Thu 25 Oct 2007
While everyone is busy with other drama, on 27th August, 2007, Bangladesh High Court issued writ petition declaring 1997 CHT Peace Treaty Unconstitutional. If this challenge is not met, the historic treaty that ended a 30 year guerilla war in CHT (although CHT Paharis still wait for Treaty implementation) will be canceled. Shabash Bangladesh!
The CHT Peace Accord and the Voters List
Zobaida Nasrin Kona
Along with various parts of the country, the listing of voters in Chittagong and the three Hill Districts of Rangamati, Khagrachari and Bandarban began on 22nd October, 2007 (Prothom Alo, 23rd Oct.2007). Each part of Bangladesh has its own historicity and geographical characteristic.
From that perspective, the Chittagong Hill Tracts with its cultural richness and geographic distinctiveness has always deserved special attention. On 2nd December, 1997, a Peace Accord was signed between the Parbottyo Chattogram Janasanghati Samiti and the erstwhile Government. But over the years, the implementation of the Accord has been questioned from time to time by Adivasi leaders. The reason for bringing up the issue of the voters list is due to a writ petition issued by the High Court to the Government of Bangladesh on 27th August in response to a case filed by Tajul Islam (writ petition 6451/2007). The petition asks the Government to give reasons as to why the Peace Accord between the Government of Bangladesh and the Parbottyo Chattagrram Jana Shanghato Samiti (PCJSS) should not be considered as unconstitutional. Previously a Md. Shamsuddin had filed a similar case in 1999 against the Government of Bangladesh and others, opposing the signing and implementation of the Peace Accord. Through the writ petition issued by the High Court (4113/99), the Bangladesh government was asked to respond as to why the Peace Accord should not be regarded as unconstitutional. More recently, another case was filed by a Md. Badiuzzaman on a similar tone. In the writ petition (no. 26669/2000), the government was asked to explain as to why the Regional Council 1998 and Rangamati, Khagrachari and Bandarban Hill District Council Act should not be considered anti-constitutional. Both these cases were subject to prolonged hearing, and a final verdict is still in the offing.
Under the present circumstances, the writ petition given in the third case bears some distinctive characteristics. This case was filed against the Government as the sole opposition. No mention was made of PCJSS as the opposing party or the Regional Council. But more important, was the special directive given to the Election Commission as part of the writ petition: “Direct the Respondent No. 8, The Election Commission not to deprive of any non-tribal citizen residing on CHT area from being enlisted as voter during the ensuing voter enlistment process on ground of being non-permanent resident in CHT pending disposal of the rule.”.
According to the Peace Treaty only permanent settlers of the CHT should become voters. The criterion for permanent settlement was defined as a minimum of 15 year residentship and ownership of land. If this is disregarded and everybody is considered to be a voter, then for all practical purposes, in both national and international perspective it will only foreground the possibility of considering the Peace Accord to be null and void..
On the other hand, the process of illegal migration of Bengali settlers continues even today. And under the provision of this recent writ petition they could be enumerated into the voters list. Such a process is not devoid of the kind of politics that the Peace Accord has been trying to resolve, the strengthening and imposition of Bengali rule over the indigenous people of the Hill Tracts.
Related OP-ED: My Own Little Palestine
October 25th, 2007 at 9:02 am
I’m admittedly ignorant of much of this matter, so i mainly have questions. Isn’t the CHT part of the territory of Bangladesh? [I'm under no illusions that bengali people arent amongst the most racialist in the world.]
Do you think the recent change in official attitude will bring more war? Did the govt at the time forget some procedures, or is our sacred cow constitution internally contradictory hence lame?
Should bangladesh just forget the CHT ever existed for the purposes of settlement of its teeming masses, internally displaced, but willing to bring new land under cultivation? if your answer is yes, please explain your idea of balance.
October 26th, 2007 at 7:57 am
No move by EC on CHT local elections
Fri, Oct 26th, 2007 1:21 pm BdST
Biplob Rahman
bdnews24.com Senior Reporter
Dhaka, Oct 26 (bdnews24.com) - The Election Commission has taken no initiative to hold elections to the regional and three district councils, administered under specialised rule, of the Chittagong Hill Tracts.
Chief Election Commissioner ATM Samsul Huda told bdnews24.com, Friday morning, that according to the CHT peace treaty and laws related to it, the elections in those areas were to be held according to a voter list prepared separately for the permanent residents of those areas.
“But the voter list currently being prepared with photographs in the CHT was for the national election,” he added.
The CEC, in reply to a question, said that no decision had been taken whether a separate voter list for permanent residents of the regional and council areas would be made following preparation of voter lists for the national election.
Meanwhile, an official of the regional council told bdnews24.com that council chairman Jyotirindra Bodhipriyo Larma alias Santu Larma had met CHT affairs adviser Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury last Tuesday.
“Santu Larma requested the adviser to speed up the CHT treaty implementation process.”
Larma also demanded holding of the local and regional council elections, the official added.
In 1989, three separate district councils, each with five-year tenures, were established for Rangamati, Khagrachari and Bandarban.
However elections to these councils have not been held in the 18 years since their formation.
They have continued to function with government appointed ‘interim’ council heads, with permission of the courts.
October 27th, 2007 at 3:18 am
fugstar asked
>Isn’t the CHT part of the territory of Bangladesh?
Yes.
>Do you think the recent change in official attitude will bring more war?
CHT Paharis no longer have the ability to make war as they have disbanded the guerilla army built up over 30 years and Shantu Larma came out of hiding (and is also now old).
So war as it exists in CHT is one-sided.
>Did the govt at the time forget some procedures, or is our sacred cow constitution internally contradictory hence lame?
Hard to find out as the 1997 CHT Peace Treaty was championed by Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir of AL, and he is in jail now under CHT’s corruption charges (I believe he got 30 years for “discrepancy” in statement). So the original architects are safely behind bars.
>Should bangladesh just forget the CHT ever existed for the purposes of settlement of its teeming masses, internally displaced, but willing to bring new land under cultivation?
We have already settled enough Bengalis there such that Paharis have shrunk from 99% to 60% (don’t know exact #). The Peace Treaty was supposed to find a compromise, allowing the Bengalis to stay, but Paharis would get back land seized from them. 1997 Peace Treaty was heavily tilted towards Bengali side, and a portion of Paharis opposed it an “unjust” (like Palestinians post-Oslo). Hence the split now in Pahari movement (to our convenience). But by now, most Paharis would be happy to get even the 1997 Accord (it lay unimplemented for 10 years).
This High Court case (filed no doubt with covert support of CTG) would scrap the Treaty completely.
if your answer is yes, please explain your idea of balance.
October 28th, 2007 at 10:34 am
Thankyou, your answers show that you care.
There should have been at least some good relations between ‘bengalis’ and ‘paharis’ outside the interface NGO/advocacy over the past 36 years?
I don’t think we have resettled enough bengalis. The adarsho gram project is slow and pretty donor funded. tens of thousands of displacees generated annually.
What are pahari traditions like on the whole territory/migration/settlement issue? do they have anything resembling the muhajir ansar thing?
Do they tend to prefer Christianity to Islam because ones followers are helping while the otheres are being lame?
March 8th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
So the pahari’s are not citizens of Bangladesh? and we bengalis are not able to stay in the “pahari” area is that what you are trying to say?
I don’t understand one thing about this Pahari and Bengali business! Every citizen of Bangladesh has the right to live and vote in any area they want as long as they are residents. Thats what the law is. And to be a resident you don’t have to live somewhere for 15 yrs.
How would u like to loose your constitutional right, if I had told you you cannot vote in Dhaka or any other areas of the country because you haven’t lived there for 15 years. Can you go and vote where you stayed before? The answer is “NO” and why not? Because you have to be a resident of at the time when the voters are being listed.
Now we cannot have two laws in the same country. The “paharis” should stay in pahars and not ask for any other civil rights from Bangaldesh then? How does that sound?
Now there is lots of discrepencies in the so called peace law (which me and my friends luckily had the opportunity to study when we were studying at Dhaka University at the time the treaty was signed).
Now I believe in equal rights for everyone whether they are “Paharis” and Bengalis and the Peace treaty is certainly not offering that.