Archives: Briefs Reports

A problem can occur, no matter where we live, pass by everyday or cross occasionally. One could be living next to an industrial site which is polluting the nearby river, a power plant which is dumping fly ash on an agricultural field or a beach where the municipality is dumping the town’s solid waste. A friend or a fellow resident of one’s village might point us to an instance of river bed sand mining causing flooding or a tourist resort blocking access to a drinking water source and a grazing ground. Even if none of these problems are near where you live, your everyday access road could be the main route transporting coal, bauxite, iron ore or any other mineral, which would still make living conditions difficult.

Each such activity is more often than not, governed by a law. This could be both for prior approval and post approval compliance, based on specific safeguards or conditions. Safeguards or conditions are not just limited to environmental approvals, but can exist in lease documents or land transfer agreements. There could also be a court judgment or order which is generic in nature and has a bearing, no matter where you are located in the country, on particular issues like permissions for sand mining, tree felling or change of land use of common lands. It is possible that problems you notice or are directly affected by are occurring because someone, somewhere is not adhering to provisions of legal directions, be it by way of laws or court directions. If this is the case, there is likely to be a clear institutional framework and defined administrative agencies who would be mandated to restrict this activity, monitor non-compliance, as well as take action to remedy the situation and issue penalties. There could also be instances where an impact is not the result of a legal violation, but it may still be causing a hindrance to everyday living and affecting access to clean air or water. In such cases, there is also a possibility of invoking the authority of an administrative official to intervene and resolve the matter.

However, people affected by a problem are often not aware that it is because of noncompliance with the law or that there is an institutional remedy available for the same. Maybe, if the mandatory requirements had been adhered to, the problem might not have occurred in the first place. This is not a surety but a distinct possibility. Understanding whether the difficulty one is facing is due to legal or illegal actions can be one way of attempting to find a resolution. It does not require one to qualify as a lawyer, know how to draft court petitions or be fluent in legalese. Basic knowledge of applicable legal clauses and which institution would be best suited to approach for remedy, can be important allies in trying to solve real time problems with people dealing with a range of environmental and social impacts discussed further in this handbook.

One of the most critical components of such problem-solving with law (both in court and outside) is the requirement of evidence or proof. Once the problem is identified and defined and the affected party clarifies what remedy is being sought, community level legal practitioners would along with them need to prepare robust evidence to back the claims. For instance, if it were ascertained that a construction activity is being carried out in contravention to the provisions of any law, it would be important to gather specific evidence before filing a complaint or approaching a relevant institution. A range of documents can be included as proof of illegality, which includes government documents, responses to Right to Information (RTI), photographs, maps and complaint letters. One could also check if the information disclosed by the project proponent at the time of project appraisal was complete and true. Records of public hearing could also be checked to find out if they reflect the mentioned concerns.
This handbook is an attempt to present scenarios where community level environmental justice practitioners can apply and use law to work with affected communities and seek desired remedies through an administrative route. Each scenario presents a problem type, what the complaints could be and then goes on to suggest some legal clauses through which a remedy can be pursued. It draws from several cases currently being pursued by enviro legal coordinators associated with the Centre for Policy Research (CPR)-Namati Environmental Justice Program. It also draws from the resolutions being pursued by implementing partners like Janabhivyakti (Chhattisgarh) and Keonjhar Integrated Rural Development and Training Institute (KIRDTI) (Odisha).

There are two clear caveats while using this handbook:

First, the legal clauses listed with the problem, are indicative in nature and do not claim to be exhaustive. This implies that it is advisable that practitioners using this handbook look out for additional legal remedies for the problem in hand, which may not be listed here.
Second, we encourage practitioners to as far as possible share the legal knowledge with affected communities and try to jointly work towards seeking institutional response. This will encourage collective learning and help achieve legal empowerment through practice.
The handbook does not specifically list judicial and court related processes of any of these problems. In case the problem does not get resolved through the administrative route, affected people and community practitioners have the option of accessing avenues such as the National Green Tribunal (NGT) and courts. For this, the assistance of a lawyer is likely to be required. In such instances, the evidence collected, complaints filed and other documentation could form an important basis and support for any legal intervention.

This handbook is also available in Oriya, Gujarati, and Kannada.

This report has been obtained from the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India in response to an RTI request (application number – MOTLA/R/2016/80065) filed by CPR Land Rights Initiative.

This report has been obtained from the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India in response to an RTI request (application number – MOTLA/R/2016/80065) filed by CPR Land Rights Initiative.

Homelessness is generally described as an absence of a physical dwelling. However, homelessness triggers many social and economic factors that, together, perpetuate patterns of vulnerability amongst the urban homeless. This case is an anthology of three long-form narratives that relate the complexity of vulnerability and deprivation in the lives of the homeless in the streets of Delhi. Through action research, photo-journalism, and ethnography, the case explores the trajectory of vulnerability through the lens of violence, health, psychological impacts, social bonds, and access to housing. The case narrates the realities of homelessness in Delhi as well as their official and informal responses. By presenting an integrated perspective of the drivers of homelessness and the complex nature of vulnerability and deprivation, this case allows learners to consider alterative indicators when thinking about social safety nets and reimagine how to design basic services in the city.

People around the world live in areas that have been altered for industrial, infrastructure or mining projects. Their lives and occupations are being negatively impacted by problems of access, encroachment or pollution. Though governments in many countries have regulatory procedures for implementing environmental and social safeguards that are applicable to such projects so that problems can be minimised or mitigated, the qualitative difference of such regulatory systems depends on the efficacy of their compliance safeguards.

Typically, in countries where compliance is low, projects meant for development have also resulted in substantial environmental and social costs. Governments and investors fear the implementation of environmental policies and claim that these are bottlenecks or speed breakers to growth. Several new studies show that stringent compliance of environmental policies will neither affect competitiveness nor slow down GDP growth. On the contrary, it may result in bottom line benefits at the level of projects as well as sustain economic growth by enhancing efficiency and innovation.

India promulgated a series of environmental legislations between 1980 and 2005 to ensure that environmental and social impacts of land use change, infrastructure development and industrialisation are kept in check and timely mitigation is undertaken. The laws establish detailed procedures for assessing the environmental impacts of the proposed projects that are likely to cause land use change. The laws also involve the laying of conditions that are attached to the approvals granted to these projects. These conditions are meant to mitigate or prevent damage or impacts to the extent ascertained by the project proponents and the government or regulator.

Since the time these laws were first designed, there have been numerous amendments to them to change the scope of applicability of these laws, the time taken by regulators for decision-making and the sharing of responsibility between state and central governments in implementing these laws. However, one aspect of these laws that has seen minimal change is in their monitoring and compliance regimes. What happens to the projects once they are granted approvals? Do they comply with all the conditions imposed on them for mitigating or minimising environmental and social impacts? Who oversees these processes and what is the extent to which compliance is achieved?

This report is the outcome of a research project undertaken to understand the efficacy of conditional compliance, institutional monitoring and enforcement of environmental regulations to address the impacts faced by communities living around industrial and infrastructure projects. The project identified the institutions responsible for monitoring and compliance under various environmental laws, their procedures and practices by which these roles are realised. While it has been known that government agencies and regulatory bodies hold the formal duties of monitoring, the project also focused on how affected communities engage these institutions for greater compliance and remedies in case of environmental and social impacts of various kinds, such as encroachment or damage to common or private property, loss of livelihoods and loss of access to public spaces.

By analysing the efforts made by affected parties to engage with environmental institutions to craft remedies for existing environmental impacts, this research aims to highlight regulatory ingredients that are necessary for sound environment regulation and better outcomes through compliance. If translated into concrete policy on environmental monitoring and compliance, these lessons could address the chasm between enforcement of environmental regulations and the ever-growing difficulties of meeting environmental challenges.

Volatility in global financial markets has increased significantly in recent months. This reflects several concerns including the likley delay in US Fed raising rates; flat consumenr spending and continued price weakness in Japan despite BOJ introducing negative interest rates; slowing growth in emerging markets specially China and Brazil; falling commodity prices, fresh fears about sustainability of Greece debt; and recession in Russia and Brazil.* The seminar discussed the impact of these global headwinds on India, with a particular focus on the slowing down in China.

The 86th Amendment to the Constitution has made Elementary Education a Fundamental Right of every child in the age group 6-14 years. Based on this Amendment the Right to Free and Compulsory Education Act was passed in Parliament in August 2009 and came into effect on April 1, 2010. This is a landmark legislation that seeks to make fundamental changes in the system of delivering education. One of the first and most crucial challenges facing future of the Act is the establishment of an effective Grievance Redress System. Unfortunately at present a well-defined grievance redress mechanism does not exist. The Act has made local authorities the grievance redress agencies and the SCPCRs the appellate bodies at State level, but that does not suffice to establish the modalities through which violations can be dealt with. A well-defined institutional mechanism for grievance redress involves a system of registering, investigating and responding within a well-appointed time frame. This will have to be done along with the implementation agency, which is charged with the actual redress of the grievance by ensuring that the right under consideration is actually restored. This policy brief indicate some of the issues that need to be addressed in order for a process of Grievance Redress system to be established. These could be framed as Rules for Grievance Redress.

Suggested Citation: Kiran Bhatty (2012). Grievance Redress Mechanism for RTE. Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi.

Groundtruthing broadly means to compare facts stated in official documents and maps with the ground realities at a site or in a place. As a method of physical verification of statements made on paper, groundtruthing can act as an effective tool to create evidence by collecting easily observable facts about operations that might be illegal, prohibited or causing harm. The evidence can be used in complaints directed to the relevant regulatory authority, appellate mechanism or judicial body. This method is useful for one-time investigations or the ongoing monitoring of impacts.

Over the last two decades, civil society organizations, academics, and researchers have debated different methods for measuring and improving transparency,
accountability and monitoring in development programs meant for the poor. In this area, Social Audits have emerged as a powerful method of including people’s participation in evaluating the implementation of programmes meant for them, since the most effective monitoring can be done through the involvement of people particularly the rights-holders. This has allowed not only verification of the official account of the programme but also assessing its usefulness to the people for whom they are meant. Social Audits involve looking into those areas of information, which conventional audit mechanisms and agencies typically do not include. It also involves looking into those areas that official data sources may not collect. These could be either information accessed and brought into the public domain or new information collected from the people. This paper suggests Guidelines for how Social Audits of schools may be conducted. The Ministry of Human Resource Development [MHRD], Government of India, had asked the National Commission for the Protection of Child Rights [NCPCR] to develop a set of Guidelines for School Social Audits, under the Right to Education Act [RTE]. The author was the chairperson of the Working Group set up by the Commission for framing of the Guidelines, which were sent to the Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD) for appropriate action.

Suggested Citation: Kiran Bhatty (2013). Guidelines for School Social Audits. Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi.

This report has been obtained from the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India in response to an RTI request (application number – MOTLA/R/2016/80065) filed by CPR Land Rights Initiative.