In the face of mounting mass opposition to the acquisition of peasants' land for establishing Special Economic Zones (SEZs), the ruling circles are discussing various ways to adjust their tactics. An all-party committee set up by Parliament is considering the addition of more 'concessions' to pacify the mass opposition, especially the peasants who are threatened with loss of their land.

The all-party committee on SEZs is expected to table its report in Parliament in the upcoming monsoon session. All the ruling parties in the centre and states are represented in this 31-member committee. Meanwhile, it is reported that 36 new Special Economic Zones (SEZs) were approved by the Government of India on 22 nd June, 2007, raising the total number approved to 339. In addition, there are another 170 proposed SEZs that have received ‘in-principle approval’.

The SEZ Act, which was passed in 2005 in the interest of the big capitalists, is being sought to be legitimized in the eyes of the people by introducing some 'concessions'. It is reported that one possible concession being debated is to guarantee a job for one member of every family whose land is taken over for establishing an SEZ.

It must be remembered that SEZ approvals were put on hold during January-April 2007, following widespread protests against the acquisition of agricultural land, including the clash in Nandigram, West Bengal, where the state police attacked and killed many protestors. Intense struggles over land acquisition have taken place recently also in Raigad and Belapur in Maharashtra; Kalinganagar in Orissa; Dadri, Kanpur and Unnao in Uttar Pradesh; Nandagudi, Karnataka, etc.

On 6 April 2007, the Empowered Group of Ministers (eGoM) formed to go into the SEZ question, lifted the 73 day moratorium on SEZ approvals and notifications, with some minor modifications. The lifting of the freeze paved the way for 53 SEZs to be notified in April. The centre advised the state governments to avoid using the Land Acquisition Act to seize agricultural land, but rather leave it to the ‘market forces’. At the same time, the centre refused to abolish the colonial Land Acquisition Act, as it would be needed as the last resort to seize those plots of land whose owners are not willing to sell.

The disputes over land acquisition have exposed differences in positions between different state governments. For instance, the Karnataka and UP governments agreed that they will not resort to compulsory acquisition of land, but allow the promoters of SEZs to directly negotiate with the peasants. The West Bengal government, however, did not agree with the recommendation that state governments need not be involved in land acquisition. The Uttarakhand government has taken a decision not to allow the sale of any agricultural land in that state. Formation of the all-Party Parliamentary Committee is a move aimed at enabling the ruling parties in different states to iron out their mutual contradictions, so that the program of the big bourgeoisie can move ahead.

Workers and peasants must be vigilant about the tactics of the bourgeoisie. No matter what concessions are added, they cannot change the fundamental truth that the SEZ Act is anti-social. It is in the service of the narrow interest of big capitalists, to get hold of whatever prime land they set their eyes on. It is against the interests of workers and peasants, and against the general interest of society.

Which land should be made available for industrial use is a problem that has to be solved on the basis of an overall land use plan for each state and the country. This is not the approach being adopted today in capitalist India. Reliance or Tata or any big capitalist approaches a state government and says he would like such and such land to be made available for establishing an industrial plant or an SEZ. The state government agrees to help the capitalist get the land of his choice. Only after such a deal has been struck are the peasants and other interested parties brought into the picture.

The SEZ Act has made it legitimate for the big capitalists to select which land they want, and then go ahead acquiring that land. What is currently being debated is only the method, or mix of methods to be used, for the capitalists to get what they want.

The central question that is being ignored in the bourgeois debate is the question of rights over land. Should the use of land be governed by an overall social plan? Or should it be left to the so-called market forces?

The policy reform agenda of the bourgeoisie at this time is based on the premise that the best option is to convert land into a freely tradable commodity. This is a reform agenda that is dictated by the interests of the big capitalists who want to get hold of prime land from the hands of peasants, for generating maximum profits for themselves, through productive activity, tax sops as well as though outright speculation.

Land is not a product of human labour. It is therefore not a commodity. It is a vital natural resource that belongs to nations and peoples. It cannot be left to be monopolized by self-serving private corporate interests.

Capitalists must not be allowed to acquire whatever land they choose. Agricultural land needs to be secure in the hands of those who till it, and over time, brought under collective and social ownership and control. Urban land can and must be brought under social ownership and control even more quickly.

The SEZ Act, which legitimizes capitalist land grabbing, must be scrapped. No concession can change the fact that it is an anti-social act.