 Good evening everybody. It is my pleasure to welcome you to this timely and important webinar on forest rights and governance in India, which is co-organized by Tartan Institute of Social Sciences and LENSA India with support from NRMC Center for LEN Governance and the LEN Portal Foundation. Thank you for joining us today. My name is Geetan Jaisau. Currently, I'm an Austrian professor at the Tartan Institute of Social Science, Mumbai. It is my honor to moderate this forum. As all of you know, the several tribes and other traditional forest development acts of 2006, which is popularly known as the Forest Rights Act, has been widely recognized as one of the landmark legislations in the post-independent India, which recognizes the role of community members of grams above as the local self-governing relief in determining the use, access, management, and disposal of forest resources post-2005 December. The Forest Rights Act has the potential to restore rights of forest dwellers on 40 million hectares of forest land in around 170,000 villages across India. This covers one quarter of the village in India, at least 150 million people, including 90 million tribal people who are largely dependent on forest resources are going to benefit from the recognition of forest rights under the Forest Rights Act 2006. Similarly, the Forest Rights Act has the potential to democratize forest governance by recognizing the rights of the local communities who will have rights of how the land is used, who should get all types of resources. While the Forest Rights Act came into force on 1 January 2008, its implementation over the last 10 years has not been effective. The government data sources say that only 70% of the total potential forest area has been recognized till date. And there has been a great deal of variation in implementation among different states. Nonetheless, the Forest Rights Act has great potential to bring about changes in forest governance by transferring community forest resource rights and management authority to forest-willing communities. Over the past few years, thousands of villages, especially in Maharashtra, that is in Western India, and Odisha, that is in Eastern India, have received such rights. And many of them have begun to excite them. For example, harvesting and selling non-tinkered forest resources, increasing forest protection, reducing destructive practices, managing fire, regenerating degeneration of forests, and identifying forests for forestry. The challenges they face is how to enable simultaneous pursuit of livelihood enhancement, equitable distribution, ecologically sustainable forest management, and democratic process in community forest rights management and governance. The idea to have this webinar series, to have this interactive session today, is to discuss why have there been various and implemented forest rights. As I mentioned earlier, only 17% of the potential area has been recognized, and it also varies from state to state. And the second objective is to identify the institutional and political bottlenecks to implement FRAs effectively. And third, and the most important one is to understand the examples, especially from states like Maharashtra and Odisha, the best practices, and how those best practices can be of scale or can be applicable in other parts of the country. Now, let me introduce our esteemed panelists. To begin with, we have Tussardas, who is well-known for his work in the field of forest rights and governance. He has been part of various networks, including community forest rights, learning advocacy. Then we have Dr. Soma K.P, a very well-known expert in the field of gender and development rights for her work on various policy analysis, mobilizing field level to state level work, especially focusing on resource rights, agriculture, forest, so on and so forth. And third, we have Mr. Pinaki Haldar, who is currently the state director for LENSA, especially in West Bengal and Odisha. Welcome to all of you to this panel discussion. Thank you. Thank you, Gitan. Hello, everybody. So, thank you so much. We have asked the panelists to address basically four important aspects of FRA. One is implementation. Secondly, the question of inclusion. Third is the important part, which is going to be very useful for the faculty and many others who are interested to know what exactly has happened in the course of FRA phase. So in that case, we'll be discussing some of the innovative ideas that have been executed in the course of FRA phase. And fourth, important part is the impact of FRA over the last 10 years. Let us first begin with the question of implementation. Why there has been variation in the implementation process and also all the mistakes you find there are various things. Now, Tusa, we want to get to the bottom of why FRA has not been effectively implemented over the last 10 years. Can you share your perspective on this? Yes, Gitan, as part of a national initiative called Community Forest Rights, Learning, and Advocacy. Last few years, we have produced a series of reports, performance reports called Promise and Performance of Forest Rights Act in India. As for that, we see that the implementation of Forest Rights Act has not been effective because there is an absolute lack of political will at the central and state government level. Non-cooperation by forest administration, which is a major challenge, then the challenges in institutional and structural challenges, number of procedural bottlenecks in the process of claim making, verification of claims, and recognition. And importantly, operation of a host of conflicting laws and policies. Some of the high potential states which are MP, Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, Odisha, Andhra, Telangana, Rajasthan, Karnataka, Himachal and Uttarakhand, we see that there is a high potential of recognition of rights. But except for Maharashtra and Odisha, Forest Rights Act remained largely unimplemented in vast majority of states. And in the forest and tribal areas. And this has happened, especially so in the last few years, due to a lack of attention and push from the central government. Yeah. Thank you so much, Tussar, for giving valuable points. Pinaki, can you say your perspective on why implementation has not been so effective and for especially the national part of India? Yes, thank you, Gidendra, and hi all. Yeah, from my side, which I have seen and also perceived from the working experience in two to three states in respect of Forest Rights Act. First of all, this is a central legislation. This was passed by government of India in 2005. But the implementation responsibility comes from the state governments. And even within the state government, a lot of coordination is required. There are three pioneer departments. One is the Schedule 5 and Schedule Cast Development Department. The Revenue Department, second one. And the third one is the Forest Department. Along with it, there are roles defined for the village assembly's Gram Sabha, which is looked after by the Pandayatiras Department. So all these departments have to act in coordination when it goes linking, so that's also a reason why there is a gap in the implementation and there is a mindset, typical mindset, what we see from the Forest Department officials. They have a feudal mentality of possessiveness, which is undermining the implementation within this department. In addition, the Forest Rights Act is also seen as only by several governments what we have seen. It's an act meant for providing individual part that is a title giving this act is meant for that. But as Tushar was mentioning, there has to be a lot of work in respect of community ownership, community management of forest, and we need to focus in the coming days, these gap areas, the claims of non-tribal communities, those are objectively rejected and often without assigning any reason thereof. Okay, thank you, Srinakthi. Soma, we'd like to hear from you on why you think the act has not been effectively implemented. Thank you, Gita Anjoy. Hello, everyone. I'm part of a network called Makkam, Mahila Kisan Adhikar Manj, the Women Farmers Forum in India. And through our work in trying to integrate gender issues into the Forest Rights Act, we've come across various problems which I'd like to highlight. You know, the act is premised on restoration of historical justice, but the issues of gender justice, along with the feudal attitudes that Pinaki mentioned, these gender justice has not been incorporated into the approach that state agencies have adopted, despite the provisions being there in the act. And this is largely due to the deeply patriarchal and structural biases that exist within the state bureaucracies and hierarchies. The overbearing presence of the Forest Department also plays an obstructive role in the implementation of its act. And that department has resisted the implementation of the act in various ways, due to fears of loss of control over forest territories, as well as over the produce from it, which means a loss of revenue to them. So the Forest Department's resistance to implementation, as well as its active use of coercive and forced violent methods to restrain communities from claiming rights, we have evidences of that in the form of trench digging and fencing of village premises so that people cannot access the forest, fencing of forest lands that the Forest Department claims to be its territories when communities have already filed their claims for these. And now more recently, acts of sexual harassment as have been reported from Bastar earlier, more recently from Khatima in Uttarakhand, as well as from Gujarat in Dahod region. So all these and many other regions, we have documented these and we find that the resistance is only becoming more explicit. The greatest challenge this poses is for women who are now seen as encroachers rather than as potential title holders. As a consequence, the women from forest dwelling communities are constrained from even accessing the basic needs for livelihood, which includes grasses, dry fuel, wood, uncultivated foods, or even practicing scatter agriculture as they have done through Valar practices, for instance, in Rajasthan in Chattisgarh and the podu cultivation practices of Andhra Pradesh. So traditional livelihoods are impacted huge. Violence is an issue that we'd like to highlight here and sexual violence cases don't get registered while the cases against women as encroachers are only adding to the statistics of crimes against women. Like, in addition to one of the important implementing actors, the forest department, which is also part of the HDLC and DLC committee. Pinaraki, what else do you think are the bottlenecks in the implementation of FR? bottleneck primarily lies in the mindset, in the mindset of the implementers, in the mindset of the government, in the mindset of the local stakeholders. First of all, there has to be a huge political commitment from the government, as also the social commitment. So this is a great, great opportunity to do the justice and undo the historical injustice. So that is a big, big commitment. And we often find that the state governments are having some mandate to comply with the provisions of the forest rights act, but actual commitment sometimes missing. And as Soma has highlighted, Dushar has also the feudal mentality of the forest department. And they see, traditionally, whoever is encroaching into the forest, they see the forest dollars as primarily encroachers. And they don't have, they think that they don't have to be treated with dignity and rightful claim holders. This is a gap what I was mentioning in the mentality mindset. And this is, again, compounded by whatever we have said earlier, that the lack of ability to act in a coherent manner by several departments and it has to be reflected. A lot of coordination needs to happen, the district level committee, the subdivision level committee, and also the state level monitoring committee. And also there were several departments that has to be so. Several instances can be cited by state level monitoring committees hardly take place. That is a very good convergence forum for addressing the lacuna or the implementation gaps. So that is a demand area. And above all, each of the department involved in its implementation, they see that each department, they see the role on behalf of the department to be performed according to their own mandate. And so as a result, interdepartmental conflicts sometime again hinder the implementation process. And all these things are further compounded by one single fact that the beneficiaries, the claim holders, what is being done precisely to educate them, to disseminate the information related to claiming process and what are the impediments, what are the avoidable mistakes while filing a claim and how the Gramsabha, the village assembly, how the forest rights committee would be made more knowledgeable. So these are some of the challenges and the bottlenecks in the scope of implementation. Right. Soma, coming back to you again, because you talked about the forest department, you talked about some of the repressive methods which are also employed by other agencies. But as you know that tribal department is the Nautilegency to implement FRA. So how do you locate the tribal department? Do you see tribal department role and responsibilities also in some ways bottlenecks for FRA implementation? As far as the tribal department is concerned, I think there are structural and operational issues at play here in terms of bottlenecks. Apart from the feudal and patriarchal attitudes that I mentioned earlier, the department bureaucracy, even if there are positive pronouncements in the tribal department at the national level or even at the state level, it is at the ground level that one finds that the state bureaucracies. My research has revealed that there is a lack of understanding of what the nuance for instance, for inclusion of OT, FT, the other tribal, other forest dwellers categories, the particularly vulnerable tribal groups that the act is supposed to reach out to the nomadic groups. There is a lack of understanding of the nuance that the act has made provision for and there is a lack of training for them as well. And unless some systematic training and then outreach campaigns are planned, there's going to be very little effective implementation of the act because the tribal department, tribal affairs department has primarily been involved in implementation of welfare schemes for education, health and area development so far. And to be a department that is actually implementing an act for restoration of rights and restoration of historical justice, there needs to be a far more concerted effort in the direction of enabling them. For women for instance, the constraints are further complicated by traditional mindsets that don't recognize women as title holders and decision makers in mainstream societies as well as in tribal societies. Women are not part of traditional decision-making committees. And to make that happen, we need to have much more leadership development, much more investment into organizing women's sabbaths before the grand sabbaths. Those kinds of initiatives will certainly help. And those are the things that need to be demonstrated and concentrated upon more. Right. So, sir, what would you add to this list of bottlenecks? Would you like to have few more points? Yeah, yeah, there are a few more important points to add in bottlenecks. You see, I mean, the Forest Rights Act 62, 62 set of a democratic governance of forest and ensure rights by putting in three basic structures. At the grass root, it is the village council of the grand sabbaths which are empowered to determine and claim rights. And then there is a nested governance framework set up at the district and sub-district level involving the Panchayati Raj institution, the revenue department, the travel department, as well as the forest department. And importantly, at the national level, at the central and state level, it is the ministry of tribal affairs and the tribal welfare departments who have been given the mandate and authority to implement this law. This is how the Forest Rights Act 62 make a transition to a new paradigm of governance. However, if you look at the implementation at this three particular level, one importantly at the grand sabbath level or the village council level, there is a lack of support to the grand sabbath and the forest rights committees in terms of information, training, and actual support to facilitate claims. And then at the district level, district level committee, sub-division level committee, although there is a nested governance and an expectation for participation of all these Panchayati Raj institution members and also the other departments. But it is the forest department which dominates. And at the central level, also state level, we see that the mandate which is given to the travel department has been diluted to a considerable extent by not investing in capacity. So the capacity of travel development department and the concerned officials have not been built up as a result of which the implementation has not been very effective. Secondly, we see that that large number of claims, almost about 60 to 70% of claims have got rejected. And this rejection have not been done through a due process of law. So it also creates that sense of insecurity which was earlier there. And mostly claims of other traditional forest dwellers have been rejected. And then we also see that there are these very important provisions relating to community forest resource right, provisions relating to the rights of vulnerable communities which are the particularly vulnerable tribal groups, pastoral communities. And these rights have not been addressed in the implementation process. There are excluded communities like communities living in the forest and unsurveyed villages. The displaced communities, there are special provisions made for these communities in the forest right act. But these provisions also remain unimplemented. These are some of the major bottlenecks which are still there in the implementation process. Yeah, thank you, Ishwana. Nevertheless, we have also seen in addition to what people just mentioned about the non-implemented part of FRS. Recent years, we have experienced very, very interesting examples especially with reference to community forest rights instead like Maharashtra and Odisha. There are best examples coming from Maharashtra in the Kshiroli districts in other parts of Vidurga. So how does one look at the success of FRS, especially community forest rights in Maharashtra and also in Odisha recently in Kalahandi district? So Pnaki, would you like to talk in like why it has been very, very effective especially on community forest rights in Maharashtra and Odisha? Yeah, thanks, Gitanjaya. If you go by the earlier deliberations from the respective panel members, we have identified the lacuna, the gaps, what are the bottlenecks? The success depends upon the government's endeavor, sincere endeavor to plug those gaps. The first of all is the institutionalization of the committees. Those are there mostly on paper. There is lack of sense of urgency. Those who act with more sense of urgency at the, for this reconstitution of the forest rights committee as per the 2012 amendment with adequate women's representation and also the regular meeting to be held at the subdivision level, regular meeting to be held at the district level committee and the state level monitoring committee. So there the political commitment is reflected. So first of all, Maharashtra has shown a great political commitment. So also is the Odisha government. First of all, then these village-level institutions, the forest rights committee and the Gramsabha, this needs to be spent. This needs to be really a capacity product so that they can perform the assigned duties and responsibilities, filing the claim and assisting the governance system for disposal of the claims, et cetera. So these two things I think have come very handy in respect of these two states. And there are some innovations. I believe there will be opportunity later to speak specifically about some innovations, how to strengthen the land rights provided through Forest Rights Act. There are very good examples and by way of the innovations and involvement of the civil society organizations NGOs because government cannot really do it alone be it whatever the department. So there is enough opportunity and scope of involving the NGOs and civil society organizations. This area, this need not be treated as a floodgate but this area need to be again scrutinized that who are the real committed NGOs and civil society organizations that can come handy in respect of strengthening the capacity and the institutional mechanism. So these are two three areas I think the political commitment support from the civil society NGOs and also strengthening of the institutions at the subdivision and the region and the district. So these are primarily the broad reasons why these two states have really shown good result. Thanks Binasi. Before I go to Tussar to add his comments, I would request all the participants who are listening to all of us, please pose your questions, type your questions into the webinar page so that we can ask the panelists to address them once they speak on these questions. Please, pose your questions. Yeah, Tussar, would you like to add other important points why Maharashtra and Odisha have good examples in the FR implementation? Yeah, I think Pinaki has made important points regarding that and I agree to that. I think firstly these states had seen active involvement of organization of tribals and forest dwelling communities initially in the campaign for enactment of forest right act and also actively in the post-implementation phase which have actually led to collective actions and these collective actions have actually evolved successful strategies, strategies and innovation for claiming various rights. Importantly the community forest resource right and mapping of customary boundaries and these strategies have later on been adopted by the state governments and replicated. So that has contributed to scaling off of the process. And in these two states, we also see a situation where state governments and the tribal welfare department have taken proactive measures to strengthen institutional mechanism, allocate funds, deploy staffs and importantly, issue enabling circulars and government orders which have helped in the implementation process. Great. So both of you mentioned about the role of civil society groups and NGOs. Could you elaborate a little bit what type of role NGOs play in the FRR process and how effective has been the process? So, sir, could you begin with that? Yeah, as I have highlighted, you know, the organizations of tribal and forest-building communities and NGOs, they have played a major role in the implementation and the kind of role which civil society organizations have played and particularly strategies which have worked. There we see that, you know, in Maharashtra and Odisha, in some part of Maharashtra and Odisha, there is a very active coordination and collaboration between the civil society organization and government authorities. Being a new law, it is now increasingly felt that there is a new paradigm of governance of community forest resources. And there is a set of complex rights which the law wants to address. So in order to work on those rights, for example, you know, in order to, for example, understand the concept of community forest resources, the customary boundaries, the habitat or territories of PVTG, this kind of complexities in the rights process, this has been simplified by involvement of this civil society organizations who have worked with the communities for a long time. And they have, you know, their experience and work with the communities have actually enriched the process of implementation. So they are the coordination and collaboration process is most important. Yeah. So Pinnakir, do you see also the similar role, especially in West Bengal and Odisha, when it comes to the role of NGOs? Yes, absolutely. Yes, absolutely. And yes, the capacity development of the claim holders, as I have been mentioning, Tushar and Shoma, all of us are mentioning, that's of prime importance. And the NGO and civil society organizations, they can really cut the ice in this area. And they can make it very, very difficult in terms of creating awareness in several accounts, strengthening of the Grams and Forest Rights committees. The second one, what I have been, we have been seeing is that application of the suitable user-friendly technology in respect of boundary demarcation, one of the important provisions of the Forest Rights Act, very categorically mentions about the conversion of forest villages or mougas into revenue mougas. How to demarcate the boundary? Because most of the desert forests, they do not have the internal, these cadastral survey map, et cetera. So proper boundary and demarcation of the plots of individual holding, community rights holding. So all these are extremely important to provide this opportunity to these excluded population to have their rights in place. And NGOs and civil societies are really making a difference. They are coming up with good integrations. They are supporting the government in actually applying this technology in the field to sort out the issues related to plot measurement, boundary demarcation, and also creating awareness in it. Soma, what about the implementation of IFR in other parts? We discussed the success stories of Maharashtra and Odisha. So why don't we hear the similar stories in other parts of India? Yeah. Thanks, Tushar. Sorry, Gitanjoy. Before we move to the other states, I think it's important to note that in Maharashtra, the role of the governor in issuing the circulars that Tushar mentioned is very important to note because it gives a direction to the department, especially the forest department's attitude in working to support the implementation of the Forest Rights Act has been possible because civil society organizations have collaboratively worked to make those guidelines known to the forest department and to build an environment where they are working with the Tribal Affairs Department and its ESOs to create this kind of an atmosphere for collaborative implementation. And even where there has been any kind of conflict, the attempts to come together to address those has been much more active. Coming to the issue of other states, there has been a lot of issues that we've been dealing with in trying to implement the act. We find that a large problems remain in this area, especially in the outlier states where women continue to be targeted for encroachments, for instance, and other state interventions encroach upon their livelihood rights, as I mentioned earlier. In Gujarat, for instance, the tribal areas, many CSOs have been trying to implement the PISA Act as well as the Forest Rights Act, which works synergistically to each other, but they have received resistance from the Tribal Affairs Department and the state machinery because of the kind of attitudes, as we mentioned earlier, and the misgovernance and the masculinist assertions seem to rule despite community institutions being built, despite women's organizing and the claims to claim the forest rights. The IFRs that have been submitted, we find that in Gujarat, the implementation has not been to the mark that other states like Odisha and Rajasthan, Odisha and Maharashtra have shown. So one of the reasons for that is that the support needed for communities to file their claims, to be able to process the requirements of the act is not forthcoming as we find in these two states. Also, when it comes to filing their claims, women's names have not been included in many of the states. And in some states, people didn't even know which departments are actually the nodal department. For instance, in Uttarakhand, only in a couple of years back was the social welfare department identified as the nodal department in the absence of a tribal department. In Rajasthan, it took the civil society organizations to educate the tribal affairs department to the provisions of the act and to actually undertake a Patalgadi process in their villages before the tribal affairs department started recognizing and issued the guidelines, et cetera, in the state. So it's CSOs working in tandem with the state has certainly helped to strengthen this process. But where that has not happened, we find that communities and especially women are having to face the wrath of departments and the Gramsabhas themselves are having to struggle against all kinds of mechanisms of the state agencies without that kind of a supportive environment created. Right. So I think it's a very valid point, Soma. You talked about the exclusionary approach that has been followed by the implementing agencies. We have also seen similar kind of position by the implementing agencies, especially with reference to the rights of the OTFDs or the pedigree forest owners. Pinaraki, would you like to highlight why there has been reluctant to process the title for OTFDs? Focus on the titles of the other traditional forest owners. Yes. Yeah, audio is a bit poor. Yes, first of all, the other traditional forest owners, they have to come up with the proof of three generation habitation. So that's a very tough call. And most of these populations, they do not have the proper records. And the second one is that the owners of proof is up on them. Otherwise the forest department look at them as encroaches. And this is very stringently followed by the forest department, which is the primary stakeholder in respect of forest rights settlement. So that has been one reason. And they are unable to prove the continuous habitation in a particular village and also livelihood practices over 75 years, period of time or three generations. The papers are not available. And also there are evidences not available, but there are other mechanisms. The Forest Rights Act very clearly mentions about other mechanisms. They're like the taking, collecting evidences from very, very senior people, the geriatric people, old people who can very surely confirm that these people are settled here in a particular forest area for a very long period. So you need to demonstrate flexibility when you are settling the rights of the most underprivileged and invisible population. So that is a mindset of the government. Something needs to be done or something needs to be thought about seriously in respect of to what extent this could be and not meaning relaxation of these provisions. But within the act and rules of the Forest Rights Act, how this could be satisfied in a more convenient and acceptable manner. So, sir, would you like to add why there is lack of progress in recognizing OTFD rights? Briefly, if you can highlight few more points. Because Odisha, at some point, recognize most of the OTFD rights and all of a sudden they cancel those rights. Yeah, a couple of points to add on that. This is a very serious issue of other traditional forest dollars getting excluded. And this exclusion has actually happened due to a confusion created over the criteria for recognition of OTFD rights. The law does not distinguish between Sidu tribe and other traditional forest dwellers. But in the initial years and even now, it is widely understood that other traditional forest dwellers require both residents and occupation of forest land for three generation, which is 75 years. But later on, this has been clarified by the ministry that only residents of three generation is required for making claims by other traditional forest dwellers. Now, even now that understanding is not shared widely, or there is a deliberate misinterpretation of this understanding, which is why claims from other traditional forest dwellers have been excluded, rejected in the entire implementation process. The other important issue is of evidence and particularly documentary evidence which is insisted by the government authorities. Whereas the rules require that all kinds of evidence, such as the statement of elders, genealogy of a family and all that physical evidence needs to be considered. And importantly, the law and rules also require that providing evidence is something which has to be done proactively by the government authorities. It is not for the other traditional forest dwellers to go around and collect their evidence. But this is something which is not happening on ground as a result of which large number of these communities who should have actually got rights are excluded in the process. Right, right. So we discussed two important points in the implementation and exclusion part. In addition to what we have also seen how women rights are not recognized. Both in the process part and as well as also in the governance especially village level committees and also in the title. So now would you like to throw some light on this? Yeah, thanks. The focus on gender issues has only now begun to emerge in the discourse on the Forest Rights Act with civil society interventions earlier also before the act. There has been a mobilization of women in claiming forest rights and in protection of forests and governance of forests. But the Forest Rights Act for the first time provides a space for women to claim titles jointly with the spouses as members of households and does not prevent households from submitting claims even with the woman as the first title holder. But this is still resisted by the state bureaucracy despite our attempts to do this in Rajasthan and Gujarat. We did manage to get some women's names put as the first title holder but there is largely a resistance to this. Is this true across India or on limited Himalaya reasons? No, not to the Himalaya region. I'm talking about Gujarat and Rajasthan. We have been able to register the names of women as the first title holders but there was a lot of resistance from the patwaris, the revenue officials to this because they said, how can women be the first holders? It is not done in our society. And we said that the women said that there is no such clause that says women cannot be the first name. And so they accepted single women's names women who were heads of household as the first holder but in other households they insisted that it had to be the men as the first holder. But on the other hand, we find that only a small proportion of single women have actually been registered as payments. And there are some efforts ongoing in Orissa where and in Gujarat and Maharashtra to bring women more actively into the forest rights committees in the implementation of the act. But elsewhere we find that there has been little effort by the tribal department to make this happen. And women are then told about the meetings later are not really consulted in the governance whereas they are the ones who are actually managing the forest and managing to keep the livelihoods needs and the ecological balance going within the forest. So it's really a matter of significance that we bring women more actively into these forums in a formal role in already playing the management role but against the structures of patriarchy. And their role needs to be legitimized for effective forest governance to happen as well as for ecological balance to be maintained and community needs to be met. Now, let me turn to questions related to innovations. Okay, so we have heard about implementation, challenges for including communities, marginalized communities and OTFTs, right? But we have also seen some successes especially as I said earlier in Maharashtra, that practices are emerging where OTFT rights are recognized, women rights are recognized. So how do we attribute like what has contributed to these success stories in Maharashtra? Naki, would you like to, because earlier you talked about defective. But can you just say some highlight on the success stories even from your own experience in West Bengal and Odisha working on individual forest rights? Yeah, thanks Gitanjaya. And yes, these two states I have been working on behalf of Landesa. One, our organization promotes women land rights specifically as our main mission work across the globe in several countries. So we try to understand that where the problems are lying. So we have successfully advocated at the government level, state government level that how not to miss the women's name as the first claim holder in the title document and also how the record of rights could be generated. That is of very, very importance because unless the record of rights are generated along with the title deeds. So the right is insecure. The right is not fully secured. And women's name when it is appearing as the first holder exactly that is happening in both the states. We proposed that how it could be done. First of all, the strengthening of the mechanism which has been to the government for establishing an FHRSL. FHRSL consisting at the Tahaseel level and the convener is the Tahaseel there and other departmental representatives and sub-collector is the chairperson and other people are there including video including the forest person, et cetera. So they take a decision that how to smoothen the implementation process how to ensure the women's names are coming. So there is sensitization program for all the implementing grassroot level implementing officials including the forest guards, foresters, including the revenue inspectors and also the welfare extension officers. They are departmental people and revenue inspectors. So that they are aware of the importance they were aware of the importance of including women's name and how not to mislead them. And that was subsequently disseminated through to the Gram Sabha and the Forest Rights Committee. Whenever the claims and the re-verification is happening re-verification or the Biraj Assembly is again sitting together to see that earlier for whose cases the title has been given in the name of main only and they collect the Forest Rights Committee and Gram Sabha, they collect the women's name and then they recommend, the Forest Rights Committee recommends through Gram Sabha to the subdivision level committee and FRA also, FRA the sale, thus constituted at the Dhanashildar. They also verify. So that ultimately at the Dhanashildar level they approve it and the record is generated in the name of women as the first holder and that is the final proof that women are given their dues here. And to ensure this, the joint verification at times we are facilitating, we are trying to convince the government that joint verification will be a good process so that the names of the women and with particularly presence of women are ensured from each and every household. And there is a Gram Sati person who is the coordinator for MG Energy Implementation within the Gram Panchayat. So this person, a young man from the community mostly the tribal community, a young person either male or female, she or he actually also coordinates between the Gram Sabha and the Forest Rights Committee and the community in general. Awareness generation, capacity development of the implementing officials, establishment of a mechanism that really takes care of some of the non-compliance issues. Actually, these have helped in both the states. Sir, have you identified some of your studies and policy advocacy work? Any success stories, best practices which can be useful for other states and stakeholders who are interested to upscale FR implementers in the respective states? Would you like to add a few more points here? I would like to highlight a few more important initiative. From Odisha, we have seen that the Gram Sabhas, the village councils and the tribal communities have very successfully claimed a community forest resource rights and have actually mapped community forest resource site and customary boundaries using technology, GPS technology. And this has importantly also happened in areas which are contested, like in the protected areas in Tiger Reserve. So this is an example of the Simlipal Tiger Reserve, where a large number of these Gram Sabhas have claimed community forest resource rights and mapped the entire customary boundaries. These are very well documented. And these are important for the Forest Rights Act because Odisha and the large part in central India, forest land remain unrecorded. I mean, rights of local communities have never been recorded. So as we see in the process of claiming these rights and mapping customary boundaries, a large part of forest, like for example, in Odisha, almost about 70, 80% of forest, which was outside the village boundary, which although accessed by communities but never recorded, are now part of the customary boundary and are recorded as community forest resources. So this is one important thing. Then in Maharashtra, there are these large number of Gram Sabhas now exercising very successfully their community forest resource rights, non-timber forest produce, and importantly, high-value producers like Bamboo. And these producers were earlier under the monopoly control of forest departments and local communities were not able to access and make use of this forest produce. Now they are able to use that. The third important initiative is coming from the particularly vulnerable tribal groups who in Odisha have actually claimed habitat rights or rights over their larger territories and have asserted this right, which is demonstrated in this very well-known case of Niyamgiri, where the local village councils use forest rights and the other important law, PESA, to assert their rights over the Niyamgiri and their customary habitat. There are a large number of these initiatives coming up as part of the community forest rights learning process we are trying to document it. And we have also published this Promise and Performance report, which have many of these initiatives documented there. We heard about some of the such stories. And I'm sure these such stories are going to be very useful for practitioners who are interested to understand the factors behind that. Now coming to the last part of the discussion, we have only 10 minutes for all three panel members to focus on the impact of FRA, overall impact in the last 10 years. To begin with, Soma, would you like to highlight some key impact, especially in terms of livelihood, governance, and sustainability? If you can just take two minutes to explain from your side. You know, some of the examples of convergence that have happened in the tribal areas through the efforts of women's groups getting involved in the process of implementation of FRA need to be highlighted here because they have raised issues of food security, access to resources, and the convergence of services for welding and livelihoods in the forest communities. Now we find that with your question regarding the implementation process and how other acts are impacting on the forest rights of people, we find that there is a lot of expectation from the Forest Rights Act. But in the absence of, with the implementation of other acts, we find that the governance of forests and decision-making processes are being taken away from the people where they should actually be investing in their capacities. For instance, we see the way that the Kampa Act, the Compensatory Air Forestation Act is being implemented. It's actually taking away from communities in three ways. One, it empowers the forest department with resources from forest resources, which would actually lie with the Gram Sabha and the revenue should also flow through the Gram Sabha in how their forests can or should not be diverted and how the money received for any diversions should be used. And instead, this is empowering the forest department, whereas the community institution needs to be empowered. The second thing is that when there is loss of forest by such diversion, the community livelihoods are usually impacted and the burden of this is mostly on the women for foraging, for fuel, water, and the violence that they experience when they then try to access these resources. The third is when the diversion occurs, the community lands are given away to these corporate entities to then do plantation policy. Now, very often these lands are places where the location where the lands are being given to them as compensatory lands, if those lands become unavailable and inaccessible to the communities living there and they then are denied their livelihoods needs of order, fuel, and water. And what this means is that communities at both ends are being impacted. And this is a kind of triple whammy that seems to be operating. The other enactments like the national forest policy and the non-implementation of the consent clause in the land acquisition and rehabilitation and resettlement enactment of 2013 are some of the others that we'd like to point to as well as the land bank policy. All of these seem to undermine the livelihood needs of communities and the capacities of people to be able to govern their own forests. Whereas this is a right that the Forest Rights Act actually provides and it is a constitutional reality and it is time that we take cognizance of that and enable and strengthen communities to do so rather than to resist what should rightfully be there. Right, thank you, Soma, for a very elaborative and useful addition because when you talked about enabling conditions are very important, especially after 10 years of nefarage, somehow implementing agencies could not enable the title holders to integrate some of these schemes as well as in different circumstances. Now, coming to Saad, you have done a lot of work, especially in the advocacy side. How do you look at the impact because you have seen also parallel policies, competing policies from other departments. So how do you look at the impact especially in the context of the government? I think, you know, Gitanjeeva, Soma has already pointed out a number of these other laws conflicting with the Forest Rights Act. You know, I would just like to reiterate that when the Forest Rights Act was enacted during that time, the law was enacted in response to a struggle by the tribal organizations and the forest dwelling communities. And so that time, there was this vision which was introduced in the context of forest and land governance in India that FRI is going to be a tool for democratizing forest governance and to empower gram sabhas and communities. But now over a period of time, we see and particularly so in last few years, there is this growing concern in India and especially with the indigenous population that, you know, the vision and the structure of forest governance introduced under the Forest Rights Act has been diluted potentially. And this dilution has been happening by the government introducing new laws like the plantation law, the Kampa law and the land bank, the new national forest policy privatizing forest and all this kind of things. Not just that, but the other disturbing trend is that there is also this dilution of the mandate of ministry of tribal affairs and the tribal department to deal with forest rights matter which the ministry of tribal affairs has also pointed out that the forest department and the ministry of environment forest has gone about implementing forest laws without actually consulting the tribal department. So these are serious concerns and we have been demanding that this be addressed by the central government by harmonizing these laws with the Forest Rights Act. Thank you, sir. Now we'll have the final word from Pinaqi. Then we'll open the discussion for the participants. Pinaqi, would you like to highlight the key issues especially from as far as the impact of FRH Gunson? I think Gitanjaya, we have covered everything within this time constraint. There are several, several other things which could have been highlighted, but that's what I'm taking to you from Somaya and the two shares last thoughts that the convergence of the various legislations, enactments that is a necessity of the hour, strengthening of the institution that is a necessity of the hour, thinking and acting with innovation. That is also another necessity and also respecting the rights of the claim holders. I think that is another necessity. Overall, this is my final comments. Okay, thank you very much to each one of you for sharing your experience, the kind of work people are doing with the grass root level insights to policy level. Now we'll open the discussion for the participants. So we have many questions. So we'll have the session for discussions in a few minutes. To begin with, there is a question which I'm directing this question to Tusa. There is a question from Sandeela Samseh. This question is about, have forest lands been used for commercial purposes? If yes, how multinational corporations are investing on forest land? If you have any examples, if you want to address this. Tusa. Yes, if I understood it correctly, then this question of how corporations are investing in forest land, as you know, all across India in the forest landscape, the forest land have been diverted and large area of forest land have been diverted because of various projects. And these projects are both of government projects as well as projects set up by private corporations, including multinational corporations. What is happening and which is something which is a matter of concern is that after enactment of forest right act, the government came up with a guideline which required that the government while diverting forest land must ensure that before diversion of forest land happened, the process of recognition and resting of forest rights must be completed in all respect, which is a precondition. And importantly, the free prior informed consent of the village council of the Gram Sabha must be obtained. However, as we have studied the process of forest clearance and forest land diversion, a post enactment of forest right act, these preconditions which are legal requirement are largely violated. The case of Niyam Girish, which I have explained and there are many other examples from the central part of India as well as from other part of India, which clearly point out that because of this investment from private agencies, which is facilitated by the government, the forest land diversions are taking place without following the legal requirement under forest right act, also under Panchayat extension to civil areas act and the constitutional provision. Right. Thank you, Tussar. There is another question from Misaka Sarma and I direct this question to Soma. Soma, you talked about in your presentation and especially when you began with implementation strategies, you talked about the lack of awareness and capacity building. And the question from Misaka is what is the solution and who will give that rating? Well, I think Misaka has asked a very pertinent question. You see, we are talking about in the forest rights act, we are talking about women participating more actively in Gram Sabhas, the DLC and the SDLC being strengthened with community-based representation. Now it has to be since this is a constitutional mandate of the tribal department and the Panchayati Raj and rural development department also looks at the Panchayati Raj extension to rural areas, which is another enactment that relates to the schedule five areas of the country. We really need to look at state agencies that can undertake this job. So far it has been civil society organizations that have been doing much of the campaigning, the awareness and building up the capacities, but that is only so much that they can do. It is state agencies that have to be responsible. There is the National Institute of Rural Development, the state institutions, the tribal development department has its state research institutions, the Panchayati Raj training institutions in the states. All of these are there. They all have a mandate. It is the problem is that the nuances of the Forest Rights Act need to be understood. Dedicated teams need to be built that the training and curriculum can be developed. And I think we would be happy from Macaam and from CFR LA to facilitate and participate in such a process to take the, to bring the training into focus so that the implementation of the act is strengthened as we go along in the next couple of years. Thank you, Swamma. There is another question from Michael Rice. This question I direct to Pinaki. We talked about this is Central Act, Forest Rights Act is a national law. So the question is does implementation of FRA depend on state, governmental, politics, resource and agenda? Do you agree with that? If yes, how do you address this? So sorry, Gitanjaya, could you please repeat the question? Yes, I could repeat the question. From Michael Rice and she asked the question is about when you say Forest Rights Act is a national act and implementation has not been effective. Does it mean the implementation of FRA is dependent on state, government, politics, resources and agendas? Oh yes, state governments, all the state governments have a great role to play in respect of implementation. The legislation comes from the central government. It was passed in both the houses of the parliament and now the rules have been framed and the government's consent has been taken. So now it's up to the state governments for implementation, the central government can monitor. They also monitor the implementation process and the progress, but actually intention, actual commitment, actual innovation and also arch to act in signage that has to come from state government. Okay, thank you, Vinaki. There is another question from Marion Gauthier and her question is, are there substantial provisions in the law or in implementing implementation about the rights of indigenous people? So sir, would you like to draw some light on this? Would you like to address this question? Gitanjir, can you repeat? Are there substantial provisions in the law concerning the rights of indigenous people? Okay, see, I mean, if you look at the entire structure of protective legislation in India, the Forest Rights Act address both rights. It provides both substantive rights to the local communities, as well as it also provide empowered authorities to the Gram Sabhas and communities to govern and manage their resources, also to stop any kind of interventions which are destructive, which are destroying their forest, their local culture and their habitat. Apart from that, the other laws which complement our Panchayat extension to Schedule Areas Act, the fifth schedule provision, sixth schedule provision and as we see, all this in combination provide substantive provisions which address to rights of indigenous communities in India. Apart from that, there is also this recent enactment which is called the Prevention of Atrocities Act, which is amended recently, which also provides, which also has new provision which require government to also treat disposition from land, disposition from forest rights or interference in enjoyment of forest rights as something which is treated as atrocities under this law. So I mean, in India, as we discussed, there are these laws which work together to ensure an advance rights of indigenous peoples. And although indigenous as term is not recognized by government of India, but we believe that the Adivasi population are indigenous communities in India and their rights have been substantially addressed by these laws. The problem is only with enforcement of these laws. Yeah, there is another question from Jayaraj Yajnopalli and the question is in states like Andhra Pradesh, community claims conferred on VSSM, not reconformed in the name of Guram Sabha as by directions from MOTA. So how to address this issue? Pinaki, could you throw some light? Titles are given in the name of VSS or Jetham committees in Andhra Pradesh. So what are the different ways to address such kind of titles are not given to you? These committees rather to be given to the Gram Sabha. Yeah, Gram Sabha has been given the supreme authority in respect of establishing the individual as also the community rights, community submission and the checking of the community claims to heart extent, the resources could be allow the community can be allowed to enjoy the benefits of the resources without causing any damage to the environment or the forest resources. So this is where I think the improvement needs to happen and the government has to go forward with enabling the Gram Sabhas to act as a bridge between the claim establishment and claim recommendation. And so the MOTA, the directions from MOTA, the Ministry of Tribal Affairs has already been there. So it's up to the state government and there has to be a lot of agreement at the DLC level. The DLC meeting, it can be reviewed. The DLC meeting is precisely the platform at the district that why certain provisions are not properly observed and there can be a decision if there is some undeserved issues, the issue can be referred to the state level monitoring committee. So there are several appellate authorities for non-settlement of community rights in a prescribed manner. So perfectly sensitization, some advocacy may be required. Thank you, Pinaki. There is one question from Paul Fanandis and this question is, how does one address when people's rights are not recognized at the village level because of the dominant forces? Would you like to answer this question? What do dominant forces at the village level are not allowing the claimants to file their claims? Yeah. If you allow me, I would like to be a little, include some of the other questions also in my response. One is that it is the tribal department that is responsible for the implementation of this act for the very reason that there has been resistance to tribal communities from claiming their rights. Having said that the government of India does not recognize indigenous people as and is not a signatory to the ILO convention on indigenous people. So we have an issue there and we also have the rights of the tribal communities being resisted from the powerful people at the community level also who want to make state claims to these lands. Now, what the strategies we have been using for that is to organize communities by organizing their own meetings, by having separate women's meetings and then a full committee meetings so that women can participate actively, enabling them to understand the law, building up campaigns that will focus on the lack of implementation or what is it that the communities need by way of support to bring this into focus. There are local mafias operating that want to claim the local resources. Communities, for instance, in Maharashtra and Garchiroli district have resisted that by coming together for the sale of their Tindu Kukta which is the leaves from the trees in these area which are commercially very valuable to say that we will not sell until we get the price that we are demanding and we will not go through middlemen. So community level institutions of the community have organized across 12 villages to resist this kind of coercive practices and land grab. In Kochi, in Garchiroli, for instance, the community has organized and has built up a support group around 44 villages to support them in their resistance against mining that were leases that were given by the district authorities without the knowledge of the community and they have been able to resist the mining from being started in that area and have challenged the rights being accorded to a company in that region. So the resistance has been growing through these kinds of violations of their constitutional rights, but the state also needs to be more active in supporting them in being able to exercise their rights to claim and to govern the forest resources because these are after all people who have been living in these regions who have subsistence from the forest and have maintained the forest in the richness that we find them. In Uttarakhand, in Maharashtra, in various parts of the country, we see that the forests that have been managed and maintained by the communities are far richer in their biodiversity, in their canopy, in their ability to resist climate change and to contribute to the IPCC goals and we find in the forest that the forest department itself has been managing. So that says something for what the solutions need to be and we need to work in that direction. So that is our resolve in our community-based initiatives through Makam and through CFRLA and we hope that there will be more involvement and collaboration with state agencies to take this forward. Thank you, Soma. There is one question from Mr. Arun Pujari and this question I direct to Pinaki. This question is how the land recognized under FRA to different benefit series. We developed so that their livelihood can be announced. What are the different ways to enhance their livelihood once FRR, especially I think it is about individual forest rights. Since you have worked on FRR extensively in West Bengal, what is your opinion, Pinaki? Would you like to- Yes. So in these two states what has been done precisely in respect of promoting the livelihoods and income augmentation for the individual claim holders after the proper demarcation of land has happened for each individual and the rights have been settled and then they get the record of rights. The record of rights that is the gateway for accessing to different government extension services including agriculture extension. There are several, there are this lot of schemes available particularly MG NRGA that is of extreme value for the forest lands to be developed and made suitable. Forest lands under occupation and speaking for making it suitable for augmenting the livelihood, the agriculture department, the horticulture department, animal resource development department, all these departments that DLC is headed by the collector. So these departments can again act in synergy in respect of addressing the, first of all identifying the needs. There has to be a community level exercise. That's what Landesa has been actually doing in the field and we have successfully piloted in several districts in Orisha and also in Ospingol. So now this is now left with the state government for going for scaling of this initiative. This is there is a synergy of three departments. They identify the individual needs and the inherent skills they are having in respect of livelihood, how they are using the land and what are the better ways of using the land providing extension advice, training, capacity development all these activities, whatever we are doing focus precisely on women because women are at the pivot around which the well-being of a family will evolve. So that way there has been some good examples, good successes in the pilot districts and more than in Orisha, more than 7,000 families have benefited in three districts. And in Ospingol, you know the forest area is very less. So about 2,000 families have benefited and they are now equipped with the knowledge, extension advice and also better way to use land and also the inputs from the respective departments including some, including some this bird and animal rearing training and supply of inputs followed by the training. So the land use proper way, how to make it more sustainable for livelihood, how to get out of the poverty cycle, that is the motto. And there are some good examples, good learnings from the field and those are now being actually incorporated in the scaling process. And the government is in a mood to consider these efforts. Thank you, thank you Pinaki. So we have nine minutes to wind up the session. So I have three more questions and then I'll take five minutes to summarize the discussion. So we have a question from Amanda Richardson. And the question is when FRA is being implemented through a civil society involvement, is there a way to institutionalize what the civil society organizations have done in order to scale that water? Soma, would you like to throw some light on this? I think there is a way to institutionalize the role of civil society. Is there any hope to bring society on board? Yeah, you see that is why we have formed Makam as a network organization to be able to build upon the experiences and the successes and to demonstrate how that can be done. So that state institutions also recognize that us as partners in that process. So what we are doing is in the example that I'd like to give you is of the claim process when IFR claims in individual forest rights are not being recognized in women's names. CFR LA and Makam have been working towards collaboration with the state government to actually undertake a survey and see to what extent women's claims have been registered or not. And now we are getting the data back. The first round of the data was not clear enough. So the survey has been re-conducted and the data that's coming back is much clearer on whether the women's names have been included or not. This is a beginning of a collaborative process simply made possible by the fact that we represent an institutional forum with which the state can dialogue and take the process forward. We're suggesting that we can partner the state in strengthening the provisions of the right as well as in advocating for the proper implementation and the redressal of violation on the right. If such representative forums at state level and at national forum can become part of the dialogue and interface with the tribal affairs department to implement the scheme. And that convergences are encouraged and facilitated through the tribal affairs department with other departments such as the Panchayati Raj department, the forest department, the land and water departments so that community livelihoods are strengthened and community rights are ensured. And where there are lacunae in the process then we strengthen the community institution. So our role as civil society organizations, we see as strengthening the voices from the ground to represent their issues through forums such as ours and creating the dialogue spaces where the multiple agencies that should be delivering rights to communities so that their basic needs as well as the entitlements are ensured, that dialogue process can move forward with as little conflict and acrimony as possible and that there is this address. Yeah, so we have two quick instances I expect from Tussar and Pinaki on two questions. One is from Indrani Pani. The question is when the acts like LARR, the name like Christian Rehabilitation Resettlement and FRA are not implemented and the relocation is happening illegally and very often one witnesses the court is not responding ever a bill. So how does one address this? So, Tussar would you like to respond? Yeah, I think this is a very important issue raised by Indrani in this question. And this is happening large scale. I mean, the LARR, the Forest Rights Act, all of them wants to secure rights but then there are illegal alienation of forest land and community forest resources. And in such cases, as we have worked with communities in different states, one of the strategy that we have been talking about is that, if you look at Forest Rights Act and PESA, then both these laws empower the Gram Sabha as a competent authority to determine their rights, to assert their rights and to also take decisions. So, when we see that at a higher level, at the level of authorities when there is absolutely no enforcement of law or no redressal of issues like violation of rights, then it is good to think of ways in which Gram Sabhas can be supported to assert their rights. For example, in the case of the plantation issues, when the Forest Department has been fully planting commercial species in tribal land claimed under FRA, there the Gram Sabhas, they are taking up a position and they are passing resolution under Forest Rights Act and PESA stating very clearly that these are community forest resource areas and they are without the consent of Gram Sabhas and in violation of Forest Rights, any agency or the Forest Department cannot do plantation and doing plantation would be illegal. So, I think we must acknowledge this fact that in India, if Forest Rights Act has to be implemented successfully, then we have to have a process in which Gram Sabhas, at large, have to be supported by civil society organization and Gram Sabhas have to take position against alienation of forest land, illegal plantation and all other kind of illegal activities. I think that's the solution. Yeah, thank you, sir. And now we'll go to the last question from Natalia Forer and her question is, has the recognition of community forest rights helped in securing the land and forest resources of communities in India? Natalia, would you like to summarize this? Sorry, I am not hearing properly. Gitanjya, could you please repeat quickly? Yeah, so this is a question on, has the recognition of community forest rights helped in securing the land and forest resources of communities in India? Is it related to? Yeah, overall, so broad question, the overall, let me sort of explain this, the overall is to what extent the implementation of FRA has benefited the communities in securing the land and access to resources? Okay, yeah, yeah. Yeah, basically the community has been given a great opportunity by giving them a right to protect and manage the forest, manage the forest resources and protect the forest from being degraded and from being wasted, from being unauthorized encroached and also protect the biodiversity, protect the flora and fauna. So this is a great, great opportunity. The question remains to what extent this is given a direction for the community to actually act in tandem with this principle and there is a process of empowerment. So all the efforts, a majority of the efforts need to focus on that to really empower the community, eligible forest claimants, forest rights claimants and also the forest dwelling communities that this is your property, this is your and your owning and government is giving you the right to protect, to manage, to protect the environment, flora, fauna and biodiversity. So how do you act yourself? A very, very solid opportunity for empowerment of the community. Right, thank you so much. I think we have few more questions but taking in mind the time constraints, let me stop here the, you know, the questions and discuss and session here. At the same time, I really appreciate all the participants who posted their questions. There are a few more related to wheel tribals in Vandepurde, the community forest rights, people who asked how Red Plus can be used for FRA implementation in India. Also questions about the livelihood enhancement program that are implemented in India. There are questions also, the overlapping between IFR and CFR. I request all the participants not to be disappointed or not getting answer to the questions but you are most welcome to talk these questions to our email IDs, to the experts so that they can independently write to you. At the same time, there are several networks in India which you can access or use a report or like the Forest Rights Learning Advocacy CFA-LA, there is FRA.org.in. You also get reports prepared and documented by various research institutes like Dada Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai here. And then you also have open lessons like ATRI in Bangalore and there are many places where you will find some of these empirical evidences about how the potential of FRA has been sort of executed or generalized in some cases that also have been, people succeeded in accepting the right. So with this, I would like to summarize the discussion. To begin with, I would like to thank all the panel members, Dr. Sarmas, Dr. Soma KP and Pinaik Haldar for all your valuable inputs, especially focusing on more important components, implementers of FRA, why it has been not effective. At the same time, talking about some of these success stories because one doesn't need to be pessimistic about the current state of FRAs, especially when it comes to FRA, because there are success stories from Maharashtra and to some extent in Odisha. These success stories can be very, very useful for practitioners, research scholars who are interested to work in the field of forest rights and governance. The three quick points I would like to highlight that to upscale the forest rights, there are different strategies that need to be employed at multiple levels. And there is already a multi-led governance structure that has been placed under FRA, ranging from Gram Sabha to Minister of Tribal FRAs and in between you have civil society groups. What is equally important as all the speakers agree that capacity building needs to be strengthened as to complete the independent communities and the tribal department needs to take the lead because it cannot run away from its responsibility and has to play a very, very effective role at the local level, at the SDL level and SDL level because that is one of the important tasks of the tribal department in implementing FRAs. Second, we also need to think about enabling conditions and it has been widely recognized in purely as well as in infrastructure and infrastructure that enabling conditions are very important once we enact any rights-based policies and programs. And there are several studies in Latin America and Africa where success stories are coming, whether you talk about Mexico, whether you talk about Bolivia, all these countries because there are enabling conditions in the post-FRF, or post-frights recognition phase. And when you talk about success stories in Maharashtra and Odisha, because you find some of these enabling conditions by the implementing agencies like the tribal department bringing rules and regulations, supporting the dams above, supporting the village councils. So this is very important to practice in other parts of the country, especially the department needs to engage in the post-FRF. Hard and the most crucial part is about the role of civil society groups. Currently, as most of you talked about that civil society is very crucial to the FRF process, but also the civil society needs to focus both on the process as well as the outcome. And also civil society needs to focus both on the quantity as well as the quality of the FRF process. So in many cases, when people ask about like why there is a variation in different states because of entry intervention, then we need to engage with also civil society groups like what are those different ways through which they can strengthen the process and ask them to work in that particular state. And the last but equally important is talking about the convergence, talking about integration of programs and schemes along with the forest rights. Because we have seen in many parts of the country wherever the department try to integrate the nine department schemes or inter-department schemes from tribal department to rural development department, Panchayagraha's ministry, then also the revenue ministry at the state, they will see the results are very, very impressive. And that is what the time and again people refer to Maharashtra because you see there is convergence committees at the district level and that committee integrates this policy and programs with the Forest Rights Act. And many forest rights at beneficiaries, especially the beneficiaries and refer have got a lot of facilities, especially scheme programs because of the convergence idea. I think these are the four important elements from this discussion. One, we need to focus on the existing resources that is capacity training of the stakeholders as the NC member. Second, we need to focus on enabling conditions that need to be created, that need to be advocated by civil society groups by those networks which are engaged. How do we talk about the role of civil society? How they need to focus both the process as well as the outcome. They also need to focus on quality aspect of FR implementation. And fourth, which is equally important is convergence and integration of schemes and programs. And especially when we talk about integration of some programs, we need to be special or special focus on the rights of the women as well as the landless people. These are the people who are more dependent on forest resources in rural India. So with this, I summarize the discussion. So thank you everybody for participating. It was really informative and learning experience and hope all the participants in the discussion will try to further explore and scale this work on FRM so that there will be more best practices and practice stories in future. So thank you all and bye. Thank you, Gitanjail. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. Thank you to Landisa and to Tis. Thank you so much, Samaar Gitanjail and Neil and Tushar. Thank you, thank you. Okay. Neil.