EDITORIAL : THE HINDU, INDIA

The Emperor of Clay

Considered by many to be the greatest clay-court tennis player of all time, Rafael Nadal strengthened his case after winning his sixth French Open and tying Bjorn Borg, his only rival for the title. The two champions share several traits. Much like Borg did during his aborted career (he played his last major at 25), Nadal has dominated the red dirt utilising a style based on incredible athleticism and furious topspin. But while Borg's and Nadal's formidable physical prowess cannot be understated — clay, like grass but in a different way, rewards the superior athlete — it's their tremendous mental resolve that set them apart. It's this attribute that was most discernible at Paris this year. The 25-year-old's sixth Roland Garros title didn't feature the overwhelming form that characterised his previous successes. He even admitted to not feeling his best, which the locker-room immediately picked up on. But though he played more cautiously, trying to compensate for the sort of inconsistency he hasn't had to overcome in the past, he found a way to win. Roger Federer did him a favour in stopping Novak Djokovic, who during an astonishing 41-match streak in 2011 had defeated Nadal in two clay-court finals. Djokovic would have known, however, that beating Nadal in a best-of-three-sets match is markedly different from conquering him over five sets.

Federer's renaissance was the other story of the men's event. The Swiss master produced passages of transcendental brilliance in making the final, his victory over Djokovic an exhibition of judicious, sparkling attack. Federer began similarly against Nadal, getting to within a point of winning the first set; his fight-back to win the third set had even Rafa admitting that when Roger was in that touch, no one had a chance. But Federer couldn't sustain those levels, and the contest broke down into the familiar pattern of clay-court matches between the two great champions. The Spaniard's victory was his sixth in eight Grand Slam finals against Federer. It took Nadal's record at Roland Garros to 45-1 and his winning percentage on clay to 92.65. The corresponding numbers for Borg are 49-2 and 86.27. There isn't much between the two. But the world number one has the opportunity to settle the debate if he can stay fit over the next five years. While Rafa's triumph was an occurrence the French crowd has grown accustomed to, they had the delight of a surprise winner the previous day. China's Li Na became the first Asian player to win a Grand Slam singles title. Breaking through demands both independent thought and indomitable spirit, and 29-year-old Li proved she has reserves of both.

Sound policy shift

The Uttar Pradesh government's new land acquisition policy, announced in the face of farmers' protests and impending elections, is a significant improvement over existing practices. It is sounder than the amendments to the central Act proposed by the UPA government, which have been awaiting enactment since 2007. Poor compensation calculated on rates based on the pre-development phase, a lack of consultation, and cumbersome procedures have marred the whole business of land acquisition across India. Unlike land acquired for public projects such as construction of roads, the state-enabled forcible takeover of farmland to promote private development has been strongly and rightfully challenged. The Mayawati government has commendably attempted to address some of these issues. First, the government will henceforth not directly involve itself in acquiring land for private developers. Secondly, the acquisition will not proceed without 70 per cent of the farmers consenting to the project. Thirdly, on top of the cash compensation, 16 per cent of the developed land will be given to them. In the case of land acquired for roads and canals, each affected family will be provided with a job, along with shares in the development company. These new measures are to be implemented prospectively. This means, the farmers of Bhatta-Parsaul villages who started the agitation will, unfortunately, not benefit from them.

The new policy, which sensitively integrates compensation with rehabilitation, paves the way for consensus-building. However, there is scope for improvement. For instance, the percentage of allotment of developed land need not be a fixed figure; it can be related to the extent of the impact of a project and the scale of acquisition involved. Small farmers may find it difficult to handle complicated share transactions, so simplified procedures must be put in place. Alternatives to land acquisition also need to be encouraged. For example, a study of international land acquisition practices has shown that land readjustment followed in countries such as Japan and South Korea is an alternative worth considering. This system encourages landowners to collectively negotiate land transfers and seek either land-for-land exchange or other forms of stake-holding and compensation. In India, land and development are State subjects but acquisition of land falls under the Concurrent List. The central Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is the legal instrument that is widely used by many State governments. The Mayawati government's change of course is a reminder to the UPA that the central Act needs comprehensive and urgent change — placing equity and justice at the centre of the process.