A recent history of evictions
EVICTION drives have been carried out in Sivasagar, Nagaon, Marigaon, Kamrup, Kamrup (Metro), Barpeta, Dhubri, Lakhimpur, Jorhat, Nalbari, Biswanath, Charaideo, Hojai, Goalpara, Sonitpur, and Golaghat districts, apart from Darrang. In a submission made before the Assam State Assembly on August 6, 2021, in response to a question raised by Chenga MLA Ashraful Hussain, the Minister of Revenue and Disaster Management provided details of the post-2016 evictions. In Barpeta, evictions were carried out to clear land at Gaurijhar of Dhanbanda Gaon from Barpeta Revenue Circle, Cow reserve of Ganakkuchi village, government land from Sankuchi village, government land near a river from Metikuchi village and government land beside the road of Jati village, Shree Shree Haridev Satra land from Bahori village under Chenga revenue circle, five bighas of land of crematorium from Sathbhoni’s Tup village under Barnagar revenue circle, 20 bighas allocated land for drainage of Barpeta Municipality in Katajhar Patar village, and hostel of Adarsha Vidyalay from Titapani Mouza of Shoupur village under Kalgachiya
revenue circle. However, none of the families that were evicted were given any compensation or land for resettlement.
In Darrang, evictions were carried out to clear land at Fuhurtuli, Hiloikhunda, Paniyakhat, Shapowatari, Gomishkiya Pothar, Khator Pothar, kekuruwa, Baghpori Chapori, no. 1 Gadhowa, no. 3 Dholpur, Dargaon Town, Bechimari, Kuruwa Chapri, South Kuruwa, Mangaldoi town, Nech Logajan, Barogola, and Dargaon Khuti. However, none of the people ousted have been given any compensation.
As many as 3,000 bighas of land had been cleared after evicting encroachers in Hojai. However, the evicted people will only be given land at the “right time” and that too “depending on citizenship”.
In Lakhimpur, evictions were carried out in North Lakhimpur, Naoboicha, Bihpuriya, Narayanpur, Kadam and Shawanshiri. Here too, no compensation was paid or relocation land given.
In Nagaon, eviction was carried out to clear government land from Charhi Nanke Under Roha Revenue
Circle, Harbor, Chirmola and Dangori Pond, Bechamari under Dhing Revenue Circle, Dhupguri, Datodraba, Barhicha Satra, Atuyatika Pokhar under Sadar Revenue Circle, Bandardubi under Kaliyabor Revenue Circle, Palkhuwa, Deuchur chang, Jhokholabanda Town and Garubanadhath. Here, 12 families were given one katha of land each for rehabilitation under Dhing circle. (Katha is a local unit of measurement of land area and is approximately equal to 2,880 square feet.)
In Sivasagar, evictions were carried out to clear land at revenue circle of Sivasagar Nagar Mahal, Meteka Bongaon, Betbari, Kuwarpur and Jakaichuk Mouza, Pohugarh under Amguri revenue circle of Jaysagar village, historic Rudrasagar from Rudrasagar village, Ali Kahor from Shalguri village, illegally occupied land from Mohan Hazarika Ali Kash, historic Gaurisagar pond from Fukanphudiya village and near Namdang river from Namdang Kumar village. So far, in terms of redistribution of land, two kathas were allocated to 12 landless families each.
In Sonitpur, evictions were carried out in at Tezpur, Thelamara, Dhekiyajuli, Chariduwar and Laduwar. But no compensation was paid and no land was offered for resettlement of evicted families either.
It is clear then, that over the past five years since the BJP came to power in Assam, thousands of bighas of land have been “cleared” after evicting families dubbed as “encroachers”, with only a few dozen families having been given land for relocation purposes.
Coming to more recent happenings, eviction drives are disproportionately targeting members of the Muslim community. Some recent examples:
May 17, 2021: 25 families evicted from Dighali chapori, Laletup, Bharaki Chapori, Bhoirobi and Baitamari in Sonitpur District. These are flood-prone riverine areas.
June 6, 2021: 74 families evicted from Kaki in Hojai District. Roughly 80 per cent of the population here is Muslim.
June 7, 2021: 49 families evicted from Dhalpur, Phuhurtuli in Darrang district. All, except one family, are Muslim.
August 7, 2021: 61 families evicted from Alamganj in Dhubri district. 90 per cent of the population here is Muslim.
September 20, 2021: Around 200 families evicted from Fuhuratoli, Dhalpur in Darrang district.
Teesta Setalvad
Assam. This is clearly yet another attack on the Bengalispeaking population, who are also residents of the geographical area of Assam since at least the early- to mid-1800s.
The implementation of the Brahma Committee’s recommendations, along with the controversial 2019 Land Policy, can potentially disenfranchise about 70 lakh Assamese Muslims and 60 lakh Bengali-speaking Hindus from the riverine, grazing and forest areas of the State. If the implementation of these policies continues, a staggering 1.3 crore people of the State stand to be denied basic human rights, the right to life, equality before the law and the right to live without being discriminated against. Finally, the land policy that discriminates on the basis of caste, ethnicity, and language is against Articles 15, 14, and 21. To worsen the situation, in July 2021, the newly anointed Chief Minister announced the creation of the new Department of Indigenous Faith and Culture to address the concerns of the State’s indigenous communities, including some and excluding others.
While referring to tribes such as the Rabha, Boro, Mising, Moran and Matak in terms of their “rich heritage”, he singled out the Moran and Matak, excluding the Tai Ahom, Koch Rajbongshi, Chutia and Tea Tribes. The issue is also linked to the unfulfilled electoral promise by the BJP (in two consecutive election manifestos) to give them Scheduled Tribe status, which will ensure certain specific social welfare benefits and also bring them under the Forest Rights Act, 2006, an entitlement to land and recognition of rights law.
Under the garb of providing protection to a section of Assam’s indigenous people (which section it is still unclear), what the 2019 Land Policy backed by the Brahma Committee report does is deliberately leave out certain specific communities. This is being done on the basis of personal or “immutable” characteristics. The individual faith or tribe which a person is born into or located in is at the heart of individual autonomy and personal self-determination. The policy is a disadvantage to families as it acts on the basis of their personal characteristics, which they are in no position to either change or modify.
Not only does this seminally violate Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, it is ultra vires or contrary to emerging fundamental rights jurisprudence, such as the famed Navtej Johar vs Union of India (2018) case. In the case, the Supreme Court stated in paragraph 27: “….that Article 14 contains a powerful statement of values—of the substance of equality before the law and the equal protection of laws. To reduce it to a formal exercise of classification may miss the true value of equality as a safeguard against arbitrariness in state action. As our constitutional jurisprudence has evolved towards recognising the substantive content of liberty and equality, the core of Article 14 has emerged out of the shadows of classification. Article 14 has a substantive content on which, together with liberty and dignity, the edifice of the Constitution is built. Simply put, in that avatar, it reflects the quest for ensuring fair treatment of the individual in every aspect of human endeavour and in every facet of human existence.”
For the essence of this mandate to have meaning for the beleaguered and targeted sections in Assam, constitutional values and their evolving and rich essence need to permeate down through applied state policy. What we see today is a bitter contrarian policy where a 21st century avatar of the state uses brute force to first violently kill its targets, and then disenfranchise and exclude them. Teesta Setalvad is a journalist and rights activist and secretary of Citizens for Justice and Peace (www.cjp.org.in).
The author would like to acknowledge the contributions of the www.cjp.org.in team of fieldworkers, legal researchers and writers, without which this work would not have been possible.)