Caso individual (CAS) - Discusión: 1993, Publicación: 80ª reunión CIT (1993)

Convenio sobre poblaciones indígenas y tribuales, 1957 (núm. 107) - India (Ratificación : 1958)

A Government representative indicated that his Government had just supplied a detailed report to the Office on the questions raised by the Committee of Experts concerning: the list of Scheduled Tribes; the reports of the Commissioner for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes; the reservation of seats for tribal populations in local administration; the rehabilitation of displaced tribal people; the National Forest Policy of 1988; the carrying-out of a survey on the extent of alienation of tribal land; and the health and education programmes for the welfare and development of tribal people. As concerned the Sardar Sarova dam and power project, he noted that the World Bank had prescribed certain benchmarks on resettlement and rehabilitation and on environmental aspects of the project, taking into account the issues raised by the independent review. These benchmarks were substantially fulfilled by the Government before the prescribed date. However, in order to avoid further vitiation of the atmosphere, the Government had decided to disengage from the World Bank and not seek any further disbursement out of the outstanding portion of the credit for the project. With respect to rehabilitation, the state Government of Gujarat had exhibited its capability to resettle project-affected persons, depending on their willingness. 5,058 project-affected persons in Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra and Gujarat States, more than 90 per cent of whom were tribal people, had already been resettled by July 1992. The Government of Gujarat had so far allotted 10,107 hectares of land to these project-affected people. Furthermore, resettlement grants had been given to 1,645 families and subsistence allowance to 3,659 families. Development assistance of Rs. 5,000 per family had been given to 2,645 families. Thirteen rehabilitation sites out of a total of 86 had already been provided with electricity. Employment had been provided to 349 people. A health survey had also been conducted for the preparation of a detailed health programme for the displaced. Details of the steps taken by individual states were included in the report provided to the Office.

The Workers' members stated that they had in the past commented on the problems raised by the construction of the Sardar Sarovar Dam, and generally on World Bank projects throughout the world which often had catastrophic consequences as far as indigenous and tribal populations were concerned. The World Bank and the IMF should consult the ILO before they embarked upon such projects. In this case, this was especially true because although the World Bank had made its decision on technical not political grounds, it nevertheless had the consequence of disturbing thousands, perhaps a million, tribals. Although there was a need for the dam, adequate preparation had not been made to deal with the consequences of the large-scale disturbance of people and the amount of resettlement compensation that was likely to be paid. There was still a gap between the resettlement needs of the tribal populations being displaced and the amount of land available. Thus, the Government was invited to continue to give detailed reports on all aspects of tribal indigenous populations in India since it had one of the largest of these groups in the whole world. Moreover, continual reports were requested on the developments as far as the dam was concerned and on whether the displaced people were receiving adequate compensation.

The Employers' members pointed out that this case had been discussed four times since 1986, and in 1991 the Committee had addressed an urgent request to the Government for detailed replies to its questions. However, regular reporting over the last few years had been extremely inadequate. The dam project was only one example of a general problem that tribal peoples required special protection as stated in the Convention. This protection was necessary since tribes had a different status and should be able to live differently. Up to now adequate responses had not been received from the Government on this subject. Since hundreds of thousands of people had been resettled it was particularly important to know whether compensation was adequate, whether there was enough substitute land for these tribals and where this land was. Much greater clarification was required than had been the case in the past on the resettlement measures. The Employers' members hoped that the report that had been referred to by the Government representative would answer many of these questions so that the Experts could take note of positive changes.

The Committee took note with interest of the detailed information supplied by the Government representative. The Committee regretted that the Government had not sent a report to the Committee of Experts in time for it to be examined during the 1993 meeting of that Committee. The Committee noted that, notwithstanding the earlier discussions on this subject and the repeated examination by the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee, it still did not appear that the resettlement and rehabilitation measures for the displaced tribal peoples were in conformity with the Convention. It expressed its deep concern at the fact that the measures for the resettlement of tribal populations displaced in future might give rise to greater difficulties with regard in particular to the Sardar Sarovar Dam and Power Project, the Committee was of the opinion that the Government could examine with the ILO the question of the social impact of this project on the tribal peoples concerned. Consequently, the Committee requested the Government to take urgent measures to bring its resettlement and rehabilitation policies into line with the Convention. In this connection, the Committee recalled that the Government could seek technical assistance from the Office, if it so wished. The Committee expressed the wish to be able to examine this case again next year and hoped to be able to note concrete progress in the harmonization of national law and practice with the provisions of the Convention.