Indigenous tribes–people in Aruchal Pradesh are in ferment over the
September 17 Supreme Court ruling that the Chakma and Hajong refugees
in the State, numbering more than 50,000, be granted citizenship within
three months. While the Buddhist Chakmas and the Hajongs, who had fled
present–day Bangladesh’s Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) between 1964 and
1969, are celebrating the judgement of the apex court, Aruchal’s 20
major tribal groups are out protesting the decision through rallies
across the State and in New Delhi. The All Aruchal Pradesh Students’
Union (AAPSU), that is at the forefront of this protest, is not against
granting of citizenship to the Chakma and Hajong refugees, but are
opposed to these people settling down in the State.
The tive versus alien debate may be common in Northeast India,
largely because the issue of illegal migration from Bangladesh continues
to be a live subject, but the dissent in the highly sensitive frontier
State of Aruchal Pradesh that shares a 1,126 km long border with Chi
is something that can make New Delhi extremely worried. There is reason
to be uneasy because Chi has made it a point to reiterate its claim
over Aruchal Pradesh on and off, and any restiveness among the
indigenous population may make the Chinese happy. The protestors, too,
seems to be aware that the authorities cannot ignore their plea for
obvious reasons. For instance, placards during the AAPSU protest rally
in New Delhi recently read: ‘Is Aruchal dumping ground for
foreigners”; ‘If Aruchal is part of India, listen to the voice of
Aruchalees’; and ‘Despite Chi’s repeated claims, we have shown our
patriotism, now where do we go?’
There had been anti–refugee (read Chakma and Hajong settlers) stir in
Aruchal Pradesh in 1983, 1989 and 1995, during which dozens of homes
of the settlers were torched, but the rendra Modi Government would not
like the situation to go out of hand this time. After all, New Delhi,
under Prime Minister Modi, is on a foreign policy overdrive to boost
ties with the intertiol community, and would, therefore, not want
global attention turn to Aruchal for the wrong reasons. Moreover, the
Buddhist Chakmas from Bangladesh’s CHT are a global community, settled
in India and elsewhere, and any atrocity or discrimition against them
can project any government in poor light.
That New Delhi is on a sticky wicket on the issue was evident with
the response of Union Minister of State for Home Kiren Rijijju, an
Aruchalee himself, who said the Court order will ‘dilute the
constitutiol safeguards of the State’s people.’ Groups like the AAPSU
have claimed that the refugee population has grown from around 15,000 in
the mid–sixties to around 60,000 now, and could alter the ‘ethnic
balance’ in the State. The ‘Bara Parang’ or the great exodus of these
refugees to India followed their displacement in the wake of the
construction of the Kaptai dam in 1963 in Bangladesh’s CHT. Alleged
persecution, beginning with the partition of India, too, was believed to
have aided the exodus.
Granting of citizenship to the Chakmas and the Hajongs can have a
huge impact on local politics in the State. All political parties in
Aruchal Pradesh, including the ruling Congress, the opposition BJP,
and others, have called upon the State Government to take legal recourse
and challenge the Supreme Court ruling. The State Cabinet has already
initiated steps in this direction. The AAPSU on its part has moved the
apex court demanding it be made a party to the process concerning the
issue of granting citizenship to the refugees. The AAPSU, while
demanding that these refugees should not be allowed to settle down for
good in Aruchal Pradesh, said the Centre should bring these people
under the purview of the Inner Line Regulations, meaning they should
also be required to obtain an entry permit to the State like other
non–Aruchalees.
The matter is tricky and may not be that easy for the executive to
ignore the Supreme Court ruling and sit tight. The Supreme Court, for
instance, had gone into various official documents before coming up with
the ruling and cited the joint statement issued by the prime ministers
of India and Bangladesh in 1972, to confer citizenship on the
Bangladeshi refugees under Section 5 (1) (a) of the Citizenship Act
1955. This, of course, is contested like many other apparent commitments
on the subject. Some say Article 5 of the Constitution is not
applicable in this case as these refugees came much after 1950. As per
the Court order, the 1964–1969 stream of refugees are to be granted
citizenship. But, an unspecified number of Chakma and Hajong refugees
had entered Aruchal Pradesh much after the first stream of their
kinfolk arrived the State. Therefore, it is not really possible to grant
wholesale citizenship to every refugee without determining if they or
their children belong to the 1964–1969 lot within a span of three
months. The issue is bound to keep the frontier State on the boil in the
days ahead.