Why we want our voice to be heard?

Pages

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

"I have been working for long 11 years with unendurable experience and in a unfavourable condition"-says Shantu Larma. source:prothom-alo

রাঙামাটিতে সন্তু লারমা

১১ বছর দুর্বিষহ অভিজ্ঞতা নিয়ে কাজ করছি

নিজস্ব প্রতিবেদক, রাঙামাটি | তারিখ: ২৯-০৯-২০১০


পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম আঞ্চলিক পরিষদের চেয়ারম্যান ও জনসংহতি সমিতির সভাপতি জ্যোতিরিন্দ্র বোধিপ্রিয় (সন্তু) লারমা অভিযোগ করে বলেছেন, ‘সরকারের সদিচ্ছার অভাবে পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম আঞ্চলিক পরিষদ যথাযথভাবে কাজ করতে পারছে না ১১ বছর ধরে দুর্বিষহ অভিজ্ঞতা নিয়ে কাজ করছি এ অবস্থা চলতে থাকলে এখানে থাকার কোনো অর্থ হয় না
গতকাল মঙ্গলবার ‘পার্বত্য চুক্তি বাস্তবায়ন, উন্নয়ন ও সংবিধান সংশোধন’ শীর্ষক মতবিনিময় সভায় সভাপতির বক্তব্যে সন্তু লারমা এ কথা বলেন রাঙামাটি শহরের ক্ষুদ্র নৃ-গোষ্ঠী সাংস্কৃতিক ইনস্টিটিউট মিলনায়তনে এ সভার আয়োজন করে পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম আঞ্চলিক পরিষদ সহযোগিতা দিয়েছে জাতিসংঘ উন্নয়ন কর্মসূচির (ইউএনডিপি) পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম উন্নয়ন সহায়তা প্রকল্প (সিএইচটিডিএফ) মতবিনিময় সভায় তিন পার্বত্য জেলার দুই শতাধিক আদিবাসী ও বাঙালি যোগ দেন
সন্তু লারমা বলেন, পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামের তিন সাংসদ, তিন জেলা পরিষদ চেয়ারম্যান, তিন সার্কেল-প্রধান (রাজা) ও আঞ্চলিক পরিষদের চেয়ারম্যান ঐক্যবদ্ধ হলে পার্বত্য চুক্তি বাস্তবায়ন না হওয়ার কোনো কারণ নেই তিনি আরও বলেন, অনেক আদিবাসী এখনো পার্বত্য চুক্তিকে নিজের চুক্তি বলে মনে করতে পারেন না সরকারের সর্বোচ্চ পর্যায় থেকে সর্বনিম্ন পর্যায় পর্যন্ত পার্বত্য চুক্তিবিরোধী রয়েছে উল্লেখ করে সন্তু লারমা বলেন, আমলাদের বিরোধিতা ও বৈরী মনোভাব চুক্তি বাস্তবায়নে বড় বাধা
সভায় পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম আঞ্চলিক পরিষদের সদস্য গৌতম কুমার চাকমা বলেন, ‘পার্বত্য চুক্তির মাধ্যমে আমরা যে অধিকার পেয়েছি, তা নতুন কিছু নয় আমাদের এসব অধিকার আগেও ছিল, যা বিভিন্ন সময়ে কেড়ে নেওয়া হয়েছে চুক্তির মাধ্যমে সেগুলো সুদৃঢ় করা হয়েছে’ ভূমি ও পুনর্বাসিত বাঙালিদের সমস্যার সমাধান ছাড়া পার্বত্য চুক্তির সফলতা আসবে না বলেও তিনি মন্তব্য করেন
পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম নাগরিক কমিটির সভাপতি গৌতম দেওয়ান বলেন, পার্বত্য চুক্তির মূল লক্ষ্য শাসনকাঠামোতে সব জনগোষ্ঠীর অংশগ্রহণ নিশ্চিত করা অথচ চুক্তির আওতায় গঠিত পার্বত্য জেলা পরিষদগুলোতে নির্বাচনের আয়োজন না করে দলীয় লোক দিয়ে সেগুলো পরিচালিত করা হচ্ছে তিনি বলেন, বর্তমানে যে পার্বত্য জেলা পরিষদ চলছে, তা সম্পূর্ণ অবৈধ কারণ এর আগে আদালত থেকে ১৩ বার সময় নিয়ে পরিষদগুলোর নির্বাচন পেছানো হয়েছে দুই বছর ধরে সরকার তারও প্রয়োজন মনে করছে না বর্তমানে পরিষদগুলোর নির্বাচন অনুষ্ঠানের ব্যাপারে উচ্চ আদালতের নির্দেশ রয়েছে
চুক্তি বাস্তবায়ন না হওয়ার সেটিও একটি কারণ


------------------


source: http://www.prothom-alo.com/detail/date/2010-09-29/news/97326

Monday, September 27, 2010

Human chain formed across the country demanding constitutional recognition of IPs- Kapaeeng Foundation

Human chain formed across the country demanding constitutional recognition of IPs

On 25 September 2010 Bangladesh Indigenous Peoples Forum (BIPF) and other Indigenous Peoples Organisations (IPOs) organized Human Chain in Dhaka, Rajshahi, Sylhet, Chittagong, Chittagong Hill Tracts and other parts of the country where indigenous peoples live in. Many IPOs and CBOs representatives, political leaders, journalists, lawyers, university teachers, human rights defenders, indigenous peoples rights activists had joined the demonstrations and raised their voices for the constitutional recognition of indigenous peoples of Bangladesh.

In Dhaka

Indigenous people’s organizations led by Bangladesh Indigenous Peoples Forum organized a human chain in front of Jatiyo Jadughor, Shahbag, Dhaka, demanding Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Peoples of Bangladesh. Many organization including Kapaeeng Foundation, CHT Hill Students’ Council (PCP), Bangladesh Adibasi Chatra Songram Porishod, Hill Women’s Federation (HWF), Tripura Students Forum (TSF), Indigenous Peoples Development Services (IPDS), Association of Land Reform and Development (ALRD), Bangladesh Adibasi Odhikar Andolon etc. joined the demonstration.

On the contrary, President of PCP Mr. Bablu Chakma, Organizing Secretary of Bangladesh Adibasi Chattra Sangram Porishod Mr. Litus Chiran, Organizing Secretary of HWF Ms. Chanchana Chakma, teacher of Dhaka University Professor Dr. Dalem Chandra Barman and Zobaida Nashrin Kona, chairperson of Patra Somprodai Kalyan Parishod Mr. Gouranga Patra, presidium member of Communist Party of Bangladesh (CPB)Haider Akbar Khan Rono, researcher Mr. Pavel Partha, Mr. Sharif Jamil of Bangladesh Paribesh Andolon, general secretary of Bangladesh Adibasi Adhikar Andolan Professor Mesbah Kamal and general secretary of Bangladesh Indigenous Peoples Forum Mr. Sanjeeb Drong have delivered their solidarity speeches during the demonstration, While Mr. Hiran Mitra Chakma conducted the program.

In their speeches, speakers urged the Government to seriously consider the issue of constitutional recognition of indigenous peoples; otherwise, the process of amendment of constitution will remain incomplete. This time, it is the unique opportunity for the county to erase the wrong done in 1972, they added.

In CHT

In three hill districts of Rangamati, Khagrachari and Bandarban in Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) region, human chain was also formed by CHT branch of BIPF and other local IP organisations. In Rangamati, BIPF and M N Larma Memorial Foundation jointly formed human chain in front of Deputy Commissioner’s office long the mail road. Among others, convenor of CHT branch of BIPF Mr. Prakriti Ranjan Chakma, convenor of M N Larma Memorial Foundation Mr. Bijoy Ketan Chakma, Dr. Kaniska Chakma, former teacher Mr. A K Newar, youth leader Mr. Udayan Tripura at el spoke during the human chain.

On the other, human chain was formed in front of Shapla Chattar area in Khagrachari while in front of Press Club in Bandarban district.

In Chittagong

Bangladesh Indigenous Peoples Forum, Socheton Nagorik Somaj, Pahari Shramik Kalyan Forum, CHT Hill Students’ Council (PCP) have jointly organized the Human Chain in front of Shaheed Minar in Chittagong town. Hundreds of indigenous people and rights activists participated in this demonstration. Among others Mr. Sharat Jyoti Chakma of PCJSS, Mr. Indra Nandan Dutta, Vice-president, Jatiyo Somajtantrik Dal; Advocate Abu Hanif, General Secretary, Chittagong Metropolitan Unit, Workers’ Party of Bangladesh; Advocate Rana Dasgupto, General Secretary, Bangladesh Hindu-Buddha-Christian Oikyo Parishod and Mr. Andrew Solomar, Finance Secretary, Bangladesh Indigenous Peoples Forum at el spoke during the demonstration.

All speakers demanded the constitutional recognition of the indigenous peoples. They urged the government for the greater interest of they country and for ensuring fundamental rights and dignity of the indigenous peoples, government should consider this issue seriously.

In Rajshahi

Human Chain was formed in front of Shaheb Bazar Zero Point in Rajshahi city. Hundreds of indigenous and mainstream people have taken part in this demonstration. Principal Shafiqur Rahman Badsha, General Secretary, Rajshahi Metropoliton Unit, Bangladesh Awami League; Mr. Liakat Ali Lipu, General Secretary, Metropoliton Unit, Workers’ Party of Bangladesh; Mr. Bimal Chandra Rajowar, Organizing Secretary, Jatiyo Adibasi Porishod; Mr. Anil Marandi, President, Jatiyo Adibasi Parishod; Mr. Rabindranath Soren, General Secretary, Jatiyo Adibasi Parishod and Vice-President of Bangladesh Indigenous Peoples Forum at el spoke during the demonstration.

In addition, Adibasi Chattra Porishod and Hill Students’ Council (PCP) of Rajshahi University unit have also joined the Human Chain and delivered their solidarity speeches demanding constitutional recognition of indigenous peoples.

In Sylhet

Bangladesh Indigenous Peoples Forum, Sylhet Chapter organized Human Chain in front of Sylhet Central Shaheed Minar. Many other IP organizations have joined the demonstration. Advocate Shahidul Shaheen, President, Lawyers Association of Sylhet, Ghana Sangma, Ex President of Tribal Welfare Association, Mr. Mintu Deshowara, President, Sylhet Adibasi Chattra Parishod et al spoke and delivered their solidarity speeches.

BIPF Demands

BIPF published a leaflet demanding constitutional recognition of indigenous peoples in Bangladesh on the occasion of human chain programme where following demands were placed before government of Bangladesh-

1. Ensure constitutional recognition of national entities, languages and cultures of indigenous peoples;

2. Provide constitutional recognition of special governance arrangement of CHT region for the protection of political, economic, cultural and religious rights of CHT;

3. Provide seat reservation for indigenous peoples including women in the parliament and local government councils;

4. Ensure constitutional guarantee so that no law and constitutional provisions related to indigenous peoples’ rights would be changed without consent of indigenous peoples;

5. Recognise rights to control over land, territory and natural resources of indigenous peoples;

6. Provide constitutional recognition of CHT Accord signed in 1997 and laws formulated under this Accord.




-- ----

report by:
Kapaeeng Foundation
(An Human Rights Organization for Indigenous Peoples of Bangladesh)

Sunday, September 26, 2010

Meeting on amendment of CHT Land Commission Act held at CHT Ministry

Meeting on amendment of CHT Land Commission Act held at CHT Ministry


On 22 September 2010 at 11.00 a.m. a meeting on amendment of CHT Land Dispute Settlement Commission 2001 was held at the conference hall of the Ministry of CHT Affairs (MoCHTA) with State Minister for CHT Affairs Mr. Dipankar Talukdar in the chair.

From the government side, chairman of CHT Development Board MP Bir Bahadur Ushwe Sing, chairman of the Task Force on Rehabilitation of Returnee Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) MP Jatindra Lal Tripura and officials from MoCHTA, Land Ministry, Forest & Environment Ministry and Law Ministry including secretary of the MoCHTA Mr. Masud Ahmed attended the meeting

From CHT Regional Council (CHTRC) side, its members Mr. Goutam Kumar Chakma and Mr. Sneha Kumar Chakma were present in the meetings while Chakma Circle Chief Raja Devasish Roy, representative of Bohmong Circle Chief Chaw Hla Prue Jimi and Mong Circle Chief Saching Prue Chawdhury participated in the meeting.

It is mentionable that the CHTRC reviewed the recommendations/decisions adopted in the meeting held on 06 December 2009 chaired by the Land Minister and participated by CHTRC delegation in its 49th session (27 April 2010) and accepted decision to place recommendations once again on few sections of the CHT Land Dispute Settlement Act 2001 to the Government of Bangladesh (GoB). Accordingly the CHTRC placed the recommendations to the Land Ministry and passed its copy to the MoCHTA as well.

Discussion was started on the basis of CHTRC’s recommendations for amendment of CHT Land Dispute Settlement Commission 2001, where following decisions adopted on the concerned sections were as below:

1. Section 2- Definition of Rehabilitated Refugees: CHTRC recommended including the refugee returnees, who got returned from India in 1992-1994 as per the 16 point Package Deal between the GoB and the refugee leaders. GoB side not once again denied accepting it and the State Minister opined that yet these refugees would be able to have the opportunity of receiving settlement of land disputes as non-refugees.

2. Section 3(2)(Gha)- To add representative of concerned Circle Chief: Present provision narrates Circle Chief (concerned). CHTRC recommended to replacing it with the provision as ‘Circle Chief (concerned) or his representative nominated by him’. This recommendation was accepted in the meeting.

3. Section 6(1)(ka)- To add all others’ Land disputes: This provision narrates that land disputes of only the refugee returnees would be settled. CHTRC recommended, as per the CHT Accord, to adding all others’ land disputes. Decision was adopted to amend this provision as per the Accord.

4. Section 6(1)(Ga)- Condition: This provision narrates that Reserved Forests, Kaptai Hydro Electric Project Area, Betbunia Earth Satellite Centre, state owned Industrial Areas, lands recorded in the name on GoB or local authorities would remain outside the jurisdiction of the Land Commission. CHTRC recommended, as per the CHT Accord, to omit it. Decision was made to recommend for omitting it.

5. Section 7(3)- Quorum: This provision narrates that Chairman and other two members would fulfill the quorum of the Land commission meeting. Raja Devasish Roy explained that as per this provision the Commission even in absence of the concerned circle chief and the concerned HDC Chairman were entrusted with the power of settlement of the land disputes, which as a consequence, may not be proper and hence presence of anyone of these two institutions must be imperative. In light of it, decision was made that this provision would be amended stating that ‘Chairman and three other members would fulfill the quorum’.

6. Section 7(5)- Process of taking Decision: CHTRC put recommendations that in the meeting of the Land Commission decision would be adopted unanimously and if it fails then it would be adopted with votes of majority members including the Chairman. In this meeting decision was accepted to put recommendation to the Land Ministry for reviewing the recommendation of the CHTRC.

7. Section 10: To use the term Deputy Commissioner: CHTRC put recommendation to replace the word ‘Zella Prashasak’ with the word ‘Deputy Commissioner’, which is in use in CHT as per the CHT Regulation, 1900. GoB side preferred to retain the word ‘Zella Prashasak’, which is used in the country.

In the meeting the State Minister for CHT Affairs Dipankar Talukdar opined the decisions of this meeting would be placed to the Land ministry, which would be asked for holding a meeting for finalizing the amendments on the Land Commission Act as early as possible.

It is notable that it is yet to be known whether the minutes to be framed by the MoCHTA and signed by the State Minister (as chaired by him) would include the decisions of the meeting properly.

In the meeting it was observed that most of the officials of the MoCHTA and the representative of the Forest and Environment Ministry, being anti-Accord elements, were quite against of the decisions particularly on the area jurisdiction of the commission adopted in the meeting.



----------------------

source: PCJSS

Special unit of RAB may be deployed in CHT if situation deteriorates: Tuku

Special unit of RAB may be deployed in CHT if situation deteriorates: Tuku

Reported by: UNBconnect
Reported on: September 25, 2010 23:33 PM
Reported in: National
Rangamati, Sept 25 (UNB) - State Minister for Home Shamsul Haq Tuku has given a broad hint of deploying special unit of Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) in the Chittagong Hill Tracts in view of deteriorating law and order situation.

Speaking at a meeting of the Rangamati law and order committee today he expressed dissatisfaction at the situation in the region. He told the district leaders that the government has plan for deployment of special unit of RAB in case the situation deteriorated.

Reviewing the situation Tuku said recovery of illegal arms is a continuous process. The law enforcing agencies have been advised to see none could indulge in using illegal firearms to destabilize the situation.

The meeting over, the State Minister talked to reporters. Replying to a volley of questions he did not rule out declaring any group or party illegal in Chittagong Hill Tracts. “If their activities are found against the peace of the region or against the nation, they will be banned,” he said.

It was pointed out at the meeting that a section of tribal under the banner of UPDF has been trying to destabilize the situation.

Rangamati Parbattya Zila Parishad chairman Nikhil Kumar Chakma, DC Sourendra Nath Chakraborty, Police Super Maud-ul-Hasan, elite of the town and journalists took part in the meeting.

Meanwhile, Adivasi Forum and Manabendra Larma Memorial Foundation jointly held a human chain in front of DCS office. The human chain lasting six hours demanded constitutional recognition of the tribals of the country.

-----------

source: http://unbconnect.com/component/news/task-show/id-30858

News about the Human Chain-published in different important dailies

News about the Human Chain-published in different important dailies

The daily star:

Human Chains, Rallies in Districts

Indigenous people call for restoration of '72 constitution

Jatiya Adivasi Parishad forms a human chain at Shaheb Bazaar in Rajshahi city, right, brings out a procession in Thakurgaon town yesterday demanding restoration of the 1972 constitution and constitutional rights of the indigenous people.Photo: STAR

Indigenous people formed a human chain yesterday in the town demanding restoration of constitution of 1972 and constitutional rights of indigenous people.

The human chain followed a discussion at the same venue.

The speakers reiterated the demand for a separate land commission to protect rights of the community living in plan lands.

They said the indigenous people are still victims of discrimination in different fields due to government indifference to their causes.

They are always lagging behind as they are being deprived of their rights in all sectors, they said.

The speakers also called to establish a separate ministry for indigenous people to deal with their problems.

Indigenous people are becoming landless as criminals and local influential people with the help of a section of officials are grabbing their lands, they pointed out.

Urging the government to save the indigenous people from the land grabbers, they said all fake documents made to occupy their land should be declared illegal.

They demanded allocation khas land to the landless indigenous people for their survival.

Calling for withdrawal of all false cases against the indigenous people, they said the indigenous community is still not getting facilities like others in the fields of education and job.

The speakers also demanded mother tongue-based primary education for their children and the community's quota in higher education and government service.

They said the indigenous people played a significant role during the liberation war in 1971 but they are yet to be given constitutional rights.

Demanding restoration of '72 constitution they said the people of the country including indigenous people joined the Liberation War to establish a secular society. But even after 39 years of independence it is yet to be achieved, they lamented.

Indigenous people in Rangamati also organised a human chain in the town yesterday demanding restoration of '72 constitution and constitutional recognition to the rights of the community, reports our correspondent.

Hundreds of ethnic people from different far-flung areas with banners and festoons joined in the programme followed by a rally.

Speakers at the rally said the indigenous people have been playing important role in national level since long but they are still deprived of their rights.

Congratulating the current government for move to restore the '72 constitution, they said the opportunity now has come for providing constitutional recognition to the indigenous people.



The Daily Star:


Recognise the indigenous in constitution

Adivasi Forum urges govt

Bangladesh Adivasi Forum forms a human chain in front of the National Museum in the city yesterday demanding constitutional recognition of the indigenous people.Photo: STAR

Bangladesh Adivasi Forum yesterday reiterated its demand for constitutional recognition of the ethnicity, language and culture of the country's indigenous people.

They also demanded constitutional recognition of the indigenous people of Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) for their political, economic, social, cultural and religious security.

The forum placed the demands at a human chain programme in front of the National Museum at Shahbagh in the city yesterday.

Gono Forum Presidium Member Pankaj Bhattacharya said the 1972 constitution did not give any recognition to the indigenous people, which is a historical mistake.

"Since the government has taken initiative to amend the constitution, I request them to include the recognition of indigenous people and their rights in the constitution."

He, however, said some government people are reluctant to give such indigenous recognition.

The forum also demanded seats reserved for the indigenous people in parliament as well as the local government.

The forum leaders also called on the government for keeping a guarantee provision in the constitution to take their opinion when amending the constitution and laws in indigenous people's interest.

They said the government should also give constitutional recognition to the CHT Peace Agreement.

Sanjeeb Drong, general secretary of Bangladesh Adivasi Forum, said the government assured him that the indigenous people's rights would be protected in the amended constitution.

Bangladesh Adivasi Forum also organised similar programmes throughout the country including Rangamati, Chittagong and Rajshahi in support of their demand.



The New Age:

Constitutional recognition
of minorities demanded

Staff Correspondent . Sylhet

Leaders and activists of Adivasi Forum, a platform of ethnic minority groups, formed a human chain in the Sylhet city on Saturday, demanding their constitutional recognition.
A cross-section of people also expressed solidarity with the minority groups’ demands for constitutional recognition and participated in the human chain in front of the Central Shaheed Minar at noon.
At a rally during the human chain, the forum’s leaders demanded immediate step to give constitutional recognition of the ethnic minority group people in the country and to recognise their ownership of land in the areas inhabited by the minorities.
Mentioning that 33 out of some 45 small ethnic groups have been living in the Sylhet region for over centuries and they have their own culture, religion and ethnic identities.
But, their participation in the policy making process of the country was ignored, depriving them of their citizen right, they said.
It is essential to give constitutional recognition of the small ethnic groups, to recognise their ownership of their land and to ensure their representation in the government’s policy making in order to put an end to the existing disparity they are facing, the speakers claim.
The Sylhet Tribal Welfare Association’s former president, Danos Sangma, presided over the rally.
Sylhet Bar Association president EU Shahidul Islam, Bangladesh Paribesh Andolan’s district secretary Abdul Karim Kim, Bangladesh Human Rights Implementation Association’s district secretary Shahin Ahmad Khan, Tribal Welfare Association leader Ilias Nakrek and Sylhet Divisional Indigenous Student Organisation leader Swapan Naek, among others, addressed the rally.


Prothom-Alo:

News about the Human Chain-prothom-alo


News about the Human Chain-prothom-alo


Human Chain Organised


KalerKantho:

kalerkantho=hc


The Daily Samakal:


samakal=hc

Press release of Human Chain Organised in Front DC Office in Rangamati

Press release of Human Chain Organised in Front DC Office in Rangamati

Pictures of Human Chain organized in Dhaka demanding constitutional recognition for the indigenous people of Bangladesh.





Pictures of Human Chain organized in Dhaka (infront of National Museum) demanding constitutional recognition for the indigenous people of Bangladesh. Pictures received from Bidhayak Da (Kapaeeng foundation) and Pallab Da.

Pictures of Human Chain organized in Chittagong demanding constitutional recognition for the indigenous people of Bangladesh







Pictures of Human Chain organized in Chittagong demanding constitutional recognition for the indigenous people of Bangladesh. Pictures received from Bidhayak Da (Kapaeeng foundation)

Pictures of Human Chain organized in Rangamati on 25th September demanding constitutional recognition for the indigenous people of Bangladesh







Pictures of Human Chain organized in Rangamati (infront of DC office). Pictures received from Bidhayak Da (Kapaeeng foundation)

Friday, September 24, 2010

Secularism, Bangali Hegemony and Our Constitution -HANA SHAMS AHMED evaluates the lack of an indigenous voice in our constitution

Secularism, Bangali Hegemony and Our Constitution


HANA SHAMS AHMED evaluates the lack of an indigenous voice in our constitution



NAEEM MOHAIEMEN

The Constitution of Bangladesh has been brought under the microscope for the 15th time since 1972. With the annulment of the fifth amendment of the Constitution through a judgment by the Supreme Court this year, the Constitution is to revert to some of the core values behind the formation of the original 1972 version, whose four main pillars were democracy, socialism, nationalism and secularism.

The latest judgment by the Supreme Court gives us a chance to look closely at the Constitution, which was adopted soon after the liberation war ended in 1971, in the aftermath of the emotions and ideology that led the nation in the struggle for identity and existence. While the 1972 document had an equal vie towards citizens of all religions, ethnic, cultural and linguistic pluralism were patently absent from the document. Thus, while the 1972 constitution was even-handed to all religions, it did not recognise the fifty or more indigenous peoples and their distinct identities, who still remain as second class citizens of Bangladesh.

When the draft of the Constitution of Bangladesh was presented to the Constituent Assembly in 1972, Manabendra Narayan Larma (founder general secretary of PCJSS) refused to endorse a Constitution that did not recognise the existence of people of other ethnic origins than Bangali . He had protested: "Under no definition or logic can a Chakma be a Bangali or a Bangali be a Chakma… As citizens of Bangladesh we are all Bangladeshis, but we also have a separate ethnic identity..."

Thirty-eight years after MN Larma's protest, the time has finally come to correct a basic flaw in our national constitutional framework. The formation of the current special parliamentary committee to review and recommend constitutional amendments is a welcome move by the government. Its recommendations must include remedies to a Constitution that is still ethnically communal in nature, putting people from non-Bangali groups outside our definition of nation.

The 1997 CHT Accord and the 2008 AL election manifesto
One of the objectives of the Constitution review and amendment committee is "implementation of ruling Awami League-led grand alliance's electoral pledges". One commitment that the Awami League government has so far not fulfilled is implementation of the CHT Accord. The 2008 election manifesto promised: "The 1997 Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord will be fully implemented. More efforts will be directed towards the development of underdeveloped areas, and special programs on priority basis will be taken to secure rights of the ethnic minorities, indigenous peoples and other communities, and to preserve their language, literature, culture, and unique lifestyles."


NAEEM MOHAIEMEN

However, by the second year of the Awami League government, the Pahari people are still waiting for positive steps towards implementation of the Accord. In fact, instead of implementation, in April of this year the CHT Accord received a setback when a bench of the High Court Division of the Supreme Court declared the CHT Regional Council (RC), set up under the Accord, as unconstitutional. The RC was formed, among others, to coordinate and supervise the activities of the three Hill District Councils, and to oversee general administration, local council and NGO activities. The court decision is currently being appealed against by the government and the RC, pending which the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court has stayed the High Court Divisions' s judgment.

The Bangali hegemony
Article 3 (The state language) of the Bangladesh Constitution states, "The State language of the Republic is Bangla." In November 1999, UNESCO declared February 21 as the International Mother Language Day, paying respect to the fight to preserve the mother tongue of the millions of Bengali-speaking people in Bangladesh. Unfortunately the Bengali people have failed in the post-1971 period to acknowledge the existence of other mother tongues, such as those of the fifty or more indigenous peoples of Bangladesh. In fact, the only acknowledgment of an "other" is through the problematic and derogatory phrase "backward section of society." It is important therefore, for the Constitution review committee to confront this exclusionary idea of nationhood, and expand the mandate of Article 3.

Although the Constitution talks about equal rights and freedom from discrimination, because of the discrimination historically faced by indigenous people, which remains largely unacknowledged by the majority, true equal right is yet to be enjoyed by indigenous people. Unless special measures through affirmative action are taken, indigenous people will not be able to freely exercise their fundamental rights as citizens in a non-discriminatory manner. Providing procedurally identical treatment to all citizens, including those that are disadvantaged with regard to representation in decision-making processes, in access to education, healthcare, livelihood, drinking water, electricity, market access and communications is itself an act of discrimination by the state.

Historically, indigenous people have not been given the opportunity of being involved in the process of decision-making at national, or even local level. Even now their roles in these processes are marginal. Unless firm affirmative actions are taken, the discrimination against marginalised people will still remain.

Unfortunately a section of the population benefits from the continuing marginalisation of indigenous people and so oppose all efforts to provide affirmative action, such as through the adoption of an indigenous policy by the government. Even the very word "adibashi" (indigenous) has made several quarters uncomfortable. There have even been instructions to officially use the word "upojati" (literal meaning "sub-nation," but when writing in English, the term 'tribal' is used) instead of "adibashi." This is so in spite of the fact that the word "upojati" is rejected by indigenous groups in Bangladesh. There is an attempt to limit the word "indigenous" to "original inhabitants", and not the internationally accepted meaning referring to a peoples' distinctiveness from the dominant majority in terms of custom, religion and culture, and their exclusion from the mainstream political processes, which have historically resulted in marginalisation and a deprivation from state-led development.

This year the parliament also passed the Small Ethnic Groups Cultural Institutes Act, 2010, but the indigenous peoples were not consulted regarding the terminology to be used and only 27 "small ethnic groups" were recognised across the country. Interestingly, the law states that "small ethnic groups" in the Act referred to the "adibashi" (indigenous people) of the country!

It's very unfortunate that despite both Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina (2009) and Former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia (2003) having used the word "adibashi" in their commemorative statements on World Indigenous Day (as did Caretaker Chief Adviser Fakhruddin Ahmed), representatives of the Government of Bangladesh declared at the United Nations this year that Bangladesh did not have any indigenous population but rather had several ethnic minorities and tribal groups. The Ministry for CHT Affairs (MoCHTA) also issued a memo instructing district-level officials to not use the terms "Adivasi" or "indigenous" in any government documents, and instead to use the word "upajati." At the World Indigenous People's Day on August 9 this year many senior government officials including the Food and Disaster Management Minister Abdur Razzaq and Information Minister Abul Kalam Azad acknowledged the importance of using the term "adibashi."


NAEEM MOHAIEMEN

International treaties
Only six months before the 1972 Constitution was framed, Bangladesh had ratified ILO Convention No. 107 on Indigenous and Tribal Populations, 1957. Unfortunately there was no reflection of this ratification on the Constitution. Since 1972 the government has endorsed many more international treaties like the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). About the indigenous people, Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP)-II says:

Ensure their social, political and economic rights; ensure security and their fundamental rights; and preserve their social and cultural identity. It envisages that indigenous communities will not be subject to any discrimination in social, political and economic activities. They will be ensured of access to education, health care, food and nutrition, employment and protection of rights to land and other resources (p.143).

Two very significant treaties related to this debate are ILO Convention No. 107 and 169. Convention 107 covers a range of subjects, including land, recruitment and conditions of employment, rural industries, social security and health, and education and means of communication. Particularly it has specific wide coverage definitions regarding land, territories and resources, and are similar to those of Convention No.169

Convention No.169 has been ratified by 22 countries, including Nepal. But Bangladesh has so far not ratified it. It is functioning as a global reference point for basic standards on indigenous peoples' rights. The fundamental concepts in Conventions No. 107 and 169, are consultation and participation. This implies that indigenous peoples have the right to par-ticipate in policy, legislative, administrative and development processes, and to decide their own priorities for development. The key principle of ILO Convention No. 169 (an updated version of Convention No. 107), which relates to the current debate about the Bangladesh Constitution are self-identification; non-discrimination; special measures; recognition of the cultural and other specificities of indigenous and tribal peoples; right to decide priorities for development.

Constitutions in other countries
Recently the Kenyan Constitution underwent a reform to incorporate rights of indigenous peoples and marginalised communities. They have used the term "marginalised community" rather than backward (used in Bangladesh, which is a derogatory term and gives supremacy to Bengaliness over other ethnic origins). Samburu Women for Education & Environment Development Organization (SWEEDO) reports that the new Constitution defines a "marginalised community" as one that "out of need or desire to preserve its unique culture and identity from assimilation, has remained outside the integrated social economic life of Kenya as a whole..."

The indigenous people of Nepal have made the following demands for the new Constitution of their country, after a new interim constitution was put in place in 2007 -- "realisation of a secular, federal state system; recognition of indigenous peoples' right to self-determination, ethnic and linguistic autonomy; affirmative action: and guarantees for proportionate representation for indigenous peoples." Unlike Nepal though, Bangladesh has not ratified ILO Convention 169 but it has been reported that its ratification is under consideration at high policy levels.

However, although Bangladesh abstained from voting when it was adopted by the General Assembly, Prime Minister Hasina, Law Minister Shafique Ahmed and other senior leaders have pledged their support towards the implementation of the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples). UNDRIP recognises the right of indigenous peoples right to self determination (while respecting the territorial integrity of states), autonomy, land rights (including restitution and fair dispute resolution), treaty rights, customary law, language rights, education (in mother tongue and in culturally-appropriate ways) and so forth.

Although the Indian Constitution does not specifically mention the word 'indigenous'; it does recognise Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and has provision for preservation of their distinct culture and even subjects the freedom of movement of citizens to regulation in the interest of protection of the concerned tribes. Seats in the state and federal legislatures are reserved for tribals as are special autonomous councils with legislative, judicial and land administration autonomy.

In the case of Mizoram and Nagaland states, even the federal parliament cannot legislate on land rights, and on social and religious customs of the tribes concerned, without the concurrence of the state legislative assemblies of Mizoram and Nagaland states. In the section on "Cultural and Educational Rights" (Protection of interests of minorities), the Constitution states, "Any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof having a distinct language, script or culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the same."

Indigenous people make up a small fraction of the population of Bangladesh, but they are equal citizens of this country, and it is the responsibility of the majority to now create an atmosphere where all citizens have equal opportunities to practice their religion, maintain their distinct ethnic and cultural identities, get equal opportunities to health and education, and participate in the country's decision-making process at all levels. And that has to begin with framing the document that underlies everything - the constitution of the country.

1. Mong Sa Nu, 'A Glowing Tribute to a Leader', Manabendra Narayan Larma's Life and Struggle, M N Larma Memorial Foundation.

2. Staff Correspondent, “Special body sits today to review constitution”, The Daily Star, 29 July 2010.

3. Rakib Ahammed, 'Most indigenous communities unrecognised', The Daily Star, 31 July 2010.

4. Naeem Mohaiemen, “Connecting the visible dots: A post-Accord history”, 16 April 2010.

5. Raja Devasish Roy and John B. Henriksen, 'Inclusion of Indigenous Peoples' Rights in the New Constitution of Nepal', a publication of ILO, February 2010.

Hana Shams Ahmed is a member of Drishtipat Writers' Collective and can be contacted at dpwriters@drishtipat.org.

© thedailystar.net, 2010. All Rights Reserved


----------------------


courtesy: thedailystar.

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Organise human chain throughout the country demanding constitutional recognition for indigenous peoples

Bangladesh Adivasi Forum and Indigenous Peoples Organizations (IPOs) are going to organize human chain throughout the country demanding constitutional recognition for indigenous peoples in Bangladesh on 25 September 2010 at 10.30 am.

We request everyone to join or organize such human chain at each and every district and upazila headquarters.


Below is the leaflet published by Bangladesh Adivasi Forum for this human chain:


Click here to download the leaflet in pdf format


evsjv‡`‡ki Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni mvsweavwbK ¯^xK…wZi `vex‡Z
†`ke¨vcx gvbeeÜb

wcÖq †`kevmx,
Avcbviv wbðq Rv‡bb †h, eûj Av‡jvwPZ msweav‡bi cÂg ms‡kvabx gvgjvi iv‡q mycÖxg †KvU© KZ…©K ZrKvjxb mvgwiK kvmbvg‡ji AvB‡bi ˆeaZv cÖ`v‡bi D‡Ï‡k¨ cÖYxZ cÂg ms‡kvabx AvBb‡K msweavb ewnf©~Z I †eAvBbx g‡g© †NvlYv †`qv n‡q‡Q| D³ iv‡q h_vh_ AvBbx c`‡¶‡ci gva¨‡g Õ72-Gi msweav‡bi g~j¯—¤¢mg~n cybe©nvj KiviI wb‡`©k i‡q‡Q| D³ HwZnvwmK iv‡qi Av‡jv‡K AvIqvgx jx‡Mi †bZ…Z¡vaxb eZ©gvb gnv‡RvU miKvi †`‡ki msweavb ms‡kvab ev Õ72 mv‡ji msweav‡b wd‡i hvIqvi D‡`¨vM wb‡q‡Q| ejvevûj¨, Õ72 mv‡ji msweavb MYZvwš¿K n‡jI G‡Z Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni mvsweavwbK ¯^xK…wZ †bB| Aciw`‡K eZ©gvb miKv‡ii msweavb ms‡kva‡bi GB gnvb D‡`¨v‡Mi †cÖ¶vc‡U Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôx¸‡jvi mvsweavwbK ¯^xK…wZi Dchy³ †¶Î I my‡hvM ˆZix n‡q‡Q| ejvevûj¨, msweavb ms‡kva‡bi gva¨‡g Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôx¸‡jv‡K mvsweavwbK ¯^xK…wZ †`qvi g‡Zv msL¨vMwiôZv eZ©gvb miKv‡ii i‡q‡Q|

Avcbviv mg¨Kfv‡e AewnZ i‡q‡Qb †h, Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~n †`‡k AwaKvsk †¶‡Î h_v_© bvMwiK gh©v`v I †gŠwjK AwaKvi wb‡q emevm Ki‡Z cv‡i bv| Zviv AvMÖvmb, AvµgY I D‡”Q‡`i Kvi‡Y Rwg †_‡K DrLvZ n‡q co‡Q Ges wbR f~wg‡Z cievmx Rxebhvcb Ki‡Q| Zviv †`‡ki me‡P‡q `wi`ª, ewÂZ, wbcxwoZ, D‡cw¶Z I †kvwlZ As‡ki Aš—f©y³| ejvi A‡c¶v iv‡L bv †h, evsjv‡`‡ki e„nËi Rb‡Mvôxi Zzjbvq Avw`evmx‡`i `vwi`ªZvi nvi me‡P‡q †ekx| Avw`evmxiv bvbv †¶‡Î Pig eÂbv I Ae‡njvi wkKvi n‡q Avm‡Q| Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni ¯^kvmbmn ivR‰bwZK, A_©‰bwZK, mvgvwRK, mvs¯‹…wZK I f~wg AwaKvi¸‡jv GL‡bv mvsweavwbKfv‡e A¯^xK…Z i‡q †M‡Q| mKj cÖKvi Dbœqb Kg©Kv‡Û Zv‡`i wm×vš—-wba©viYx f~wgKv Pigfv‡e Ae‡nwjZ I D‡cw¶Z ejv hvq| Zviv mg AwaKvi, mg gh©v`v, mvg¨, ¯^vaxbZv I mywePvi †_‡K ewÂZ| ZvB †`‡ki e„nËi bvMwiK mgv‡Ri g‡Zv Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡niI mKj cÖKvi †kvlY n‡Z gyw³ `vb Kivi welqwU mvsweavwbKfv‡e wbðqZv weavb Kiv AZxe Ri“ix|


wcÖq msMÖvgx RbZv,
Avcbviv wbðq Rv‡bb †h, evsjv‡`‡ki Avw`evmx RbMY Dcwb‡ek we‡ivax Av‡›`vjb †_‡K ïi“ K‡i †`‡ki gnvb gyw³hy×mn mKj MYZvwš¿K Av‡›`vj‡b cÖZ¨¶fv‡e AskMÖnY K‡i Avm‡Q| wKš‘ AZ¨š— `yt†Li welq †h, msweav‡b Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni ¯^xK…wZ †bB ev Avw`evmx‡`i m¤ú‡K© mivmwi †Kvb wKQzB D‡j­L †bB| Z‡e msweav‡bi 28 I 29 Aby‡”Q‡` D‡j­wLZ ÒbvMwiK‡`i †h †Kvb AbMÖmi AskÓ wn‡m‡e we‡ePbv K‡i miKvi Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni AMÖMwZi Rb¨ we‡kl weavb cÖYqb ev BwZevPK c`‡¶c MÖnY K‡i Avm‡Q| wKš‘ msweav‡bi D³ ÒbvMwiK‡`i AbMÖmi AskÓ cÖZ¨qwU AZ¨š— A¯úó Ges Gi gva¨‡g Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni mvsweavwbK ¯^xK…wZ cwic~iY nq bv| Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxi mvsweavwbK ¯^xK…wZ bv _vKvi Kvi‡Y mKj †¶‡Î Zviv bvbv D‡c¶v I cÖvwš—KZvi wkKvi n‡q Avm‡Q|

miKvi G hver Gme RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~n‡K ÔDcRvwZÕ ev Ô¶z`ª b„‡MvôxÕ wn‡m‡e AvL¨vwqZ K‡i Avm‡Q hv Gme RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni wbKU KL‡bvB MÖnY‡hvM¨ bq| Avš—R©vwZKfv‡e ¯^xK…Z wewfbœ msÁvq Avw`evmx ej‡Z eySvq †h, hviv Jcwb‡ewkK ivR¨ weRq wKsev Dcwb‡ek ¯’vc‡bi Kv‡j A_ev eZ©gvb iv‡óªi mxgvbv wba©vi‡Yi Kv‡j GB †`‡k wKsev †h †fŠ‡MvwjK f~L‡Ê †`kwU Aew¯’Z †mLv‡b emevmKvix RvwZ‡Mvôxi eskai; hv‡`i cÖ_vMZ mvs¯‹…wZK, A_©‰bwZK, mvgvwRK I ivR‰bwZK cÖwZôvb¸‡jv †`‡ki cÖavbZg mgvR I ms¯‹…wZ †_‡K Avjv`v; hviv eZ©gv‡b mgv‡R cÖvwš—K Rb‡Mvôxfy³ Ges SzuwKMÖ¯— mvgvwRK I mvs¯‹…wZK ˆewkó¨c~Y© Rb‡Mvôx; hv‡`i wbR¯^ fvlv i‡q‡Q hv mPivPi †`‡ki miKvix fvlv ev D³ A‡ji cÖPwjZ fvlv †_‡K c„_K; hv‡`i mgvR ivóªxq AvB‡bi †P‡q cÖ_vMZ AvB‡bi Øviv AwaKZi wbqwš¿Z I cwiPvwjZ nq| Gme msÁv Abymv‡i †`‡ki Gme RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~n‡K wbtym‡›`‡n ÔAvw`evmxÕ wn‡m‡e AvL¨vwqZ Kiv hvq| ïay ZvB bq, †`‡ki A‡bK AvB‡b †hgb - 1950 m‡ji ivóªxq AwaMÖnY I cÖRv¯^Z¡ AvBb Ges 1900 mv‡ji cve©Z¨ PÆMÖvg kvmbwewa. miKvix cwicÎ I `wj‡j Ges Av`vj‡Zi iv‡q Gme RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~n‡K ÔAvw`evmxÕ wn‡m‡e D‡j­L Kiv n‡q‡Q|


wcÖq bvMwiK mgvR,
evsjv‡`k KZ…©K Aby¯^v¶wiZ Avš—R©vwZK AvBb Abymv‡i †`‡ki Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni AvZ¥wbqš¿‡Yi AwaKvi i‡q‡Q Ges D³ AwaKvi e‡j Zv‡`i ¯^vaxbfv‡e ivR‰bwZK gh©v`v wba©viY Kivi AwaKvi i‡q‡Q| Avš—R©vwZK AvBb Abymv‡i Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni Dbœqb I cÖvK…wZK m¤ú‡`i Dci KZ…©Z¡ I wbqš¿‡Yi AwaKvi Ges Zv‡`i wbR¯^ ms¯‹…wZ I cÖ_vMZ cÖwZôvb A¶zbœ ivLvi AwaKvimn mvgvwRK, mvs¯‹…wZK I A_©‰bwZK AwaKv‡ii ¯^xK…wZ i‡q‡Q| ïay ZvB bq, Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxi Zv‡`i wbR¯^ Kg©c×wZ‡Z wbe©vwPZ cÖwZwbwa‡`i gva¨‡g Ges Zv‡`i wbR¯^ wm×vš—-wba©viYx cÖwZôvb A¶zbœ ivLv I Dbœqb, Zv‡`i AwaKvi‡K cÖfvweZ Ki‡e Ggb mKj wel‡q wm×vš—-wba©vi‡Yi AwaKvi i‡q‡Q| Dc‡iv³ Avš—R©vwZK AvBb Abymv‡i Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni AwaKvi mvsweavwbKfv‡e ¯^xK…wZ cÖ`v‡bi `vqe×Zv evsjv‡`k miKv‡ii i‡q‡Q|

we‡k¦i wewfbœ MYZvwš¿K †`‡k GK‡Kw›`ªK ev hy³ivóªxq ‡hB kvmbKvVv‡gv †nvK bv †Kb †`‡ki Avw`evmx RvwZ Aay¨wlZ A‡j ev RvwZmg~‡ni Rb¨ mvsweavwbKfv‡e we‡kl kvmbZvwš¿K e¨e¯’v ev AvZ¥wbqš¿‡Yi j‡¶¨ ¯^-kvmb e¨e¯’v MÖnY Kiv n‡q Avm‡Q| cvwK¯—vb, gvj‡qwkqv, B‡›`v‡bwkqv, wdbj¨vÛ, biI‡q, fviZ, wdwjcvBb I j¨vwZb Av‡gwiKvi A‡bK †`‡k Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni mvs¯‹…wZK ¯^vqËkvmb, ivR‰bwZK ¯^vqËkvmb, ¯^kvwmZ miKvie¨e¯’v, f~wg, cÖvK…wZK m¤ú` I f~L‡Êi Dci wbqš¿‡Yi AwaKvi ¯^xK…wZ †`qv n‡q‡Q|


wcÖq †`kevmx,
evsjv‡`‡k cÖvq 45wUi AwaK Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôx ¯§iYvZxZ Kvj †_‡K emevm K‡i Avm‡Q| Gme RvwZ‡Mvôx hyM hyM a‡i wbR¯^ mg„× mgvR, ms¯‹…wZ, ixwZbxwZ, ag©-fvlv I b„ZvwË¡K cwiwPwZ wb‡q G A‡j emevm K‡i Avm‡Q| Zv‡`i kvmbZvwš¿K BwZnvm, mvgvwRK ixwZbxwZ, †fŠ‡MvwjK cwi‡ek, ˆ`wnK-gvbwmK MVb, ivR‰bwZK, A_©‰bwZK I agx©q RxebhvÎv evsjv‡`‡ki msL¨vMwiô evOvwj Rb‡Mvôx †_‡K m¤ú~Y© ¯^Zš¿|

HwZnvwmKfv‡e msweavb, AvBb, bxwZ cÖYqb, iv‡óªi cÖkvmwbK KvVv‡gv wbg©vYmn Dbœqb Kg©Kv‡Ûi wewfbœ ¯—‡ii wm×vš—MÖn‡Yi cÖwµqvq Avw`evmx‡`i AskMÖn‡Yi my‡hvM †`qv nqwb| Gme cÖwµqv I Kg©Kv‡Û Zv‡`i f~wgKv GLbI cÖvwš—K| mwZ¨Kvi A‡_© mgAwaKvi Avbq‡b Dc‡iv³ Dcvqmn Ab¨vb¨fv‡e mvsweavwbK ms¯‹v‡ii gva¨‡g we‡kl e¨e¯’v MÖnY e¨ZxZ Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni cÖwZ ˆelg¨ `~ixKiY m¤¢e bq e‡j Avw`evmx RbMY g‡b K‡i| msweav‡b Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni AwaKvi ¯^xK…wZi gva¨‡g Zv‡`i cÖwZ ˆelg¨ `~ixf~ZKi‡Yi GKwU Kvh©Ki wfwË ¯’vwcZ n‡e Ges wfbœ wfbœ Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôx Zv‡`i cwiPq I ¯^KxqZv eRvq †i‡L †`‡ki bvMwiK wn‡m‡e g~j‡mªvZavivi Kg©Kv‡Û h_vh_fv‡e AskMÖn‡Yi mgmy‡hvM cv‡e e‡j evsjv‡`k Avw`evmx †dvivgmn Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxi msMVb¸‡jv wek¦vm K‡i| Gi gva¨‡g msNvZ I Ø›Ø wbimbK‡í †`‡ki w¯’wZkxjZv, kvwš— I mg„w× e„w× cv‡e| AZGe cve©Z¨ PÆMÖvgmn †`‡ki Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni AwaKvi msµvš— wb‡gœv³ welqvejxi mvsweavwbK ¯^xK…wZ †`qv Acwinvh©-


1.msweavb ms‡kva‡bi gva¨‡g 45wUi AwaK Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxi RvwZmËv, fvlv I ms¯‹…wZi mvsweavwbK ¯^xK…wZ cÖ`vb Kiv|

2.cve©Z¨ PÆMÖv‡gi ivR‰bwZK, A_©‰bwZK, mvgvwRK, mvs¯‹…wZK I ag©xq AwaKv‡ii wbivcËvi Rb¨ cve©Z¨ PÆMÖv‡gi we‡kl kvwmZ Avw`evmx A‡ji gh©v`v mvsweavwbKfv‡e cÖ`vb Kiv|

3.cve©Z¨ PÆMÖv‡gi msm`xq Avmbmg~nmn †`‡ki Avw`evmx Aay¨wlZ AÂj¸‡jv‡Z Avw`evmx bvixmn Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni Rb¨ RvZxq msm‡`i Avmb I ¯’vbxq miKvi cwil‡` Avmb msi¶Y Kiv|

4.Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxi mvsweavwbK I AvBbx i¶vKeP hv‡Z Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni m¤§wZ Qvov ms‡kvab ev evwZj Kiv bv nq Zvi mvsweavwbK M¨vivw›U cÖ`vb Kiv|

5.Avw`evmx‡`i HwZn¨MZ f~wg AwaKvimn f~wg, f~LÊ I cÖvK…wZK m¤ú‡`i Dci Avw`evmx‡`i AwaKvi mvsweavwbKfv‡e ¯^xK…wZ cÖ`vb Kiv|

6.1997 mv‡j ¯^v¶wiZ cve©Z¨ PÆMÖvg Pzw³ Ges GB Pzw³i Aax‡b cÖYxZ AvBbmg~n‡K mvsweavwbKfv‡e ¯^xK…wZ cÖ`vb Kiv|


evsjv‡`k Avw`evmx †dvivg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
evsjv‡`‡ki Avw`evmx RvwZ‡Mvôxmg~‡ni mvsweavwbK ¯^xK…wZi `vex‡Z †`ke¨vcx gvbeeÜb Dcj‡¶
evsjv‡`k Avw`evmx †dvivg KZ…©K 25 †m‡Þ¤^i 2010 cÖKvwkZ I cÖPvwiZ|



Leafleat Constitutional Recognition of IPs (Final)

ভূমি কমিশন আইন সংশোধনে মতৈক্য পার্বত্য চুক্তি সংবিধানে যুক্ত করার উদ্যোগ

ভূমি কমিশন আইন সংশোধনে মতৈক্য

পার্বত্য চুক্তি সংবিধানে যুক্ত করার উদ্যোগ



সাধারণভাবে ‘শান্তি চুক্তি’ নামে পরিচিত পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম চুক্তিকে দেশের সংবিধানে যুক্ত করার উদ্যোগ নিয়েছে সরকার বিষয়টি নিয়ে পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামবিষয়ক মন্ত্রণালয়সংক্রান্ত সংসদীয় কমিটিতে আলোচনার পর এ উদ্যোগ বাস্তবায়নের প্রক্রিয়াও শুরু হয়েছে সংশ্লিষ্ট সরকারি সূত্রে এ খবর জানা গেছে
এদিকে পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামের ভূমি বিরোধ নিষ্পত্তির জন্য গঠিত ভূমি কমিশনকে কার্যকর করতে ভূমি কমিশন আইন সংশোধনের বিষয়ে একটি প্রধান বিষয় ছাড়া বাকি সব বিষয়ে মতৈক্য প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়েছে বলে জানা গেছে গতকাল বুধবার পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামবিষয়ক মন্ত্রণালয়ে আন্তমন্ত্রণালয় সভায় এই মতৈক্য হয় এখন পার্বত্য ও ভূমি মন্ত্রণালয়ের মধ্যে শিগগিরই একটি বৈঠকে আইন সংশোধনের বিষয়টি চূড়ান্ত হবে
তবে কাপ্তাইসহ বেশ কিছু সংরক্ষিত এলাকা ভূমি কমিশনের আওতাধীন না থাকার যে বিধান আইনে রয়েছে, সেটি সংশোধনের ব্যাপারে ভূমি এবং পরিবেশ ও বন মন্ত্রণালয়ের আপত্তি রয়েছে ভূমি কমিশন আইন সংশোধনের এটিই এখন একমাত্র প্রধান বিষয়, যা নিয়ে মতানৈক্য আছে
সংবিধানে সংযুক্তি: পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম চুক্তি সংবিধানে সংযুক্ত করার বিষয়ে সরকারি সূত্র জানায়, এ চুক্তি যাতে কখনো কেউ বাতিল করতে, এমনকি আইনগতভাবে চ্যালেঞ্জ করতে না পারে এবং চুক্তির সম্পূর্ণ বাস্তবায়নও যাতে নিশ্চিত হয়, সে জন্যই এ উদ্যোগ নেওয়া হয়েছে এ ব্যাপারে প্রয়োজনীয় প্রস্তাব তৈরি করে সংবিধান সংশোধনের জন্য গঠিত বিশেষ কমিটিতে উপস্থাপন করা হবে সূত্র জানায়, প্রধানমন্ত্রী শেখ হাসিনার সম্মতিতেই এ উদ্যোগ নেওয়া হয়েছে
এ ব্যাপারে জানতে চাইলে পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামবিষয়ক মন্ত্রণালয়ের প্রতিমন্ত্রী দীপংকর তালুকদার সরকারের ওই উদ্যোগ ও প্রক্রিয়া শুরুর সত্যতা স্বীকার করে গতকাল প্রথম আলোকে বলেন, বিষয়টি নিয়ে আলাপ-আলোচনা শুরু হয়েছে পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম ও আদিবাসী জনগণের সাংবিধানিক স্বীকৃতি ও অধিকার রক্ষায় বর্তমান সরকার আরও অনেক কিছুই করছে এবং করবে
এ বিষয়ে মন্তব্য করার অনুরোধ করলে চাকমা সার্কেলের প্রধান রাজা দেবাশীষ রায় প্রথম আলোকে বলেন, এটি অবশ্যই একটি প্রশংসনীয় উদ্যোগ এর মাধ্যমে দেশের সংবিধান আরও সমৃদ্ধ হবে এ উদ্যোগের জন্য তিনি সরকারকে অভিনন্দন জানান
উল্লেখ্য, ১৯৯৭ সালের ২ ডিসেম্বর সরকার ও জনসংহতি সমিতির (জেএসএস) মধ্যে স্বাক্ষরিত ওই চুক্তি পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামে দীর্ঘদিনের সশস্ত্র যুদ্ধের অবসান ঘটায় কিন্তু চুক্তির মৌলিক বিষয়গুলো এখন পর্যন্ত বাস্তবায়িত হয়নি তবে চুক্তি বাতিল করার দাবিসহ অনেক বিষয় আদালত পর্যন্ত গড়িয়েছে
আইন সংশোধন: পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম চুক্তি এবং ওই চুক্তি অনুযায়ী ভূমি বিরোধ নিষ্পত্তির লক্ষ্যে প্রণীত ভূমি কমিশন আইনের মধ্যে অসামঞ্জস্য থাকায় এর আগে গঠিত তিনটি ভূমি কমিশন কোনো কাজ করতে পারেনি বর্তমান সরকার ভূমি কমিশন পুনর্গঠনের পরও কমিশনের কার্যক্রম নিয়ে, বিশেষ করে পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামে ভূমি জরিপ নিয়ে তীব্র মতবিরোধ সৃষ্টি হয় এই বিরোধ মীমাংসায় সরকার ভূমি কমিশন আইন সংশোধনের উদ্যোগ নিয়েছে
২০০০ সালে ভূমি কমিশন আইন প্রণীত হওয়ার পরই জনসংহতি সমিতি ২৪টি স্থানে সংশোধনের প্রস্তাব দেয় এগুলো নিয়ে বিভিন্ন সময় আলোচনা হয়েছে বিগত বিএনপি-জামায়াত জোট সরকারের আমলে আইনমন্ত্রী মওদুদ আহমদ জনসংহতি সমিতির সব প্রস্তাবের সঙ্গেই একমত হয়েছিলেন কিন্তু তার পরও আইনটি সংশোধন করা হয়নি
বর্তমান সরকারের উদ্যোগের অংশ হিসেবে সম্প্রতি ভূমি মন্ত্রণালয় ওই আইনের ছয়টি ধারা সংশোধনের সিদ্ধান্ত নেয় কিন্তু তাতে আইনটি পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম চুক্তি অনুযায়ী সম্পূর্ণ কার্যকর হবে না বলে পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামের সংশ্লিষ্ট সব পক্ষ মত প্রকাশ করে এই প্রেক্ষাপটে প্রতিমন্ত্রী দীপংকর তালুকদারের সভাপতিত্বে গতকাল আন্তমন্ত্রণালয় সভা অনুষ্ঠিত হয়
গতকালের সভায় ভূমি কমিশন চেয়ারম্যানের নিরঙ্কুশ ক্ষমতা, কমিশনের সভার কোরাম ও সদস্যদের প্রতিনিধি পাঠানোর বিধানগুলো সংশোধনের বিষয়ে মতৈক্য হয়েছে
ভূমি কমিশন আইন অনুযায়ী কমিশনের সভা কোনো বিষয়ে একমত না হলে সে বিষয়ে চেয়ারম্যানের সিদ্ধান্তই চূড়ান্ত এ বিধান পরিবর্তন করা হবে চেয়ারম্যান ও কমিশনের দুই সদস্য উপস্থিত থাকলেই কোরাম হওয়ার বিধানও পাল্টে চেয়ারম্যান ও তিন সদস্যের উপস্থিতিতে কোরাম হওয়ার বিধান করা হবে এ ছাড়া পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামের তিনটি সার্কেলের তিন প্রধান (চাকমা রাজা, মং রাজা ও বোমাং রাজা) যাতে কমিশনের সভায় তাঁদের প্রতিনিধি পাঠাতে পারেন, সে জন্যও আইন সংশোধন করা হবে
প্রতিমন্ত্রী দীপংকর তালুকদার বলেন, আলাপ-আলোচনার মাধ্যমে সব মতানৈক্যের অবসান হবে ভূমি কমিশন পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামের ভূমি বিরোধ নিষ্পত্তির কাজ যথাসময়ে শুরু করতে পারবে

---------------

source: prothom-alo (23.09.2010)

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Rangamati Jhogora BIl people submitted memorandum to PM requesting not to evict them from their places in the name of constructing university

রাঙামাটিতে মানববন্ধন স্মারকলিপি




বাসিন্দাদের উচ্ছেদ করে রাঙামাটিতে বিজ্ঞান ও প্রযুক্তি বিশ্ববিদ্যালয় স্থাপনের অভিযোগ তুলে গতকাল মঙ্গলবার মানববন্ধনের পর প্রধানমন্ত্রীর বরাবর স্মারকলিপি দিয়েছে সদর উপজেলার ১০৪ নম্বর ঝগড়াবিল মৌজার বাসিন্দারা
রাঙামাটি জেলা প্রশাসন কার্যালয়ের সামনে ঝগড়াবিল মৌজার অধিবাসীরা বেলা ১১টা থেকে দুপুর একটা পর্যন্ত মানববন্ধন করে পরে জেলা প্রশাসকের মাধ্যমে প্রধানমন্ত্রীর কাছে স্মারকলিপি দেওয়া হয় জেলা প্রশাসক সৌরেন্দ্রনাথ চক্রবর্তী স্মারকলিপি পাওয়ার বিষয়টি নিশ্চিত করেছেন
ঝগড়াবিল মৌজার বাসিন্দাদের অভিযোগ, কাপ্তাই বাঁধ নির্মাণের ফলে ওই মৌজার বাসিন্দারা ১৯৬০ সালে একবার উদ্বাস্তু হয়েছিল এরপর বিডিআর সেক্টর সদর দপ্তর ও পর্যটনকেন্দ্র স্থাপনের সময় তাদের জমি হুকুমদখল করা হয় এতে ৫০ বছরে তাদের দুবার উদ্বাস্তুতে পরিণত হতে হয়েছে
স্থানীয় মৌজার হেডম্যান সুভাষ তঞ্চঙ্গ্যা বলেন, ‘আমরা বিশ্ববিদ্যালয় প্রতিষ্ঠার বিপক্ষে নই আমরাও চাই বিশ্ববিদ্যালয় হোক কিন্তু আমাদের বারবার উচ্ছেদ করে কেন এসব প্রতিষ্ঠান গড়ে তোলা হবে? বিশ্ববিদ্যালয় বা অন্য কোনো প্রতিষ্ঠান গড়ে তোলার অনেক জায়গা আছে

--------------

source: prothom-alo (22.09.2010)

আদিবাসীদের সাংবিধানিক স্বীকৃতি প্রয়োজনীয় সংশোধনীর সুপারিশ করবে সংসদীয় কমিটি

আদিবাসীদের সাংবিধানিক স্বীকৃতি দিতে সংবিধানে প্রয়োজনীয় সংশোধনী আনার জন্য বিশেষ কমিটির কাছে সুপারিশ করবে পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামবিষয়ক মন্ত্রণালয়-সম্পর্কিত সংসদীয় কমিটি
জাতীয় সংসদ ভবনে আজ মঙ্গলবার কমিটির এক সভায় এ সুপারিশ করা হয় সভায় সভাপতিত্ব করেন কমিটির সভাপতি মোহাম্মদ শাহ আলম সভায় ১৯৭২ সালের সংবিধানে পুনঃপ্রত্যাবর্তন এবং আদিবাসীদের সাংবিধানিক অধিকার সুনিশ্চিত করার বিষয়ে বিশেষজ্ঞ মতামত গ্রহণ করা হয় সভায় বাংলাদেশ সংবিধানের ৬, ২৩, ২৮(৪) ও ১৫২ নম্বর অনুচ্ছেদে সামান্য পরিবর্তনের প্রস্তাব করা হয়
সভায় পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রাম অঞ্চলে কর্মরত এনজিওগুলোর তালিকা উত্থাপন করা হয় এবং তাদের কার্যক্রম নিয়ে আলোচনা হয় এতে পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামে কর্মরত এনজিওগুলোর ওপর প্রশাসনের নজরদারি বাড়ানোর সুপারিশ করা হয় যেসব এনজিও জেলা প্রশাসনের নির্দেশনা মানছে না, সেগুলোর নিবন্ধন বাতিলের উদ্যোগ নিতে মন্ত্রণালয়কে বলা হয় এ ছাড়া পার্বত্য জেলা পরিষদগুলোর কার্যক্রম জোরদার করতে এসব দপ্তরের সমস্ত শূন্যপদ দ্রুততম সময়ে পূরণের জন্যও সভায় সুপারিশ করা হয়
পার্বত্য চট্টগ্রামবিষয়ক প্রতিমন্ত্রী দীপংকর তালুকদার, বীর বাহাদুর, এথিন রাখাইন ও গিয়াস উদ্দিন আহমেদ সভায় অংশ নেন সভায় বিশেষ আমন্ত্রণে যোগ দেন সংস্কৃতি প্রতিমন্ত্রী প্রমোধ মানকিন
সভা শেষে কমিটির সভাপতি শাহ আলম সাংবাদিকদের বলেন, দীর্ঘদিন ধরেই আদিবাসীদের সাংবিধানিক স্বীকৃতি দেওয়ার বিষয়টি নিয়ে আলোচনা হচ্ছে ’৭২-এর সংবিধানে ফিরতে হলে এ বিষয়টির একটি সুরাহা হতে হবে পার্বত্য চুক্তিতেও বিষয়টি আছে কমিটি এ ব্যাপারে আলোচনা করে বিষয়টি প্রধানমন্ত্রীর কাছে উত্থাপন করবে তিনি বলেন, ‘কমিটি মনে করে, আদিবাসীদের সাংবিধানিক স্বীকৃতি দিতে হলে সংবিধানের কিছু ধারা ও উপধারার পরিবর্তন করতে হবে সংবিধান সংশোধনে গঠিত বিশেষ কমিটির কাছে এ ব্যাপারে আমাদের প্রস্তাব তুলে ধরা হবে


------------------

source: prothom-alo (21.09.2010)

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Constitutional amendment Proposal

Constitutional amendment Proposal : We would like to thank Bidhayak Da and Raja Devasish Roy for sharing this with us!!!

The committee who drafted this is chaired by Chakma Raja Devasish Roy, the Member Secretary is Albert Mankin (ED, CIPRAD, Garo leader), and other members include Sanjeeb Drong (Secretary, Bangladesh Adibashi Forum), U Shit Mong (Rakhaing leader) and Goutam Kumar Chakma (Member, CHT Regional Council), and through co-option by consent, Mangal Kumar Chakma.


Please click here to download Constitutional amendment Proposal

BD Cnsttnl Amndmnt TABLE (Consulted on 23 August 10) 3

Constitutional Reform & Indigenous Peoples’ Rights In Bangladesh – I: Terminology on Identity: ‘Indigenous’ versus Other Terms -Devasish Roy

Constitutional Reform & Indigenous Peoples’ Rights In Bangladesh – I:
Terminology on Identity: ‘Indigenous’ versus Other Terms


Devasish Roy, Chakma Chief




CONTEXT OF CONSTITUTIONAL RECOGNITION & THE ADIVASI MPS INITIATIVES -------1
THE ADIVASI MPs’ INITIATIVES -----------------------------------------------------------------1
INCLUSION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ RIGHTS ------------------------------------------------------ 3
UPAJATI --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3
SMALL ETHNIC GROUPS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
MINORITIES -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW ----------------------------------------------5
INDIGENOUS, ABORIGINAL, ADIBASHI IN BANGLADESHI INSTRUMENTS --------------------6
WHY ADIBASHI ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7



CONTEXT OF CONSTITUTIONAL RECOGNITION
The recent judgment of the Bangladesh Supreme Court in what has come to be called the 5th amendment case, declared the Constitution (Fifth Amendment) Act, 1979 (Act 1 of 1979) ultra vires and illegal and instructed the Government of Bangladesh to take legislative measures to revert to the original Constitution of 1972. This in turn has re-ignited demands from indigenous peoples from different parts of Bangladesh for specific and direct recognition of their identity and rights in the forthcoming amendment process, as previous demands on the issue had not been met by successive governments since 1972 to the present time. The ongoing demands are being articulated and promoted by different groups, in different forums and in different ways. I wish to solely discuss in this article the process initiated by the indigenous members of parliament in August, 2010 and which is still ongoing, and present my views on the appropriate terminology to be used in the context of reforms.

THE ADIVASI MPs’ INITIATIVES
The indigenous members of parliament, including ministers-of-state, Promode Mankin and Dipankar Talukdar, are known to have recently met Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who had reportedly agreed to consider the inclusion of Adivasi issues in the future constitution of Bangladesh. On 7 August, 2010, Minister Talukdar hosted a meeting at his Dhaka residence, which was participated in by all the indigenous MPs and a number of indigenous leaders from different parts of Bangladesh. At this meeting, a Constitutional Reform Drafting Committee on Adivasi Issues was formed with this writer as the chair. This committee met on 11 August, 2010, among themselves, and along with three indigenous MPs, on 13 August, both at the Dhaka residence of this writer wherein some draft proposals were deliberated and unanimously agreed upon. The proposals – contained in a columned matrix referring to existing constitutional provisions, desired amendment proposals and justification for the same - were refined further and presented to a larger gathering in Dhaka on 23 August, 2010, presided over by State Minister Promode Mankin. This writer presented the amended proposals, which drew considerable support, along with some friendly criticisms and suggestions, among the participants. This draft – which is being further refined and strengthened - will be annexed to the sequel to this article (as mentioned in footnote no 1, supra). It is hoped that the draft will help stimulate healthy debate so that strong proposals are ultimately presented to the constitution drafting committee and to the Government of Bangladesh by political groups, citizens’ groups, organizations and institutions of indigenous peoples and others.



INCLUSION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ RIGHTS
The ongoing debate and discussions on the appropriate terminology to be used to refer to the non-Bangali ethnic groups of the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) and those of the “plains” regions of Bangladesh show varied opinions. Whilst variety and pluralism is desirable in many contexts, in the context of possible and imminent constitutional reform in Bangladesh and for the sake of clarity, unity and strategy, the most desirable way forward would be to promote consensus on the use of one set of terms. The use of correct terminology is also important because the term necessarily sets the context of, and defines the parameters of, the rights that attach to the concerned group of citizens it refers to, especially under national (Bangladeshi) law and also to an extent under international human rights law. In English, my humble opinion is that the most appropriate term is ‘indigenous peoples’. In Bengali, the equivalent is ‘adibashi jaatigoshthhi’. At the very least, even if the term ‘peoples’ is not used, we should insist on ‘indigenous’ in English and ‘adibashi’ in Bengali.

I shall attempt to justify my opinion through the “process of elimination”, by trying to demonstrate why and how the other terms under discussion or serious consideration are less desirable than ‘indigenous’. These include “upajati” (similar to, but not exactly, ‘tribal’), “khudro nrigoshthhi” (small ethnic groups) and “shongkhya loghu” (minorities).

UPAJATI
Although ‘upajati’ (literally ‘sub-nation’ or ‘sub-ethnic group’) is probably a direct, and yet etymologically flawed, translation of the English term ‘tribe’/’tribal’, many feel that the former has more racist, derogatory and disparaging connotations than the latter. I am painfully aware of the fact that the term occurs in the CHT Accord of 1997 and in the district and regional council laws of 1989 and 1998. However, we also know that the term was not included on the basis of the free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) of the peoples of the CHT. And in any case, the world, along with Bangladesh, has moved on from 1989 and 1997-98 to today. There may have been some justification for the use of the term “backward” in 1949 (when the Constitution of India was adopted) and, to a lesser extent, in 1972 (when the Constitution of Bangladesh was adopted), as philanthropic practices at the time had not learned to rid themselves of paternalism. At least that is the view of some, although I would not agree with such a view. Be that as it may, in today’s times of democratic norms when non-discrimination is regarded as a peremptory norm (or jus cogens) of international human rights law, I see no justification to continue to use such terms. Such an epithet may be used with some logic to describe an area’s economic status, or a state of technology (with which too I would have a quarrel, but I forgo that for the moment), in the case of a section of humanity, this is surely disrespectful, and more importantly, grossly inaccurate, and hence worthy of being permanently exiled into oblivion.

For the same reasons, there is every reason that we shun the term ‘upajati’ as well. Although the Khudro Nrigoshthhi Sanskritik Protisthhan Act of 2010 fails to satisfy the aspirations of those peoples in Bangladesh who regard themselves as indigenous or adibashi, it, however, provides, and quite rightly too, a clear rejection of the term ‘upajati’, which was hitherto attached to the name of the institutes concerned. This term should be condemned to the gutters for its colonialist and racist connotations. May I be permitted to congratulate the Government of Bangladesh on this, however much I (and other citizens) totally disagree with the use of the term ‘nrigoshthhi’ in this context (small, medium or large!). The respected academics who were engaged as experts by the Ministry of Culture to advise it on the terminology to be used in the law had unanimously urged the government to use the term “adivasi/adibashi” and to refrain from using other terms such as “upajati” or “nrigoshthhi” or “nritattik jonogohsthhi”. The use of the term “upajati” is also dying out in West Bengal and in Tripura State, India. And Hindi and Nepali never, thankfully, translated ‘tribe/tribal’ in this way. The latter two languages use the term ‘janajati’, which some accept and some find disparaging too. But surely it is less objectionable than ‘upajati’.

SMALL ETHNIC GROUPS
While the term “small ethnic groups” may be preferable to ‘upajati’ or ‘tribe/tribal’, it too is problematic. In the first place, the indigenous peoples and the Bengali people are both ethnic groups and the ‘smallness’ of the indigenous peoples (in population?) should not be the basis to distinguish between the different ethnic groups because the difference in the numbers would lead to discrimination against those with small numbers and promote discriminatory attitudes among those with large populations. It is also inaccurate, because Urdu-speaking Bangladeshis would also then qualify as a “small ethnic group”. This would therefore be confusing and imprecise.

MINORITIES
While the term minorities – whether ethnic, linguistic or religious – could accurately describe the indigenous groups of Bangladesh, it is still not as appropriate as indigenous as a human rights construct. In some respects, the discrimination that members of indigenous groups suffer may be similar to that of non-indigenous members of religious minority groups (e.g., Christians and Hindus) and ethnic and linguistic minority groups (e.g., urdu-speaking Bangladeshis), but in other respects the nature of discrimination against indigenous people is far deeper (on account of racist attitudes towards indigenous groups) and grounded in more structural and historic circumstances unlike in the case of other minorities groups (indigenous minorities were totally excluded from modern state formation and development, while non-indigenous minorities were not so excluded). Thus if we look at the UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious, and Linguistic Minorities (1992), we will see that while this brief instrument contains several provisions that address discrimination, such as of the nature that are suffered by members of indigenous and non-indigenous minorities groups alike, these are rights of individuals, and not that of a collectivity that pertains to the group as a group. It therefore fails to address several aspects of collective rights – e.g., with regard to customary law and traditional justice systems, customary land and territorial rights, right to self-determination and self-government - which, conversely, are adequately addressed in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007), and to a lesser extent, in the ILO Conventions No. 169 and 107. The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action adopted at the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna in 1993 addresses the rights of ‘persons belonging to minorities’ and the rights of ‘indigenous people’ in separate paragraphs.

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW
‘Indigenous Peoples’, and to a lesser extent, ‘indigenous people’, are established beyond doubt as the preferred globally accepted terminology – as invoked in several United Nations instruments - to refer to groups that are, or were, referred to as ‘aboriginal’, ‘tribal’, ‘hill tribes’, ‘scheduled tribe’, ‘ethnic minorities’, etc.. The World Bank and regional development banks too adopt the same language. As in the case of minorities, there is no formal definition of indigenous peoples in any international human rights instrument. The ILO Convention No. 107 (ratified by Bangladesh) provides some criteria to identify ‘indigenous’ and ‘tribal’ populations. The former are those that are (i) descended from historical population groups that inhabited the country at the time of conquest or colonization; and (ii) who live more in conformity with the social, economic and cultural institutions of these historic groups than with the ‘institutions of the nation to which they belong’. The CHT indigenous peoples fulfill both criteria on the nature of the institutions to which they belong and with regard to their presence in the concerned territory at the time of conquest (1787 by the British East India Company) and colonization (1860: annexation of CHT to Bengal by the British Indian government).

Perhaps one the most widely accepted ‘working definitions’ of indigenous peoples is the one provided by UN Special Rapporteur Jose Martinez Cobo, who includes the following criteria to identify indigenous peoples: (i) continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies; (ii) comprising non-dominant sectors of society; and (iii) determination to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories and ethnic identity “in accordance with their cultural patterns, social institutions and legal systems”. If we summarize the above criteria, the following may emerge as the most crucial ones: (a) exclusion from (or only marginal inclusion in) the modern state-building and formal development processes; (b) continuing non-dominance (or marginalization) in major decision-making processes; (c) presence of customary law and traditional governance institutions; (d) close attachment to an ancestral or historical territory; and (e) geographic concentration in those territories. All of these criteria are applicable to the indigenous groups in the CHT, and in the plains of Bangladesh. Moreover, when it ratified the ILO Convention No. 107 in June, 1972, the Government of Bangladesh did not raise any objections to the use of the word ‘indigenous’. It would be mala fide, discriminatory and unacceptable for the government to now say that it accepts the ‘tribal’ epithet but not ‘indigenous’. Moreover, there are several Bangladeshi, including CHT-specific, laws that refers to the indigenous peoples as ‘indigenous’, ‘aboriginal’ and ‘adibashi’, as mentioned hereafter.

‘INDIGENOUS’, ‘ABORIGINAL’, ‘ADIBASHI’ IN BANGLADESHI INSTRUMENTS
The most important law for the CHT, the CHT Regulation, 1900 (Regulation I of 1900), uses the term “indigenous” to refer to the peoples living in the CHT other than the Bengali inhabitants. Most CHT laws of 1989 to 2009 use the term ‘upajati’ (Hill District Council Acts of 1989 and CHT Regional Council Act of 1998) or “tribal” {CHT Regulation (Amendment) Act, 2003}. In contrast, the Khudro Nrigoshthhi Sanskritik Protishthhan Act, 2010 (the Small Ethnic Groups Cultural Institutes Act, 2010) – which applies to the CHT and other parts of Bangladesh – uses the term “khudro nrigoshthhi” (small ethnic groups) to refer to the indigenous peoples. However, in the definitions section, when explaining the meaning of the term “khudro nrigoshthhi”, it uses the term “adibashi”, the Bengali equivalent of indigenous or aboriginal. Similarly, the Finance Acts of 1995 and 2010 use the terms “indigenous”. A yet earlier law, which applies to the “plains” regions but not to the CHT, the East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act of 1950 uses the terms “aboriginal castes and tribes”. The Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRSP) of 2008 and of 2009 use the term “indigenous people”, while the PRSP of 2005 used the term “ethnic minority/adivasi”. Also worthy of note is that three succeeding heads of government in Bangladesh, namely current prime minister, Sheikh Hasina (both as prime minister and as Leader of the Opposition), former prime minister and current opposition leader, Khaleda Zia, and then Caretaker Chief Adviser, Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed, all used the term ‘adibashi’ in their goodwill messages during the celebrations of International Indigenous Peoples Day in Bangladesh.

WHY ADIBASHI
Among all the terms referred to above, the term ‘adibashi’ would be the most accurate and acceptable. Firstly, this is a word that is being increasingly used in the Bengali language, the official national language, in writing and orally, by indigenous people themselves and by progressive Bangali citizens, including a growing and large section of the private press and media. Secondly, it is also etymologically correct, as indigenous peoples of Bangladesh settled in the territories they now live in prior to the Bengali citizens (there is no evidence of indigenous peoples having forcibly occupied these territories by ejecting Bengali people). Thirdly, it is an accepted transliteration of ‘indigenous’. Fourthly, this would truly integrate the indigenous peoples into the mainstream body politic of the country without artificially and coercively assimilating them into the mainstream. And this can be done without disrupting national unity and integrity. Bangalis and Adibashis would both be Bangladeshi citizens. Fifthly, many laws and other governmental instruments already use the term (e.g., Cultural Institutes Act of 2010) or its English equivalents of ‘indigenous’ (CHT Regulation and Finance Acts) or ‘aboriginal’ (East Bengal State Acquisition & Tenancy Act of 1950).

The Constitution of Bangladesh needs to catch up with the times, and demonstrate to the world, and to the country’s citizens, that it truly reflects the pluricultural composition of its citizenry and their rich heritage of ethnic, linguistic, cultural, religious and spiritual diversity. I firmly believe that this would be in tune with the ‘spirit of 1972’. We just have to remind ourselves one important thing. In 1972, we were dealing with the ghosts of religious intolerance and the stifling of secular (at the time, largely, Bangali) cultural and linguistic identity, heritage, practices and expressions. In the last thirty-eight years, Bangalis and Muslims have been at the helm of state affairs and the national economy in Bangladesh. Of course, the cultural and religious identity and integrity of Bangalis and Muslims in Bangladesh may yet be threatened on occasions in today’s times of globalized uniformism and international market-worshipping trends. But it is unfair that this should be at the expense of further marginalizing the indigenous peoples of the country, who are even far smaller players, in both the national and global contexts. It is therefore the identity and culture if the non-Bangali and non-Muslim peoples that requires the equal protection of the state, with a spirit of affirmative action. This can only be done by redefining nationalism, socialism, democracy and socialism – the pillars of the 1972 Constitution – by drawing upon the principles and provisions of the international human rights treaties that Bangladesh has ratified from 1972 to 2010. Bangladesh has been a member of the new Human Rights Council for two succeeding terms. It will benefit us all to learn from this experience and give the country a real chance to maintain a respectable reputation in the comity of nations and at home.