The Analysis of
Chittagong Hill Tracts Land Dispute Settlement Commission (amendment)
Act 2013
Introduction
The
Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) is located in the south-eastern corner of
Bangladesh, bordering Burma and the north-eastern Indian states of Mizoram and
Tripura. They are the homeland of 12 ethnic groups, numbering about 600,000
people. Covering 5,093 square miles (10 per cent of the country) and rising as high
as 3,000 feet in places, the hill ranges contain limited cultivable land, most
of it of low quality, in contrast to the fertile multi-cropped alluvial plains
of Bangladesh. The hill people differ markedly from the Muslim Bengali majority
in Bangladesh in language, culture, religion and farming methods.
Moreover,
land is closely connected to the social, cultural and spiritual lives of the
indigenous peoples of the CHT. Therefore, many feel that the success or failure
of the 1997 Accord in bringing forth lasting peace and in paving the way for
socioeconomic progress in this hill region is very largely dependent upon how
the land-related problems are addressed in the coming years The CHLDSC, 2001
addresses various land-related issues through the strengthening of the hill district
councils, the formation of commission for the CHT, and with regard to various provisions
that sought to deal with the issues of land dispossession, the recognition of
customary land rights of the indigenous people and other related issues. Some
of the most crucial issue are discussed in the following sections.
Objectives of the study
The objectives of the study are as
follows
1. To
analysis the Chittagong hill tracts land dispute settlement commission Act
2. To
explain the various causal factors and conflicts between various ethnic group.
3. To
identify the factors of the implementation of CHT land commission Act.
4. To
appraise the performance of the land commission of CHT.
5. To
provide policy analysis and recommendations concerned with re-situating the
illegally occupied lands of the indigenous peoples of CHT.
6. To
identify the problems of CHT land dispute settlement commission.
7. To
analysis the amendment of that Act.
8. To
explore the access of indigenous people in formal court
9. To
understand difficulties the ethnic groups faced by informal judiciary system.
Methodology
This
study based on firstly on primary data generated through fieldwork by the
researcher, involving unstructured interviews and focus group discussions with
respondents in the CHT as well as the city of Ctg. Secondly it involves the
content analysis of hundreds of secondary sources including legal documents,
official reports, application, petition, press, reports etc. In addition the
study has been able to utilize information from the activities of the CHT
commission based on its individuals and agencies. Both quantitative and
qualitative tools of data collection received equal emphasis in this study
Scope and
limitation
The
limit of time provides a brief review of the implementation and status of CHT.
This process will be during 1995-2013 in CHT. This study is to explore my
issues in greater depth and provide a more comprehensive analysis of land alienation
in the CHT. Furthermore, the contents have focused on the pattern of lands of
IP and Bengali interest. Lastly, this is not a full-fledged academic study,
even though the arguments and conclusions are based on rigorous analysis and
assessments of empirical evidence. The following pages are aimed to explain
technical and legal issues.
Who are the
indigenous peoples?
There
are various definitions of the term "indigenous peoples," so a
definitive answer to this
Question
remains elusive. However the following is a definition that is relatively
widely accepted. In general, indigenous peoples are "ethnic groups that
have lived in a particular region as their ancestral territory, that have their
own unique language, culture, religion and other characteristics distinct from
that of other ethnic groups, and that were not involved as constituent peoples
information of the modern nation state but were rather invaded and subjugated
by the state, and therefore assert their rights of self-determination as well
as rights as the first peoples of the land." There are many indigenous
peoples in the world. Their population is not well known, and is said to be
difficult to grasp. It is estimated to be approximately 250 million in 79
countries worldwide. [1]
Statistics
of the amount of land by indigenous people
Land
disputes resulted in eight clashes between indigenous hill people and Bangle
settlers in different parts of the region claiming 14 lives only in the last
two and a half years, according to news reports. Traditional community land
ownership of the indigenous hill people in CHT declined to 28.76 per cent from
76.21 between 1978 and 2009, says a study. Over the same period, possession of
land by government agencies increased to 25.77 per cent from 5.22 per cent,
found a study on CHT land conducted by Chairman of Dhaka University Economics
Department Dr Abul Barakat. The forest department announced 2, 18,000 acres of
land as reserved, all of which used to be regarded as community land of the
indigenous people. Only in Bandar ban the government allocated 1,605 plots
consisting 40,077 acres of land to Bengalese for commercial rubber plantations.
[2]
Recent amendment of
the Act
Indigenous
leaders and Bengalis settlers in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) have had
mixed reactions to the Chittagong Hill Tracts Land Dispute Resolution
Commission (Amendment) Act 2013, which was approved by the cabinet on Monday. The
cabinet has decided to prepare the guidelines within the next three months. The
authorities concerned have been ordered to prepare the draft and submit to the
cabinet division for its approval.
According to the proposed amendment, the authority
to take a decision has been distributed among members of the commission, which
was earlier entrusted solely in the hands of its chairman. Mosharraf said:
“But, if the commission fails to take a unanimous decision, the opinion of the
majority members including the chairman’s opinion will be accepted as final
decision.”
Elaborating on the formation of a full commission,
he said the five-member commission would be formed under the leadership of a
retired justice of the Appellate Division. Other members of the commission will
include Divisional Commissioner of Chittagong, representative of the CHT
regional council chairman, chairman of the district council and the concerned
circle chiefs.
According to the amendment, it is not mandatory for
the circle chiefs to attend the commission meetings; instead they may send
their representatives. The cabinet secretary said the meeting decided on
empowering the commission to settle land disputes about illegal leases, and
land occupied by people and distributed to illegal settlers. The commission
will be able to deal with the disputes under the law pertaining to the CHT. According
to the amended law, members of the ethnic minorities will be prioritised when
the commission’s secretary or officials are picked. [3]
Mixed reactions
to CHT Land Dispute settlement Commission Amendment Act, 2013
To make the land commission more effective, the
government brought 11 amendments to the Land Dispute Resolution Commission
Act-2001 and the cabinet approved the amended Act on June 3. These amendments
have been proposed mainly by the CHT Regional Council. After the approval to
the amended Act, the Bangle inhabitants in the CHT area have been continuing
movement against the Act.
Reaction of
indigenous people
Ø Nomita
Chakma, president of the Khagrachhari District Adivasi Coalition, welcomed the amendment
saying it would end many longstanding differences and help establish peace
permanently in the hill tracts.
Ø General
Secretary of CHT Refugee Welfare Association Santushito Chakma Bakul said
indigenous people would have been happier with the draft amendment had the
government fully followed CHT Regional Council’s recommendations.
Ø Khagrachhari
MP Jatindra Lal Tripura however said the government takes into consideration
everyone’s interests.
Ø Indigenous
leaders thanked the cabinet for “finally” amending some of the contentious
sections of the bill, and hopes it will help resolve outstanding land disputes.
Ø Now most
of the indigenous people lost their land due to document forgery by Bangle
settlers, and 62 per cent indigenous people of CHT are passing their days in
extreme poverty, the study conducted by Dr Barakat says
Reaction of Bengalese
Ø However,
convener of Khagrachhari District Parbattya Bangali Chhatra Parishad (PBCP)
Abdul Mojid said the settlers would lose their land and government control in
the CHT would also be lost if the amendment is approved.
Ø Mayor
Md Rafiqul Alam of Khagrachhari municipality said the government decision would
not have positive consequences if Bengali settlers’ interests were overlooked.
Ø Leaders
of the Bangle community, on the other hand, said it is “controversial”.[4]
Constructive criticism of that amendment
¯ They alleged that the Act has ignored
the matter of peaceful co-existence of all residents of CHT area, irrespective
of Bangle and indigenous people, through ensuring rational rights of land for
all the inhabitants. As per the Act, the CHTLDRC will have five members; three
memberships have been reserved for indigenous people while the chairman of the
commission will be a retired Justice of the Supreme Court with the divisional
commissioner of Chittagong or an additional divisional commissioner nominated
by the divisional commission
¯ There is no provision in the Act that the Commission
chairman and the Chittagong divisional commissioner shall be a Bangle. As a
result, uncertainty has been created regarding protecting the right of land of
nearly half of the population of the CHT area.
¯ Besides, as per the amended Act, there
is obligation of giving priority in appointing the Commission secretary and
other officials and employees from the indigenous community. There is also
provision in the Act that traditional laws and customs will be followed to
settle land dispute in the CHT area, but there is no specific area and
explanation of local customs of indigenous people regarding their rights of
land.
¯ In the amended Act, the scope of the
land commission has been extended through incorporating the issues of the
rehabilitee indigenous refugees’ land, illegal settlement and ousted land, land
inside water bodies and any type of land—which will create complexity with the
land which had been given for settlement of Bengalese residents in the last four
decades, and the word ‘any land’ will also create the chance to consider
illegal land used for various purposes including construction of important
government infrastructures.
¯ But the commission will not get any
representation from the Bengalese community despite Bengalese settlers living
in the CHT area, who constitute almost half the total population of the area.
¯ Experts fear that complexity would also
be created with the land that has been provided for bangle inhabitants there.
Demonstrations are being staged in CHT demanding that the act be scrapped. On
June 2, the Parbatya Bangali Chhatra Parishad (PBCP), a student organisation of
CHT area, and ‘Somo Odhikar Andolon’ observed daylong hartal in three hill
districts.
¯ one-sided’ Act that has been formulated
only to protect the interest of the indigenous people,” the demonstrators said.
¯
It was announced that a cadastral survey would
be carried out in the region before the land disputes are settled. The
announcement created apprehension.
¯ Occupying
indigenous peoples’ lands illegally would be recorded as the possessors and
eventually as titled owners, while the displaced individuals and communities
would be excluded from the survey records. [5]
The Most Weakness of the Act
Main weaknesses in the CHTLDSC Act and implementation with regard to
land:
1.
The Hill District Councils have not been given the authority to deal with the
largest part of the CHT area, i.e. the reserved forests and unclassified State
forests, nor with land already leased out by the government, including land
leased to non-resident individuals and corporations for commercial plantations
and industries.
2.
The legislation empowering the Hill District Councils and the Regional Council
to assume their role in land and resource management as well as in development
projects has still not been adopted.
3. In
the previous chapter we discussed the large number of repatriated refugees who
have still not been returned their land, as well as the problem of the
internally displaced Jumma refugees whose rehabilitation is still pending. The
question of how to deal with the problem of land belonging to Jumma people but occupied
by settlers is very sensitive.
4.
The Land Commission has been established but has not yet started functioning. A
weakness of the Accord in relation to the Land Commission is that it provides
for an executive order and not for formal legislation.
5. The
government is sitting on thousands of complaints about land ownerships in the
hills as the Chittagong Hill Tracts Land Dispute Resolution Commission has
remained inactive since its inception 10 years ago.
6 Representatives
of the indigenous hill people oppose a few provisions of the Land Commission
Act-2001. They say that some of its provisions contradict the CHTPA. [6]
Problem of the
section in recent amendment
Section
6(1)(c) of the Chittagong Hill Tracts Land Dispute Resolution Commission Act
says, “Any land that has been given in settlement in violation of the existing
laws of CHT, shall be cancelled, and if any lawful owner has been illegally
occupied on account of such settlement shall be restored:
According
to the draft of Section 7(3), “Attendance of the Chairman and another two
members on the meeting shall be necessary for maintaining quorum and the
Chairman of the commission shall preside over all meetings.”
Section
7(5) of the draft Act says, “Chairman shall take decision on the basis of
discussion with other members present on the areas of its activities along with
the matter stated in section 6(1) unanimously and in case decision is not
unanimous, his decision shall be treated as the decision of the Commission.”
The
secretary observed that the local people of the CHT areas have filed at least
3,000 complaints with the land commission so far. But the previous commission
had failed to settle the complaints, he noted. [7]
The
Crisis of Implementation of the Act
Although
a reasonably positive working relationship has been established between the
traditional leaders and the CHT councils, increased synergy in their work is,
of course, possible and desirable. However, the more serious problem at the
moment is the non-implementation of crucial land-related aspects of the 1997 Accord.
These include devolution to the hill district councils, the resolution of land-related
disputes by the CHT Land Dispute Resolution Commission, the cancellation of
land leases granted to non-residents, and the proposed grants of land titles to
landless indigenous people.20 Unless these measures are addressed in the near
future, meaningful reversal of the historical process of marginalization
and
dispossession will not be possible. The climate for early progress in this regard,
however, does not seem very likely, given the differing perspectives on various
aspects of the Accord between the indigenous peoples of the CHT and the government
of the day. [8]
The
relevant Case reference
Indigenous
vs. Bengali
The
case was started in 1987 and judgment came in 2006. His land was occupied by a
Bangali in the name of Khas land. He was working in D.C’s office. DC
sent officials to identify Khas land and they reported that there was no
khas land within the border of his land. Still DC made documents
declaring his land as khas land and that person occupied his land. Then
he filed case. At first DC (District Court) gave order for investigation. The
investigation report came in his favour. Then DC dismissed the investigation
report. DC again made the investigation and kept it again in favour of 36 that Bengalis
people. Then Sachin again made appeal
to Chittagong Court. In 2006, judgment
came in his favour. Then again appeal was made in land appeal board. There also
judgment came in his favour. Now he is planning to file another case of eviction.
He had to spend two lakhs of taka for it. He thinks as DC was Bengalis, he was
in favour of Bengalis. [9]
Settlers’ Titles v. Customary Rights
Apart from land dispossession caused by the
Kaptai Dam, forestry projects, and land loss to commercial non-resident
lessees, indigenous people in the CHT have also lost large tracts of their
lands through fraudulent and coercive acts by non-indigenous settlers. Some
250,000 to 450,000 non-indigenous settlers were brought into the region through
a government sponsored program that was started in 1979 and concluded in the
early 1980s as a “counter-insurgency” measure and, some say, to make the indigenous
people a minority in their ancestral homeland.83 He said the commission
had prepared a total 43 cases from among 3,000 selected cases for hearing
yesterday when all the applicants were present in court. [10]
A case of racial discrimination
The
Jumma refugees repatriated from India have received food rations for less than
one and a half years following their return from India; the internally
displaced Jumma refugees have not received any rations at all. By contrast,
Bengali settlers brought to the CHT in the late 1970s and living in cluster
villages have been receiving food rations ever since they arrived in the CHT.
In Khagrachhari district alone there are 80 Bengali cluster villages, inhabited
by 26,262 families (or approximately 125,000 individuals).22 Settlers living in
these cluster villages are still receiving free rations, consisting of food grains
received through the World Food
Programme, aided by the Australian and Canadian governments. Quite clearly,
Bengali settlers and returned Jumma refugees are not treated on an equal
footing.
[11]
Land case of Ms. Munika Chakma
Ms.
Munika Chakma owned three acres of land before she fled to India after the
massacres in 1986. Upon return from India, she found all her land occupied by
22 Bengali families. These settlers had been resettled there from another
village in Dighinala area in 1994. She lodged a case against the occupation of
her land (misc. case nr. 106/98). Ms. Munika Chakma showed a letter from Mr. Salauddin,
the local TNO, dated 21/7/99, informing the
Deputy Commissioner that her land should be vacated by the settlers and that
the 22 settler families demanded rehabilitation and shifting charges. When the
representatives of The Chittagong Hill Tracts Commission visited the settlers,
who were still in occupation of Ms. Munika Chakma's land, they denied having
received any orders to vacate the land. One of them, Md. Harej Mia, s/o
Mohammed Ali, was one of the occupants. He said that he came to the CHT in
1984. At first he had been kept near the army cantonment in Dighinala and since
1993 he had been settled here. He never received any land for cultivation from
the government but he was cultivating some hilly land. Other settlers also testified
that they had never received any land for cultivation, despite promises from
the government. [12]
Rights
of Indigenous in International Instrument
ILO Convention No. 107
ILO
Convention No. 107 has a number of strong provisions that seeks to protect the customary
land rights and other economic, social, and cultural rights of indigenous (and
“tribal”) peoples and populations. In particular, it obliges the state party to
recognize customary land rights and protect indigenous or tribal people where
land alienation takes place due to their ignorance of law. While such
tripartite arrangements may be suitable for matters of labor law and related
matters, this author is of the opinion that they are far from adequate or
appropriate to deal with matters concerning indigenous peoples’ rights.
Indigenous peoples need to be directly represented at the ILO regarding
violations of provisions of this Convention, as in the case of the later and
more progressive Convention No. 169. [13]
The Future UN Declaration on Indigenous Peoples’
Rights
The
adoption of a U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples has been
under formal deliberation within the U.N. system ever since Professor Erica-Irene
Daes, the then chairperson of the U.N. Working Group on Indigenous Populations,
tabled a working paper on a Draft Universal Declaration on Indigenous Rights at
the sixth session of the Working Group in 1988.[14]
Relevant provision of
international Instrument
Chittagong Hill Tracts
Land issues
v ILO
Convention 107
v ILO
Convention: 169
v ILO
Recommendation on Indigenous and Tribal Populations.
v International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 1965.
v International
Laws Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 (UDHR)
v United
Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 2007. [15]
Recommendation
1.
(a) Declare a timeline for implementation of all
provisions of the Chittagong Hill Tracts Accord during the remaining period of
its term.
(b) Facilitate the expedient settlement of land
disputes by the Land Commission through the immediate amendment of the Land
Dispute Settlement Commission Act of 2001.
(c) Implement a phased withdrawal of temporary
military camps in the region in accordance with the Accord in order to reduce
the extent of undue military control and resultant tensions.
(d) Government to amend CHT Land Commission
law in accordance with the advice of the CHT Regional Council and implement
that amended Act.
(e) Government
to provide logistical and other support to Traditional Institutions to enable
them to carry out their Justice Administration, Revenue & Land and Natural
Resource Management Functions in a more effective & functional manner
(f) Hill District Councils to frame
regulations to guide the exercise of their authority on Land Administration and
Management
(g) Establish legal services in the region and
develop an effective public information and education programme so that victims
and witnesses of human rights violations and crimes, in particular violence
against women, are able to access legal remedies.
(h) Allow United Nations agencies, international,
national and local human rights institutions and groups, including the
international watchdog body, the press and the media, free and easy access to
travel within the region.
(i) Invite the United Nations Special Rapporteur
on the rights of indigenous peoples and other thematic special rapporteurs to
assess the situation in the region;
(j) Include provisions in the Constitution of Bangladesh
during its expected amendment, giving explicit recognition to the distinctive
identity, culture and rights of the indigenous peoples along with ancillary
safeguard provisions;
(k) Formally endorse the United Nations
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, ratify ILO Convention No. 169
of 1989 and the optional protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights.
2. The Commission agrees that the return of the
settlers to the plains is the ideal solution and calls upon all donor
governments and agencies.
3.
Put pressure on the Bangladesh government to accept funds with which to start programmes to resettle Bengali settlers
outside the CHT. Many Bengalis settlers have become victims of the whole
process, particularly settlers
in the Bengali cluster villages.
4.
Set up a Resettlement Committee (consisting
of re-settlement experts, human rights experts, Members of Parliament, NGOs and
representatives of the international donor community) to advise the government
on the implementation and phasing of resettlement. The rehabilitation of Jumma
refugees returned from India.
5.
Propose to the Bangladesh government the creation of an International Land Advisory Commission (consisting of
specialists in land law) to assist the Land Commission in its very complex
assignment.
6. Activate regional council and hill council for
dispute resolution
Regional
council and hill council have the scope to play significant role in dispute resolution
among indigenous people, but these are not active. Advocacy is badly needed to
make these organizations active for this purpose.
7. Acknowledge the rights of the indigenous people
in the Constitution
This
has been a long demand of the indigenous people to realize their rights through
the Constitution of Bangladesh. HRLS programme can do advocacy with the government
to make acknowledge the rights and the customary land rights of the indigenous
people by amending the Constitution.
7. Hill
District Councils to exercise their authority and assert their role in
accordance with the HDC Act, 1989,
including providing recognition to collective customary law use of untitled
lands
8. Withdrawal
of the Security Forces.
9. Removal of the settlers and restoration of
lands to the original owners.
Conclusion
Now,
after almost twelve years, the Government has amended the Chittagong Hill
Treats Land Dispute Settlement Act, 2001 in 3 June 2013. But The Chittagong
Hill Tracts Land Dispute Commission can come to the process of implementation
has been a very slow one, not least because of delaying tactics on the part of
the government, and that the situation in the CHT is far from peaceful. Many of
the delays in implementation are due largely to the fact that the Bangladesh
government did not abide by the letter of the Accord when implementing the
various clauses. This provoked repeated protests by the JSS and did, in fact,
force the government to change its proposals and act in compliance with the
agreement. At other points (e.g. the government nominees for the Interim
Regional Council, and the Chairperson of the Land Commission), the government
got its way and the JSS had to capitulate. The very slowness of the peace
process is in itself a threat to its success. Much precious time has been lost
and, with it, much of the goodwill and confidence.
Ultimately,
the protection of adibashi land rights will depend upon how much awareness
there are, among the general public, and on the part of the government, and
other crucial actors – indigenous peoples’ organizations, NGOs, human rights
organizations, judicial officers, legal practitioners, human rights activists
and the press and media – about adibashi land rights. Therefore, coordinated
action by both rights-holders – primarily the indigenous peoples – and the
duty-bearers – the government, courts of law, indigenous institutions, human
rights organizations and so forth – will be required.
Reference
1. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Unrepresented Nations and
Peoples Organization (UNPO)
2. Dr Abul
Barakat (2013). Chairman of Dhaka University, Economics Department
3. Amendment-of-CHT-Land-Commission-Act-okayed,
Daily-sun
4. Mixed reactions to CHT
Land Commission Amendment Act Daily-sun.com, Khagrachhari Law & Rights,
June 6, 2013,
7. ibid
8. Life and nature at risk. In: Gain P
(Editor). The Chittagong Hill Tracts: Life and
Nature
at risk.
9. Indigenous vs. Bengali(DC), CHITTAGONG
HILL TRACTS COMMISSION, 58-78 (1991);
10. ibid
11. According to
figures obtained by the Refugee Welfare Association from the DC office in
Khagrachhari in 1999
12. Land
case of Ms. Munika Chakma,Taungya
Newsletter Issue 1, Year 1, January 1999
13. Arizona Journal of International &
Comparative Law Vol 21, No. 1 2004
14. 114. U.N. Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
Peoples, 114 U.N. Doc.
E/CN
4/Sub 2/1988/25 (1988).
15. ibid
Web References
www.The Daily Star.com
www.The Daily sun.com
www.minstre
of Law.com
Appendix 1
A Brief History
of land of the Indigenous people
33.
Land is widely recognized as the most critical issue in the Chittagong Hill Tracts
where indigenous peoples have lost and are continuing to lose their ancestral Lands
at an alarming
Rate
as a consequence of forceful eviction from and Expropriation of their lands
through development projects and occupation by the Military. To address
land-related problems, the Accord provides, inter alia, for the Establishment
of a Land Commission with a mandate to settle land disputes, including the
authority to cancel leases of lands given to non-tribal and non-local People.
34.
The first Chairperson of the Land Commission was appointed in 1999 but, in Effect,
the Commission remained inactive until July 2009 when it’s current Chairperson
was appointed. In addition to disposing of land disputes by taking into Account
customary laws and local traditions and procedures, the Commission has the authority
to annul the rights of ownership of lands that were granted illegally. The work
of the Commission is guided by the Accord as well as the Chittagong Hill Tracts
Land Disputes Resolution Commission Act of 2001. A number of provisions of the
Act are contrary to the Accord, however, and not long after the Act was passed
the Regional Council submitted a list of proposed amendments to the Government,
including to the near-veto powers of the Commission’s Chairperson and to
address uncertainties regarding the extent of jurisdiction of the Commission
over forest land and seasonally cultivable plough lands known as fringelands.9
The issue of amendment of the Land Commission Act has been one of the factors hindering
the proper functioning of the Commission; indigenous members have agreed not to
start work until the discrepancies between the Act and the provisions of the
Accord have been removed through legal amendments.
35. The
work of the Land Commission’s recent decisions, which were announced by the
Chairperson without the consent of the Commission’s indigenous members, have
generated substantial criticism from indigenous peoples in the region and from civil
society organizations. Firstly it was announced that a cadastral survey would be
carried out in the region before the land disputes are settled. The
announcement created apprehension that those currently occupying indigenous
peoples’ land illegally would be recorded as the possessors and eventually as
titled owners, while the displaced individuals and communities would be
excluded from the survey records. After months of protests against the
decision, the Government announced that the survey had been called off and that
land ownership would be determined before a survey is conducted.
36.
The Land Commission also made a call for the submission of complaints by affected
parties, without obtaining the consent of the indigenous members of the Commission
regarding the process for the hearing of such complaints. This has resulted in
the submission of claims, mostly by Bengali settlers, who are typically occupying
indigenous peoples’ lands. Indigenous peoples and their major social and political
organizations boycotted this controversial procedure. The Commission subsequently
issued notices to indigenous peoples requesting their appearance before it;
those failing to appear would risk having their cases be decided in their absence.
As a result, there is grave misapprehension about large-scale loss of land rights
of the indigenous peoples through this so-called legal mechanism.21
37.
Regarding the cancellation of leases for rubber and other commercial plantations
to non-tribal and non-local people, in cases where the lands have not been
properly utilized for over 10 years, in July 2009 a parliamentary committee on affairs
in the region recommended that the concerned leases be cancelled, including for
over 45,000 acres of land in the three hill districts. By August 2009, leases
of 8,175 acres of land had reportedly been cancelled while leases of another
15,000 acres are known to be awaiting immediate cancellation.22 Many indigenous
people feel that these reports are not based on fact, and that only a very few
leases have actually been cancelled. In a few cases, some of the land has
allegedly been leased out again rather than given back to its original owner.
38. A
critical but highly sensitive issue in relation to the restitution of indigenous
peoples’ land in accordance with the provisions and intentions of the Accord
and its preamble about safeguarding the special characteristics of the area as
a tribal inhabited region is the voluntary relocation of Bengali settlers to
areas outside the Chittagong Hill Tracts. Several suggestions for a relocation
process that would protect the dignity of the settlers and facilitate their proper
rehabilitation have been made23 but there appears to be no visible initiative
by the successive Governments to start such a process. In the past, the
European Parliament is known to have
Offered
its support for such a relocation.17
Appendix 2
Relevant laws of
Chittagong hill tracts
v
- The Chittagong Hill Tracts Regional Council Act of 1998
- The Hill District Council (amendment) Act of 1998
- The Chittagong Hill Tracts Land Disputes Resolution Commission Act of 2001
- The Chittagong Hill Tracts Regulation (amendment) Act of 2003
- The Hill District Council Acts of 1989 (Acts XIX, XX and XXI of 1989)
- Chittagong Hill Tracts Regional Council. 1998 (English)
- CHT Bazar Fund Manual, 1937 (Bangla)
- CHT Regulation, 1900 (Bangla)
- Rang Amati Hill District Council Act 1989 (English)
- Social Forestry (Amended) Rules 2010
- THE ভূমি-খতিয়ান (পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম), ১৯৮৫
- The Chittagong Hill Tracts (Land Acquisition) Regulation, 1958 (East Pakistan)
- The Chittagong Hill Tracts Development Board Ordinance, 1976
- The Chittagong Hill Tracts frontier Police regulation III of 1881
- The Chittagong Hill Tracts Loans Regulation, 1938.
- The Districts (Extension to The Chittagong Hill Tracts) Ordinance, 1984
Prepared and Posted by: Mohammad Riaj Uddin
No comments:
Post a Comment