A bumpy ride from North Tripura’s Kanchanpur to Naisingpara -- the largest settlement of Bru refugees in Tripura – brings one face-to-face with the trauma of thousands of Bru refugees who have been living there for 13 years now. Way back in 1997, almost 50,000 people from the Bru community fled from the Mammit district of Mizoram when a fierce ethnic clash broke out between the majority Mizos and the minority Brus. The ethnic violence was sparked by the murder of a Mizo forest guard Lalzawmliana in the Dampa Tiger Reserve. The then underground Bru National Liberation Front (BNLF) was accused of being behind the incident. At that time, BNLF was spearheading an insurgent movement inside Mizoram with a demand for creation of an Autonomous District Council (ADC) in the Bru-dominated areas of western Mizoram.
While a section of the Bru refugees further migrated to Southern Assam, around 35,000 Brus, remained stranded in six camps in Kanchanpur subdivision of north Tripura. Their lives are full of uncertainty -- a political solution to their problems is nowhere in sight, while death and diseases stalk the camps, particularly during the monsoon.
The young tots are malnourished, their parents jobless and their grandparents ailing. The eagerness to return to Mizoram is almost palpable among the older generation. “I do not know when our sorrows will end. Two generations have almost been lost in this darkness. Now in the name of repatriation a lot of politics is being played...” says 102-year-old Phoroti, breaking into tears. She has lived enough to see her house burnt down, family members dying of hunger and diseases. No one has bothered to keep a proper count of the number of people who die every year in these camps. Almost every family has lost more than three persons in the last 13 years.
Youths from the relief camp under the patronage of banned underground outfit United Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) formed the Bru National Liberation Front (BNLF) that surrendered in 2001 followed by Bru Liberation Front of Mizoram (BLFM) that came overground and surrendered en-masse in 2006. The laying of arms came after the Mizoram government (that has been always dominated by the Mizo tribe) promised to repatriate the refugees once the Bru outfits abjure violence.
The Bru youths kept their words but the Mizoram Government is yet to keep its promise. A political movement spearheaded largely by the frontal organization of the refugees the Mizoram Bru Displaced Peoples’ Forum (MBDPF) and the apex body of the Bru community -- the Bru coordination Committee (BCC) -- made sure that New Delhi finally looked at their quandary. With the result that they even took part in the last Assembly elections in Mizoram but remain sandwiched between the whims of the Central and state governments.
In his last visit to Mizoram, Home Minister P Chidambaram made it clear that Mizoram has to take back the Bru refugees by the end-October 2010. Earlier efforts to repatriate them in November 2009 only saw a fresh exodus of few thousands of Bru tribals after a 17 year-old Mizo boy was killed by unknown miscreants in Bungthuam. The killing triggered yet another spell of violence against the Brus by the Mizos.
With the stepping in of the Asian Centre for Human Rights (ACHR) as facilitator, gloomy clouds of uncertainty started to disperse. A meagre compensation package of Rs 80,000 per family and one year’s free ration was chalked out. All this while, what the Bru refugees got in the name of compensation was ridiculous: five rupees per day for adults and half of it for every minor. Plus 600 grams per day for every adult and 300 grams for minors. “New Delhi is too far and our cries do not reach there,” says Rankati, who lost two sons in a week to malaria.
Solendra, another inmate at the Kascau relief camp, says. “Last year, my daughter died after suffering from fever. As a father I could not provide her home, clothes, not even proper food.” He too wonders if Delhi knows that the Bru tribe exists.
While the Centre and the Mizoram government initially remained indifferent, the Tripura government that sheltered them looked at them only as an administrative problem. “What Tripura could have done is to take part in the political solution of the issue,” says Prof Charvak of Assam University, who has been closely following this vexed issue. “When the Left was supporting UPA-I government, the CPI(M) could have pushed the Centre for education, health facilities for the displaced.”
To clear the deck, Mizoram government conducted a fresh survey of inmates of the camp. They finalised the names of more than 27,000 refugees to be taken back in phases. To meet Chidambaram’s date, the Mizoram government tried its best to hurry up the process.
Issues of security and land for rehabilitation are still hanging in the air, says Bruno Msha, the General Secretary of MBDPF. “The money given for rehabilitation will finish soon and then if we do not find a livelihood, what we will do? We will again have to migrate for food and work.”
In all, 101 families did return to Mizoram in November amid hard-pressed agitation by the refugees against what definitely appears to be a ‘forced repatriation’. “We were threatened not only by Mizo officials but also by Tripura officials and cops. They told us that we must go back with whatever we get otherwise the camps will be closed, we will be arrested. Tripura officials we creating a lot of pressure on us to even start for Mizoram in darkness,” recalls A Lalbiakthanga of Khakchan relief camp.
The Mizoram discontinued the repatriation process since they felt there was security threat to their officials overseeing the process, with a section of the refugees were opposing the repatriation. Added to this was an acute shortage of rice that the state has been witnessing.
The inmates of the camp allege that the Mizoram Government lured refugee leader Elvis Chorkhy and Bru Coordination Committee (BCC) and former Commander-in-chief of BNLF Suryamoni Reang to dance to their tune. “They got the leadership divided. Elvis and Suryamoni accepted a repatriation process that has no clarity,” says Swaibunga, President of MBDPF. Elvis have been staying at Aizwal even since he was removed from the President post of MBDPF. “We were losing previous time,” says Elvis in his own defence. I believe that once we get back things will happen. I did not want to waste time once the Mizoram government wanted us back. They wanted everything to happen fast.”
The Mizoram government says the process is transparent enough. “This repatriation cannot be a smooth ride; we have been able to convince Centre of our objective. If some people do not want to come then it is their problem. Rather, it is the Tripura government’s headache. The refugee leaders have vested interest to stay back in Tripura,” is the retort of a senior Mizoram Home Department official who has been overseeing the process.
Be that as it may,New Delhi has decided to close down all the six relief camps of the Bru refugees by March this year. Free rations will also be stopped. “This is an autocratic decision,” says John, a youth in the Naisingpara relief camp who spends time imparting English lessons to the refugee kids. “We are valid Indian citizens and even then our concern over a written guarantee of safety and livelihood is overlooked.”
‘They are vulnerable to the games governments play’
Noted human rights activist SUHAS CHAKMA mediated between the Centre, Bru refugee leadership and Mizoram government to break the ice. He explains to RATNADIP CHOUDHURY some of the complexities involved
There seems to be a stalemate. Has something gone wrong?
Aizawl lacked lacked a clear roadmap for repatriation. This only accentuated the mistrust th at already prevailed. As some Bru leaders opposed the repatriation without a roadmap, it could not have been pushed as sought by other Bru leaders. Repatriation is not something that could have been continued only on good faith, as the Mizoram government has been seeking.
Do you feel there is a way out of this deadlock?
All displaced communities are vulnerable to the games governments play. Differences of opinion are also necessary in a democratic process. In my view, the differences are not beyond repair.
Or is it that these people are sandwiched between two state governments that lack coordination?
The role of the state government of Tripura has been irresponsible, not only with repatriation. It had failed to conduct Census regularly which is necessary for the right to food. Further, it failed to provide basic facilities -- it is responsible for denying a generation of Brus access to education. Tripura’s policy has been only to send the Brus back which is matched by Mizoram’s policy of opposing any repatriation. In fact, both Chief Minister Lalthanhawla of Mizoram and Chief Secretary of Tripura Sudhir Sharma told me that Brus do not want to return as they are getting free rations and leaders are making money. I have been able to demonstrate that the Brus are willing to return but they needed a clear roadmap. The ball is in the court of both the State governments.
So in your view, what is the solution this time?
The Central government should convene a meeting involving Mizoram government and all factions of the Bru leaders to hammer out the obstacles. Mizoram said it cannot provide food supplies for so many Brus and that is something that the Centre ought to address. This is one of the Brus’ legitimate concerns. The Brus returned based on a written guarantee given to the Asian Centre for Human Rights by the MHA with regard to safety, security and rehabilitation package. At the end of the day, neither me nor the organisation I work with, represent the displaced Brus. Therefore, if the Bru leaders want to recognized through a formal agreement. That is something that can be addressed.
Do you feel the Centre should have been more involved in the negotiations between the Bru refugees and the Mizoram government to avoid complications? Has the Centre missed the bus?
It was never going to be easy. It is not possible to complete the repatriation in six months given the terrain. I think the Centre should take up the Bru issue to demonstrate that solutions are available. If even an issue such as repatriation of the displaced Brus cannot be facilitated, there will be legitimate questions as to whether the Centre can resolve many of the disputes in the Northeast. But it cannot be done hurriedly or perfunctorily.
Courtesy: ratnadip@tehelka.com
While a section of the Bru refugees further migrated to Southern Assam, around 35,000 Brus, remained stranded in six camps in Kanchanpur subdivision of north Tripura. Their lives are full of uncertainty -- a political solution to their problems is nowhere in sight, while death and diseases stalk the camps, particularly during the monsoon.
The young tots are malnourished, their parents jobless and their grandparents ailing. The eagerness to return to Mizoram is almost palpable among the older generation. “I do not know when our sorrows will end. Two generations have almost been lost in this darkness. Now in the name of repatriation a lot of politics is being played...” says 102-year-old Phoroti, breaking into tears. She has lived enough to see her house burnt down, family members dying of hunger and diseases. No one has bothered to keep a proper count of the number of people who die every year in these camps. Almost every family has lost more than three persons in the last 13 years.
Youths from the relief camp under the patronage of banned underground outfit United Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) formed the Bru National Liberation Front (BNLF) that surrendered in 2001 followed by Bru Liberation Front of Mizoram (BLFM) that came overground and surrendered en-masse in 2006. The laying of arms came after the Mizoram government (that has been always dominated by the Mizo tribe) promised to repatriate the refugees once the Bru outfits abjure violence.
The Bru youths kept their words but the Mizoram Government is yet to keep its promise. A political movement spearheaded largely by the frontal organization of the refugees the Mizoram Bru Displaced Peoples’ Forum (MBDPF) and the apex body of the Bru community -- the Bru coordination Committee (BCC) -- made sure that New Delhi finally looked at their quandary. With the result that they even took part in the last Assembly elections in Mizoram but remain sandwiched between the whims of the Central and state governments.
In his last visit to Mizoram, Home Minister P Chidambaram made it clear that Mizoram has to take back the Bru refugees by the end-October 2010. Earlier efforts to repatriate them in November 2009 only saw a fresh exodus of few thousands of Bru tribals after a 17 year-old Mizo boy was killed by unknown miscreants in Bungthuam. The killing triggered yet another spell of violence against the Brus by the Mizos.
With the stepping in of the Asian Centre for Human Rights (ACHR) as facilitator, gloomy clouds of uncertainty started to disperse. A meagre compensation package of Rs 80,000 per family and one year’s free ration was chalked out. All this while, what the Bru refugees got in the name of compensation was ridiculous: five rupees per day for adults and half of it for every minor. Plus 600 grams per day for every adult and 300 grams for minors. “New Delhi is too far and our cries do not reach there,” says Rankati, who lost two sons in a week to malaria.
Solendra, another inmate at the Kascau relief camp, says. “Last year, my daughter died after suffering from fever. As a father I could not provide her home, clothes, not even proper food.” He too wonders if Delhi knows that the Bru tribe exists.
While the Centre and the Mizoram government initially remained indifferent, the Tripura government that sheltered them looked at them only as an administrative problem. “What Tripura could have done is to take part in the political solution of the issue,” says Prof Charvak of Assam University, who has been closely following this vexed issue. “When the Left was supporting UPA-I government, the CPI(M) could have pushed the Centre for education, health facilities for the displaced.”
To clear the deck, Mizoram government conducted a fresh survey of inmates of the camp. They finalised the names of more than 27,000 refugees to be taken back in phases. To meet Chidambaram’s date, the Mizoram government tried its best to hurry up the process.
Issues of security and land for rehabilitation are still hanging in the air, says Bruno Msha, the General Secretary of MBDPF. “The money given for rehabilitation will finish soon and then if we do not find a livelihood, what we will do? We will again have to migrate for food and work.”
In all, 101 families did return to Mizoram in November amid hard-pressed agitation by the refugees against what definitely appears to be a ‘forced repatriation’. “We were threatened not only by Mizo officials but also by Tripura officials and cops. They told us that we must go back with whatever we get otherwise the camps will be closed, we will be arrested. Tripura officials we creating a lot of pressure on us to even start for Mizoram in darkness,” recalls A Lalbiakthanga of Khakchan relief camp.
The Mizoram discontinued the repatriation process since they felt there was security threat to their officials overseeing the process, with a section of the refugees were opposing the repatriation. Added to this was an acute shortage of rice that the state has been witnessing.
The inmates of the camp allege that the Mizoram Government lured refugee leader Elvis Chorkhy and Bru Coordination Committee (BCC) and former Commander-in-chief of BNLF Suryamoni Reang to dance to their tune. “They got the leadership divided. Elvis and Suryamoni accepted a repatriation process that has no clarity,” says Swaibunga, President of MBDPF. Elvis have been staying at Aizwal even since he was removed from the President post of MBDPF. “We were losing previous time,” says Elvis in his own defence. I believe that once we get back things will happen. I did not want to waste time once the Mizoram government wanted us back. They wanted everything to happen fast.”
The Mizoram government says the process is transparent enough. “This repatriation cannot be a smooth ride; we have been able to convince Centre of our objective. If some people do not want to come then it is their problem. Rather, it is the Tripura government’s headache. The refugee leaders have vested interest to stay back in Tripura,” is the retort of a senior Mizoram Home Department official who has been overseeing the process.
Be that as it may,New Delhi has decided to close down all the six relief camps of the Bru refugees by March this year. Free rations will also be stopped. “This is an autocratic decision,” says John, a youth in the Naisingpara relief camp who spends time imparting English lessons to the refugee kids. “We are valid Indian citizens and even then our concern over a written guarantee of safety and livelihood is overlooked.”
‘They are vulnerable to the games governments play’
Noted human rights activist SUHAS CHAKMA mediated between the Centre, Bru refugee leadership and Mizoram government to break the ice. He explains to RATNADIP CHOUDHURY some of the complexities involved
There seems to be a stalemate. Has something gone wrong?
Aizawl lacked lacked a clear roadmap for repatriation. This only accentuated the mistrust th at already prevailed. As some Bru leaders opposed the repatriation without a roadmap, it could not have been pushed as sought by other Bru leaders. Repatriation is not something that could have been continued only on good faith, as the Mizoram government has been seeking.
Do you feel there is a way out of this deadlock?
All displaced communities are vulnerable to the games governments play. Differences of opinion are also necessary in a democratic process. In my view, the differences are not beyond repair.
Or is it that these people are sandwiched between two state governments that lack coordination?
The role of the state government of Tripura has been irresponsible, not only with repatriation. It had failed to conduct Census regularly which is necessary for the right to food. Further, it failed to provide basic facilities -- it is responsible for denying a generation of Brus access to education. Tripura’s policy has been only to send the Brus back which is matched by Mizoram’s policy of opposing any repatriation. In fact, both Chief Minister Lalthanhawla of Mizoram and Chief Secretary of Tripura Sudhir Sharma told me that Brus do not want to return as they are getting free rations and leaders are making money. I have been able to demonstrate that the Brus are willing to return but they needed a clear roadmap. The ball is in the court of both the State governments.
So in your view, what is the solution this time?
The Central government should convene a meeting involving Mizoram government and all factions of the Bru leaders to hammer out the obstacles. Mizoram said it cannot provide food supplies for so many Brus and that is something that the Centre ought to address. This is one of the Brus’ legitimate concerns. The Brus returned based on a written guarantee given to the Asian Centre for Human Rights by the MHA with regard to safety, security and rehabilitation package. At the end of the day, neither me nor the organisation I work with, represent the displaced Brus. Therefore, if the Bru leaders want to recognized through a formal agreement. That is something that can be addressed.
Do you feel the Centre should have been more involved in the negotiations between the Bru refugees and the Mizoram government to avoid complications? Has the Centre missed the bus?
It was never going to be easy. It is not possible to complete the repatriation in six months given the terrain. I think the Centre should take up the Bru issue to demonstrate that solutions are available. If even an issue such as repatriation of the displaced Brus cannot be facilitated, there will be legitimate questions as to whether the Centre can resolve many of the disputes in the Northeast. But it cannot be done hurriedly or perfunctorily.
Courtesy: ratnadip@tehelka.com
