Why
UPDF has serious reservations on the Chittagong Hill Tracts
(CHTs) Peace Accord of 1997
The United People's Democratic
Front (UPDF) and its sister organizations have expressed serious
reservations about the Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord
signed between the Government of Bangladesh and the Jana Samhati
Samiti (JSS) on 2 December 1997. The UPDF's reservations are
based on the past experience of the indigenous Jumma peoples
with the ruling Government in Dhaka, irrespective of political
colour and ideology of the parties concerned.
The Accord did not come in
a day. The JSS declared a unilateral cease-fire on 10 August
1992 to show its willingness for dialogue after which the
negotiations started, culminating in an accord in December
1997. Yet, none of the Jumma overground organizations, intellectuals
or community leaders were consulted or taken into confidence
by the JSS before the signing of the Accord. Given the pace
of the negotiation and uninterrupted five-year-long cease-fire
- unheard of in the history of peace negotiations - the Jummas
did not expect miracles from the Accord. Yet a cursory look
reveals that the Accord failed to meet the basic demands of
the Jumma people.
UPDF firmly believes that
the success of any Accord does not lie in the piece of paper
signed by the parties concerned. The Hill Peoples Council,
the Hill Students Council and Hill Women Federation had to
organize demonstrations against the Government of Bangladesh
to get the dialogue started.
Yet, any inadequacies can
be addressed through the in-built mechanisms for implementation
of the Accord. The Accord failed abysmally on that score.
The mechanisms for implementation of the Accord were built
in only for the JSS and not for the Government of Bangladesh
that has the primary responsibility to implement the Accord.
In a nutshell, the JSS even failed to incorporate mechanisms
for implementation of the Accord. From the declaration of
a unilateral cease-fire on 10 August 1992 to the signing of
the Peace Accord on 2 December 1997, it was desperation, not
serious thinking, that dictated the actions of the JSS. UPDF
had little reason to be cheerful about the Accord.
Some of the UPDF's reservations
are given below:
General:
1.The Chittagong Hill Tracts
Peace Accord fails to address the basic demands of the Jumma
peoples. These demands have been articulated by the JSS. The
demands are: regional autonomy, constitutional recognition
of the indigenous Jumma peoples of the CHT, restoration of
land rights, withdrawal of the military and withdrawal of
the settlers from the CHT. Moreover, there is no reference
to accountability for human rights abuses that bordered on
genocide. All the indigenous Jumma peoples believe that without
fulfillment of these basic demands and accountability for
human rights abuses, a genuine and permanent peace cannot
be established in the CHT. The UPDF was born as a result of
this perception.
Regional Autonomy
under the Regional Council and District Councils:
1.
The Accord envisaged the establishment of a Regional Council
(RC) to supervise the activities of the existing three Hill
District Councils that were established under the Hill District
Council Acts of 1989 by military dictator General H M Ershad.
Like the Hill Districts Councils, the Regional Council does
not enjoy constitutional safeguards. In other words, the RC
and the three District Councils were formed under simple parliamentary
law and not by constitutional law. Consequently, any Government
that enjoys simple majority in the Parliament can repeal the
Regional Council and District Council Acts. The President
of Bangladesh can do the same through promulgation of a mere
ordinance.
Moreover, executive functions
rest with the District Council, and not the Regional Council.
Under such circumstances, the Regional Council or its members
have little responsibilities. The Jummas have described the
work of the Regional Council members as the work of the "retired
politicians". The Act provides for "supervision"
of the District Councils by the Regional Council. In reality,
it means little as the District Councils are practically controlled
by the government through various ministries, including CHT
ministry. Moreover, since 1989, the Jummas have witnessed
the selection of District Council Chairmen without any election
required under the Act. Until today, no election has been
held to nominate the District Councils' members or Chairmen.
The unconstitutional appointment of the District Council Chairmen
irrespective of whichever party is in power in Dhaka does
not evoke any confidence, nor does it guarantee autonomy.
The District Council chairmen have, in practice, become executive
assistants to the District Commissioner.
2.Under
the Accord, neither the Regional Council nor the three District
Councils will have any control over the general administration
of the Chittagong Hill Tracts. This will continue to remain
in the hands of the Deputy Commissioners appointed by the
Government. The only effective power that the Councils will
have with regard to the general administration is to appoint,
transfer and discharge third and fourth-class employees, a
power also provided in the erstwhile District Councils established
by General Ershad's regime.
3.The
Government has full and absolute control over the RC and the
District Councils. Section 21 of Chapter "Kha" of
the Accord provides that if it is proved to the full satisfaction
of the government that any action performed or proposed to
be performed by the Councils is not in conformity with the
law or has gone or is likely to go against the interest of
the public, then the government is entitled to demand information
and explanation from the Councils and to give advice and issue
directives.
4.The
Accord provides for establishment of the Ministry on the Chittagong
Hill Tracts Affairs for monitoring the work of the Regional
Council and District Councils. This CHTs Ministry, in fact,
is nothing but a new label for the Special Affairs Division
of the Prime Minister's Secretariat that was responsible for
the matters relating to the Chittagong Hill Tracts. In the
past, many Jumma ministers and advisers served under various
governments. It made little difference in the state of affairs
of the Chittagong Hill Tracts. The CHTs Affairs Ministry does
not ensure autonomy of the Regional Council or District Councils.
It is a mechanism to beguile the international community on
CHT issues by referring the concerned people to the Minister
on CHTs Affairs who is a Jumma but does not have any independent
power and is under the direct control of the Prime Minister.
Constitutional Recognition
and Constitutional Guarantees:
1.There
is no mention of the constitutional recognition of the indigenous
Jumma peoples of the Chittagong Hill Tracts in the Accord.
The issue of constitutional recognition of the indigenous
Jumma peoples figured prominently in the discourse of the
Bengali intellectuals, constitutional experts and political
leaders. The Constitution of Bangladesh does not explicitly
recognize the existence of indigenous peoples nor does it
recognize the diversity and plurality of the country. The
extreme Bengali nationalism and attempts at establishing homogeneity
in the country have been described as serious shortcomings
of the Bangladesh Constitution.
Today even after signing of
the Peace Accord, non-Jummas can be elected from the three
parliamentary seats from the CHTs. Today, Jummas face a situation
where their voices may not be heard in Parliament as the seats
in the CHTs are not reserved for the indigenous Jumma people.
Even such constitutional guarantees have not been provided
in the Accord. On the contrary, the indigenous Jumma peoples
of the Chittagong Hill Tracts have been termed as "tribals'
and the Chittagong Hill Tracts as a "tribal area".
The term "tribal" bears pejorative connotations
and hence, acceptance of the word "tribal" in the
Accord by the JSS has further derogated the indigenous Jumma
peoples.
Land Rights of Indigenous
Jumma peoples: Lack of mechanisms
1.The
Accord failed to recognize traditional land rights of the
indigenous Jumma people. The doctrine of terra nellius (does
not belong to any one) has been used to grab the lands of
the indigenous Jumma people.
The Accord stipulates the
establishment of a Land Commission to redress land disputes
arising between the Bengalis and the Jumma residents. This
also tantamounts to recognising the doctrine of terra-nellius.
Thousands of Jummas lost their property records while the
Bengali settlers got their way using forged documents. The
office maintaining land records in Khagrachari district was
burnt down to eliminate all records. The land issue in the
Chittagong Hill Tracts is a political issue that cannot be
resolved only through legalistic manner. Attempts could have
been made to address some land disputes legally if the modus
operandi of the Land Commission was spelt out clearly. The
land rights issue is also intrinsically related to the withdrawal
of the settlers and the army. The army has consistently provided
direct assistance to the settlers who occupy the lands of
the Jumma people even in cases where the ownership of the
land by Jummas has been established under the law. However,
in the absence of mechanisms to ensure withdrawal of the army
within a specific time frame, the Land Commission has proved
to be yet another false assurance.
2.The
Accord treats the Bengalis of the Chittagong Hill Tracts in
the same category. The Accord has failed to segregate the
old Bengali migrants from the new settlers who were brought
into the CHT under government sponsored population transfer
policy. Thus, the status of the old settler Bengalis is on
par with the new Bengali settlers who are responsible for
forcible occupation of Jumma lands.
Withdrawal of Bengali
Settlers
1.The
CHTs Accord is silent about the withdrawal of Bengali settlers.
Hundreds of thousands of Bengali settlers were implanted in
the CHTs under government-sponsored population transfer policies.
Such population transfer is a crime under international law
and prohibited under Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Conventions.
It constitutes a war crime.
The
JSS leaders have consistently referred to a "verbal agreement"
with the Government of Bangladesh on the withdrawal of settlers.
When serious doubts have been expressed as to the implementation
of the written agreement, what is the value of a "verbal
agreement"? The reference to a "verbal agreement"
indicates the immaturity of the JSS leaders. The resulting
ridicule has demeaned the Jummas further.
Withdrawal of the
Army
1.The
Accord provides that temporary army camps will be rolled back
conditional upon the "improvement of the situation"!
In this case, the Government of Bangladesh is judge and juror
and has arrogated to itself the authority to decide what constitutes
an "improvement of the situation". Consequently,
the Government has shown little interest in withdrawing the
army. The Jummas continue to face serious human rights abuses
including arbitrary arrest, torture, detention and rape at
the hands of the Bangladesh army.
Returnee Jumma refugees
1.The Accord does not mention
what steps the Jana Samhati Samity would be entitled to take
in case the returnee Jumma refugees are not properly rehabilitated
as promised by the Bangladesh government. On the other hand,
the JSS is bound by the agreement to extend all out cooperation
possible in the repatriation process.
Martyred families
1.The
Accord provides for the rehabilitation of the JSS and Shanti
Bahini members. However, it failed to address the grievances
of the martyred families and of those affected by military
oppression.
Impunity for Human
Rights Abuses
1.The
Accord does not make any reference to human rights violations
committed upon the Jummas. About a dozen massacres were perpetrated.
The Government of Bangladesh ordered a judicial inquiry headed
by Justice Habibur Rahman into the Naniachar massacre of 17
November 1993. Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina ordered an inquiry
into the abduction of Ms Kalpana Chakma, a leader of the Hill
Women Federation. Both the inquiry commissions' reports have
been submitted to the Government. The victims, their relatives
and the people of Bangladesh have the right to know about
these inquiries. By failing to stress the issue of accountability
for human rights abuses, the JSS helped reinforce the impunity
of the security forces.
The lack of accountability
on part of the armed forces has been the single most important
factor contributing to continuous and consistent human rights
violations. If nothing else, the JSS should have urged the
Government to make its own inquiry commissions' reports public,
to allow the law to take its own course and not tinker with
the independence of judiciary.
Restricted Amnesty
1.The
Accord provides that the government would withdraw all cases
filed, and quash judgements passed by the courts, against
the JSS and Shanti Bahini members. But, the Accord does not
refer to the false cases filed against the members of the
Hill People's Council, Hill Students Council and Hill Women's
Federation.
Intra-Jumma division
1.At
a more fundamental level, the JSS since its inception demonized
the feudal lords (Rajas, Dewan, Taludakdar, etc) in the CHTs,
despite the fact that it was a struggle for the survival of
the Jumma people. These policies were carried out to the extent
that many Jummas from such feudal families were excluded from
the struggle. However, contrary to what it preached, the JSS
had accepted the authority of the feudal lords that it consistently
demonized and vilified. While the UPDF has no problem with
this step, it is yet another illustration of the inconsistent
policies of the JSS.
In short, there is no basic
difference between the Councils provided for in the so-called
Peace Accord and the Councils introduced by General Ershad
in 1989. The existing Councils have been reintroduced after
a few modifications. Now the question is: if Ershad's Councils
have failed to resolve the CHT crisis and bring about peace
in the CHT, how can the new ones be expected to deliver the
goods? The Hill District Councils were not acceptable to the
JSS. Even if the present RC and Hill District Councils were
acceptable to the JSS, UPDF is of the firm view that the Accord
fails to meet the aspirations of the Jumma people. Therefore,
the movement of full autonomy and survival of the Jummas must
continue.
|
