Adivasi (Indigenous) communities, or scheduled tribes, make up nearly 9% of India’s population, yet they remain some of the most politically and economically marginalized groups in the country.
Their lands—often forested, mineral-rich, or strategically located—are frequently targeted for development, mining, conservation, or surveillance. These interventions are rarely initiated with full consultation or consent, despite constitutional protections and the Forest Rights Act of 2006.
“Only 3% of eligible forest dwellers have received land titles under the Forest Rights Act.”
Over the past two decades, India has adopted an increasingly digital model of governance. Tools like the Aadhaar biometric ID system and GIS-based forest mapping, have been implemented to promote efficiency and transparency.
But when these technologies are deployed in Indigenous territories, they can deepen exclusion. Systems that depend on fingerprints or digital literacy often fail in areas with poor connectivity or limited access to services. Mapping tools may classify inhabited lands as “vacant” or “degraded,” undermining long-standing land claims.
Environmental sustainability efforts increasingly rely on satellite imagery and AI to detect deforestation and monitor land use in India. While these tools are important for climate action, they can inadvertently criminalize Indigenous practices or justify evictions under the guise of conservation.
In many cases, forests have been protected by Adivasi communities for generations. The rise of “technological conservation” often ignores their traditional knowledge, replacing it with top-down enforcement.
“The impact of AI on Indigenous cultural heritage and social cohesion remains under-researched, despite growing evidence of digital erasure and governance overreach.”
“We don’t want a machine telling us what to do with our lands.”
A Timeline of events from 2022 - Present highlighting cases from the Indigenous Rights Advocacy Clinic in India, and the role technology, or its absence, played.
2022
Oct 13 – Death of Kariyappa, tribal man, allegedly tortured by forest officials: No body cameras or digital reporting systems were used, even though India has surveillance cameras around its forest and often mandates them in conservation areas. Their absence in this situation conveniently enabled violence without documentation.
Oct 24 – Tribal youth Sarin Saji arrested in a likely fabricated case: Tribal individuals often lack access to legal protections or digital documentation that could help prove innocence. Sarin did not even own a phone, and if he had, then IRAC’s biggest argument - that he was not at the location of the crime - could’ve proved his innocence.
Dec 10 – IRAC demands release of undertrial tribal prisoners: Many undertrials have no digital case records, Aadhaar-linked documentation, or access to legal e-portals.
2023
Mar 17 – Bherulal, tribal youth, killed in police firing (Indore): Once again, there was conveniently no camera surveillance or digital inquiry. Despite pushes for digital policing, there is often no tech oversight (like dashcams or bodycams) in tribal regions, limiting accountability.
May 31 – IRAC urges rejection of proposed Community Reserve in Arunachal Pradesh: Satellite-based forest classification can redefine land boundaries, ignoring long-standing community use. The proposed reserve relied on maps, not local testimony.
July 20 – IRAC condemns violence against Kuki tribal women in Manipur: This incident was brought to national attention through viral videos and in this case, technology helped reveal the truth, but the official response lagged, showing a gap between visibility and accountability.
2024
May 23 – IRAC protests forcible eviction in Tamil Nadu: State authorities often justify removals using outdated or incomplete digital land records, dismissing undocumented tribal occupation.
Nov 26 – IRAC responds to demolition of tribal huts in Kerala: In these cases, authorities frequently rely on GIS data over on-ground consultation to identify areas that can be classified as ‘uninhabited’ and demolished for construction or other purposes, showing how tech can be used to legitimize displacement.