Title: Statelessness or Permanent Rehabilitation: Issues Relating to Chakmas of CHT in Tripura and Arunachal Pradesh

Author: Anindita Ghoshal

Abstract: In South Asia, statelessness is not only a source of human insecurity and a cause of forced displacement, but it may also pose a threat to national or regional stability. The political map of Chittagong Hill Tracts has been redrawn several times over, as a result of annexation of this region by different rulers. After mainly the commercial relationship with the Mughals, it was only 1860 that the CHT was brought fully within realm of the British Empire. Eventually, the largest ethnic group in CHT was the Chakmas. According to the Radcliffe Award, CHT was handed over to East Pakistan just after Partition, with 98 percent of its population comprising of dominantly Buddhists and various other ethnic communities. By such unfair decision, from a relatively economically self-sufficient and politically semi-autonomous region, the CHT was turned into a peripheral area within East Pakistan.

With the inclusion of CHT in Pakistan, the Chakmas were abruptly exposed to unexpected political as well as religious discrimination at the hands of the new administration. The economic exploitation of that region had started right from early 1950s when the new Government undertook industrial developmental projects in the CHT. The first modern project to weaken Chakmas’ claim to a special status on grounds of their unique history and ethnicity was the construction of Karnaphuli paper mill at Chandragona in 1953, followed by the Kaptai hydroelectric project between 1959 and 1963. These two incidents led to one of the biggest displacements in the early history of modern South Asia. The 90 percent of the uprooted populace were Chakmas, who were never adequately rehabilitated. Again in the 1980s, the newly independent state of Bangladesh by design encouraged people from the plains to settle down in the hill areas, just to crush the expectation of self-determination in the CHT by the original inhabitants.

For over four decades of eviction Chakmas took asylum in India, especially in two states, i.e. Tripura and Arunachal Pradesh. The case of Tripura is virtually unique, as after Partition the indigenous peoples have been reduced to a marginal minority in their own land. Interestingly, the Chakmas in Tripura have always been an integral part of the ongoing militant movement against the dominant settler Bengali Hindus. But, after in different phases between the late 1970s and early 1980s, especially after a series of massacres by the Bangladesh security forces in the CHT, the number of Chakma refugees touched almost 70,000. Though through agreements, talks and promises of the Bangladeshi Government, and repressive policies made by the Government of Tripura for years even in the camps, most of the Chakmas still remain stateless in the land of Tripura.

But, the scenario of Arunachal regarding this particular uprooted community is thoroughly different in the sense that they are living consistantly in this country or the State over 40 years. Indeed, they are not camp refugees aided by both the State and Central Governments like Tripura; rather on the contrary, in most cases they have their right over lands and own-houses in the respective villages in Arunachal. But, in the course of transformation from NEFA to the State of Arunachal Pradesh, the status of the Chakmas became worst. The Citizenship Act of 1955 was never implemented for their cause. Moreover, the Government denied the Pact of 1972, by explaining its protected area status. The local people, political forum and parties, along with the State Government often raise the issue of alleged involvement of Chakmas in so called criminal, illegal and anti-national activities in respective villages and areas occupied by them.

In both these States, Chakmas were basically the victims of Partition. After the War of Liberation and the establishment of Bangladesh, they expected to get their legal rights over the land and properties. But, the then Bangladeshi Government had denied them as their citizens and after the death of Nehru; the Central Government also became reluctant about those stateless Chakmas. They did not either extended their hands for the end of the statelessness of Chakmas in this country, or advocated for legal procedures so that they can get their due recognition, in CHT.

Comments from Core Faculty Mamber:

1. The Buddhist population of CHT is further divided into various ethnic communities – many of whom remain invisible thanks to the huge attention that the Chakmas, the Hajongs and a few others get. Although all are victims, the uneven distribution of in-/visibility has its own politics to be explained.

2. The collection of reports entitled ‘Life is not Ours’ may be of help to you. The report is also available in Bengali published from Bangladesh.

3. While the point regarding ‘repressive’ policies followed by the Government of Tripura is well taken, a little elaboration of such policies will be welcome.

4. A little reflection on possible solutions is likely to add to the policy thinking on statelessness.