National Commission for Minorities: Communalising Assam Riots? - ACHR press release

Asian Centre for Human Rights
[ACHR has Special Consultative Status with the UN ECOSOC]
C-3/441-C, Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058, India
Tel/Fax: +91-11- 25620583, 25503624
Website: www.achrweb.org; Email: achr_review@achrweb.org


Embargoed for: 21st August 2012

Dear Sir/Madam,

Asian Centre for Human Rights (ACHR) has the pleasure to share the report,
”National Commission for Minorities: Communalising Assam Riots?”. It is
available at our website:
http://www.achrweb.org/reports/india/NCM-2012.pdf

On 11-12 August 2012, a team of the National Commission for Minorities
(NCM) following a visit by a team of NCM consisting of Planning Commission
Member, Dr. Syeda Hameed, Advisor Dr. G. B Panda, and Member of NCM, Keki
N. Daruwalla the riot affected areas of Assam and submitted it “Report on
Visit to Bodoland Territorial Autonomous Districts (BTAD) and Dhubri
District in Assam”. It is available at:
http://www.ncm.nic.in/pdf/tour%20reports/Assam.pdf

It is important to bear in mind that 77 people have been killed and over
400,000 have been displaced in the riots in Assam from 20 July 2012 and
further 50,000 people from the North East India who have nothing to with
the riots in Assam had to flee from mainland India (Bangalore, Hyderabad,
Chennai, Pune etc) between 15 to 20th August 2012 because of the threats
received based on their Tibeto-Mongoloid features.

In a separate letter today, ACHR has called upon Prime Minister Dr
Manmohan Singh to reject the report of the NCM because of the following
shortcomings:

1. The NCM has violated its mandate and failed to act as per its mandate.
As per the National Commission of Minorities Act, 1992, the NCM’s mandate
is the protection of religious minorities notified by the Government of
India. However, the NCM ignored the fact that at least 15% of the Bodos
are Christians while about 50% of the Bodos follow their own animist
religion, “Bathou” and therefore fall under the definition of “minorities”
under the NCM Act. However, the NCM effectively reduced the riots in Assam
to “Bodos” Vs “Muslims” wherein Muslims have been defined as “minorities”,
therefore, falling within the mandate of the NCM and the Bodos have been
defined as a majority in clear violation of the NCM Act. The NCM Act does
not include “ethnic minorities”. If the NCM has extrapolate “ethnic
minorities”, it failed to indentify them and it must be noted that in the
BTAD every community has the feeling of being a minority.

This argument is not mere semantic but raises fundamental questions about
enjoyment of the rights recognized under law and the way an institution
such as the NCM supposed to function.

2. The NCM’s report is biased and contains inflammatory contents that can
radicalize some sections of the mis-guided Muslims while increasing the
risk of the people with Tibeto-Mongoloid features, mainly from the North
East, in mainland India though they have nothing to do with the riots in
Assam. As over 6,000 people from the North East India assembled at
Bangalore Railway station on 15 August 2012, the NCM released its report
which stated that “the conflict was unequal as the Bodos were killing
Muslims with AK 47s and there is impending fear of militant Jihadis
supplying arms to Assam”. These inflammatory statements contributed to the
vulnerability of the North Eastern people and the feeling among them that
NCM is not for their protection even if majority of them are Christians
and had nothing to with the riots in Assam. These statements were made
when the authorities, press and human rights groups were exercising
maximum restraints not to publish the names of the victims or community
wise displaced persons in order to prevent further escalation of violence.

3. The NCM team visited only one Bodo camp i.e. Vidyapeeth High School at
Kokrajhar town while it visited six Muslim relief camps. The Vidyapeeth
High School is in the heart of Kokrajhar town, the headquarters of the
BTAD and therefore, its condition is better than other Bodo relief camps
and therefore, the inferences drawn by the NCM are inaccurate.

The NCM also failed to ensure impartiality at a time when it is clear that
both the Bodos and Muslims are scared to return to their respective
villages surrounded by the other community. Despite this reality, the NCM
concluded that in the case of the Muslims abandoning their villages and
their houses being looted and gutted, there is a “design to see that they
do not return to their own villages”, while with respect to the Bodos
houses, the NCM stated that “in most cases (Bodos) had their houses looted
and gutted”, suggesting that the Bodos did themselves.

Finally, there is a clamour growing demanding the visit of the National
Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) that is mandated to protect the
rights of the Scheduled Tribes including the Bodos.

Asian Centre for Human Rights believes that if the NCST were to visit the
areas and make a recommendation to safeguard the tribal land rights
through implementation of the provisions of the 6th Schedule to the
Constitution and the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation 1886 which prohibit
transfer of tribal lands to non-tribals, though legally tenable, will not
help to contribute to the reconciliation process which is indispensable at
this moment.

It is essential that all the National Commissions established with
mandates to protect the rights of the citizens do not act in such a manner
which is prejudicial to the interests of other communities. The NCM has
regrettably failed on that premise.

We thought you would find the report of interest.

With kind regards,

Yours sincerely,

Suhas Chakma
Director