Arunachal Pradesh
Kotga Area, Mebo sub-division
,
Mer village, Mebo sub-division
,
East Siang
Published : 12 July, 2014   |   Last updated - 24 Jun, 2024
Arunachal Village Alleges Foul Play in Elephant Corridor Project, Refuses to Surrender Land
Reported by
East Street Journal Asia
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Updated by
Anupa Kujur
120
Households affected
People Affected
2021
Year started
1500
Land area affected
120
Households affected
People Affected
2021
Year started
1500
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Conservation and Forestry
Reason/Cause of conflict
Protected Areas
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

Residents of Mer village in the state’s East Siang district are adamant not to give up their community land for the Daying Ering-Dibru Saikhowa Elephant Corridor Project. The project was proposed in 2016 by the Wildlife Trust of India (WTI). While some have demanded scrapping of the project, others continue to oppose it despite numerous threats and have alleged foul play in the project execution.

They claim that the government and the WTI are trying to grab community land of at least 1,000 hectares in the name of donation for conservation but in doing so have not taken the consent of the people.
Reportedly, only six individuals from the village were approached by the authorities to represent the community and were offered a deal in return for their consent. These six individuals were appointed members of the recently formed non-profit, Kotga Gora Community Conserve Reserve Society (KGCCRS).

Uryak Noroh, a youth leader and former panchayat member of Mer village, told LCW that no one from the Pasighat Territorial Forest Division, the WTI or the KGCCRS took prior consent of the Village Assembly to start an elephant corridor on their land. According to him, the land in question is used by the villagers to grow cash crops and for cattle-grazing. “We will not cede even an inch of our community land. We have communicated our decision to the minister of forest and environment, the principal chief conservator of forests and to the district forest officer during a meeting held on April 29, 2021,” Noroh told LCW.

He added that the village representatives had also blacklisted the KGCCRS in the meeting as it was formed to meet the selfish needs of a few individuals. The non-profit has refuted the allegations.  

Village heads, local journalists and wildlife conservationists have written several letters to the WTI and government officials, seeking transparency in the execution of the project, but they have not got a single response from either party, and no details of the project have been made public yet.

The proposed elephant corridor will connect the Daying Ering Wildlife Sanctuary in Arunachal Pradesh with the Dibru Saikhowa National Park in Assam. More than 300 elephants are estimated to move through community lands, settlements and flood plains of the Siang, Dibang and Lohit Rivers, which lie between these two protected areas.

In November 2022, the Government of Arunachal Pradesh wrote a letter to the Wildlife Trust of India, informing them that the project was being halted due to the various objections raised against the project's implementation.

On 12 July 2024, Nongku Megu of Roying village in Pasighat wrote to the DFO (territory) in the Pasighat Forest Division of the East Siang district stating that around 9 hectares of his land in the Tengabari area of Namsing village was brought under the D. Ering-Dibru Saikhowa Elephant corridor by the Wildlife Trust of India (WTI) without his knowledge or consent. He further communicated that he purchased this plot of land back in 2015 and, is still in possession of all the valid documents. 

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Complaint against procedural violations

Refusal to give up land for the project

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Scrapping of the project

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Non-Forest (Grazing Land), Forest and Non-Forest

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Grazing, Agricultural land

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Yes

Source/Reference

https://arunachal24.in/arunachal-pccf-office-stops-d-ering-dibru-saikhowa-elephant-corridor-of-wti-owing-to-its-mismanagement-and-controversy/

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Author
Reported by
East Street Journal Asia

Arunachal Pradesh

Kumar Sambhav is a social entrepreneur and award-winning journalist, leading innovative research in accountability investigations. He is the founder of Land Conflict Watch and is currently working as India Research Lead with Princeton University’s Digital Witness Lab.

Read More

Latest updates
Arunachal Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh

Hydroelectric projects on Subansiri river continue despite public outcry, disasters, and persistent floods

Gujarat
Gujarat

Farmers divided over Mandal-Becharaji Special Investment region in Gujarat

Gujarat
Gujarat

Farmers protest against GIDC in Gujarat, demand promised jobs, compensation

Goa
Goa

Proposed construction in Goa village blocks residents' access to agricultural fields, river

Assam
Assam

Violence erupts in Dhemaji amid ongoing Assam-Arunachal border dispute

Odisha
Odisha

Odisha's Dungripali village protests Aditya Birla solar power project

Assam
Assam

Illegal coal mining continues to thrive in Assam's Tinsukia

Assam
Assam

5 Cops Killed, 60 Civilians Injured in Firing between Assam, Mizoram Police

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Complaint against procedural violations

Refusal to give up land for the project

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Arunachal Village Alleges Foul Play in Elephant Corridor Project, Refuses to Surrender Land

Reported by

East Street Journal Asia

Legal Review by

Edited by

Anupa Sagar Kujur

Updated by

Updated by

East Street Journal Asia

Published on

June 23, 2021

August 20, 2024

Edited on

August 20, 2024

June 23, 2021

Sector

Conservation and Forestry

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Protected Areas

Wildlife Sanctuary

Starting Year

2021

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

1500

ha

Households Affected by Conflict

120

People Affected by Conflict

State

Arunachal Pradesh

Sector

Conservation and Forestry

People Affected by Conflict

Households Affected by Conflict

120

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

1500

ha

Starting Year

2021

Location of Conflict

Mer village, Mebo sub-division

Kotga Area, Mebo sub-division

East Siang

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Protected Areas

Wildlife Sanctuary

Land Conflict Summary

Residents of Mer village in the state’s East Siang district are adamant not to give up their community land for the Daying Ering-Dibru Saikhowa Elephant Corridor Project. The project was proposed in 2016 by the Wildlife Trust of India (WTI). While some have demanded scrapping of the project, others continue to oppose it despite numerous threats and have alleged foul play in the project execution.

They claim that the government and the WTI are trying to grab community land of at least 1,000 hectares in the name of donation for conservation but in doing so have not taken the consent of the people.
Reportedly, only six individuals from the village were approached by the authorities to represent the community and were offered a deal in return for their consent. These six individuals were appointed members of the recently formed non-profit, Kotga Gora Community Conserve Reserve Society (KGCCRS).

Uryak Noroh, a youth leader and former panchayat member of Mer village, told LCW that no one from the Pasighat Territorial Forest Division, the WTI or the KGCCRS took prior consent of the Village Assembly to start an elephant corridor on their land. According to him, the land in question is used by the villagers to grow cash crops and for cattle-grazing. “We will not cede even an inch of our community land. We have communicated our decision to the minister of forest and environment, the principal chief conservator of forests and to the district forest officer during a meeting held on April 29, 2021,” Noroh told LCW.

He added that the village representatives had also blacklisted the KGCCRS in the meeting as it was formed to meet the selfish needs of a few individuals. The non-profit has refuted the allegations.  

Village heads, local journalists and wildlife conservationists have written several letters to the WTI and government officials, seeking transparency in the execution of the project, but they have not got a single response from either party, and no details of the project have been made public yet.

The proposed elephant corridor will connect the Daying Ering Wildlife Sanctuary in Arunachal Pradesh with the Dibru Saikhowa National Park in Assam. More than 300 elephants are estimated to move through community lands, settlements and flood plains of the Siang, Dibang and Lohit Rivers, which lie between these two protected areas.

In November 2022, the Government of Arunachal Pradesh wrote a letter to the Wildlife Trust of India, informing them that the project was being halted due to the various objections raised against the project's implementation.

On 12 July 2024, Nongku Megu of Roying village in Pasighat wrote to the DFO (territory) in the Pasighat Forest Division of the East Siang district stating that around 9 hectares of his land in the Tengabari area of Namsing village was brought under the D. Ering-Dibru Saikhowa Elephant corridor by the Wildlife Trust of India (WTI) without his knowledge or consent. He further communicated that he purchased this plot of land back in 2015 and, is still in possession of all the valid documents. 

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Complaint against procedural violations

Refusal to give up land for the project

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Scrapping of the project

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Non-Forest (Grazing Land), Forest and Non-Forest

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Grazing, Agricultural land

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Yes

Source/Reference

https://arunachal24.in/arunachal-pccf-office-stops-d-ering-dibru-saikhowa-elephant-corridor-of-wti-owing-to-its-mismanagement-and-controversy/

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Forest and Scheduled Area Governance Laws, Other, Land Reform Laws, Case Laws

Legislations/Policies Involved

Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972
Section 2(12A) [Definition of forest officer as appointed under the Indian Forest Act]; Section 24(2)(b) [Collector can pass order to acquire land if owner has agreed to accept compensation]
Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006
Section 3(1)(d),(f),(i) [Forest rights, including rights of communities, rights over disputed lands and right to protect community forest resource]; Section 4(2)(e) [Consent of gram sabha needed for resettlement of forest rights]; Section 7 [Offences by authorities under the Act]
Arunachal Pradesh (Land Settlement and Records) Act, 2000
Section 2(d) [Definition of community includes residents of village]; Section 11 [Assignment of land for special purposes such as forest reserves by Deputy Commissioner]; Section 40 [Jurisdiction to decide record of rights]; Section 43 [Decision as to the record of rights in case of conflict]; Section 99(b)(3) [Power to make rules as to decision of rights]
Hospitality Association of Mudumalai v. In Defence of Environment and Animals and Ors. Etc. (Civil Appeals No. 3438-3439 of 2020, Supreme Court)
The power of the state government to notify elephant corridors under Chapter IV of the Wild Life Protection Act was held to be legitimate by the Madras High Court in WPPIL/10098/2008, which was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2020.
  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Non-implementation/violation of FRA

Violation of free prior informed consent

Legal Status:

Out of Court

Status of Case In Court

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Case Number

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

Blackmail/threats/intimidation

Reported Details of the Violation:

In a letter to the Additional Deputy Commissioner, village representatives claimed that members of the non-profit KGCCRS threatened the residents of Kebang village to forcefully obtain their signatures to show their consent to the elephant corridor.

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Mer Village

Additional Information

Nature of Protest

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Campaigns (grassroots organisations/press releases/media)

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Pasighat Forest Division

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Kotga Gorah Community Reserve Society

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials
Campaigns (grassroots organisations/press releases/media)

Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Resources

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Images

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Video

Other Land Conflicts in Arunachal Pradesh

cross
    Not a member yet?
    Sign up now