and said he is in favour of land acquisition. He has said urbanisation and the march of industrialisation are inevitable and even endorses acquisition of fertile agricultural land for industries. At the other extreme is social activist Medha Patkar, who says even if fair compensation is paid to farmers it is unethical to acquire their land because farming has been their livelihood since antiquity and they know nothing else. This echoes shades of the primordial attachment to land.
But what exactly is the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) Land Ordinance? And why is it now strenuously trying to amend the Land Act of 2014 that was passed when Congress was in power? Very simply, the ordnance tries to ease the process of acquisition because the Land Act was seen as being impractical. The BJP wishes to fast-track the process and according to Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, more than $300 billion (Dh1.1 trillion) worth of projects have been held up because the Act is unworkable.
A closer reading of the BJP’s ordinance shows why the party is facing such a concerted opposition. The most significant deviation from the Land Act relates to the consent of the owners for acquisition of farm land for five activities (a) projects vital to national security or defence of India or defence production; (b) rural infrastructure, including electrification; (c) affordable housing and housing for the poor people; (d) industrial corridors; (e) infrastructure and social infrastructure projects, including projects under public-private partnership where the ownership of land continues to vest with the government. Whereas in the Act it required prior consent of 80 per cent of the effected families for private projects and 70 per cent for public-private projects, no such consent is required under the ordinance. In addition, land can be acquired for private hospitals and private educational institutions on the same basis as the aforesaid five, unlike the Land Act, which specifically barred these entities.
The consent clause is frankly the heart and soul of the Act and its removal is what has caused this firestorm. Remove that clause and land acquisition suddenly seems predatory. To defend itself against the charge of being anti-farmer, the BJP has included land acquisitions for 13 new activities hitherto not covered in the Land Act and all of these qualify for the enhanced compensation stipulated in the Act. This sweetener, however, will not wash with the farmer.
The compensation package for land acquisition under the BJP and Congress is generous and none can say it is rapacious. A comprehensive and a humanitarian view has been taken to not only pay for the land at well above market rates, but to also compensate for loss of livelihood on account of such acquisition besides a payout for resettlement, an entitlement to alternate dwelling with a plinth area no less than 50 square metres and a guaranteed job for at least one family member.
The Land reforms now being undertaken, whether under the Act of 2014 or in its modified form by way of the ordinance, can change the face of India. It has taken almost 120 years for the country to frame these new laws and India’s growth story is hinged on how this all-important legislative measure is tackled inside and outside parliament. Civil society has to be fully behind it and the Anna Hazares will need to back this landmark legislation if it has to deliver the results.
Sadly, however, the Modi government has painted itself into a corner. It has been inept and let the opposition set the agenda. It has allowed itself to be branded as pro-corporate and anti-farmer. Not all its allies are on board and, tellingly, some of the party’s pro-farmer lobbies have raised objections. The BJP looks like a house divided and in rushing through with this ordinance, it resembles the bumbling Congress party.
Modi needs the opposition parties to make this work; he needs to walk across the aisle and craft a broad consensus. The BJP has to acknowledge the Congress’s pioneering work and co-opt them to sell these reforms. Modi should use the parliament to make an impassioned speech like he did at the Red Fort and take the nation into confidence; its citizens need to understand the complexities of land acquisition. He needs to put his well-known histrionics to the test.
History will judge him not for the monogrammed suit he wore when he met US President Barack Obama, but for his ability to carry the nation with him on this contentious piece of legislation.
Ravi Menon is a Dubai-based writer, working on a series of essays on India and on a public service initiative called India Talks.
