Saksham GoelAIR 27 · CSE 2021 · 242 wordsTheir whole copy
Opening · a definition
The PESA Act of 1996 sought to extend local self-governance institutions to tribal areas of the country.
PESA 1996 as empowering tribal local self governance
Body · points
- Empowering Gram Sabha to:-
- Control application of certain policies, programmes and laws in tribal areas.
- Protect the local traditions and customs, in view of the laws.
- Control local minor minerals, resources, land, etc.
- Approve of plans, welfare measures, etc.
- Involve tribal community members in decision making process by reservation in Panchayats and Chairpersons posts for STs.
Thus, a model of participatory democracy was adopted. But there are certain concerns -
Dented the objectives - Causes
- Minimal interpretation of the Act and conferred powers on Gram Sabha by the State
- Lack of operationalising rules and laws at state level
- Excessive interference by forest bureaucracy with respect to:- 3.1 Applying programmes without proper approval 3.2 Use of resources without Gram Sabha's due process
- Land mafia, timber mafia and other criminal elements entering the said regions
- Non-application in strategic sectors with respect to EIA, etc
Way Forward
- Sensitisation of forest bureaucracy
- Empowering provisions and explanations in the Act
- State legislations for effectual delegation
- Proper devolution of funds
- Awareness regarding powers of the Gram Sabha.
Close · a way forward
True, PESA was a step in the right direction for culture-sensitive and custom-accomodative policy making in a participatory democracy, which needs to be strengthened and implemented in its true spirit.
How toppers approach this question, and more on its topic: open the question.