Resources for all concerned with culture of authoritarianism in society, banalisation of communalism, (also chauvinism, parochialism and identity politics) rise of the far right in India (and with occasional information on other countries of South Asia and beyond)
In Tripura, Bengalis and Mizos have joined hands to thwart the resettlement of Bru refugees
Brus cannot go back to their homes in Mizoram. And they are not welcome in Tripura, where they took shelter.
Piyangmoni Reang was 20 when she fled her home in 1997.
|
Arunabh Saikia
In January, Union Home Minister Amit Shah declared that the
23-year-old Bru refugee crisis, which has displaced tens of thousands
of people from the community, was over. In what he called the “logical conclusion”
to the crisis, Shah announced that around 34,000 displaced Brus,
originally from Mizoram, would be settled in Tripura, where they had
been living in camps since 1997.
Cut to November: residents of
North Tripura, where the government intends to settle a bulk of the
displaced Brus, are up in arms over the proposed rehabilitation plan.
For over a week, the North Tripura sub-division of Kanchanpur has been
shut down by locals opposed to the settlement of the refugees.
On
November 21, two people was killed and at least 20 injured as protests
turned violent when the police tried to forcibly clear a highway
blockade at North Tripura’s Panisagar.
Protesters gathered in large numbers on Saturday (Credit: Special arrangement)
Ethnic tensions
The
Brus were forced to leave their homes in Mizoram after a bout of ethnic
violence in 1997, triggered by questions over the community’s voting
rights in the state. Mizo pressure groups had demanded that the Brus be
struck off the state’s electoral list on the grounds that the community
was not “indigenous” to the state. This had already led to the formation
of a Bru militant group, demanding a Bru Autonomous District Council,
in 1996.
In 1997, a Mizo forest guard was allegedly killed by Bru militants – a flashpoint that led to a violent reaction by the Mizos, driving many Brus out of the Mizoram.
A ‘settlement’ finally
There
have been several attempts since to get the Brus back home – but few
families have gone back. The reason: Brus insist that they are not safe
in Mizoram. Even when the Centre cut off rations to the camps, the Brus
refused to move. They would rather die hungry than go to Mizoram, they averred.
Advertisement
Finally,
in January 2020, after eight failed attempts at repatriation, Bru
representatives, the Centre, and the states of Tripura and Mizoram,
agreed upon settling the community permanently in Tripura.
In line
with the agreement, the Tripura government has identified 15 locations
across Tripura to set up resettlement colonies for the community. Six of
them, including four major ones, are located in the North Tripura
subdivision Kanchanpur, which also houses the Bru refugee camps.
Fresh troubles
But
residents of Kanchanpur, most of them Bengalis, are opposed to the
resettlement plan. “We will not allow more than 500 families in
Kanchanpur and they should not be settled in areas close to villages of
original permanent residents,” said Sushanta Bikash Barua, the general
secretary of the Nagarik Suraksha Manch, a committee of local Bengali
residents of Kanchanpur.
Officials said a decision was yet to be
taken on the exact distribution of people area-wise. “The Central
government wanted it to be a consultative process, so we have asked the
Bru leaders to tell us who wants to settle where, but they are yet to
get back to us,” said Chandni Chandran, the sub-divisional magistrate of
Kanchanpur. “And we are aware of the issues, so the locations we have
selected are at a considerable distance from any existing habitation.”
Advertisement
Old fissures
Barua
said the local residents of the area were still wary as they feared
being overwhelmed by the Brus. He claimed their fears stemmed from bad
experiences in the past. “In the past, several Bengali people living
close to the Bru camps have had to flee because of atrocities by the
Brus,” he alleged.
In December last year, Barua alleged, members
of the Bru community had attacked Bengali shops and establishments in
the area while protesting against the Citizenship Amendment Act, which
makes undocumented non-Muslim migrants from Bangladesh, Pakistan and
Afghanistan eligible for Indian citizenship.
The
Act had invoked mixed reactions in Tripura. The state’s majority
Bengali-Hindu population, many of whom migrated to the state from
erstwhile East Pakistan after Partition, had rejoiced. The state’s
tribal residents protested against it. This had led to clashes resulting
in the death of a tribal man.
In
the North East, local communities fear the amended Act will lead to
unabated migration from Bangladesh, altering the demography of the
region. Critics of the Act often cite the example of Tripura to point
out that their concerns are not imaginary: in 1948, tribal communities
accounted for over 80% of the state’s population, now they are barely
30%.
Protesters blocking a highway on Saturday. (Credit: Special arrangement)
New alliances
Yet
the current opposition to the settlement of Brus in Tripura moves
beyond the binary of tribal and non-tribal and has seen some unlikely
alliances. The Manch has made common cause with the Mizo Convention, a
group that represents the interests of the Mizos living in Tripura’s
Jampui hills, also part of the Kanchanpur sub-division. Together, they
have formed the joint movement committee.
Advertisement
The Jampui hills are home to around 7,000-10,000 Mizos, according to local estimates.
The
Mizos’ concerns and demands are the same as the Bengalis. “Mizo
families living close to the Bru camps had to suffer the same fate as
the Bengalis,” said Zairemthiama Pachuau, general secretary of the Mizo
Convention “So, we have joined hands for a common goal.”
Pachuau added the association was limited to “one specific particular issue”. “That is the Bru settlement issue,” he said.
Meanwhile,
the Brus have also threatened to launch their own protests. “If the
protests escalate, we also will not keep quiet,” said Charlie Molshoy, a
secretary at the Bru Displaced People’s Forum.
To keep the peace,
the district authorities have summoned the Assam Rifles. “They have
taken charge now,” said Chandran on Sunday afternoon.
If Afghans Are Good Refugees in India, Why Not Rohingya Muslims?
Chandan Nandy
The Union Home Ministry’s effort to identify, arrest and
finally deport 40,000 Rohingya Muslims who fled appallingly violent
conditions in Myanmar to seek refuge in some Indian states, including
Jammu region, Assam, Andhra Pradesh, UP, Kerala, West Bengal and Delhi,
is reminiscent of government initiatives in the early and mid-1990s to
“detect, delete, deport” Bangladeshi Muslim illegal immigrants.
In
the past, deportations and physical “push backs” were carried out by
the Border Security Force with little or no success before a few
detention camps were set up in Assam to warehouse Bangladeshi
immigrants, mostly Muslims. Bangladeshi Hindu immigrants, who claimed to
be persecuted, could settle in Assam, West Bengal and elsewhere across
the country. They remained largely untouched. Also Read:Govt Exploring Ways to Deport 10,000 Rohingya Muslims from J&K
Rohingya Muslim refugees shout slogans during a protest against
the crackdown on ethnic Rohingyas in Myanmar, in New Delhi, 19 December
2016. (Photo: Reuters)
Differential Grant of Refugee Status
Clearly, the Centre’s vision in dealing with Rohingya Muslim
‘refugees’, who have suffered extreme levels of violence and other
privations in Myanmar, is not sufficiently based on classifying who
should or should not be granted refugee/asylum status.After
all, India has granted the same status to Afghans who fled the civil
war in Afghanistan through the 1980s and 1990s, ethnic Kachins from
Myanmar, Buddhist Chakmas and Sri Lankan Tamils.
What is worrisome is a 4 April report in The Times of India
which used “statist” language to describe the Rohingyas as “illegal”
migrants and that they followed “infiltration” routes to enter India.
Forced migrants anywhere across the globe take to flight from their
countries of origin when faced with dire situations of life and death.
They
often cross borders after travelling great distances, not to seek a
“better life” but to escape degradation or certain death. Surely, the
governments of countries to which the forced migrants escape to have a
duty towards protecting lives regardless of religious persuasions. The
migrants are trying to piece together their lives in appalling
conditions – a denial of human rights in itself. Also Read:Hoardings in Jammu Ask Rohingyas, Bangladeshi Muslims to Leave
The 1971 Refugee Inflow
As far back as 1971, when India was burdened by about 10
million “refugees” fleeing the fire and steel of a marauding Pakistan
army, the Indira Gandhi regime of the time took a political decision to
shelter the hapless humans – Muslims and Hindus – before the 1972
Mujib-Indira Pact was operationalised to “send” them back to an
independent Bangladesh.
Even then, while the fleeing East Bengalis
were granted the nominal status of refugees, India was not a signatory
to the 1951 Refugee Convention or its 1967 Protocol. It still isn’t.
Besides, India is among very few countries in the world which neither
has a national refugee protection framework nor an immigration policy.
But it has, from time to time, allowed nationalities such as Afghans,
ethnic Kachins, Sri Lankan Tamils and Buddhist Chakmas asylum purely on a
selective basis. Also Read: No Stake in Resources for B’deshi Illegal Migrants: Hazarika Panel
Border Failure
Neither the Indira-Mujib treaty nor subsequent efforts by
successive Indian governments to fence the 4,096-km-long
India-Bangladesh border failed to stem the inflow of immigrants. While
on paper and on the ground India’s border with neighbouring countries
are highly militarised and restrictive, the absence of an
immigration/refugee policy causes its security forces and the political
parties in different border states to look the other way when dealing
with the phenomenon of illegal or unauthorised migration, especially of
Hindus and Muslims from Bangladesh.
There is, of course, a
political dimension to the selective entry of immigrants – depending on
their religious affiliations, they serve an electoral interest for
vote-maximising parties. Also Read:Amendments to Citizenship Act in Assam is BJP’s Political Ploy
Acting Selectively
One reason why India has not signed the 1951 Refugee
Convention is that it does not make it an obligation on the part of the
receiving State to protect and safeguard the lives of refugees, leaving
it enough room to act selectively. The United Nations High Commission
for Refugees (UNHCR) has, from time to time and from group to group,
intervened with the government of the day to “modify” and “increase” its
registration activities and conduct “refugee status determination for
asylum seekers”. Besides, it also works to identify and map stateless
groups whose precise numbers are not known.
Originally living in
Myanmar’s Rakhine state, the Rohingya Muslims, one of the worst
persecuted minorities in the world, were forced to leave after the then
Burmese military junta subjected them to mass expulsions in 1977 and
1992. They were “threatened by the State’s antagonistic policies towards
their religion, their language and their culture.” This created a
chronic refugee crisis in Bangladesh which subsequently tried to push
back the Rohingya refugees from its soil.
A man from the Burmese Rohingya community ties a tarpaulin to a
tree to erect a makeshift shelter for his family at a camp in New Delhi,
14 May 2012. (Photo: Reuters)
Official Statelessness
The Rohingyas who returned to Myanmar were given limited
rights to movement and employment, but thousands were faced with mass
conscription to forced labour, arbitrary detention and other forms of
maltreatment.
This was followed by their official statelessness
(because the government then described them as having “nonindigenous
ancestry”) in which the Myanmar State codified their legal exclusion.
Clearly,
the Rohingyas qualified to be defined as refugees who have
“well-founded fear of persecution due to his/her race, religion,
nationality, member of a particular social group or political opinion
and are unable or unwilling to return” to their home countries. The
UNHCR emphasises that refugees “must not be expelled or returned to
situations where their life and freedom are at risk.”
Not a Security Threat
And yet the Modi government has embarked on a controversial
course to deport the hapless Rohingyas and push them across the border
to likely depredation and violence.
It will be unwise for India to view the Rohingya
Muslims on its territory as a security threat or even as a threat to its
major societal values. Likewise, an explanation that the Rohingyas are
an economic burden does not hold water because their numbers are
minuscule.
An attempt to classify types of threats from immigrant or
refugee groups runs into potentially dangerous distinctions between
“real” and “perceived” threats or into “absurdly paranoid notions” of
threats and anxieties.
It is therefore an imperative on the part
of the Modi government to take a stand that while not dismissing fears,
does not regard all anxieties over immigration and refugees as a
justification for exclusion.
The Indian government cannot have two
different yardsticks to measure – and find solutions to – the vexed
issue of immigrants/refugees living on its territory. It will do good
for the administration to realise that while conflicts create refugees,
refugees can also potentially create conflicts.
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)
[ It is one thing to protest the communal nature of the notifiaction declaring its intent to allow all Bangladeshi and Pakistani nationals belonging to the minority communities only, but to stand up for the Assam Accord of 1985 to prevent any settlement by cross border immigrants is pure and simple xenophobic nationalism ... see report below]
Protests in JNU against MHA notification on immigration into Assam
Shreya Roy Chowdhury, TNN | Sep 24, 2015, 12.14 PM IST
Protests in JNU against MHA notifiaction declaring its intent to allow all Bangladeshi and Pakistani nationals belonging to the minority communities, who sought shelter before December 31, 2014.
NEW DELHI: On Sunday, a number of student organisations joined hand in Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi to protest against the recent decision of the Ministry of Home Affairs to allow migrants from Bangladesh to settle in Assam on the basis of religion. The organizations that took part in the protest included the Assam Study Circle JNU, JNU Students' Union(JNUSU), All India Students Association (AISA), All India Students Federation (AISF), Chatra Mukti Sangram Samiti, Democratic Students Federation (DSF), Khasi Students Union of Delhi, Mishing Students Association of Delhi and Students Federation of India (SFI).
The students were protesting against a September 7 notice sent to Assam by the centre declaring its intent to allow all Bangladeshi and Pakistani nationals belonging to the minority communities (Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Jains, Parsis and Buddhists), who sought shelter before December 31, 2014, "due to religious persecution or fear of religious persecution" in their country, to stay in India without documents.
"This move, which completely violates the recommendations of the Assam Accord of 1985, is a nefarious design to communalise the political space in Assam," says a statement issued collectively by the protestors. "First, the watershed year of 1971 for identification of 'foreigners', which had been unanimously accepted has been changed to 2014. Second, the Assam Accord insisted on identification of 'foreigners', Hindus, Muslims or of any other religion, without any prejudice. This has been violated by the recent decision... leading towards a very communally polarised atmosphere in the state. Third, no representatives of any political party, ethnic organisations, students groups or civil society groups from Assam were consulted in any manner before the centre came to the said decision", said a joint statement by the organisations, "If Hindu Bangladeshis need to be rehabilitated in India, then the question arises here is why a politically tumultuous, underdeveloped and resource-short state like Assam will have to bear the largest share of them? Why can't geographically larger and economically advantageous states with more resources also share the responsibility of receiving the displaced persons from Bangladesh, in accordance with their capacity?"
Sandipan Talukdar, a research scholar from Delhi University said that this attempt to communalise the politics in Assam will "dilute the harmonious relationship between various ethnic groups in the state." Kanhaiya Kumar, the President of JNUSU asked why no democratic processes were followed by the centre before coming to this decision. "This decision threatens to erase the identity of the indigenous people of the state," he said adding that "similar techniques of overpopulating states with population from outside the states, to gain votes, have been practiced throughout India in recent times." AISA's Shweta Raj argued that Assam was always known for diversity and this "attempt of communalising the situation in the state in view of 2016 elections will strike at the very core of this diversity."
Kiran Pegu, from Mishing Students Association of Delhi said that at present the rights of the Mishing people and all the tribal people of Assam is at threat due to this rampant migration. He urged the government to take requisite steps to safeguard the rights of the people of Assam. Shaheen Ahmed, a research scholar from JNU hailing from Assam, observed that earlier, religious tensions rarely existed between Hindus and Muslims in Assam and they lived in harmony. "Muslims in Assam always took pride in their identity as Assamese. Only after the Partition were the seeds of communalism sowed in Assam. Its grown needs to be checked by both Hindus and Muslims together," Shaheen added. Simon, President of Khasi Students Union of Delhi mentioned that the rights of the tribal people in north-east India has been affected by rampant illegal migration. Not only Assam but all the states need to take a stand against it together, he said.
An election ploy?
Prasenjit Biswas
14 September, 2015
The recent notification granting right to residence and stay to members of minority religious groups persecuted in Bangladesh and Pakistan is an exemption aimed at garnering Hindu votes in Assam’s fractured polity. The Centre’s humanitarian gesture swells the support base of Bengali Hindus for the BJP even when hundreds of their ilk live in detention camps on suspicion of being illegal migrants. The irony is that many of these suspects are declared illegal ex-parte, many of them proving to be bonafide Indians after a strenuous legal battle.
The ex-parte modus operandi of declaring such bonafide Indians “non-citizens” amounts to the enforcement of a sense of stateless on soft targets like Bengali-speaking Hindus and Muslims. In many a proceeding under the foreigners’ tribunal, appropriate legal recourse, appeal and safeguards under the law were denied to suspected foreign nationals and they were sent to detention camps, the first step in their disenfranchisement and statelessness prior to deportation.
Interestingly, although India does not have an extradition treaty with Bangladesh to send back people declared “foreigners”, many have been pushed back without any explanation. More often than not they are shot on the border, which, according to international law, is not only anti-immigrant but also an abomination on humanity. Where, one may ask, in national and international law is such a practice permitted?
There is no certainty that the lives of such legally-created stateless individuals, belonging to some persecuted communit or the other, is going to change because they are exempt from being termed foreigners under a set of pre-Independence laws like the Passport Act, 1920 and Foreigners’ Act, 1946. Indeed, such outdated laws and and their provisions found reincarnation in Clause 2(1)(b) of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2003 that retains the notion of “illegal migrant” for those who enter India without valid papers from specified territories (read Bangladesh and Pakistan) and which still remains in vogue and applicable within judicial purview in determining the status of persecuted entrants from other countries. The notification, drawn up under the previous Acts of 1920 and 1946, does not provide a legally foolproof safeguard for such persecuted migrants against being called illegal and rendered stateless.
Further, rules framed under the Citizenship Act, 2003. which relate to a revision of the National Register of Citizens requires legacy data within 1971, which again is another mechanism to revoke citizenship. Such a play with citizenship laws continues to threaten Assam’s large non-Assamese population, including Bengali Hindus, in keeping them in limbo between non-citizen and citizen.
The situation shows up two opposite and contrasting tendencies. On the one hand, India, under the broad scope of the United Nations Convention on the Status of Stateless Persons, 1954, grants “exemption” to persecuted religious minorities of Bangladesh and Pakistan, keeping in mind the contextual situation in Assam. This very idea of exemption from having to produce valid passport and other travel documents is a declared humanitarian consideration for those being persecuted and displaced as a result of violence — a scenario that Bengali-speaking Hindus of Assam’s Barak Valley are all too familiar with.
There had been many victory processions by the BJP in Barak Valley claiming to protect the persecuted Hindu minorities who had come from Bangladesh and Pakistan. In the Brahmaputra valley, the same party merely paid lip service with regard to allowing persecuted migrants to remain in India. This has angered ethno-nationalists of the Brahmaputra valley, who see this as the imposition of a burden on the state’s refugees. Apparently, the exemption is a great political ploy to win over Assam’s sizeable Bengali Hindu vote that would allow the BJP to form the next government in Assam. Arguably, the exemption could be utilised to allay the fears of Bengali Hindus. Legally, the exemption would restrain the police from harassing religiously persecuted minorities at the slightest pretext.
The shrewd mix of politics and law, combined with a humanitarian concern produces a “fast pitch” for the BJP in Assam to bowl out the already beleaguered Tarun Gogoi government by placing on it the task of “freeing Hindus” from detention camps and even winding up these camps since “suspected foreigners” are kept there along with hardcore criminals. In response, Gogoi has placed the ball in the Centre’s court by claiming Assam has nothing to do with the issue.
According to Gogoi’s interpretation, if the Centre has granted these exemptions then it alone can grant Hindus immunity from legal proceedings on citizenship and, hence, he preferred to have nothing to do with it. This, needless to say, has given the BJP the gumption to accuse the Congress of being anti-Hindu. The political outcome of such legal exemptions, therefore, is a pretty kettle of fish that completely marginalises the case of Muslim migrants being given any exemption on any humanitarian grounds. There is no gainsaying that a large number of Muslim inhabitants of lower Assam districts are victims of ethnic cleansing and natural calamities, deprived of all their belongings and documents. Does not the heart of secular India bleed for such woebegotten religious and linguistic minorities living in Assam and elsewhere?
The writer is Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, North Eastern Hill University, Shillong
By basing asylum policy on religion, Modi government has set a dangerous precedent
The
Centre has marked out Hindu, Sikh, Christian, Jain, Parsi and Buddhist
refugess for special treatment allowing them to stay in India even
without any visas.
“Pseudo-secularism”
was a term invented by Bharatiya Janata Party supremo LK Advani,
ostensibly to attack the misuse of secularism in India. In reality, the
phrase functioned as dog whistle and was used by people who had no
desire to correct Indian secularism but who intended to remove it
altogether.
Advani is now out of the picture but the wheels he
set in motion have gathered a lot of momentum. Narendra Modi might now
be a political adversary of Advani’s but they still remain fellow
travellers. In keeping with the pseudo-secular spirit, therefore, Modi’s
government this week announced an asylum policy based explicitly on
religious lines.
In a notification
issued on Monday by the Ministry of Home Affairs, it was announced that
people from Pakistan and Bangladesh who had sought shelter in India
before December 31, 2014, “due to religious persecution or fear of
religious persecution” would be allowed to stay. The notification also
took great care to list out the religions whose followers were eligible
for this relaxation in the rules: Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, Jains,
Parsis and Buddhists.
Weak justification
Of
course, that the rationale of “religious persecution” is only half the
story, as is obvious from the glaring omission in the list: Muslims.
(Or, put another way, is shown by the fact that you needed to have a
religious list at all). Shia Muslims, by any standard should be
categorised as under “religious persecution”: more than 150 members of
the community were murdered in Pakistan in just the first six months of
2015 . Most of these killings were gruesome: in May 2015, terrorists
attacked a bus and killed 43 Ismailis, a sub-sect of Shia Muslims. The
killing of a Shia ethnic group, the Hazara, has reached a point where a
number of commentators have taken to calling it a genocide. The Hazara,
desperate to escape, ironically look to far-away Australia as a refuge –
a country that has accepted
them, citing the persecution they face in Pakistan. Neighbouring India,
a country with which the Hazara have historic links – there was even
once a Hazara regiment in the British Indian Army – is not even an
option.
The Ahmadis – a small Muslim sect – has been facing
continuous persecution almost since Pakistan was formed. Today
television shows openly denounce Ahmadis as so-called infidels. In 2014,
11 Ahmadis were killed by religious fanatics. Ahmadis are often
pejoratively called “Qadianis” after the town of Qadian, the birthplace
of founder of the Ahmadi community. Qadian is, incidentally, located in
India now but India has no policy of offering asylum to this persecuted
group.
Hindutva and elections
Clearly
then, India’s claim of offering asylums to people suffering from
“religious persecution” is only half true. The other half is driven by
India’s internal considerations: majoritarianism and, also, the
Bharatiya Janata Party’s own electoral chances.
Majoritarianism
here would mean a Hindu equivalent to the Law of Return that allows any
Jew anywhere in the world to migrate to Israel. The BJP’s ideology of
Hindutva assumes a religio-ethnic definition of Indian which excludes
so-called foreign religions from its purview. In its election manifesto
for the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, the party had declared India to be "a
natural home for persecuted Hindus" who "shall be welcome to seek
refuge". Even the addition of “Christian” in the current list is largely
for cosmetic purposes since Christian numbers are too small in Pakistan
to even figure a blip on India's refugee radar. Indeed, in its first
year in power, the Modi government granted citizenship to 4,230 Pakistanis but not a single one of them was Christian (they were either Hindu or Sikh).
The Bengali Hindu vote in Assam
The
other driver: the upcoming Assam elections. The Bharatiya Janata Party
is angling for the Bengali Hindu vote in the state and the detention of
illegal migrants from Bangladesh is a major issue in Assam, driven by
the Assamese-Bengali ethnic divide. No sooner had this notification been
issued that Ram Madhav, national general secretary of the BJP,
immediately bought in the political demand that illegal Bangladeshi
Hindus detained by the Assam government be released.
Of
course, ethnic Assamese are chaffing under these new rules. Migration
of Bangladeshis, both Hindu and Muslim, has been a contentious issue in
Assam almost since 1947, and has lead to much violence. The 1985 Assam
Accord, an agreement between the Centre and political forces in Assam,
had come to a settlement on this regard, agreeing to accept Bangladeshis
who had come into India before 1971, but not after. Many Assamese see
these new rules issued by the Modi government as a dilution of the Assam
Accord. The Assam Tribunereports
that the All Assam Students Union would launch an agitation against the
notification. Similar agitations in the 1960s, ‘70s and ‘80s had often
sparked off anti-Bengali violence in Assam.
Basic policy unit
Apart
from Assam, the notification will also have deep ramification for the
nature of the Indian state itself. In 1947, when the Congress accepted
the division of British India, it implied a de facto acknowledgment of
the “Two Nation Theory”. However, India’s leaders at the time never even
considered accepting it de jure. Becoming a “Hindu Pakistan”, in the
words of Jawaharlal Nehru, was anathema and the Indian state always
sought to define itself as secular. In fact, even Muhammed Ali Jinnah,
the poisonous theory’s biggest backer till 1947, sought an eleventh hour
panicked withdrawal in his famous August 11, 1947 speech, remarking
that “in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus, and Muslims
would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is
the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as
citizens of the State”.
Of course, for Pakistan, it was a
textbook case of far too little, far too late. Nevertheless, almost
seven decades after all this should have been buried in India, why is
the Modi government now making policy that treats religious categories
as political? Why is the Indian state using religious communities and
not individuals as policy building blocks? Have no lessons been learnt
from history at all?
As the Narendra Modi
government makes noises about welcoming Hindus, Sikhs and other
minorities persecuted in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan, the
families of those waiting to make that journey do not have
enough reasons to be too upbeat yet
For a country that is not a
signatory to the UN Refugee Convention of 1951 and the 1967 Protocol,
which govern refu gee protection and rights, India has been, at least
on paper, quite welcom ing of refugees, as attested by the huge
numbers of Tibetan and Sri Lankan refugees (see Refugees in India).
But be ing hospitable to refugees also calls for recognition of their
rights and a clearly defined path to citizenship or repatria tion,
as the case may be. The Narendra Modi-led National
Democratic Alliance government is reportedly planning to amend the
Citizenship Act, 1955 to fast-track granting citizenship to refugees,
mostly Hindus but also Sikhs, Christians and other minorities, who have
fled Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan, thanks to reli
gious persecution. But it is easier said than done, given the resistance
from locals where refugees live and legal challenges like the Assam
Accord, according to which only those foreigners who migrated to Assam
till March 24, 1971 will be considered Indian citizens,
thereby leaving the fate of thousands of migrants from Bangladesh and
Nepal in jeopardy. Even so, the government's views and actions on the
issue have attracted much attention.
In this context, ET
Magazine met two Hindu families in Jodhpur who came from Pakistan, and a
Sikh family who fled Afghanistan. While members of only one of the
three families have become Indian citizens, all of them have loved ones
in Pakistan and Afghanistan who are keen to join them in India.
“They don't have the Money“
Jasbir Kaur has little hope of her family in Afghanistan joining her in India
One has to really strain one's ears to be able to hear Jasbir Kaur
unless the conversation happens in a sound-proofed room. And she
is not quick to respond even if the questions are perfunctory, and just
before you start repeating the question, wondering if she did not hear
you the first time, pat comes the answer. She is all smiles till we get
past the pleasantries to the issue at hand.
Kaur, who does not
know how old she is but does not look older than 30, came to Delhi from
Lashkar Gah in southern Afghanistan six years ago with her future
father-inlaw and got married to Harpal Singh, a private cab driver who
had arrived from Af
ghanistan a few years earlier. Her father-in-law then went back to
Afghanistan and has not been able to come to India since. Everyone in
her family -parents, five sisters and their families, and her brother
-is in Lashkar Gah. Does she have any hope that they will be able to
move to India like she did? “I don't think so. They don't have the
money,“ she says as she struggles to not let her emotions get the better
of her.
Kaur, who has a daughter, is one of 7,425 Hindu and
Sikh refugees and asylum-seekers from Afghanistan in India. Her
separation from her family
notwithstanding, she is glad she has more free dom than she did in
Afghanistan. “I couldn't go to school there,“ she adds before she
starts her tailoring classes at the Khalsa Diwan Welfare Society's
office in Tilak Nagar in west Delhi.
Khalsa Diwan is an organisation formed to help Sikh refugees from Afghanistan.
Hardit Singh, joint secretary of Khalsa Di wan, says the Afghan
Sikhs in Delhi have mostly looked after themselves without any help
from non-governmental organisations or the govern ment, except some
assistance from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
and the local Sikh community. “About 300 families who came from
Afghanistan still get their monthly rations from our gurudwara and we
sponsor the education of 780 children,“ adds Singh, who came in
1992 along with thousands of other Sikhs and Hindus from Afghanistan,
a result of the civil war between the Mujahideen and the government.
Singh says most Hindus and Sikhs in Kabul, Afghanistan's capital, who
have been rendered homeless are now living in gurudwaras.
Singh
applied for citizenship and got his certificate in 2008, while his wife
who applied with him got it only in 2015. “While there is hope in this
government, the process has to be hastened. Those who left Afghanistan
for European countries have got citizenship while many in India haven't,
though this is our home.“
“No Hindu who has Come from Pak Wants to go Back“
Gomandlal Bheel, who fled from across the border, has got Indian citizenship but little else
Less than 10 kilometres from the imposing beauty of the
Mehrangarh Fort in Jodhpur, Rajasthan, is the desolation of Bheel Basti,
home to about 250 families, most of them belonging to the Bheel tribe
and some from the Meghwal community, who have fled Pakistan. A month
ago, the city's municipal corporation reduced the homes here to rubble,
as they were built illegally on the corporation's land. Heavy rains in
the past have only added to the misery of the inhabitants.
Gomandlal Bheel considers himself lucky; his home was spared in the
demolition drive. But there is not much else he can look forward to. “No
Hindu who has come from Pakistan wants to go back, but the government's
actions make us want to go back.Some people think they might as well go
back.“
Thirty-eight-year-old Bheel came to Jodhpur in 1997 on a
visit visa from Rahim Yar Khan in the Punjab province of Pakistan with
his father, mother, wife, brother and five cousins. His sister Marvi and
uncle Harijiram are still there. “We came here because Hindus were
under attack in Pakistan after
the Babri Masjid demolition here (in 1992) and many temples were
destroyed.“
He says the visa process for those wishing to come to
India has become more cumbersome, as a result of which thousands of
refugees in India may never get to see their relatives in Pakistan.
Bheel, who works as a farm labourer, was one of the 13,500 Pakistani
refugees given citizenship in Ra
jasthan in 2005. “My uncle Jogaramji was 21 days short of the minimum
period of stay in India to be eligible for citizenship then and he still
hasn't got it.“ Bheel says he has not benefited from any of the
government's schemes for scheduled tribes.“The government should give us
land to cultivate and build houses. We have given up everything in
Pakistan and adopted India as our home.“
Most non-Muslim
refugees from Pakistan come to India on a visit visa, which requires a
local guarantor, or a pilgrim visa and, before their visa expires, they
tell the local Foreigner Regional Registration Office (FRRO) they do not
want to come back as they fear being persecuted because of their
religion. They are then issued longterm visas, and on completion of
seven years in India, they can apply for citizenship.
While
there are no official figures for the number of refugees from Pakistan,
Hindu Singh Sodha, president of Seemant Lok Sanghatan, who himself came
to India from Pakistan in 1971, estimates that 1,25,000 people, mostly
Hindus, have come to Rajasthan alone, the largest destination for
Pakistani refugees; and about 50,000 across the country, including
12,000-13,000 in Rajasthan, are awaiting citizenship.
“As Long as we Breathe, we will be Hopeful“
Brothers Jeevanram and Kushalaram Bheel are counting on the government to help their family relocate from Pakistan
Jeevanram Bheel, along with his wife and four kids, arrived by train
in Bhagat Ki Kothi near Jodhpur on March 30, 2013, from Sanghar in
the Sindh province of Pakistan, and stayed the night at his brother
Kushalaram's home. The following morning he headed for Haridwar in
Uttarakhand, which is where his pilgrim visa was issued for. He went
straight to the FRRO and produced his residence permit issued at the
border and gave in writing his desire to live in Jodhpur with his mother
and four brothers, to never go back.
“Our grandfather went to
Pakistan because of a drought here, but this is our home. My daughter
can never get a job in Pakistan when she grows up, but she can here,“
says Jeevanram who works as a construction labourer and stays at a
makeshift settlement outside the city. Both Jeevanram's and Kush
alaram's in-laws are in Pakistan, as are their three sisters, all of
whom are eager to move to India. “It cost me `2 lakh to get my family
here. My sisters and in-laws do not have that kind of money. They are
saving up,“ notes Jeevanram.
Kushalaram, sitting at his kirana
store, says nights are tortuous when he cannot stop thinking of his
loved ones who have been left behind. When asked if he believes this
government at the Centre will do more to help their cause than its
predecessors, he says, “We can only hope. We know it is going to take
time, but as long as we breathe, we will be hopeful.“
The brothers
are not sure how long they can continue to stay where they are and what
will happen to their children's education if they do not become
citizens of India.
Seemant Lok Sanghtan's Hindu Singh Sodha says
the government does not allow refugees to live in Jaisalmer or Barmer
even if these are their ancestral towns, as they are close to the
Pakistan border. He adds that while the government's intention to
welcome Hindu refugees fleeing India's neighbouring countries are
welcome, there should be a comprehensive legal framework to recognize
refugees, which could be a new chapter in India's response to those
seeking refuge on its shores.
ET magazine VIEW
ON HUMANITARIAN GROUNDS AND NOT JUST RELIGIOUS
While the government's plans to grant citizenship to Hindus fleeing
religious persecution in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh are
welcome, it should ensure that its refugee protection policy should be
predicated, first and foremost, on humanitarian grounds. That means the
government should accord Sikh, Christian and Buddhist refugees -and even
Muslims, as is the case with Myanmar's Rohingyas, and those vilified
for their political views the same privileges it grants Hindu
refugees. India is not completely alien to this, given its support to
thousands of Tibetan refugees. For India's treatment of refugees to earn
the global cachet it needs in a world order where it is becoming an
increasingly crucial player, it should begin by doing what it has not
for decades: become a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention of the UN and
the 1967 Protocol.
India's Ambiguous Refugee Policy
India is not a signatory to the UN's Refugee Convention of 1951 and the
1967 Protocol, which expanded the scope of the Convention by removing
geographical and time limits for refugees. As a result, India has
adopted an ad hoc approach to refugees from different countries. There
have been demands for India to recognise the Refugee Convention and
Protocol, and also set up a comprehensive legal framework to deal with
refugees.The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
provides assistance to refugees from Myanmar, Afghanistan and Somalia,
among other countries, by providing them a refugee card and helping with
their voluntary repatriation. Those with a refugee card enjoy the
UNHCR's protection from deportation and also access to aid, and may
apply for a long-term visa (LTV).The Indian government directly handles
refugees from its immediate neighbours like Pakistan, Tibet, Sri Lanka
and Bangladesh.
The Modi Govt Hasn't Walked the Talk Yet
The Narendra Modi government has begun talking about granting
citizenship to minorities who have fled Pakistan, Afghanistan and
Bangladesh because of religious persecution and is even reportedly
planning to amend the Citizenship Act, 1955.However, contrary to initial
reports that the government gave citizenship to 4,300 Hindus and Sikhs
from Pakistan and Afghanistan, an RTI application filed by Seemant Lok
Sanghatan found that only 570 nationals of these countries
were issued citizenship certificates from January 2014 to March 2015.
None can object to the Union government’s move to grant citizenship to undocumented migrants who have come to India fleeing religious persecution in Pakistan and Bangladesh. Not just Hindus but also Buddhists, Christians, Zoroastrians, Sikhs and Jains are eligible for citizenship under the proposed amendment to the Citizenship Act. But ideally, so long as those seeking citizenship are able to prove they are victims of religious persecution in the neighbouring country, their religious persuasion should not be a criterion for grant of citizenship. Minority sects within Islam too face persecution, especially in Pakistan. The real difficulty, however, would be to distinguish between illegal migrants who came to India seeking work opportunities and a better life, and those who fled Pakistan or Bangladesh fearing persecution. In a situation where the Narendra Modi government continues to push for a tough stand against “infiltration” and illegal migration, the religious identity of the migrants should not be the basis for deciding their eligibility for citizenship. Given the past rhetoric of the BJP, which in the 2014 election manifesto described India as the “natural home of persecuted Hindus”, and the election speeches of Mr. Modi himself, in which he asked Bangladeshis to be ready to pack up and leave, the initial fears were that only Hindus, or at the most those adhering to Indian-origin religions, would be chosen for citizenship. That there has been some rethinking is a welcome sign. The government ought to make this religion-neutral.
However, what needs to change more urgently is India’s attitude to refugees in general. India must remain open to all those seeking refuge, and not just those fleeing religious persecution. Although not a signatory to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention, under which it would have been obliged not to send refugees back to a territory against their will if they fear threats to life or freedom, India cannot escape its responsibilities under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to respect the rights and freedoms of all people in its territories. Article 14(1) is categorical in stating that “everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.” Any well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a social group, or political opinion qualifies for refugee status. Worries about the impact this would have on relations with Bangladesh at a time when a friendly government is in place are misplaced. In any case, India cannot compromise on its commitment to human rights and fundamental freedoms. If there is a problem with the proposals, it is that they do not go far enough.
EXCLUSIVE | cover story: muzaffarnagar Thread Bared
They had invested hope in the village pradhan. He had said he’d protect them. Instead, what happened at his house during the morning of the riots will make you shudder. Outlook meets Muslim women at the camps, the faceless Nirbhayas of Muzaffarnagar....
by Neha Dixit http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?288907
EXCLUSIVE | cover story: muzaffarnagar The New Lord Of The Chaudharis
The polarisation is complete. Modi and BJP’s chances have never looked better.
by Narendra Bisht http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?288908
EXCLUSIVE | cover story: muzaffarnagar Better Safe Than Sorry In Kamalpura
No attacks were reported but Dalit Hindus of riot-affected areas take no chances http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?288909
The families that were affected by the communal violence in Muzaffarnagar district have no hope of their homes being restored to them. Is the government really unable to reassure them of a safe return?
Jameel Teli is 25 years old, married and has three sons, Sahil (8), Arshad (5) and Anas (3). He lived in Kakda village in Muzaffarnagar district of Uttar Pradesh in a joint family, including his parents and his elder brother's family of five. The men all worked as hired workers on the sugarcane fields. They had a fairly spacious 100-square yard, four-room house in the village.
Today, they live in two tents at Shahpur around 20 km from Muzaffarnagar city, having left all their belongings back at home before fleeing Kakda in panic on September 8. Teli looks haggard, the worry clearly etched into his weather-beaten face.
"I can't get back my house even if I want to go back home," he says in a mix of colloquial Hindi and Urdu. "The Jats have taken over our house." With around 2,000 other Muslims, Teli has been living in Shahpur's Camp No 2 for two months now. There are two others camps there, and a total of 31 across the district, where around 40,000 Muslims have found shelter after having left their homes in the wake of communal violence in Muzaffarnagar and some adjoining districts on September 7-8.
Fear is palpable in the air at the camp, and none of the Muslims has dared to retrace his step back to his village. So how does Teli know that his house has been seized by his neighbours? "Some of us tried to go back to our village," he begins. "Despite the presence of Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) personnel posted there, we saw armed Jats on the roads. They threatened us, and I could espy some people in my house. We had to beat a hasty retreat," he says.
Short, greying and equally despondent, Mohammad Ilyas, 53, also worked in the sugarcane fields. Muzaffarnagar is the hub of the sugar industry in Uttar Pradesh. Most sugar mills are owned by Jat farmers, while the majority of the labour force comprises Muslims. The population of the district is divided almost equally between Muslims (47 per cent) and non-Muslims. Ilyas says that they have left behind 350 houses in Kakda village. "All pucca houses, made of brick," he says. "Some of them have been burnt down, most have been looted," he says. "Returning to our village is not an option, we will be risking our lives," he says.
Not one single person in the various relief camps says that he wants to go back to his home and hearth. But you have everything in your village, your house, your belongings, how can you not go back, you ask them. "How can you even think of asking such a question?" says Mohammad Imamuddin, who has accepted that he will never return to his village of Chindori. "Going back is like committing suicide." Imamuddin, tall, bearded and in his fifties, and head of a 10-member family, says that starting life all over again wouldn't be too much of a problem. "We are poor, we did not own land, only our houses, and we were only majdoors. Our parents taught us how to cut cane, we can do that in a new place as well."
The fatalistic acceptance of the Muslims of their uprooting is disturbing. The party in power counts the Muslims and backward classes as its special constituency and yet here it is unable to assure the people of safety in their own homes. Today, people who have lived for generations together are enemies. Mohammad Taiyyab, 27, who worked as a medical representative for pharma firm Windlas Biotech, says not one person from his Bharal village in Baghpat, friends he grew up with, neighbours, has called him after he escaped from the village. Despite many of them having mobile phones, "only the stockist called, that too about the drugs I deal with." The divide seems complete.
Even Chief Minister Akhilesh Yadav appears to have accepted that the communal violence has wrought permanent ethnic dislocation. He recently told a news channel, "We tried... but they [the Muslims] are not ready to go back as they saw people who they loved burn their homes and kill their family members. That's why we have given them a rehab package to restart their lives." But talk to those living in the camps, who depend on generous donors even for their daily food, and you realise there are no instant solutions in hand.
With no government assurance on their safety, the community has taken into its own hand the rehabilitation of the villagers. At Khampur village, 16 km from Muzaffarnagar city, a fortified colony is coming up. Called the Jamiat Colony, it consists of 126 two-room brick houses with small courtyards. The 29 bighas of land on which they are built were donated by the villagers of Khampur following the September 7-8 upheaval. Already 75 families have moved in. The houses are unplastered and have rudimentary infrastructure, but they are happy to have a new permanence in their lives.
Thirty-four villages have been affected by the conflagration. The government has said villagers from only nine will be compensated. The rest will have to fend for themselves. "At least the government should give us compensation. Then we can think of a new life," says Mohammad Naushad.
* * * * *
The reason why a friendly government cannot ensure the Muslims are safely returned to their villages has perhaps to do with politics rather than social dynamics. Right from the time the trouble started on August 27 when a scuffle between three youths over eve-teasing at Kawal village led to the killing of the trio, one a Muslim and two Jats, all subsequent events have been attended by political opportunism. When the Jats called a mahapanchyat at Nagla Mandaur, close to Kawal village, on September 7, the most forceful words were reserved for the Muslims as well as the Samajwadi Party government. Then a video was circulated purportedly showing the lynching of the Jat boys at Kawal, which the police determined was fake and originated in Pakistan. Among those arrested for circulating the video was a BJP MLA, who posted it on his Facebook account. In the meanwhile, the Bharatiya Kisan Union led by Rakesh Tikait and Ajit Singh's western Uttar Pradesh-based Bharatiya Lok Dal have upped the ante by pressuring the government into taking action against the Muslims. Privately, political watchers say that ever since the Samajwadi Party came to power in the state, there has been a growing anxiety among other communities who fear that they will be left out of the development pie.
Tauqeer Raza Khan, an influential Muslim leader of western Uttar Pradesh who has been granted minister of state status by the state government, has been touring the districts after September preaching communal harmony. "The violence is related to the general elections of 2014," he says. He also cautions that political forces are causing a polarisation of votes, and therefore, Uttar Pradesh is likely to see more such clashes. He, however, doesn't agree that the Samajwadi Party itself may gain out of the situation. "This is a conspiracy for political advantage. Some parties want to polarise society and get the Hindu jamaat on their side," he explains.
Former legislator of the Uttar Pradesh Assembly, Saeed-uz-Zaman, a rich sugarcane farmer in Khampur, is more balanced in his views. "Yes," he says, "there is politics involved. And you can understand what a disaster this is when you realise that these Muslim families did not even leave their villages in 1947 after the Partition." He then nuances the situation. "This is not a Hindu-Muslim confrontation. It is only a Muslim-Jat quarrel. You see, political elements incited the Jats and said their ijjat was at risk. Even now, the Jats are regretting the events of the past and their leaders are urging the people not to continue the fight."
But will things return to status quo soon? "After the 2104 elections, life will return to normality," declares Khan. A senior police officer reiterates this. "The day the election results are announced, we will be able to bring everything under control."
Utterances like these mean that the events of September were less about social schisms, more about vote-bank politics. The current situation where it is impossible for the Muslims to return home can actually provide political dividends to almost every political party. It is in the interest of both the Congress, desperately trying to make a comeback in Uttar Pradesh, as well as the Samajwadi Party to keep the pot boiling. The image of the suffering Muslims handily sends a message to their vote bank that their futures are not assured under other parties. For the others, including the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Rashtriya Lok Dal, the upheaval hardens sectarian attitudes, to their benefit. Perhaps conditions could have been created for the return of the affected Muslims to their homes, but when it serves the politicians not to send the Muslims home, what do the woes of 40,000 people matter?
[July 22, 2013, ] The New York Times, Neyaz Farooquee reports on Christian Afghans seeking refuge in Delhi from the strict Islamic law in their homeland. Converts to Christianity, who can be charged with apostasy and possibly executed for abandoning Islam in Afghanistan, regularly flee to India but still face persecution. Despite the hostility, Pastor Obaid Jan of the Afghan Church of New Delhi remains positive: “The size of my community in India is only increasing,” he says. “I hope my community won’t have to migrate again.”
Fleeing riots, over 500 families seek refuge at Delhi's doorstep
Maria Akram, TNN | Sep 13, 2013, 06.03 AM IST
LONI (GHAZIABAD): When she is playing, Parveen forgets her plight and the terror from which her family of six escaped on Sunday night. While fleeing the riot-affected Nala village in Muzaffarnagar district, the 10-year-old and her sister Muskaan (4) were separated from their parents and brothers. But here in Loni, where around 500 riot displaced families have found refuge, an older boy, Shahrukh, has taken the girls under his wing. "My three sisters didn't make it on the train," said the 17-year-old whose 13 family members are missing. "These two are like my lost sisters."
In Loni, refugees from different riot-affected villages are helping each other survive and overcome their sense of fear and loss. It is a Muslim majority area with a large part of the population originally from Muzaffarnagar district. "More than 500 families have already arrived here and more are pouring in every day. But not a single leader has paid us a visit. The residents of Loni have donated clothes and some money to help the refugees buy rations," said Naushad Saifi, a native of Lankh village in Muzaffarnagar district, who works at a bank in Delhi.
"I have three daughters and two sons and the moment we got to know that the rioters were marching towards our village, Nala, we ran. There was no time to take our belongings. For a night we hid in a wheat field and got on a train the next morning. Many from our village have relatives in Loni," said Ruksana Begum rolling perfectly round chapattis between her hands.
The locals have decided to house the refugees free of cost for a month. "My husband is looking for work in and around Loni as going back isn't an option. The locals have told us that they will not charge rent for a month but after that we will have to pay or vacate this place," said Islaman, a mother of two kids aged less than four years. She added that all 38 houses in her village, Doghat, were looted and burned.
But for the riots, Ruksana (20) from Baghpat would have got married on Tuesday. "Everything was planned. We arranged everything from gold to gifts. Even our relatives had arrived from different villages. But we had to run for our lives. Our house that was lit up in celebration was burning when we saw it again from a distance," said Hajra Begum, Ruksana's mother, while the girl herself remained quiet. She was worried about her fiance.
Ikramuddin from Baghpat said he feels let down by the police and the ruling Samajwadi Party, and alleged that they are responsible for the riots. "When my house was looted and burned I went to the police. But instead of helping me, they said I had started the fire and sustained injuries from it. They threatened to put me in jail if I insisted on filing a complaint."
All the refugees TOI met expressed strong feelings against the Samajwadi Party, saying it had used them like a vote bank. "My uncle was killed and my younger brother is missing. When I went to a Samajwadi Party leader for help, he refused. During elections, they would have tea with us and now when we need them, they are hiding. They have lost our trust," said a white-bearded Haji Mehmood.
Many of the refugees have decided not to return. "The tension was simmering for very long and all the political parties knew that something like this was waiting to happen. The death toll is much higher than the official figure. We were threatened to leave or be killed," said Mehboob, a barber from Kudba village.
We the concerned citizens of Assam, wish to bring to your kind notice the continuing disturbed situation in Assam, post the violence of July, 2012. We request you to take urgent steps to alleviate the sufferings of the victims of the violence and displacement.
Just to recall, the communal riot in Bodo Territorial Autonomous Districts (BTAD) of Assam between the Bodos and the Muslims shattered the lives of lakhs of people. Violence claimed many lives, injured many more and displaced lakhs of people. In the riot, thousands of houses of hundreds of villages of Kokrajhar and Chirang districts of the BTAD areas were burnt into ashes. The riot spread in all the districts of BTAD areas and other contiguous districts of Assam viz. Kokrajhar, Chirang and Baksa (districts of BTAD) and Dhuburi, etc. Over four lakhs victims took shelter in more than three hundred relief camps and many of the victims found shelter in the houses of their relatives outside the BTAD areas. It was a type of ethnic cleansing, to clear out Muslims in particular from the areas controlled by BTAD. Apart from Muslims, other non Bodos, communities living in the Bodoland like the Santals, Koch-Rajbonshis, Nepalis, Bengalis and the Asamiyas are also the victims of this violence and displacement.
Unfortunately, the administration totally failed in controlling the situation. People in the relief camps suffered a lot. They did not get sufficient relief either from the government or non-government agencies to live minimum normal life. Again, the conditions of the people of many relief camps were much worse than the others as these camps were not adequately reached by the government and non-government agencies.
Nearly 36,000 Internally Displaced Persons (I.D.P.S) are still battling a cold winter in different camps of Kokrajhar and Chirang districts. Another 50,000 are in makeshift official camps, near their villages, fearful to return home. They are being threatened by the Bodo militants every day. On 24th December the IDPSof Nalbari camp in Basugaon area and of Nepalpapra of Chirnag district .were threatened by the militants. Muslims have been economically boycotted. Government is providing relief to those who are having land documents. Many of the displaced persons do not have these documents due to various reasons. The result of this policy of government is having disastrous impact on large number of people who have been deprived of govt. relief. Many people are starving. Last week ten people died of hunger and lack of proper medical treatment.
So we demand that
A) All the affected people should be provided with sufficient regular government relief and proper medical care. Sufficient warm clothes should also be provided urgently failing which many more people may lose their life.
B) As the B.T.C. administration and the state government is not taking proper steps to seize illegal arms, the central govt. should ensure that the work of seizing the illegal arms has to be done in all earnestness. Let’s not forget that armed groups are creating a law and order situation, which may become un-controllable over a period of time. All the insurgent groups which have been banned need to be disarmed with utmost seriousness.
C) The process of compensation must be completed on urgent basis. This will help the families to restart their lives afresh. Those whose houses have been burnt should be helped to rehabilitate with due protection.
Sincerely your
1.Dr. Monirul Hussain,Retd. Dean, Faculty of Arts, Gauhati University.
2.Dr.Dilip Borah, Convenor, All India Secular Forum, Assam.
3.Dr.Indrajeet Bezbaruah, Convenor, All India Secular Forum ,Assam.
4.Hafiz Ahmed, President, Char-Chapori Sahitya Parishad, Assam.
5.Hanif Mustak, General Secretary, Minority citizens Forum, Assam.
Endorsed by
Asghar Ali Engineer, L.S. Hardenia, Ram Puniyani, Irfan Engineer
