The Chakmas Refugees and Their Rights
By Chunnu Prasad
The problem of Chakma and Hajong refugees are not very new in the state of Arunachal Pradesh. It is also true that the migration is a human phenomenon and it has to accept by all the human beings throughout the universe. The problem of refugee in this universe is one of the most painful activities which happened particularly after the Second World War. Nobody wants in this universe to recognize him or her as refugee or synonym to this. The Chakma and Hajong refugees’ problem is one of the most critical but contemporary problem in the region which created lots of tension between the people who claim themselves indigenous and the Chakma and Hajong refugees of Arunachal Pradesh. Civil society is completely inactive in Arunachal Pradesh to provide the basic fundamental as well as human rights.
The paper particularly focuses on the various issues of the Chakma and Hajong refugees’ problem as well as the working of the civil society in the state of Arunachal Pradesh. It also critically discusses the other provisions of the constitution which is directly or indirectly related to the Buddhist Chakma and Hajong refugees of the state.
Introduction:
During the last over three decades, the Chakmas and Hajongs refugee issue has been the matter of simmering discontent among the indigenous tribal people of Arunachal Pradesh. The casual decision of the then Governor of Assam on April 10, 1964 to settled these refugees in Arunachal Pradesh did not take into consideration the legal protection of the indigenous tribal people and there tradition, culture, custom and identity.
The problem arising out of settlement of Chakma and Hajong refugees in Arunachal Pradesh during the period 1964-69 is as old as the settlement itself. The origin of the problem lies in the manner of settlement as it was done violating all the time-honored norms, principles and legal provisions. Obviously, the Chakmas and Hajongs refugee issue has been agitating the minds of the indigenous tribal people, the Central Government, the State Government, Human Rights Organisations and Chakma and Hajong refugees themselves temporarily settled in Arunachal Pradesh for over many decades.
While in the opinion of the indigenous tribal people, their customary laws have been encroached upon by allowing settlement of Chakma and Hajong refugees by the Central Government much against their wishes, these refugees have been mounting pressure on the authorities concerned to grant them citizenship rights so that they can legalize their temporary stay on the plea that they have been staying over three to four decades in Arunachal Pradesh.
If the problem is viewed from the demographic perspective emerging on account of fast growth rate of Chakma and Hajong population and also due to influx of non-settler Chakmas and Hajongs from outside the state, it becomes abundantly clear that the ethnic population will soon be reduced to a minority. The indigenous tribal people of Arunachal Pradesh view the presence of Chakma and Hajong refugees on their soil as a serious threat to their own survival, their age-old customs and traditions and also to the peace and tranquility of the state, which Arunachalees believe. At stake, therefore, is the very existence of Arunachal Pradesh as an ethnic state in the Indian Union in its pristine glory. In order to appreciate objectively the problem, it is necessary to know the background of the state of Arunachal Pradesh, its history and the nature of the tribal population inhabiting the state.
An information and communication society should be based on human rights and human dignity. With the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as its foundation, it must embody the universality, indivisibility, interrelation and interdependence of all human rights – civil, political, economic, social and cultural including the right to development and linguistic rights. This implies the full integration, concrete application and enforcement of all rights and the recognition of their centrality to democracy and sustainable development.
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is of fundamental and specific importance, since it forms an essential condition for human rights-based information and communication societies. Article 19 requires that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas, through any media and regardless of frontiers. This implies free circulation of ideas, pluralism of the sources of information and the media, press freedom, and availability of the tools to access information and share knowledge. Freedom of expression on the Internet must be protected by the rule of law rather than through self regulation and codes of conduct. There must be no prior censorship, arbitrary control of, or constraints on, participants in the communication process or on the content, transmission and dissemination of information. Pluralism of the sources of information and the media must be safeguarded and promoted.
Civil Society
Civil society, in the first part is about the institutional changes in the modern period, which established the democratic governmental and capitalist market. Secondly, concerned with non-governmental associations that directly do not deal with the commercial business and thirdly, it deals with the whole voluntary sector, excluding government, but includes both business and third sector (which comprises neither government nor market).
Civil society is a network of the citizens and the nongovernmental organizations. This network lies between citizens on the one hand and the state on the other. According to David Held, civil society is made up of areas of social life, the domestic world, economic sphere, cultural activities and political action which are organized by private or voluntary arrangements between individuals and groups outside the direct control of the state. Thomas, Hobbes, in “Laviathan” points that the civil society means, consent of every one and allows every one’s freedom to do whatever the law of the state prohibit. Tocqeville said that civil society is rather civilest social interaction between mob and the state. Lastly, G.W.F Hegel was the first who distinguished the state from civil society in every phase of life except the government. He describes it as a repository of public freedom; while state remain the final source of moral authority.
Arunachal Pradesh one of the largest refugees dominated state in India who settled forty years back (1964). The very fact is that the governmental administration as well the civil society is completely ineffective to provide the basic fundamental rights to the refuges and with that these refuges are continuously denied their rights and liberty by the state and civil societies. Now the very basic question is to be ask is, why the civil society is not working in the state when it comes to the Chakma and Hajong refugees, why right to information are not allowed to accesses by these refugees which is one of the fundamental rights or to be say human rights.
Historical understanding of the State:
The recent history and the administration of Arunachal Pradesh can be said to date back to 1838 when the British extended their administration to the frontiers which now form Arunachal Pradesh. The administration to this area under that regime failed to meet the desired result due to absence of good communication. It was only in 1914 that the British Government thought of treating these areas as a separate frontier tract to be administered somewhat differently from the rest of Assam. Consequently, the Assam Frontier Tracts Regulation, 1880 was extended to the North East Frontier Tracts and the Tracts were declared as “Excluded Areas” of Assam. They were administered by the Governor of Assam through the political officer in his discretion.
When the Constitution of India came into force in 1950, another change was effected in the administrative set up. The Government of Assam was relieved of its responsibility of looking after administration of the “Excluded Areas”. However, the discretionary power was vested in the Governor of Assam, who served as the agent of the President of the Republic of India. In 1954, all these tracts formed into the North East Frontier Agency (NEFA). On the enactment of North Eastern Area (Reorganization) Act 1971, NEFA was made Union Territory of Arunachal Pradesh on 21st January 1972. On 20th February 1987, Arunachal Pradesh was made a full fledged state within the Indian Union.
Even after so many political and administrative developments which culminated in the formation of the present state of Arunachal Pradesh the laws, rules and regulations which were applicable during the British period continued to be in force even today. The state of Arunachal Pradesh consists exclusively of different tribes. Part X of the Constitution read with the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution governs the administration of the state of Arunachal Pradesh. The entire area of the state has been declared as Scheduled areas. It was the endeavors of the constitution of India and various other enactment to protect and maintain the exclusive culture, custom and traditions of the local tribal people and was consistent with their ethos and aspirations.
The ethnic tribes of Arunachal Pradesh have very similar culture, tradition and custom with very rare differences. They have been following their customs and traditions, evolved over ages from time immemorial. These customs, traditions which are integral part of their life and living in tough hilly terrain in challenging circumstances have given rise to a distinctive identity to the indigenous tribal people.
The efforts being made by the state Government in preserving the tribal identity and culture are however being jeopardized by the presence of the Chakma and Hajong refugees in the state. The people of Arunachal Pradesh distinguish themselves that there is nothing common between the tribal people of Arunachal Pradesh and the Chakma and Hajong refugees. The fact that both bear Mongoloid features further complicated the issue. Both belongs to the tribal groups one from the sate of Arunachal Pradesh and another from the Chittagong Hill Tract (CHT) respectively, no doubt there is religious differences. Chakmas are largely Buddhist than animism but, on the other hand the Arunachalees are largely animism, very few populations are Buddhist. With all these few differences, it can be generalized that the ethnic identity of both the groups never the last common in some areas.
Arunachal Pradesh or the erstwhile NEFA had sui generic, political status both during earlier British rule as well as in the post-independence era. From the very beginning when the British took possession of territory, the efforts were made to pre-British rule as well as in the post-independence era. From the very beginning when the British took possession of territory, the efforts were made to preserve the tribal society in its pristine form and protect it from any outside interference in its culture, values and socio-religious norms. By various laws, rules, regulations and orders, the government, ensure that the tribal society, its identity and its culture would be protected.
Arrival of the Chakma and Hajong Refugees in Arunachal Pradesh and Human Right Violation:
During the partition of India in 1947, the people of the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHTs) under present-day Bangladesh, sought to be a part of India and even hoisted the Indian National Flag on their lands. However, the Bengal Boundary Commission headed by Redcliff awarded the CHTs to Pakistan although 98.5 percent of the population of the CHTs was non-Muslim. The then Pakistan Government took a serious view of the hoisting of the Indian flag by the Chakmas and embarked on a series of repressive measures. Unable to bear the atrocities and faced with displacement on account of the construction of the Kaptai Hydel Project about 30,000 Chakmas and Hajongs migrated to India in 1964. They were settled in Arunachal Pradesh after due consultation with the local leaders by the Central Government of India under a “Definite Plan of Rehabilitation”. The Government of India extended all possible kind of helps including financial aids, employment, trade, license, book grants etc for proper establishment of their shattered life. After the partition of India, the Government’s policy was to grant citizenship to those who originated from areas that were part of Undivided India. The rest of the migrants were accorded Indian citizenship. However the Chakmas and Hajongs were not granted Indian citizenship. In the wake of the anti-foreigner agitation in Assam, the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh undertook a series of repressive measures beginning in 1980. The State Government vide its letter No. POL –21/80 dated 29th September 1980 banned public employment for the Chakmas and Hajongs in the State. In 1991, the State Government under its order No FPSO-3/90-91 of 31 October 1991 issued by the Circle Officer of Diyun withdrew ration card facilities under the Public Distribution System. In 1994, the State Government under its order vide no. CS/HOME/94 dated 21 November 1994 further directed ‘withdrawal of all kinds of facilities from the Chakma Settlement area”.
In 1991, the Committee for Citizenship Rights of the Chakmas of Arunachal Pradesh (CCRCAP) was formed to demand for citizenship rights of the Chakmas and Hajongs of Arunachal Pradesh. Starting in 1992, the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh became more hostile and started inciting sectarian violence against the Chakmas and Hajongs. The All Arunachal Pradesh Students Union (AAPSU) served a “Quit Arunachal Pradesh” notice to the Chakmas to leave the State by 30 September 1994. As a result, a large number of Chakmas fled from Arunachal Pradesh and took refuge in the neighboring Indian State of Assam. However, the State Government of Assam issued shoot at sight orders against the fleeing Chakmas and Hajongs. The CCRCAP approached the National Human Rights Commission of India (NHRC) about the deadline set by the AAPSU and the threat to the lives and property of the Chakmas and Hajongs. The NHRC treated it as a formal complaint and asked the State Government and Central Government to report on the issue. On 7 December 1994, the NHRC directed the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh and Central Government to provide information about the steps taken to protect the Chakmas and Hajongs. This was ignored till September 1995. In the meantime, the harassment, intimidation, arrests and detention continued and increased. The issue became critical following the meeting of all-party leaders and the AAPSU held at Naharlagan, Itanagar on 20 September 1995. Political leaders of Arunachal Pradesh led by then Chief Minister Mr. Gegong Apang passed a unanimous resolution to resign en masse from the national party membership if the Chakmas and Hajongs are not deported by 31 December 1995. The resolution also prohibited any social interactions between the local Arunachalees and the Chakmas and Hajongs. The CCRCAP approached the NHRC again on 12 and 28 October 1995 to seek protection of their lives and liberty in view of the deadline and support extended to the AAPSU by the State Government. As the State Government was inordinately delaying the transmission of information regarding the steps taken to protect the Chakmas and Hajongs, the NHRC, headed by Justice Ranganath Mishra, approached the Supreme Court to seek appropriate relief and filed a writ petition (720/1995). The Supreme Court in its interim order on 2 November 1995 directed the State Government to “ensure that the Chakmas situated in its territory are not ousted by any coercive action, not in accordance with law.” As the 31st December 1995 deadline approached, then Prime Minister P V Narashima Rao formed a high-level committee headed by then Home Minister S B Chavan. On 9 January 1996, the Supreme Court gave its judgement in the case of NHRC vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh, issuing the following orders:
a) The first respondent, the State of Arunachal Pradesh, shall ensure that the life and personal liberty of each and every Chakma residing within the State shall be protected and any attempt to forcibly evict or drive them out of the State by organised groups, such as the AAPSU, shall be repelled, if necessary by requisitioning the service of para-military or police force, and if additional forces are considered necessary to carry out this direction, the first respondent will request the second respondent, the Union of India, to provide such additional force, and the second respondent shall provide such additional force as is necessary to protect the lives and liberty of the Chakmas;
b) Except in accordance with law, the Chakmas shall not be evicted from their homes and shall not be denied domestic life and comfort therein;
c) The quit notices and ultimatums issued by the AAPSU and any other group which tantamount to threats to the life and liberty of each and every Chakma should be dealt with by the first respondent in accordance with law;
d) The application made for registration as citizen of India by the Chakma or Chakmas under Section 5 of the Act, shall be entered in the register maintained for the purpose and shall be forwarded by the Collector or the Deputy Commissioner who receives them under the relevant rule, with or without enquiry, as the case may be, to the Central Government for its consideration in accordance with law; even returned applications shall be called back or fresh ones shall be obtained from the concerned persons and shall be processed and forwarded to the Central Government;
e) While the application of any individual Chakma is pending consideration, the first respondent shall not evict or remove the concerned person from his occupation on the ground that he is not a citizen of India until the competent authority has taken a decision in that behalf;
Despite the clear and unambiguous order of the Supreme Court, the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh has not taken any measure to implement the court’s directions. Rather, the State Government has undertaken various measures to undermine and violate the Supreme Court judgement. The State Government has been making the conditions of the Chakmas and Hajongs untenable by denying them fundamental rights such as right to education and other basic facilities such as health care, employment facilities. Other measures included a complete halt to any development activities, refusal to provide trade licenses, refusal to deploy teachers in the schools located in the Chakma and Hajong areas, withdrawal of all pre-primary (Anganwadi) centres and finally forcible eviction by claiming the lands of the Chakmas and Hajongs as forest lands.
After the Supreme Court judgment, the AAPSU and State Government of Arunachal Pradesh began inciting communal hatred. The State Government, however, became more tactful, calculated and deliberate in its anti-Chakma activities. With a view to repel any move to submit citizenship applications to the Deputy Commissioners, the State Government attempted to provoke communal passions by calling a state-wide bandh on 22 January 1996. The then Chief Minister, Mr. Gegong Apang, went to the extent of describing the Supreme Court judgment as the “step-motherly attitude of the Centre” and calling it biased judgment”. On 26 January1997 the AAPSU also called a state-wide bandh. On 4 May 1998, 27 Chakmas went to submit the citizenship applications to the Deputy Commissioner of Changlang District. The citizenship applications were verified by the First Class Magistrate of Margarita, Assam. However, the Deputy Commissioner of Changlang refused to accept the applications. Due to the pervasive fear and the hostile situation engineered by the State Government, the Chakmas and Hajongs were unable to submit applications to the Deputy Commissioners. It was after discussions with the officials of Union Home Ministry that the Chakmas and Hajongs started submitting citizenship applications to the Deputy Commissioners through the Union Home Ministry in February 1997. Over the years, around 4000 citizenship applications have been submitted. However, the concerned Deputy Commissioners have been blocking the said applications by not verifying them and not forwarding them within a reasonable period of time in spite of an amendment in the Citizenship Rules, 1956. Under Rule 9 of the Citizenship Rules (Amended), 1998 the Deputy Commissioner/State Government is required to forward the citizenship application within a period of six months. The blocking of citizenship applications in this manner is a clear contempt of Supreme Court order in which the apex court clearly held that the Deputy Commissioners are bound to forward the applications received by them, with or without inquiry, as the case may be, to the Central Government for consideration. It has been learnt that the State Government has forwarded around 260 citizenship applications in January 2000 after due verification. However, until today the Union Home Ministry has not taken any decision on these applications despite the fact that all the applicants have provided documentary proof (such as identity cards issued by the State Government) that can stand judicial scrutiny to prove their migration in 1964 and continuous stay in Arunachal Pradesh. Justice delayed is justice denied. The refusal of the Central Government to grant citizenship to 260 applicants whose applications have been verified is further denial of justice.
On 28 January 1996, Mr. Pularam Chakma (50), of Udaipur village under Diyun Circle of Changlang district, and Mr. Maratsa Chakma, S/o- Mr. Ratna Kumar Chakma, aged 16, of Vijoypur village under Bardumsa circle of Changlang district went for harvesting the mustard crop. They were working for Mr. Chandra Kri and Mr. Pyola Kri of Namgo village under Chowkham circle of Lohit district. Mr. Pularam Chakma and Mr. Maratsa Chakma were attacked by about 20 AAPSU activists and beaten up mercilessly at Medo Bazar of Lohit district in full public view. Mr. Pularam Chakma was beaten to death on the spot. Mr. Maratsa Chakma, who was left for dead, however later gained consciousness and was able to get assistance at a nearby Chakma house. CCRCAP had approached the NHRC on the issue.
The State Government of Arunachal Pradesh has adopted various policies to evict the Chakmas and Hajongs by issuing orders for eviction to show that its actions were being done legally without violating the Supreme Court judgement. On 8 December 1997, the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh issued eviction notices to 66 Chakma families in Kamakhyapur and Raj Nagar areas under Changlang district. Earlier, on 11 November 1997, the Circle Officer of Diyun, Mr. D Riba served quit notices (memo No Diyun/LR/EVC/97) to 109 families of Jyotsnapur village under Changlang district and directed them to proceed to their original settlement areas. Mr. Riba did not give any explanation for such eviction notice. In his notice, Mr. Riba simply stated, “You are hereby directed to proceed to your original settlement Jyotipur village with family latest by 20 November 1997 without fail. Failing which legal action will be initiated against you.” The Chakmas have been living in Jyotsnapur village for the last two decades. They have settled in Jyotsnapur village after the Diyun River flooded their areas and destroyed their houses during monsoon. For the last two decades, the State Government did not raise any objection. In fact, it was the officials of the State Government who ordered the Chakmas to settle in Jyotsnapur village.
When three Chakma families re-built their huts, the Forest Officials visited the area on 21 January 1997 and demolished them again. The properties of all the damaged houses were seized by the Forest Corporation officials, transported in two trucks with the help of 40 labourers and auctioned at Miao market in Changlang District on 21 January 1997. On 2 February 1997, the Forest Corporation Ltd officials planted trees in that area. The plantation in the Chakma inhabited areas was carried by Shri B Ajang (Divisional Manager of Forest Corporation), Mr. K K Dev (Range Manager), Mr. A Dutta (Assistant Range Manager), Mr. D D Dubey, Forest Guard, Mr. L Abou, Forest Guard, Mr. R H Lowang, Forest Guard and Mr. S K Dhar, Forest Guard. In addition, the State Government in other places evicted many Chakmas from other villages.
The Circle Officer of Diyun Mr. D Riba called a meeting with the local tribal leaders on 27 October 1997 at his office where it was unanimously decided not to “engage any Chakma/Hajong people for their agricultural field, contract work and business” by 30 October 1997. The Circle Officer issued a Circular Vide No DYN/CON-4/97 dated 27 October 1997. The Circle Officer also issued another notice on 31 October 1997 Vide No DYN/JUD-1/97, directing to “discontinue the engagement of Chakma/Hajong people in agricultural field/business and contract work forthwith”.
In 1998 the State Government imposed an economic embargo on the Chakmas and Hajongs. Agricultural products such as ginger, chili and master seeds produced by the Chakmas and Hajongs have no market in the local areas. They have to be sold in neighboring Assam. However, to sell these cash crops in Assam require permission from the State Government. But, the Chakmas and Hajongs continue to be denied permission/licenses to sell their products in Assam. As a result, their products are damaged. The CCRCAP filed a PIL bearing No. Civil Rule 4/1998 before the Honorable Gauhati High Court and the same is still pending for adjudication. The State
Government taking advantage of the judicial delay until today is denying them permission to sell their products.
While the Government of India has been taking measures to make the right to education a fundamental right, the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh has been taking all measures to completely deny the right to education to the Chakmas and Hajongs.
All the forty-nine pre-primary schools (Anganwadis), were withdrawn in 1994 (vide No. CS/HOME/94 dated 21 November 1994) during the State sponsored agitation to oust the Chakmas and Hajongs from Arunachal Pradesh. The Anganwadi Centres are yet to be restored. Consequently, the Chakmas and Hajongs have been facing a generation gap in education despite the Government of India making the right to education as a fundamental right. The Anganwadi Centres had provided employment to 98 women. The withdrawal had resulted in their termination from job without any compensation.
For about 40,000 Chakma and Hajong population there is only one Government Secondary School at Diyun. In the absence of any middle school in the whole Diyun circle, this school has to accommodate all the Chakma and Hajong students passing out every year from more than 10 primary schools operating in the Chakma areas. Around 1,400 (12 teachers) are enrolled in this school with virtually no infrastructural facilities. The school building is built by the Chakmas and no grant is given by the State Government. No developmental works has been undertaken by the State Government- bench, desk, duster and other required furniture are self-arranged by the guardians of students.
The State Government of Arunachal Pradesh in a circular on 31 October 1991 (No FPSO-3/90-91) had ordered all the Chakmas and Hajongs to surrender their rations cards under the Public Distribution System to the Circle Officer. Thousands of Chakmas and Hajongs were forced to surrender their ration cards to the State Government. Despite the Supreme Court judgement the State Government has not returned the ration cards. The Chakmas and Hajongs are very poor and rely to a large extent on the Public Distribution System. Ration card facilities are indispensable for the daily labourers. By denying the ration card facilities, the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh has condemned them to poverty. As stated above, the Chakmas and Hajongs are not even issued permission to sell their cash crops in neighbouring Assam. They are not issued licenses for trade in the local markets. At the same time, hundreds of families were rendered landless due to soil erosion caused by the Noa-Dihing River and its tributaries. More than 80 percent of the Chakmas and Hajongs are below poverty line. Yet the Chief Secretary to the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh, Mr. P M Nair in a letter to Additional Secretary P D Shenoy, MHA vide letter no D.O.No.HMB(B)-74/96 of 9 March 2000 stated that “at present Chakmas are not covered under the Public Distribution System as they are self-sufficient in food grains”. It must be mentioned that if the local people can be covered under the PDS despite having all the facilities at their disposal, the claim of the State Government that the Chakmas and Hajongs are self-sufficient economically is far-fetched. In fact, the Chakmas and Hajongs are not covered under the PDS merely because they are not citizens, which is again contrary to the Supreme Court’s directions.
Since 22 October 1997, the Circle Officer of Diyun Circle, Officer in Charge of Diyun Police Station and Second Officer of Diyun Police Station came to the shops of Chakmas in Diyun Bazar and verbally ordered the closing down of shops belonging to the following persons:
The State Government vide circular dated 29th September 1980 and circular dated 31st October 1997 has banned employment in government service, agricultural field, contract work and business etc. for the Chakmas and Hajongs in the state, resulting in the unemployment among a large number of educated youths. The ban on employment continues until today.
The entire Chakma-Hajong area consisting of 30 villages, there is only one Primary Health Centre (PHC) at Diyun circle, whereas, in other local areas PHC has been provided in almost all villages. The PHC of Diyun hardly able to cater the needs of Disseminated by Asian Indigenous & Tribal Peoples Network for public information Chakmas and Hajongs as it has only one doctor, five nurses and eight beds. The patients often remain unattended and therefore people prefer to give their own treatment gained by way of experience. Instances of malarial deaths and other simple and serious diseases otherwise not fatal are numerous. Though it is claimed that the Chakmas are provided medical facilities, in effect they are still denied treatment. Nurses also charge money to give injections. Some Chakma villages such as Dharmapur, circle Miao, Bijoypur, circle Bordumsa and Deban area (eight villages) in Changlang district are located far away from the nearest PHC. As there are rivers, which are sometimes flooded, people remain cut off sometime for a month from rest of the places. Therefore, even simple fever often proves fatal in these places.
The State Government has banned all development activities in the Chakma and Hajong areas. In an order vide no. CS/HOME/94 dated 21 November 1994 the state government of Arunachal Pradesh directed “withdrawal of all kinds of facilities from the Chakma Settlement area”. Some of the problems due to lack of any public development works are given below:
(a) The Chakmas and Hajongs have not been provided with drinking water facilities. Some villagers have to travel a distance of more than one and half kilometer to fetch water for drinking as well as for other domestic uses. During rainy season the river water causes several diseases, as it becomes unfit for drinking.
(b) No construction of roads, bridges and culverts are undertaken in the Chakma and Hajong inhabited areas. In the absence of infrastructures like roads, bridges, other developmental activities are unimaginable.
(c) Almost 90 percent of the Chakma villages are not provided with electricity though economically and technically most viable. Even those few villages having connections, electricity supply has been cut off since 1994 due to the non replacement of worn out apparatus or because of willful negligence on the part of the concerned officials. Complaints/reminders to authorities for replacement of worn out apparatus all these years have gone unheeded.
(d) The Chakma and Hajong farmers were provided improved seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, agricultural tools and implements at subsidized rates till 1991 and these facilities were stopped thereafter. On the other hand, the other locals are being provided with high yielding variety of seeds, technical know-how and agricultural training and other assistance including monetary aid.
On 23 August 1995, a petition was filed before the Rajya Sabha Committee on Petition. After extensive visits to several places where the views of the local people, the Chakmas, experts, the State Government and the Central Government were taken into account, the Committee in its 105th Report of 14 August 1997 recommended the speedy granting of Indian citizenship to the Chakmas of Arunachal Pradesh. It was also recommended that “all the old applications of Chakmas for citizenship which have been either been rejected or withheld by Deputy Commissioners or the State Government continue to block the forwarding of such applications to Central Government, the Central Government may consider to incorporate necessary provision in the Rules (or the Act if so required) whereby it could directly receive, consider and decide the application for citizenship in the case of Chakmas of Arunachal Pradesh.” The Committee further recommended that the Chakmas be also considered for granting them the status of Scheduled Tribe at the time of granting the citizenship. Although, the Government of India has submitted Action Taken Report, practically none of the recommendations of the Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions have been implemented until today.
After the Arunachal Pradesh government threatened that all members of State Assembly would resign en masse if the Chakmas and Hajongs were not expelled by 31 December 1995, a committee headed by the Prime Minister of India was established. A Sub- Committee under the chairmanship of the Union Home Minister was formed to find an amicable solution to the Chakma problem. The Home Ministry officials headed by Mr. P. D. Shenoy, Additional Secretary (Ministry of Home Affairs) representing the said Sub-Committee visited the Chakma and Hajong inhabited areas on 6 and 7 March 1999. The Sub-Committee in January 2000 submitted the report to the Union Home Minister, who is currently the chairman, containing specific recommendations to resolve the Chakma and Hajong problem. Unfortunately, no decision has been taken for implementation of the recommendations of the Home Ministry team.
In addition to the Chakmas and Hajongs who migrated in 1964, there are about 5,000 Chakmas and Hajongs who are born after the migration of their parents in 1964. They are Indian citizens by birth under Section 3(1) (a) of the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955 which states that “except as provided in sub-section (2), every person born in India, - (a) on or after the 26th day of January, 1950 but before the commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1986” is a citizen by birth. The CCRCAP filed a complaint with the National Human Right Commission on 12 December 1997 against the denial of franchise rights to the Chakmas and Hajongs. The NHRC issued notice to the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh and the Union Government of India on the issue. In their replies to the NHRC, both the Central Government and the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh recognised that “as per the provisions of the Citizenship Act 1955, every person born in India on or after 26 January 1950 and before 1 July 1987 are citizens of India by birth and therefore eligible for electoral rolls.” However, when the Chakmas and Hajongs who were born after their parents’ migration and are citizens under Section 3(1)(a) of Indian Citizenship Act, 1955, went to the Assistant Electoral Registration Officer of Diyun under Changlang District of Arunachal Pradesh, the officer refused to accept their Form 6 – Application for inclusion of name in electoral rolls. The CCRCAP approached the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). The MHA informed it that the Election Commission had been requested to include all the Indian citizens into the electoral rolls. But the Election Commission took no action. Since no action has been taken to ensure that the Chakmas and Hajongs are enrolled in the voters’ list, the PUCL and the CCRCAP filed a writ petition (CPR no. 886 of 2000) before the Delhi High Court. In its judgement on 28 September 2000, the Delhi High Court ordered the registration of all eligible voters. This order, too, was flouted on various pretexts. Till date, not a single Chakma or Hajong has been included in the electoral rolls. During the revision of electoral roll 2001 around 2000 Chakmas and Hajongs filed claim applications enclosed therewith their proof of age, residence etc. All the claim applications were, however, rejected for not specifying house enumeration number and due to lack of polling station in the Chakma areas. It may be stated that the allotment of house enumeration number and setting up of polling station are tasks of EC and the Chakma and Hajong applicants cannot be punished for omission on the part of the officials of the EC. The repeated representations to the EC failed to elicit any positive result.
Conclusion:
It is true that the tribal areas of this country have special status, and all these rights are given by the supreme book of the land called “Constitution of India”. It is the only Constitution of India and Parliament of India who recognizes all the rights, identity and status of the tribes and their regions. But one also has to understand that the same Constitution also discuss about Article 21 (Right to life) and other fundamental rights, as well as the provisions of the Citizenship rights which is directly or indirectly related to the Chakma and Hajong refugees of this country. No doubt we should respect the tribal identity, culture and etc, for their proper development to bring them to ‘mainland’ but with that, on humanitarian ground other groups who are also tribal before refugees in the Chittagong Hill Tract (Bangladesh) (Chakmas and Hajongs) should be respected largely. Once selfish nature adopted and feeling of regionalism developed, the system automatically changed without any gain.
People of Arunachal Pradesh has to understand that the legal part of the Constitution which providing rights to the Chakma and Hajong refugees to settle and get the status of Schedule Tribes in the state, and also Indira-Mujib agreement of 1972 allow legally to settle in the land of India with all the fundamental rights and other rights which Indian availing.
One also has to look all the provisions of the Constitution and Acts, and it is really, one of the most important areas to be focus. But discussing only the provisions of Inner Line Regulation Act, Special Status State, Bengal Regulation Act of 1873, and etc is I think, baseless and biased, because all these are not the free mind provisions. All these provisions adopted by the British India when India was their colony and it has to be changed. We cannot continue the British made Colonial rule and regulation, policies and Acts to tackle different types of situations even after 57 to 58 years of independence, we are following the cynical policies, i.e., the policy of inner-line regulation, which I found one of the most inhuman policy towards the Indians, and if it continues I don’t think it allow the tribal to mix with the mainland India and remove the tag of backwardness.
Whatever the case may be the Chakmas and Hajongs are those people who participated in India’s war of independence, whose forefathers lost their life to make India independent. Chakmas and Hajongs have right to get their share in a proper legal manner. The issues of Chakmas and Hajongs in Arunachal Pradesh are completely political because all the parties fueling the issue only for political gain. Apart from all this oppose and politics of deport, of Chakmas and Hajongs in the state, it has come to light that few tribes of Arunachal like Singpho and Tangsa are supporting citizenship rights of the Chakma and Hajong refugees in the state, because they know that the Chakma and Hajong refugees are legally correct and they should be given citizenship within a time bound period.
Chakmas and Hajongs came to India before forty years and have been fighting for their basic fundamental rights. Human rights are the basic fundamental rights to all the people who are residing in India. It is one of the most legal which is directly or indirectly related to the rights and liberties of the Chakmas and Hajongs. Working of civil society and governance is very poor or to be said that there is one of the worse functioning of the civil society in Arunachal Pradesh because the governmental administration as well as non governmental organizations are not functioning even to the minimum level to provide the basic fundamental rights i.e., right to life. The very simple example is the problem of Chakma and Hajong refugees in the state who are fighting to survive and waiting for the grant of citizenship and scheduled tribe status from years old.
Finally, without fueling and heating the issue more, it is very genuine to ask the question to all the political parties and NGO’s that, why till today the Chakma and Hajong refugees problem is not being settled down?, what is the reason, even after the Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, Guwahati High Court Judgment, and Rajya Sabha Committees suggestion as well as the National Human Rights Commissions directions to grant citizenship rights and fundamental rights to all the Chakma and Hajong refugees of Arunachal Pradesh, not been forwarded as such? Why civil society is not functioning in the state when it comes to the issue of Chakmas and Hajongs. Apart from it many question is to be discussed and asked which is very complicated but valid.
Lastly, we can conclude by saying that all the solution is to be sort out under the paradigm of the Indian Constitution. There should be a democratic solution to the problem which satisfies the people of Arunachal Pradesh and which also at the same time takes into full consideration, the humanitarian requirements of the innocent Buddhist Chakma and Hajong refugees in the state of Arunachal Pradesh.
The paper particularly focuses on the various issues of the Chakma and Hajong refugees’ problem as well as the working of the civil society in the state of Arunachal Pradesh. It also critically discusses the other provisions of the constitution which is directly or indirectly related to the Buddhist Chakma and Hajong refugees of the state.
Introduction:
During the last over three decades, the Chakmas and Hajongs refugee issue has been the matter of simmering discontent among the indigenous tribal people of Arunachal Pradesh. The casual decision of the then Governor of Assam on April 10, 1964 to settled these refugees in Arunachal Pradesh did not take into consideration the legal protection of the indigenous tribal people and there tradition, culture, custom and identity.
The problem arising out of settlement of Chakma and Hajong refugees in Arunachal Pradesh during the period 1964-69 is as old as the settlement itself. The origin of the problem lies in the manner of settlement as it was done violating all the time-honored norms, principles and legal provisions. Obviously, the Chakmas and Hajongs refugee issue has been agitating the minds of the indigenous tribal people, the Central Government, the State Government, Human Rights Organisations and Chakma and Hajong refugees themselves temporarily settled in Arunachal Pradesh for over many decades.
While in the opinion of the indigenous tribal people, their customary laws have been encroached upon by allowing settlement of Chakma and Hajong refugees by the Central Government much against their wishes, these refugees have been mounting pressure on the authorities concerned to grant them citizenship rights so that they can legalize their temporary stay on the plea that they have been staying over three to four decades in Arunachal Pradesh.
If the problem is viewed from the demographic perspective emerging on account of fast growth rate of Chakma and Hajong population and also due to influx of non-settler Chakmas and Hajongs from outside the state, it becomes abundantly clear that the ethnic population will soon be reduced to a minority. The indigenous tribal people of Arunachal Pradesh view the presence of Chakma and Hajong refugees on their soil as a serious threat to their own survival, their age-old customs and traditions and also to the peace and tranquility of the state, which Arunachalees believe. At stake, therefore, is the very existence of Arunachal Pradesh as an ethnic state in the Indian Union in its pristine glory. In order to appreciate objectively the problem, it is necessary to know the background of the state of Arunachal Pradesh, its history and the nature of the tribal population inhabiting the state.
An information and communication society should be based on human rights and human dignity. With the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as its foundation, it must embody the universality, indivisibility, interrelation and interdependence of all human rights – civil, political, economic, social and cultural including the right to development and linguistic rights. This implies the full integration, concrete application and enforcement of all rights and the recognition of their centrality to democracy and sustainable development.
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is of fundamental and specific importance, since it forms an essential condition for human rights-based information and communication societies. Article 19 requires that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas, through any media and regardless of frontiers. This implies free circulation of ideas, pluralism of the sources of information and the media, press freedom, and availability of the tools to access information and share knowledge. Freedom of expression on the Internet must be protected by the rule of law rather than through self regulation and codes of conduct. There must be no prior censorship, arbitrary control of, or constraints on, participants in the communication process or on the content, transmission and dissemination of information. Pluralism of the sources of information and the media must be safeguarded and promoted.
Civil Society
Civil society, in the first part is about the institutional changes in the modern period, which established the democratic governmental and capitalist market. Secondly, concerned with non-governmental associations that directly do not deal with the commercial business and thirdly, it deals with the whole voluntary sector, excluding government, but includes both business and third sector (which comprises neither government nor market).
Civil society is a network of the citizens and the nongovernmental organizations. This network lies between citizens on the one hand and the state on the other. According to David Held, civil society is made up of areas of social life, the domestic world, economic sphere, cultural activities and political action which are organized by private or voluntary arrangements between individuals and groups outside the direct control of the state. Thomas, Hobbes, in “Laviathan” points that the civil society means, consent of every one and allows every one’s freedom to do whatever the law of the state prohibit. Tocqeville said that civil society is rather civilest social interaction between mob and the state. Lastly, G.W.F Hegel was the first who distinguished the state from civil society in every phase of life except the government. He describes it as a repository of public freedom; while state remain the final source of moral authority.
Arunachal Pradesh one of the largest refugees dominated state in India who settled forty years back (1964). The very fact is that the governmental administration as well the civil society is completely ineffective to provide the basic fundamental rights to the refuges and with that these refuges are continuously denied their rights and liberty by the state and civil societies. Now the very basic question is to be ask is, why the civil society is not working in the state when it comes to the Chakma and Hajong refugees, why right to information are not allowed to accesses by these refugees which is one of the fundamental rights or to be say human rights.
Historical understanding of the State:
The recent history and the administration of Arunachal Pradesh can be said to date back to 1838 when the British extended their administration to the frontiers which now form Arunachal Pradesh. The administration to this area under that regime failed to meet the desired result due to absence of good communication. It was only in 1914 that the British Government thought of treating these areas as a separate frontier tract to be administered somewhat differently from the rest of Assam. Consequently, the Assam Frontier Tracts Regulation, 1880 was extended to the North East Frontier Tracts and the Tracts were declared as “Excluded Areas” of Assam. They were administered by the Governor of Assam through the political officer in his discretion.
When the Constitution of India came into force in 1950, another change was effected in the administrative set up. The Government of Assam was relieved of its responsibility of looking after administration of the “Excluded Areas”. However, the discretionary power was vested in the Governor of Assam, who served as the agent of the President of the Republic of India. In 1954, all these tracts formed into the North East Frontier Agency (NEFA). On the enactment of North Eastern Area (Reorganization) Act 1971, NEFA was made Union Territory of Arunachal Pradesh on 21st January 1972. On 20th February 1987, Arunachal Pradesh was made a full fledged state within the Indian Union.
Even after so many political and administrative developments which culminated in the formation of the present state of Arunachal Pradesh the laws, rules and regulations which were applicable during the British period continued to be in force even today. The state of Arunachal Pradesh consists exclusively of different tribes. Part X of the Constitution read with the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution governs the administration of the state of Arunachal Pradesh. The entire area of the state has been declared as Scheduled areas. It was the endeavors of the constitution of India and various other enactment to protect and maintain the exclusive culture, custom and traditions of the local tribal people and was consistent with their ethos and aspirations.
The ethnic tribes of Arunachal Pradesh have very similar culture, tradition and custom with very rare differences. They have been following their customs and traditions, evolved over ages from time immemorial. These customs, traditions which are integral part of their life and living in tough hilly terrain in challenging circumstances have given rise to a distinctive identity to the indigenous tribal people.
The efforts being made by the state Government in preserving the tribal identity and culture are however being jeopardized by the presence of the Chakma and Hajong refugees in the state. The people of Arunachal Pradesh distinguish themselves that there is nothing common between the tribal people of Arunachal Pradesh and the Chakma and Hajong refugees. The fact that both bear Mongoloid features further complicated the issue. Both belongs to the tribal groups one from the sate of Arunachal Pradesh and another from the Chittagong Hill Tract (CHT) respectively, no doubt there is religious differences. Chakmas are largely Buddhist than animism but, on the other hand the Arunachalees are largely animism, very few populations are Buddhist. With all these few differences, it can be generalized that the ethnic identity of both the groups never the last common in some areas.
Arunachal Pradesh or the erstwhile NEFA had sui generic, political status both during earlier British rule as well as in the post-independence era. From the very beginning when the British took possession of territory, the efforts were made to pre-British rule as well as in the post-independence era. From the very beginning when the British took possession of territory, the efforts were made to preserve the tribal society in its pristine form and protect it from any outside interference in its culture, values and socio-religious norms. By various laws, rules, regulations and orders, the government, ensure that the tribal society, its identity and its culture would be protected.
Arrival of the Chakma and Hajong Refugees in Arunachal Pradesh and Human Right Violation:
During the partition of India in 1947, the people of the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHTs) under present-day Bangladesh, sought to be a part of India and even hoisted the Indian National Flag on their lands. However, the Bengal Boundary Commission headed by Redcliff awarded the CHTs to Pakistan although 98.5 percent of the population of the CHTs was non-Muslim. The then Pakistan Government took a serious view of the hoisting of the Indian flag by the Chakmas and embarked on a series of repressive measures. Unable to bear the atrocities and faced with displacement on account of the construction of the Kaptai Hydel Project about 30,000 Chakmas and Hajongs migrated to India in 1964. They were settled in Arunachal Pradesh after due consultation with the local leaders by the Central Government of India under a “Definite Plan of Rehabilitation”. The Government of India extended all possible kind of helps including financial aids, employment, trade, license, book grants etc for proper establishment of their shattered life. After the partition of India, the Government’s policy was to grant citizenship to those who originated from areas that were part of Undivided India. The rest of the migrants were accorded Indian citizenship. However the Chakmas and Hajongs were not granted Indian citizenship. In the wake of the anti-foreigner agitation in Assam, the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh undertook a series of repressive measures beginning in 1980. The State Government vide its letter No. POL –21/80 dated 29th September 1980 banned public employment for the Chakmas and Hajongs in the State. In 1991, the State Government under its order No FPSO-3/90-91 of 31 October 1991 issued by the Circle Officer of Diyun withdrew ration card facilities under the Public Distribution System. In 1994, the State Government under its order vide no. CS/HOME/94 dated 21 November 1994 further directed ‘withdrawal of all kinds of facilities from the Chakma Settlement area”.
In 1991, the Committee for Citizenship Rights of the Chakmas of Arunachal Pradesh (CCRCAP) was formed to demand for citizenship rights of the Chakmas and Hajongs of Arunachal Pradesh. Starting in 1992, the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh became more hostile and started inciting sectarian violence against the Chakmas and Hajongs. The All Arunachal Pradesh Students Union (AAPSU) served a “Quit Arunachal Pradesh” notice to the Chakmas to leave the State by 30 September 1994. As a result, a large number of Chakmas fled from Arunachal Pradesh and took refuge in the neighboring Indian State of Assam. However, the State Government of Assam issued shoot at sight orders against the fleeing Chakmas and Hajongs. The CCRCAP approached the National Human Rights Commission of India (NHRC) about the deadline set by the AAPSU and the threat to the lives and property of the Chakmas and Hajongs. The NHRC treated it as a formal complaint and asked the State Government and Central Government to report on the issue. On 7 December 1994, the NHRC directed the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh and Central Government to provide information about the steps taken to protect the Chakmas and Hajongs. This was ignored till September 1995. In the meantime, the harassment, intimidation, arrests and detention continued and increased. The issue became critical following the meeting of all-party leaders and the AAPSU held at Naharlagan, Itanagar on 20 September 1995. Political leaders of Arunachal Pradesh led by then Chief Minister Mr. Gegong Apang passed a unanimous resolution to resign en masse from the national party membership if the Chakmas and Hajongs are not deported by 31 December 1995. The resolution also prohibited any social interactions between the local Arunachalees and the Chakmas and Hajongs. The CCRCAP approached the NHRC again on 12 and 28 October 1995 to seek protection of their lives and liberty in view of the deadline and support extended to the AAPSU by the State Government. As the State Government was inordinately delaying the transmission of information regarding the steps taken to protect the Chakmas and Hajongs, the NHRC, headed by Justice Ranganath Mishra, approached the Supreme Court to seek appropriate relief and filed a writ petition (720/1995). The Supreme Court in its interim order on 2 November 1995 directed the State Government to “ensure that the Chakmas situated in its territory are not ousted by any coercive action, not in accordance with law.” As the 31st December 1995 deadline approached, then Prime Minister P V Narashima Rao formed a high-level committee headed by then Home Minister S B Chavan. On 9 January 1996, the Supreme Court gave its judgement in the case of NHRC vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh, issuing the following orders:
a) The first respondent, the State of Arunachal Pradesh, shall ensure that the life and personal liberty of each and every Chakma residing within the State shall be protected and any attempt to forcibly evict or drive them out of the State by organised groups, such as the AAPSU, shall be repelled, if necessary by requisitioning the service of para-military or police force, and if additional forces are considered necessary to carry out this direction, the first respondent will request the second respondent, the Union of India, to provide such additional force, and the second respondent shall provide such additional force as is necessary to protect the lives and liberty of the Chakmas;
b) Except in accordance with law, the Chakmas shall not be evicted from their homes and shall not be denied domestic life and comfort therein;
c) The quit notices and ultimatums issued by the AAPSU and any other group which tantamount to threats to the life and liberty of each and every Chakma should be dealt with by the first respondent in accordance with law;
d) The application made for registration as citizen of India by the Chakma or Chakmas under Section 5 of the Act, shall be entered in the register maintained for the purpose and shall be forwarded by the Collector or the Deputy Commissioner who receives them under the relevant rule, with or without enquiry, as the case may be, to the Central Government for its consideration in accordance with law; even returned applications shall be called back or fresh ones shall be obtained from the concerned persons and shall be processed and forwarded to the Central Government;
e) While the application of any individual Chakma is pending consideration, the first respondent shall not evict or remove the concerned person from his occupation on the ground that he is not a citizen of India until the competent authority has taken a decision in that behalf;
Despite the clear and unambiguous order of the Supreme Court, the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh has not taken any measure to implement the court’s directions. Rather, the State Government has undertaken various measures to undermine and violate the Supreme Court judgement. The State Government has been making the conditions of the Chakmas and Hajongs untenable by denying them fundamental rights such as right to education and other basic facilities such as health care, employment facilities. Other measures included a complete halt to any development activities, refusal to provide trade licenses, refusal to deploy teachers in the schools located in the Chakma and Hajong areas, withdrawal of all pre-primary (Anganwadi) centres and finally forcible eviction by claiming the lands of the Chakmas and Hajongs as forest lands.
After the Supreme Court judgment, the AAPSU and State Government of Arunachal Pradesh began inciting communal hatred. The State Government, however, became more tactful, calculated and deliberate in its anti-Chakma activities. With a view to repel any move to submit citizenship applications to the Deputy Commissioners, the State Government attempted to provoke communal passions by calling a state-wide bandh on 22 January 1996. The then Chief Minister, Mr. Gegong Apang, went to the extent of describing the Supreme Court judgment as the “step-motherly attitude of the Centre” and calling it biased judgment”. On 26 January1997 the AAPSU also called a state-wide bandh. On 4 May 1998, 27 Chakmas went to submit the citizenship applications to the Deputy Commissioner of Changlang District. The citizenship applications were verified by the First Class Magistrate of Margarita, Assam. However, the Deputy Commissioner of Changlang refused to accept the applications. Due to the pervasive fear and the hostile situation engineered by the State Government, the Chakmas and Hajongs were unable to submit applications to the Deputy Commissioners. It was after discussions with the officials of Union Home Ministry that the Chakmas and Hajongs started submitting citizenship applications to the Deputy Commissioners through the Union Home Ministry in February 1997. Over the years, around 4000 citizenship applications have been submitted. However, the concerned Deputy Commissioners have been blocking the said applications by not verifying them and not forwarding them within a reasonable period of time in spite of an amendment in the Citizenship Rules, 1956. Under Rule 9 of the Citizenship Rules (Amended), 1998 the Deputy Commissioner/State Government is required to forward the citizenship application within a period of six months. The blocking of citizenship applications in this manner is a clear contempt of Supreme Court order in which the apex court clearly held that the Deputy Commissioners are bound to forward the applications received by them, with or without inquiry, as the case may be, to the Central Government for consideration. It has been learnt that the State Government has forwarded around 260 citizenship applications in January 2000 after due verification. However, until today the Union Home Ministry has not taken any decision on these applications despite the fact that all the applicants have provided documentary proof (such as identity cards issued by the State Government) that can stand judicial scrutiny to prove their migration in 1964 and continuous stay in Arunachal Pradesh. Justice delayed is justice denied. The refusal of the Central Government to grant citizenship to 260 applicants whose applications have been verified is further denial of justice.
On 28 January 1996, Mr. Pularam Chakma (50), of Udaipur village under Diyun Circle of Changlang district, and Mr. Maratsa Chakma, S/o- Mr. Ratna Kumar Chakma, aged 16, of Vijoypur village under Bardumsa circle of Changlang district went for harvesting the mustard crop. They were working for Mr. Chandra Kri and Mr. Pyola Kri of Namgo village under Chowkham circle of Lohit district. Mr. Pularam Chakma and Mr. Maratsa Chakma were attacked by about 20 AAPSU activists and beaten up mercilessly at Medo Bazar of Lohit district in full public view. Mr. Pularam Chakma was beaten to death on the spot. Mr. Maratsa Chakma, who was left for dead, however later gained consciousness and was able to get assistance at a nearby Chakma house. CCRCAP had approached the NHRC on the issue.
The State Government of Arunachal Pradesh has adopted various policies to evict the Chakmas and Hajongs by issuing orders for eviction to show that its actions were being done legally without violating the Supreme Court judgement. On 8 December 1997, the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh issued eviction notices to 66 Chakma families in Kamakhyapur and Raj Nagar areas under Changlang district. Earlier, on 11 November 1997, the Circle Officer of Diyun, Mr. D Riba served quit notices (memo No Diyun/LR/EVC/97) to 109 families of Jyotsnapur village under Changlang district and directed them to proceed to their original settlement areas. Mr. Riba did not give any explanation for such eviction notice. In his notice, Mr. Riba simply stated, “You are hereby directed to proceed to your original settlement Jyotipur village with family latest by 20 November 1997 without fail. Failing which legal action will be initiated against you.” The Chakmas have been living in Jyotsnapur village for the last two decades. They have settled in Jyotsnapur village after the Diyun River flooded their areas and destroyed their houses during monsoon. For the last two decades, the State Government did not raise any objection. In fact, it was the officials of the State Government who ordered the Chakmas to settle in Jyotsnapur village.
When three Chakma families re-built their huts, the Forest Officials visited the area on 21 January 1997 and demolished them again. The properties of all the damaged houses were seized by the Forest Corporation officials, transported in two trucks with the help of 40 labourers and auctioned at Miao market in Changlang District on 21 January 1997. On 2 February 1997, the Forest Corporation Ltd officials planted trees in that area. The plantation in the Chakma inhabited areas was carried by Shri B Ajang (Divisional Manager of Forest Corporation), Mr. K K Dev (Range Manager), Mr. A Dutta (Assistant Range Manager), Mr. D D Dubey, Forest Guard, Mr. L Abou, Forest Guard, Mr. R H Lowang, Forest Guard and Mr. S K Dhar, Forest Guard. In addition, the State Government in other places evicted many Chakmas from other villages.
The Circle Officer of Diyun Mr. D Riba called a meeting with the local tribal leaders on 27 October 1997 at his office where it was unanimously decided not to “engage any Chakma/Hajong people for their agricultural field, contract work and business” by 30 October 1997. The Circle Officer issued a Circular Vide No DYN/CON-4/97 dated 27 October 1997. The Circle Officer also issued another notice on 31 October 1997 Vide No DYN/JUD-1/97, directing to “discontinue the engagement of Chakma/Hajong people in agricultural field/business and contract work forthwith”.
In 1998 the State Government imposed an economic embargo on the Chakmas and Hajongs. Agricultural products such as ginger, chili and master seeds produced by the Chakmas and Hajongs have no market in the local areas. They have to be sold in neighboring Assam. However, to sell these cash crops in Assam require permission from the State Government. But, the Chakmas and Hajongs continue to be denied permission/licenses to sell their products in Assam. As a result, their products are damaged. The CCRCAP filed a PIL bearing No. Civil Rule 4/1998 before the Honorable Gauhati High Court and the same is still pending for adjudication. The State
Government taking advantage of the judicial delay until today is denying them permission to sell their products.
While the Government of India has been taking measures to make the right to education a fundamental right, the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh has been taking all measures to completely deny the right to education to the Chakmas and Hajongs.
All the forty-nine pre-primary schools (Anganwadis), were withdrawn in 1994 (vide No. CS/HOME/94 dated 21 November 1994) during the State sponsored agitation to oust the Chakmas and Hajongs from Arunachal Pradesh. The Anganwadi Centres are yet to be restored. Consequently, the Chakmas and Hajongs have been facing a generation gap in education despite the Government of India making the right to education as a fundamental right. The Anganwadi Centres had provided employment to 98 women. The withdrawal had resulted in their termination from job without any compensation.
For about 40,000 Chakma and Hajong population there is only one Government Secondary School at Diyun. In the absence of any middle school in the whole Diyun circle, this school has to accommodate all the Chakma and Hajong students passing out every year from more than 10 primary schools operating in the Chakma areas. Around 1,400 (12 teachers) are enrolled in this school with virtually no infrastructural facilities. The school building is built by the Chakmas and no grant is given by the State Government. No developmental works has been undertaken by the State Government- bench, desk, duster and other required furniture are self-arranged by the guardians of students.
The State Government of Arunachal Pradesh in a circular on 31 October 1991 (No FPSO-3/90-91) had ordered all the Chakmas and Hajongs to surrender their rations cards under the Public Distribution System to the Circle Officer. Thousands of Chakmas and Hajongs were forced to surrender their ration cards to the State Government. Despite the Supreme Court judgement the State Government has not returned the ration cards. The Chakmas and Hajongs are very poor and rely to a large extent on the Public Distribution System. Ration card facilities are indispensable for the daily labourers. By denying the ration card facilities, the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh has condemned them to poverty. As stated above, the Chakmas and Hajongs are not even issued permission to sell their cash crops in neighbouring Assam. They are not issued licenses for trade in the local markets. At the same time, hundreds of families were rendered landless due to soil erosion caused by the Noa-Dihing River and its tributaries. More than 80 percent of the Chakmas and Hajongs are below poverty line. Yet the Chief Secretary to the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh, Mr. P M Nair in a letter to Additional Secretary P D Shenoy, MHA vide letter no D.O.No.HMB(B)-74/96 of 9 March 2000 stated that “at present Chakmas are not covered under the Public Distribution System as they are self-sufficient in food grains”. It must be mentioned that if the local people can be covered under the PDS despite having all the facilities at their disposal, the claim of the State Government that the Chakmas and Hajongs are self-sufficient economically is far-fetched. In fact, the Chakmas and Hajongs are not covered under the PDS merely because they are not citizens, which is again contrary to the Supreme Court’s directions.
Since 22 October 1997, the Circle Officer of Diyun Circle, Officer in Charge of Diyun Police Station and Second Officer of Diyun Police Station came to the shops of Chakmas in Diyun Bazar and verbally ordered the closing down of shops belonging to the following persons:
The State Government vide circular dated 29th September 1980 and circular dated 31st October 1997 has banned employment in government service, agricultural field, contract work and business etc. for the Chakmas and Hajongs in the state, resulting in the unemployment among a large number of educated youths. The ban on employment continues until today.
The entire Chakma-Hajong area consisting of 30 villages, there is only one Primary Health Centre (PHC) at Diyun circle, whereas, in other local areas PHC has been provided in almost all villages. The PHC of Diyun hardly able to cater the needs of Disseminated by Asian Indigenous & Tribal Peoples Network for public information Chakmas and Hajongs as it has only one doctor, five nurses and eight beds. The patients often remain unattended and therefore people prefer to give their own treatment gained by way of experience. Instances of malarial deaths and other simple and serious diseases otherwise not fatal are numerous. Though it is claimed that the Chakmas are provided medical facilities, in effect they are still denied treatment. Nurses also charge money to give injections. Some Chakma villages such as Dharmapur, circle Miao, Bijoypur, circle Bordumsa and Deban area (eight villages) in Changlang district are located far away from the nearest PHC. As there are rivers, which are sometimes flooded, people remain cut off sometime for a month from rest of the places. Therefore, even simple fever often proves fatal in these places.
The State Government has banned all development activities in the Chakma and Hajong areas. In an order vide no. CS/HOME/94 dated 21 November 1994 the state government of Arunachal Pradesh directed “withdrawal of all kinds of facilities from the Chakma Settlement area”. Some of the problems due to lack of any public development works are given below:
(a) The Chakmas and Hajongs have not been provided with drinking water facilities. Some villagers have to travel a distance of more than one and half kilometer to fetch water for drinking as well as for other domestic uses. During rainy season the river water causes several diseases, as it becomes unfit for drinking.
(b) No construction of roads, bridges and culverts are undertaken in the Chakma and Hajong inhabited areas. In the absence of infrastructures like roads, bridges, other developmental activities are unimaginable.
(c) Almost 90 percent of the Chakma villages are not provided with electricity though economically and technically most viable. Even those few villages having connections, electricity supply has been cut off since 1994 due to the non replacement of worn out apparatus or because of willful negligence on the part of the concerned officials. Complaints/reminders to authorities for replacement of worn out apparatus all these years have gone unheeded.
(d) The Chakma and Hajong farmers were provided improved seeds, fertilizers, pesticides, agricultural tools and implements at subsidized rates till 1991 and these facilities were stopped thereafter. On the other hand, the other locals are being provided with high yielding variety of seeds, technical know-how and agricultural training and other assistance including monetary aid.
On 23 August 1995, a petition was filed before the Rajya Sabha Committee on Petition. After extensive visits to several places where the views of the local people, the Chakmas, experts, the State Government and the Central Government were taken into account, the Committee in its 105th Report of 14 August 1997 recommended the speedy granting of Indian citizenship to the Chakmas of Arunachal Pradesh. It was also recommended that “all the old applications of Chakmas for citizenship which have been either been rejected or withheld by Deputy Commissioners or the State Government continue to block the forwarding of such applications to Central Government, the Central Government may consider to incorporate necessary provision in the Rules (or the Act if so required) whereby it could directly receive, consider and decide the application for citizenship in the case of Chakmas of Arunachal Pradesh.” The Committee further recommended that the Chakmas be also considered for granting them the status of Scheduled Tribe at the time of granting the citizenship. Although, the Government of India has submitted Action Taken Report, practically none of the recommendations of the Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions have been implemented until today.
After the Arunachal Pradesh government threatened that all members of State Assembly would resign en masse if the Chakmas and Hajongs were not expelled by 31 December 1995, a committee headed by the Prime Minister of India was established. A Sub- Committee under the chairmanship of the Union Home Minister was formed to find an amicable solution to the Chakma problem. The Home Ministry officials headed by Mr. P. D. Shenoy, Additional Secretary (Ministry of Home Affairs) representing the said Sub-Committee visited the Chakma and Hajong inhabited areas on 6 and 7 March 1999. The Sub-Committee in January 2000 submitted the report to the Union Home Minister, who is currently the chairman, containing specific recommendations to resolve the Chakma and Hajong problem. Unfortunately, no decision has been taken for implementation of the recommendations of the Home Ministry team.
In addition to the Chakmas and Hajongs who migrated in 1964, there are about 5,000 Chakmas and Hajongs who are born after the migration of their parents in 1964. They are Indian citizens by birth under Section 3(1) (a) of the Indian Citizenship Act, 1955 which states that “except as provided in sub-section (2), every person born in India, - (a) on or after the 26th day of January, 1950 but before the commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1986” is a citizen by birth. The CCRCAP filed a complaint with the National Human Right Commission on 12 December 1997 against the denial of franchise rights to the Chakmas and Hajongs. The NHRC issued notice to the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh and the Union Government of India on the issue. In their replies to the NHRC, both the Central Government and the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh recognised that “as per the provisions of the Citizenship Act 1955, every person born in India on or after 26 January 1950 and before 1 July 1987 are citizens of India by birth and therefore eligible for electoral rolls.” However, when the Chakmas and Hajongs who were born after their parents’ migration and are citizens under Section 3(1)(a) of Indian Citizenship Act, 1955, went to the Assistant Electoral Registration Officer of Diyun under Changlang District of Arunachal Pradesh, the officer refused to accept their Form 6 – Application for inclusion of name in electoral rolls. The CCRCAP approached the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). The MHA informed it that the Election Commission had been requested to include all the Indian citizens into the electoral rolls. But the Election Commission took no action. Since no action has been taken to ensure that the Chakmas and Hajongs are enrolled in the voters’ list, the PUCL and the CCRCAP filed a writ petition (CPR no. 886 of 2000) before the Delhi High Court. In its judgement on 28 September 2000, the Delhi High Court ordered the registration of all eligible voters. This order, too, was flouted on various pretexts. Till date, not a single Chakma or Hajong has been included in the electoral rolls. During the revision of electoral roll 2001 around 2000 Chakmas and Hajongs filed claim applications enclosed therewith their proof of age, residence etc. All the claim applications were, however, rejected for not specifying house enumeration number and due to lack of polling station in the Chakma areas. It may be stated that the allotment of house enumeration number and setting up of polling station are tasks of EC and the Chakma and Hajong applicants cannot be punished for omission on the part of the officials of the EC. The repeated representations to the EC failed to elicit any positive result.
Conclusion:
It is true that the tribal areas of this country have special status, and all these rights are given by the supreme book of the land called “Constitution of India”. It is the only Constitution of India and Parliament of India who recognizes all the rights, identity and status of the tribes and their regions. But one also has to understand that the same Constitution also discuss about Article 21 (Right to life) and other fundamental rights, as well as the provisions of the Citizenship rights which is directly or indirectly related to the Chakma and Hajong refugees of this country. No doubt we should respect the tribal identity, culture and etc, for their proper development to bring them to ‘mainland’ but with that, on humanitarian ground other groups who are also tribal before refugees in the Chittagong Hill Tract (Bangladesh) (Chakmas and Hajongs) should be respected largely. Once selfish nature adopted and feeling of regionalism developed, the system automatically changed without any gain.
People of Arunachal Pradesh has to understand that the legal part of the Constitution which providing rights to the Chakma and Hajong refugees to settle and get the status of Schedule Tribes in the state, and also Indira-Mujib agreement of 1972 allow legally to settle in the land of India with all the fundamental rights and other rights which Indian availing.
One also has to look all the provisions of the Constitution and Acts, and it is really, one of the most important areas to be focus. But discussing only the provisions of Inner Line Regulation Act, Special Status State, Bengal Regulation Act of 1873, and etc is I think, baseless and biased, because all these are not the free mind provisions. All these provisions adopted by the British India when India was their colony and it has to be changed. We cannot continue the British made Colonial rule and regulation, policies and Acts to tackle different types of situations even after 57 to 58 years of independence, we are following the cynical policies, i.e., the policy of inner-line regulation, which I found one of the most inhuman policy towards the Indians, and if it continues I don’t think it allow the tribal to mix with the mainland India and remove the tag of backwardness.
Whatever the case may be the Chakmas and Hajongs are those people who participated in India’s war of independence, whose forefathers lost their life to make India independent. Chakmas and Hajongs have right to get their share in a proper legal manner. The issues of Chakmas and Hajongs in Arunachal Pradesh are completely political because all the parties fueling the issue only for political gain. Apart from all this oppose and politics of deport, of Chakmas and Hajongs in the state, it has come to light that few tribes of Arunachal like Singpho and Tangsa are supporting citizenship rights of the Chakma and Hajong refugees in the state, because they know that the Chakma and Hajong refugees are legally correct and they should be given citizenship within a time bound period.
Chakmas and Hajongs came to India before forty years and have been fighting for their basic fundamental rights. Human rights are the basic fundamental rights to all the people who are residing in India. It is one of the most legal which is directly or indirectly related to the rights and liberties of the Chakmas and Hajongs. Working of civil society and governance is very poor or to be said that there is one of the worse functioning of the civil society in Arunachal Pradesh because the governmental administration as well as non governmental organizations are not functioning even to the minimum level to provide the basic fundamental rights i.e., right to life. The very simple example is the problem of Chakma and Hajong refugees in the state who are fighting to survive and waiting for the grant of citizenship and scheduled tribe status from years old.
Finally, without fueling and heating the issue more, it is very genuine to ask the question to all the political parties and NGO’s that, why till today the Chakma and Hajong refugees problem is not being settled down?, what is the reason, even after the Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, Guwahati High Court Judgment, and Rajya Sabha Committees suggestion as well as the National Human Rights Commissions directions to grant citizenship rights and fundamental rights to all the Chakma and Hajong refugees of Arunachal Pradesh, not been forwarded as such? Why civil society is not functioning in the state when it comes to the issue of Chakmas and Hajongs. Apart from it many question is to be discussed and asked which is very complicated but valid.
Lastly, we can conclude by saying that all the solution is to be sort out under the paradigm of the Indian Constitution. There should be a democratic solution to the problem which satisfies the people of Arunachal Pradesh and which also at the same time takes into full consideration, the humanitarian requirements of the innocent Buddhist Chakma and Hajong refugees in the state of Arunachal Pradesh.
REFERENCES
1. Chadha, Sapna (2001), Right to Information Regime in India: A critical Appraisal, Indian Journal of Public Administration, Vol.52, No.1, Jan-March, Pp. 1-17.
2. Chakma, Mrinal Kanti (2001), Violation of Human Rights of the Indigenous People of Chittagong Hill Tracts and the Plight of Chakma Refugees, in Roy, S.K.(Ed.); Refugees and Human Rights Rawat Publication, Delhi, Pp. 345-360.
3. Debbarma, P.K. and George Sudhir Jacob (1993), The Chakma Refugees in Tripura, South Asian Publishers, New Delhi.
4. Dutta, S. (1998), Student Movement in Arunachal Pradesh, Himalayan Publishers, Itanagar, Delhi (India).
5. Goswami, M.C & Das, P.B (1990), The people of Arunachal Pradesh: A physical survey, Directorate of Research, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar.
6. Highland Observer, 1-15 October, 1995.
7. Highland Observer, 1-5, 7th Oct, 1995.
8. Hutchison, R.H.S (1978), Chittagong hill tracts, Vivek Publishing House, New Delhi.
9. Hutnic, Nimmi (1991), Ethnic minority identity, Clarendon press, oxford.
10. Islam, Syed Nazmul (1981), The Chittagong Hill Tracts in Bangladesh: Integrational Crisis between Centre and Periphery, Asian Survey, Vol.XXI, No. 12, December, Pp. 1211-1222.
11. Jafa, Jyoti (1987), Victims of colonialism and ethno-centric nationalism, Mainstream, Annual, Pp. 107-108.
12. Joshep, K.V (1988), Migration and economic development of Kerala, Mittal Publications, Delhi.
13. Karn, Anil (1986), Politics of population influx and labour problem, UDH Publication, Delhi.
14. Largely information is based on the White paper on Chakma and Hajong refugee issue in Arunachal Pradesh, issued by the Government of Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar, 12, March 1996.
15. Nag, Sajal (1990), Roots of ethnic conflict: Nationality question in Northeast India, Manohar Publications, New Delhi.
16. Neera, Chandhoke (1995), State and Civil Society, Sage Publication, London, p.77.
17. News Times (Hyderabad) 17th January 1996, “A Question of Human Rights”.
18. Nobert, Elias (1994), The Civilizing Process, Blackwell Publication, Oxford, p. 87.
19. Osik, Dr. N.N (1999), Modern history of Arunachal Pradesh (1825-1997), Himalayan Publication, Delhi.
20. Pamphlet distributed in Delhi on the topic entitled: Why Arunachalees are opposed to permanent settlement of Chakma and Hajong refugees in Arunachal Pradesh, brought out by AAPSU on the eve of the peoples referendum rally held on 20th September, 1996, P. 2.
21. Prasad, Chunnu (2006), Migration and the Question of Citizenship: People of Chittagong Hill Tract in Arunachal Pradesh, Indian Journal of Political Science, Vol. LXVII, No. 3, July-September, Pp. 471-490.
22. Prasad, Chunnu (2006), Chakma and Hajong Refugee problem and politics of their settlement in Arunachal Pradesh (1947 to 2004), South Asia Politics, Vol.5, No.1, May, Pp. 46-50.
23. Rajya Sabha Committee on Petition 105th Report, presented on the 14th August 1997, Rajya Sabha Secretariat New Delhi August 1997.
24. Roy, Bunker (2001), Right To Information: Profile of Grass Root Struggle, Mainstream, Vol.39, No.22, May 19, Pp. 2-8.
25. Roy, Sanjay K. (2001), Refugees and human rights, Rawat Publications, New Delhi.
26. Singh, Deepak K. (1996), The Arunachal Tangle: Migration and ethnicity, Journal of peace studies, Vol.3, issue, 18019, September-December, Pp. 50-51.
27. Singh, Deepak K.(1996), The Chakma and Hajong Question in Arunachal Pradesh, Revolutionary Democracy, Vol. 4, No.1, April, Pp. 67-70.
28. Talukdar, S.P (1988), The Chakmas: Life and struggle, Gian Publishing House, Delhi.
29. Talukdar, S.P (1994), Chakmas: An embattled tribes, Uppal Publishing House, New Delhi.
30. The Arunachal Times, 10th, August, 1995.
31. The Arunachal Times, 14th Sep, 1995.
32. The Arunachal Times, 15th August, 1995.
33. The Arunachal Times, 26th Oct, 1995.
34. The Arunachal Times, 29th August, 1995.
35. The Assam Tribune, 22nd April, 1995.
36. The Assam Tribune, 7th, August, 1995.
37. The Stateless Chakmas and Hajongs of the Indian States of Arunachal Pradesh, Information released by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India in a form of article, Safdarjung Enclave Extension, New Delhi (India).
38. Thomas, Hobbes (1952), Leviathan, Encyclopedia Britannica, Chicago, Pp. 88 and 100.
39. Weiner, Myron (1978), Sons of the soil: migration and ethnic conflict in India, Oxford University Press, Delhi.
40. Weiner, Myron, Rejected peoples and unwanted migrants in South Asia, Economic and Political Weekly, August 21, 1993, Pp. 1733-1746.
Chunnu Prasad is a Doctoral Research Fellow in Centre for Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. He has published number of research paper in different journals, viz. Journal of Peace Studies, Economic and Political Weekly, Third World Impact, Think India, South Asia, Third Concept (five articles), South Asia Politics, Indian Journal of Political Science, Radical Humanist, Social Action, Radiance Weekly, Social Change, Punjab Journal of Politics, Ham Dalit, Man and Development, Eastern Anthropology etc. He also worked as a Research Assistant with National Academy for Training and Research in Social Security, funded by Ministry of Labour, Government of India, and Indian Council for Social Science Research (ICSSR), funded by HRD ministry, Government of India, Project Fellow with Political Institutions in India, Centre for Political Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. Presently he is working with the Indian Institute of Dalit Studies, New Delhi.
No comments:
Post a Comment