India: Repatriation Storm Brews Over Brus in Mizoram and Tripura (Maitreyee Handique, 8 June 2015)

THE QUINT

Repatriation Storm Brews Over Brus in Mizoram and Tripura
Maitreyee Handique
First Published: June 8, 2015, 3:19 pm


The Bru refugees camping on the edge of Tripura in India’s northeast should be packing their bags today, as the Mizoram government makes elaborate preparations to receive them back from across the border.

But this repatriation plan, involving a staggering 20,700 people, one of the biggest state-sponsored population movements, has hit a last-minute hitch.

No Bru wants to go back home.
The Predicament

This is deeply puzzling. It’s also turning out to be an embarrassing turn of events for Mizoram, which faces a legal predicament. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court had ordered the state to accept the refugees as its own and repatriate them under a time-bound “roadmap” starting June 8.

Many meetings were held between the Home Ministry, Tripura and Mizoram officials, as well as, the Mizoram Bru’s Displaced People’s Forum (MBDPF), which represents the refugees, to work out a Rs 68-crore rehab strategy. Minister of State for Home Kiren Rijiju recently flew to Aizawl, Mizoram’s capital, to get a hands-on update.

Last week, following court directives, Mizoram officials went to Kaskaopara – one of six refugee camps in Tripura – to verify returnees and facilitate a smooth transit. For the whole time, the officials simply sat and waited. No one came.
File image of Members Bru community inside a make-shift bamboo hut in Kanchanpur village, 210 km (130 miles) from Agartala, Tripura. (Photo: Reuters)
File image of Members Bru community inside a make-shift bamboo hut in Kanchanpur village, 210 km (130 miles) from Agartala, Tripura. (Photo: Reuters)
What Went Wrong?

In the late 90s, the minority Brus fled Mizoram to seek refuge in neigbouring Tripura following violent clashes with the Mizo majority. After decades of seeking justice, the Brus are now on the verge of getting it.

One of India’s most impoverished tribal communities, the Brus, 60% of them Hindus, got into trouble in 1997 when they raised demands to secure greater political and financial rights within the Mizoram legislature – under the constitutionally-backed Autonomous Development Council (ADC).

This demand led to open confrontation with strident Christian majority Mizo youth groups that have traditionally wielded immense power in the state. First came threats, then villages were burnt, and women allegedly raped, prompting the country’s highest court to take action after 17 years.

In the mass exodus that followed, old people died and women gave birth on the way, the cycle of life hardly stopping for a moment even at their worst, desperate times. Huddled in shanties, over 200 died for lack of medicines in the first year.
A Bru tribal refugee woman sits in her makeshift shop as a child watches, inside a refugee camp in Kanchanpur, about 221 km north of Agartala, Tripura. (Photo: Reuters)
A Bru tribal refugee woman sits in her makeshift shop as a child watches, inside a refugee camp in Kanchanpur, about 221 km north of Agartala, Tripura. (Photo: Reuters)
What’s Keeping the Brus From Returning?

According to MBDPF, lack of transparency is scaring away refugees. Mizoram has given no indication where the refugees will stay, or if they will return to their original homes. Most of their former land is “occupied” – either by the forest department or by Mizos, alleges A Sawibunga, its president.

The problems don’t end here. It’s alleged that many names have been struck off from the 1995 electoral list – the basis of repatriation selection. The MBPDF is also contesting the 20,700 displaced person’s figure; it should be 35,000. Mizoram only needs to compare it with the refugee list available in Tripura’s official records, Sawibunga said.

So, even if there are court-forced overtures now, the once uprooted have many questions. The MBDPF says the new sites are either in “Mizo-dominated” areas, or in “extremely steep cliffs”.

Lalbiakzama, the state’s additional secretary, however, dismissed these concerns. “Everything is on the road map,” he said. “We are in the process of identifying people for repatriation.”
Is There a Conspiracy in Relocation Plan?

MBPDF is not so sure. It sees a pattern in the relocation plan, by not allowing the community to live together.

Villages have been identified in three districts: 48 villages in northern Mamit to house 2,594 families, eight in Kolasib for 628 families, and 233 families will move to southern Lunglei.

The new sites have been selected according to “available space” and unspecified “issues”, said two state officials who did not want to be named. The returnees will be “allotted” a new address only after their arrival at Kaiskau, a base set up to ease transit at the border.

The Congress government led by Chief Minister Lal Thanhawla has called these claims as “false propaganda” prompted by a Hindu organisation. During last year’s general election, Lal Thanhawla tried to stop the refugees from exercising postal voting from Tripura camps.

In contrast, CPM-ruled Tripura is gracious. Despite a stretch on its resources, Jitendra Choudhury, MP representing East Tripura – where the camps are based – said that the people want to return to their homestead and get their agriculture land back. “But the repatriation will not succeed unless a congenial atmosphere is created (in Mizoram).”

“From our side, we’re not in a hurry. We will never give them an ultimatum to go,” said Choudhury. “It’s a humanitarian issue.”

(Maitreyee Handique writes on India’s northeast and keeps a watch on labour, industrial safety and human rights issues)