Senior Congress leader and former Deputy Chief Minister of Chhattisgarh, T.S. Singh Deo, has dismissed the claims of the BJP government in the State as it completes one year in office. In the past, Singh Deo has consistently stood up for the rights of rural communities, even challenging his own party’s government, led by Bhupesh Baghel, whenever necessary.
In an interview with Frontline, Singh Deo criticised the current Vishnu Deo Sai-led government, stating that most of its election promises remain unfulfilled. He accused the previous Bhupesh Baghel government of neglecting tribal people’s interests, citing its failure to enforce the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996, a landmark legislation intended to uphold local self-governance through traditional gram sabhas ((village councils) in India’s scheduled areas. He also discussed the reasons for the Congress’s rout in the 2023 Assembly election. Edited excerpts:
How would you evaluate the performance of the BJP government after its first year in office?
It has been disappointing on many fronts whether it is healthcare, education, or agriculture. The law and order situation has worsened in the past year. The sad spectacle at the Balodabazar-Bhatapara Collectorate was a bizarre incident [protests over the desecration of Jaitkhams or victory pillars]. It hasn’t happened anywhere in the country since Independence.
When the new government took office, there were high expectations. Apart from what was promised to women (providing financial assistance of Rs.1,000 a month), most of the other promises remain unfulfilled. For instance, they pledged to purchase paddy at Rs.3,100 per quintal, but farmers are currently receiving only Rs.2,300, which is the minimum support price (MSP). Farmers were assured that they would receive an enhanced price for paddy in one instalment, but that hasn’t happened.
On other fronts, there’s little to show as achievement. The government has focussed more on making announcements and rebranding old welfare schemes rather than delivering real results.
With Vishnu Deo Sai becoming the first tribal Chief Minister of the State, how do you evaluate his tenure so far, particularly with respect to tribal rights?
Ajit Jogi was the first Chief Minister of the State and he was a tribal. He was elected from a reserved seat. It won’t be fair to say that he wasn’t a tribal. [In 2019, a high-level committee set up by the State government dismissed Ajit Jogi’s claim of belonging to a Scheduled Tribe and cancelled his caste certificates.]
Also Read | Ready to bring naxalites into the mainstream: Chhattisgarh Deputy Chief Minister Vijay Sharma
What is your view on the ongoing anti-insurgency operations in Chhattisgarh?
The ongoing anti-Naxal operations are progressing according to a long-standing strategy implemented since the formation of Chhattisgarh. Every government, starting from Ajit Jogi’s tenure, followed by Raman Singh, who was Chief Minister for 15 years, to Bhupesh Baghel, who served for five years, has adhered to a consistent approach to curb Naxal activities.
The strategy involves three key components: engaging in dialogue, promoting development in Naxal-affected areas, and deploying the State machinery to respond firmly to Naxal violence. When Chhattisgarh was formed in 2000, only five or six paramilitary battalions were stationed here. Today, there are over 60 battalions working largely under the State government’s direction to address violent activities. This reflects the continued emphasis on combating insurgency through a coordinated and comprehensive plan.
How do you look at the allegations of innocent Adivasis being killed in the name of anti-Naxal operations?
Unfortunately, there have been instances of collateral damage, and such incidents continue to surface. If local villagers are raising serious concerns about human rights violations, the allegations must be thoroughly investigated.
Recently, I came across deeply troubling cases where young children, aged between 5 and 12, were killed by bullets. I even have a picture of a child with a bullet lodged in her neck. Such incidents highlight the urgent need for accountability and measures to prevent harm to innocent villagers.
In recent months, the State has seen increased crackdowns on rights activists. Do you think that the space for democratic protests is shrinking in Chhattisgarh?
Such actions likely stem from the philosophy and mindset of the accused persons. But I am not aware of any significant or major actions targeting rights activists recently.
T.S. Singh Deo with Chief Minister Bhupesh Baghel (right) and Congress leader Kumari Selja (left) during a meeting on June 29, 2023.
| Photo Credit:
PTI
There is a growing concern that tribal rights are being violated for an economic development model that doesn’t align with the special needs of local communities. Your comment?
The opinions and aspirations of local tribal communities must be respected—that is the starting point for any development. Unfortunately, the current model of economic development seems to prioritise the end result over the means, suggesting that achieving development justifies any method, which is unacceptable. The rights and aspirations of local communities should always be the government’s top priority, and their consent is essential before initiating any development activities.
Recently, in my former Assembly constituency, Ambikapur, cases of fabricated consent for mining operations have come to light. The Chhattisgarh State Mining Corporation, in a joint venture with Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited, formed a Special Purpose Vehicle and leased out mining rights. The successful bidder was Gautam Adani’s company. During the land acquisition process, two villages, Hariharpur and Fatehpur, claimed that their consent was forged. The gram sabha records were manipulated to falsely show approval, but more than 90 per cent of the villagers opposed mining in their areas.
In contrast, some neighbouring villages accepted financial compensation, while others expressed reluctance to expand mining operations due to concerns about land rights. This issue is further complicated by the failure of the previous [Bhupesh Baghel] government to implement its own Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act [PESA] at the State level, relying instead on the Central model law. The Central law has a thin distinction between “consultation” and “consent”, with the former being far less protective of local rights. Unless “consultation” is explicitly defined to require “consent”, the rights of tribal communities will remain inadequately safeguarded. Even within our government, there were differences of opinion on this critical issue.
When State agencies bypass established regulations and overlook local interests in the exploitation of natural resources, does this not risk deepening the alienation of Adivasi communities and, in turn, inadvertently lending legitimacy to naxal groups?
We must not conflate these two issues. The priority should be to uphold the rights of gram sabhas to grant or withhold consent for developmental projects and mining in their areas. The legal provision for “consultation” must be supplemented with “consent”. Irrespective of the party in power, we must collectively advocate for the government to guarantee that tribal communities have the unequivocal legal right to decide on matters affecting their lands and livelihoods.
In the last Assembly election and recently held Lok Sabha election, why have the tribal people voted for the BJP in large numbers?
The tribal population has historically alternated its support between the BJP and the Congress. Within the tribal community, even today, some align with the Congress, while others back the BJP.
Also Read | Chhattisgarh’s bipolar Lok Sabha battle: Bhupesh Baghel’s fate hinges on Rajnandgaon results
What factors contributed to the Congress party’s defeat in the State Assembly election last year?
The Congress faced significant losses in both the tribal and urban belts while performing relatively well in the rural areas. In the central region of Chhattisgarh, the rural segment, which consists of 44 Assembly seats, the Congress won 27 seats in 2018 and 28 seats in 2023. However, in the tribal areas of Bastar and Surguja, which have 26 seats, the Congress won 25 seats in 2018 but could only secure four seats in 2023. This reflects a drastic shift. Similarly, in urban areas with 20 seats, the Congress won 16 seats in 2018 but managed only three in 2023.
In the tribal areas, there is a sense that the aspirations of the people were unmet, and the concerns of Sarva Adivasi Samaj, an umbrella organisation of tribal groups, were overlooked. Additionally, leadership issues, particularly regarding the choice of the Chief Minister candidate, created further discontent resulting in the party’s poor performance. In urban areas, caste politics, talk of corruption, and other local issues impacted the party’s performance. These varied challenges collectively contributed to the outcome of the 2023 Assembly election.
In the run-up to the 2023 Assembly election, there was a dominant feeling that the projection of “achievements” of the previous Congress government in the media did not really reflect ground realities?
There must have been something wrong in our approach, as we believed we were doing good work. However, the people didn’t accept us, especially in the tribal belt and urban areas. We were not able to secure support in 46 seats. In the remaining 44 seats, we performed reasonably well, winning 28 of them.
Where does your party stand in the State’s politics today? Do you think it is playing the role of opposition effectively?
Yes, it certainly is. However, there is always more work to be done. As a responsible opposition, we are fulfilling our role. As a party, we are united in raising issues that impact the people of Chhattisgarh and holding the current government accountable for its wrongdoings.
