The 'Bill to amend some Nepalese laws related to land', which has been overshadowed by political disputes and pressure from interest groups, has been passed by the parliamentary committee. The bill was passed by the Agriculture, Cooperatives and Natural Resources Committee meeting held on Thursday after the government was ready to accept the Congress amendment to block legal loopholes that could lead to misuse of land of giribandhu or similar nature and to prevent the establishment of settlements on vacant land in forest and intermediate areas.

However, the opposition parties have rejected the bill saying that it is still in favor of "land mafias". When the bill amendment report was passed by majority of Congress and UML, Maoists and RSVP have different opinions. The government has been trying to pass the bill on the 'fast track' with the aim of distributing land to more than 500,000 landless Dalits and landless squatters and unorganized residents within the current financial year.

Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli put the bill on the agenda of the Parliament on June 25 to pass it directly from the "full house" without sending it to the committee. Prime Minister Oli repeatedly discussed with the Congress leaders to pass the bill on fast track after the two general ministers of the Congress, Gagan Thapa and Vishwa Prakash Sharma, took the stand that amendments should be sent to the committee.

Prime Minister Oli tried to advance the bill by accepting the Congress amendment without sending it to the committee, but due to the stand of the Congress, the bill was sent to the committee on July 8th. "Home Minister Ramesh Ulakkar promised the Prime Minister that the bill would be passed by the committee within a week and sent to the House," said a Congress official. But after the delay in passing by the committee, the Prime Minister continued to pressurize. That being the case, the bill could not be passed unanimously by taking the opposition party along with them. The Maoist and RSVP MPs who were part of the

committee, after studying the draft of the committee, demanded to go to a decision. However, the bill was passed by the majority of the two parties. The discussion was centered on the amendments put forward by the two general ministers of the Congress. Since there was no easy solution in the committee, in the meeting a few days ago, the chairperson of the committee, Kusum Thapa, requested the Home Minister Ramesh Ukhtar to reach a consensus in the high-level political mechanism on the main points that need to be amended.

After the government was ready to accept the amendments put forward by the chief ministers, the process of passing the bill by the committee started with the agreement of the two parties. According to Pratap Poudel, an advocate who worked as a legal expert on behalf of the committee, the two general ministers of the Congress and other parliamentarians said that after the government was ready to amend the four main points of the amendment, the agreement was reached.

Giribandhu and Giribandhu have been amended in the government bill in order to stop the loopholes that can be misused. According to the report passed by the committee, it is clear that the current amendment does not allow real estate business to be carried out on land that is more than the limit set aside for residential and commercial purposes.

In the bill brought by the government, there was a legal provision to allow organizations and companies that had taken more land than the limit to be used in real estate business as well. To prevent this, section 2 sub-section (1) of the bill and the restrictive clause after sub-section 12C of the proposed bill have been amended. The amendment is said to be keeping the language of Congress General Minister Thapa and Sharma.

'However, in accordance with the existing law, when taking a limited exemption, the land that has been exempted or approved for the use of a commercial agricultural industry such as an agricultural farm, tea industry, establishment, educational institution, health institution, etc., has been kept vacant (barren) without being used for the same purpose in accordance with the specified conditions, or has been used for a different purpose, or has later set up a real estate business company and conducted real estate business on the said land in the name of that company, or has been approved to do such business, or has applied for approval for other commercial purposes, such as agriculture, industry, etc. It is not allowed to do real estate business on the land taken, or to construct housing units (apartments) on such land and to sell it in accordance with this section.

Section 12A of the Eighth Amendment of the Land Act provided that industries, companies, establishments and organizations that have illegally bought land in excess of the limit can apply for legalization within three months. The industries, associations and organizations holding such land illegally were allowed to keep the land within the limits as per the notified order of the government by taking a fee of Rs.

It was suspected that the government would allow the industries, companies and establishments that have approved to keep more than the limit of land by amending the law and turning it into a real estate business. The next amendment stipulates that apart from residential and commercial land, land in other classifications cannot be sold by developing houses, buildings and housing.

The amendment also includes the provision that the company holding land exceeding the limit should get the detailed project report (DPR) and environmental study report (EIA) approved. Earlier, the government had removed the provision in section 12 of the Act. Another clause revised by the

committee is the subject in 12B. When the government brought the bill, in this section, it tried to create a single standard for land distribution by keeping landless Dalits, landless squatters and unorganized residents together. The provisions of Section 12B of the Act currently in force are for landless Dalits and landless squatters, while Section 12C is for unorganized dwellers.

However, the government also tried to include the provisions of 12C as 12B. According to the amendment demand, the government is ready to separate the provisions of these two clauses. The issue of how much land can be given to unorganized residents based on what criteria and where was the main problem. The committee did not accept the bill when the government introduced a bill to give land to all the unsettled people under the same criteria. All the members except UML in the committee demanded that the land should be given only by classifying the unorganized according to the scientific model.

Thapa and Sharma's amendment also included this topic. It does not mean not giving land to unorganized residents, but how much to give and where to give it? How often to give? The main issue was how much to charge. The government had introduced that it could be given in a 'flat model'. But the MPs of the committee demanded classification on scientific basis. The government has also accepted that," said Paudel, a legal expert of the committee.

Many questions raised on the land bill have been resolved. The restrictive phrase of sub-section (3) of section 3 of the Forest Act 2076 has also been amended. The provision introduced by the government in the bill has been reined in through the amendment so that even unoccupied open land within the forests and intermediate areas can be distributed. Now, it has been decided that land can be distributed only in the areas where the claim has been made before 28 January 2066. In the

amendment, it is said, "However, among the land designated as forest, forest area or Bhutan area in the record, only the land that has been in Awadi Kamot since before 28th January 2066 is confirmed and re-mapping for one time. Even if the land designated as forest, forest area or Bhutan area in the record is not a forest, but is empty or butan, or is important from the point of view of wildlife conservation, management, biological diversity and ecological system, the land remains in the forest area. It will have to be done.'

committee has removed section 61A, which was added after section 61 of the land-related act proposed by the government. The section included provisions that would allow the government to make guidelines and procedures. There was a suspicion that the government might abuse it if given such powers. A similar provision in the National Parks and Wildlife Protection Act 2029 has also been amended.

In section 3B (1) of the law, the restrictive phrase proposed by the government has been amended and added, 'When remapping, the land designated as forest, forest area or butyan area in the records is not a forest but empty or butyan, or even if it is an important area from the point of view of wildlife protection, management and biological diversity and ecological system, the land must be retained in the forest area.' However, the Congress and UML did not have a majority in the National Assembly and the other parties were in the opposition, so the government's land ordinance could not be approved. According to the constitutional provision, if the House is not approved within 60 days of its sitting, it will automatically become inactive. The Ordinance was automatically repealed after it was not approved by both Houses of the Federal Parliament within 60 days.

According to the National Land Commission, more than 1.3 million 50 thousand families have applied for land, and more applications are coming. Politically, there was strong opposition to the Land Bill, saying that even fake settlers could increase their efforts to register land in the name of illegality.

The data of 1 million 354 families have been entered into the computer out of the applications submitted to the Land Commission, while the number of unorganized residents is 765 thousand 543. Similarly, there are 154,885 landless squatters and 79,926 landless Dalit families. So far, 4,440 families have received Lalpurja. The Commission has estimated that this figure may increase to 1.5 million.

'There is a pile of applications for the land registration of unorganized residents. According to the suggestion of the local level, there is no idea how many places to give land to unorganized residents. As a result, even eight to ten places have come to claim, it will be decided after the criteria are made whether they came with the intention of grabbing land or those who are really in trouble," said an officer of the Ministry of Land Management, Cooperatives and Poverty Alleviation.

Even though the landless squatters are using a lot of land, it was decided to register the rest of the land by giving a red portion of the area within the criteria of the squatters and making the rest of the land under the definition of managed. Now they will only get as much as they get. They don't get more.'

The Ministry of Forestry gave the statistics to the committee a few days ago that there are squatters and unorganized residents in about 140,000 hectares of forest area. However, he could not give the statistics of those living in the intermediate areas, Bagar and Gouchar. It has been a challenge for the government to settle and manage the people living in such areas.

The demand of the Congress to distribute land to the unorganized by classifying it on five bases has now been accepted through an amendment. Which includes the fact that criteria should be made by looking at whether the machine is land or not and also its financial strength.

There was a concern that trying to adopt a one-size-fits-all policy without classification would benefit the land mafia and increase encroachment. According to the amendment made by the committee, now there is a provision that only the land that is forest and intermediate on the map can be distributed," said a member of the committee.

What are the topics revised by the committee?

points of amendment: Efforts to control the misuse of excess land. It has been made clear that real estate business cannot be done on land exceeding the limit except for residential and commercial areas.