The State of India’s Indigenous and Tribal Peoples 2008
The State of India’s Indigenous and Tribal Peoples 2008 covering the events of 2007 is the second issue of the series. Human rights situation of the indigenous and tribal peoples in India remains grim. Since independence indigenous peoples have been victims of development and encroachments by non-tribals. The pauperisation of the tribals continued unabated and unchecked. The affirmative action programmes could not keep pace with the marginalization of the indigenous and tribal peoples.
The 55 page report highlighted wide range of issues concerning the indigenous and tribal peoples of India.
I. 2007 focus: Who are the Scheduled Tribes of India?
The report discusses the identification of the Scheduled Tribes of India as demands for inclusion into the Scheduled Tribes list by the Gujjars in Rajasthan and Adivasis in Asom dominated the news headlines in 2007.
In May and June 2007, at least 26 persons were killed during the Gujjar agitation in Rajasthan. Most of them were killed in police firing.[1] There was large-scale destruction of public and private properties bringing it to the notice of the Supreme Court. The Gujjar incident was not one-off case.
On 24 November 2007, about 10,000 tribal people, backed by the All Assam Adivasi Students Union (AAASA), took out a protest rally demanding Scheduled Tribe status for the community at the Beltola area of Guwahati in Asom. The protestors once again attacked public and private properties. However, the local residents also turned violent and beaten up the Adivasis including women with sticks, iron rods and crude weapons, resulting in killing of at least five Adivasis and injuring 70 others, 30 of them critically, during the clash. Besides, an Adivasis woman was beaten and stripped in full public view while she ran for cover amid horror of the others. The police present there remained mute spectators.[2] As the stripping of the Adivasi girl beamed through the media, it rightly raised condemnation across the spectrum.[3]
The demands for Scheduled Tribe (ST) status, among others, relate to access to affirmative action programmes. But the Constitution failed to identify all the STs. Article 366(25) defines Scheduled Tribes as “such tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or tribal communities as are deemed under Article 342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of this Constitution”. Article 342 on the other does not define “Scheduled Tribes” but only lays down the procedure for scheduling and de-scheduling of the tribes. Under Article 342(1), “the President may with respect to any State or Union territory, and where it is a State, after consultation with the Governor thereof, by public notification, specify the tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within tribes or tribal communities which shall for the purposes of this Constitution be deemed to be Scheduled Tribes in relation to that State or Union territory, as the case may be”. Under Article 342(2) “Parliament may by law include in or exclude from the list of Scheduled Tribes specified in a notification issued under clause (1) any tribe or tribal community or part of or group within any tribe or tribal community, but save as aforesaid a notification issued under the said clause shall not be varied by any subsequent notification.”
The Ministry of Tribal Affairs in its 2005-2006 Annual Report states, “The criteria followed for specification of a community as a Scheduled Tribe are (a) indications of primitive traits, (b) distinctive culture (c) geographical isolation, (d) shyness of contact with the community at large, and (e) backwardness”. The Ministry of Tribal Affairs further stated, “These criteria are not spelt out in the Constitution but have become well established and accepted. They take into account the definitions in the 1931 Census, the reports of the first Backward Classes Commission (Kalelkar) 1955, the Advisory Committee on Revision of SC/ ST lists (Lokur Committee) 1965 and the Joint Committee of Parliament on the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Bill, 1967 (Chanda Committee) 1969.” The Scheduled Areas and Scheduled Tribes Commission appointed by the President of India on 28 April 1960 pursuant to Article 339 of the Constitution of India in its report of 14 October 1961 stated that “As these groups are presumed to form the oldest ethnological sector of the population, the term “Adivasi” (`Adi’= original and `Vasi’= inhabitant) has become current among certain people. The International Labour Organization has classified such people as “indigenous”.
As the identification of Scheduled Tribes is left to the State government – which takes decisions on political considerations rather than the criteria for identification of the Scheduled Tribes, there are bound to be demands for inclusion in the Scheduled Tribes list.
II. Indigenous peoples and armed conflicts
India faced increased armed conflicts as the Naxalites – the ultra left wing extremists – spread their activities. At present, 21 out of 28 states of India are afflicted by armed conflicts. The seven North-Eastern states of Arunachal Pradesh, Asom, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland and Tripura have been afflicted by armed conflicts over demands for self-determination and autonomy. At least 13 other states – Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Uttaranchal and West Bengal in mainland India were under pressure from the Naxalites, ultra-left wing armed opposition groups also commonly known as Maoists. With the exception of Jammu and Kashmir, conflicts in all other states involve indigenous peoples irrespective of whether the armed groups are led by indigenoius persons or non-indigenous persons like the Maoists’ leaders.
In North-East India, which is the homeland of numerous tribal communities, several tribal communities have been demanding various degrees of autonomy and self-rule. The government of India has responded with military action without any accountability which has in turn fueled much resentment and grouse against the Indian establishment. The Armed Forces Special Powers Act of 1958 which is operative in the states of Manipur, Asom and Tripura has been used for extensive human rights violations of the indigenous and tribal peoples.
Though the Central government continued dialogue with a number of armed opposition groups but unrest continued to prevail over. Innocent tribal peoples who live in the conflict areas have been victims of atrocities of both the security forces and the armed opposition groups. Many were killed in the Naxalite violence in mainland India. According to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), 418 civilians and 214 police personnel were killed in Naxal violence as of November in 2007.[4]
The majority of the civilian victims have been the Adivasis, indigenous peoples of mainland India. Chhattisgarh continued to remain the epicenter of the Naxalite conflict as a direct consequence of the counter-insurgency Salwa Judum campaign which involved the Adivasi civilians to counter the Maoists.[5]
III. Violations of the rights of indigenous/ tribal peoples
Arbitrary deprivation of the right to life has been an integral part of maintenance of law and order especially in respect of any unrest involving indigenous/tribal peoples across India. Dozens of tribals are killed by law enforcement personnel each year.
On 2 July 2007, a tribal identified as Ramesh was killed by the police near Antarvelia outpost in Jhabua district of Madhya Pradesh. Ramesh was stopped by two police constables when he was returning to Jhayada village along with his wife on a motor cycle. The police allegedly conducted Ramesh’s post-mortem hurriedly at night and then cremated him the same night. The policemen also forcibly collected thumb impression of the deceased’s wife on a blank paper.[6]
On 10 July 2007, five tribal villagers including Gautam of Sindhanoor in Raichur district, Rame Gowda, his wife and their relative Sundaresh were killed by the police during an anti-naxal operation at Menasinahadya village under Narasimharajapura police station in Chikmagalur district of Karnataka. The police claimed they were Naxalites but the Civil Liberties Forum, an NGO which investigated the incident, stated that the deceased were innocent tribals who had nothing to do with the naxal activities and that they were killed in a fake encounter.[7]
On 19 August 2007, a Karbi tribal youth identified as Singh Timung (21), a higher secondary student of Diphu Government College was allegedly killed in the custody of a team of the Assam Police and the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) during an anti-insurgency operation at Ingleng Kiri village under Karbi Anglong district in Asom. The deceased was also the President of Borlangfar unit of the Karbi Students’ Association (KSA) but the security forces claimed that he was a member of the Karbi Longri North Cachar Liberation Front.[8]
IV. Violations of the international humanitarian law by the AOGs
The armed opposition groups were also responsible for gross violations of international humanitarian law against indigenous/tribal peoples such as “violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; taking of hostages; outraging of personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment; and passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples” as provided under the Geneva Conventions on International Humanitarian Law.
In 2007, the Naxalites continued to kill innocent tribal peoples accusing them of being “police informers”, members of anti-Maoist civilian militias such as Salwa Judum and for not obeying their diktats. In Chhattisgarh, innocent tribal civilians were killed for participating in the anti-Naxalite Salwa Judum campaign, irrespective of whether they had participated voluntarily or by force. In July 2007, the Maoists banned farming in the Maoist-infested Bastar region of Chhattisgarh “to protest against the exploitation of the state’s natural resources by the Government”.[9] Whoever defied the ban was given the death sentence. According to the police, at least 11 tribal farmers were killed by the Maoists for working in their fields in July 2007 in Bijapur police district alone.[10] Most of the victims were killed after brutal torture.
The Naxalites also executed many Adivasis as alleged “police informers”. Those killed on the accusation of being “police informers” included:
- Gorle Ramesh (28) of Pathakota village who was killed at Kothapalem village in Guntur district of Andhra Pradesh on 20 January 2007;[11]
- T Appa Rao (40) who was killed near Qotagedda village in GK Veedhi Agency mandal in Visakhapatnam district of Andhra Pradesh on 23 February 2007;[12]
- Nimmaka Musuru (30) who was tortured to death after tying to a tree near his house at Achchida village under Elwinpeta police station in Vizianagaram district of Andhra Pradesh on 13 July 2007;[13]
- Santosh Navdi (19) of Jambia village and Ranjit Holi (18) of Kunjmarka village who were abducted and killed in a forest near Jambia-Gatta near Etapalli tehsil town of Gadchiroli district in Maharashtra on 14 October 2007;[14] and
- Tambeli Beturu Siddhu (25) of Kotagunnala in Chintapalli mandal whose throat was slit at Peddagedda junction in Visakhapatnam district of Andhra Pradesh on 27 December 2007.[15]
V. Violence against tribal women and children
Indigenous/tribal women faced violence including torture, rape, killing and other inhuman and degrading treatment at the hands of the law enforcement personnel, vigilante groups, the armed opposition groups, non-tribals and in many cases from the tribals themselves. Many indigenous women were also targeted as “witches” especially in Asom, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Tripura and West Bengal.
As majority of indigenous/ tribal peoples live in armed conflict situations, indigenous/ tribal women have often become victims of arbitrary arrest, illegal detention and sexual violence by the law enforcement personnel. Some of the cases included:
- On the morning of 20 August 2007, 11 tribal women were allegedly gang raped by the Greyhound policemen during anti-Naxalite operations at Vakapalli village under Nurmati panchayat in Visakhapatnam district of Andhra Pradesh. While some of the women were raped in their homes, some others were raped in the fields.[16]
- On 9 January 2007, the police arrested three Paharia tribal women along with several tribal men on the charge of killing of one Deba Paharia and detained them at Sundarpahari police station in Godda in Jharkhand. While the men were detained in the police lock up, the women were illegally detained in the residential quarter of the Officer-In-Charge (OC) of Sundarpahari police station, Dipnarayan Mandal. They were allegedly tortured and raped by OC Dipnarayan Mandal and the Assistant Sub Inspector Mahadev Oraon.[17]
- On 13 February 2007, a tribal woman filed a complaint alleging gang rape by some personnel of the Mizoram 2nd India Reserve Battalion in Dantewada district of Chhattisgarh.[18]
- On the night of 27 August 2007, a 42-year-old Karbi tribal woman was raped by a soldier belonging to Bihar Regiment at Mansingh Bey village under Hauraghat Police Station under Karbi Anglong district of Asom.[19]
The armed opposition groups were also accused of perpetrating rape on indigenous/ tribal women. On 9 July 2007, a 20-year-old tribal woman was raped by two alleged members of an unidentified armed group at her Jhum hut at T-Phaijol village in Churachandpur district of Manipur.[20]
The indigenous/ tribal women were also victims of violence by the non-tribals. Some of the cases included: - On 24 November 2007, an Adivasi woman was stripped and beaten up in full public view by the non-tribal residents at Beltola area in Guwahati, the capital of Asom. The Adivasis were holding a procession demanding Scheduled Tribe status in Asom when it turned violent.[21]
- On 22 October 2007, a 20-year-old tribal woman was allegedly raped by two upper caste men identified as Badka alias Nandkumar Paswan, a bus conductor, and Fakla alias Ramgopal Verma in Birgaon area under the Urla police station in Raipur, Chhattisgarh.[22]
- On 9 April 2007, a tribal woman was raped by Ramsevak Das, a priest of a Hanuman temple in Mohna town in Gwalior district of Madhya Pradesh.[23]
Tribal women also faced sexual attack from fellow tribals. On the night of 12 May 2007, seven Reang tribal women were allegedly gang raped by a group of Jamatya tribal youths at remote Dalakcherra in Amarpur sub-division of South Tripura district. The victims along with some boys were returning from a village fair.[24]
The indigenous/ tribal children were victims of sexual violence, arbitrary arrest and illegal detention. Some of the cases included:
- On the night of 7 January 2007, suspected National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) cadres shot dead a 13-year-old schoolgoing tribal boy identified as Ramdhan after they did not find his father Mangaldhan Tripura at home at Dinarampara village under Raisyabari police station in Dhalai district of Tripura.[25]
- On 27 June 2007, a 15-year-old minor tribal girl, daughter of Mihilal, resident of Jarwatola village was allegedly gang raped by three police personnel of Nawadih Police Station including Officer-In-Charge Pramod Kumar during a socalled anti-Naxal operation at Jarwatola village in Bokaro district of Jharkhand. Prior to raping the minor tribal girl, the police personnel had stripped naked and beat up her father Mihilal when he denied having any knowledge about the Maoists.[26]
- On the night of 11 December 2007, a minor tribal girl, daughter of Rajaram Debbarma of Gopal Nagar village in West Tripura was allegedly raped by Sub-Inspector Nandan Baidya (30) in the custody of the Bisramganj police station in West Tripura. After public hue and cry, the State government suspended and arrested the accused police officer.[27]
- On 6 August 2007, two tribal children identified as Bhutan Khalko (6) and Bhuto Khalko (4), residents of tribal colony near the Barasat Municipality, were picked up by the police on the charges of stealing and illegally detained at Barasat police station in North 24 Parganas district in West Bengal for three days from 6-8 August 2007. Finally, they were released without any charges.[28]
In the state of Chhattisgarh, thousands of tribals have been displaced due to the naxalite conflict. The state government has provided them shelter in relief camps. In the name of providing employment, the state government has employed tribal boys and girls as Special Police Officers (SPOs) to fight the Naxalites. An investigation by Committee Against Violence On Women found that there were 4,048 SPOs, of whom 299 were women/ girls, and further stated that many of the young girls who have been recruited as SPOs did not appear to be 18 years of age.[29]
VI. Violations of indigenous peoples' right to land
The constitutional safeguards as provided in the 5th Schedule and 6th Schedule to the Constitution of India and various other State level laws which among others prohibit transfer of the lands of the tribal people have failed to prevent widespread alienation of the tribal lands.
The rate of alienation of tribal land is alarming in India. In the state of Andhra Pradesh, non-tribals presently hold as much as 48 per cent of the land in Scheduled Areas of the state. Since the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation came into effect in 1959, 72,001 cases of land alienation have been detected involving 3,21,685 acres of tribal land in the state. The tribals have been losing their legal fight in the Courts to recover their lands. Of the 72,001 cases registered under the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation, 70,183 cases were disposed off and 33,319 cases (47.47 per cent) were decided against tribals involving 1,62,989 acres of land. As of January 2007, about 300 cases were pending in Andhra Pradesh High Court involving about 2,500 acres of land under the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation.[30]
Apart from fraudulent means of land alienation by the non-tribals, the government can also take away any private land under the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 for socalled “public purposes”. In some states, the state governments have been directly responsible for use of violence against the tribals who try to fight for their rights on lands.
For instance, the ruling Communist Party of India (Marxists) cadres forcibly took over lands earmarked for distribution to Adivasis, indigenous peoples in Munnar of Kerala in November 2007.
VII. Displacement of indigenous/ tribal peoples
Indigenous peoples have been disproportionate victims of development and conflicts. While by 2001 they constituted 8.2% of the total population, they comprised 55.1% of the 8.54 million persons displaced in India by development projects and conflicts between 1950 and 1990.
On 31 October 2007, the government of India notified the National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy of 2007 but it failed to address the key issues relating to the booming of conflicts: forcible acquisition of lands.
The tribals have been victims of development projects, armed conflicts and security related activities.
The tribals formed the majority of the development-induced displaced persons. According to a recent survey conducted by ActionAid and Indian Social Institute, over 1.4 million people have been displaced from their homes in the four states of Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Orissa and Jharkhand where a total of 10.2 million acres have been acquired for setting up of development projects such as mines, industrial plants and dams in the last decade. Out of the 1.4 million displaced persons in these four states, 79 per cent were tribals.[31]
Indigenous peoples also constitute the majority of over 600,000 conflict- induced internally displaced persons (IDPs) in India.
Hundreds of tribals/ indigenous peoples living along the India-Bangladesh border have been displaced or facing displacement due to the acquisition of their lands by the government to erect fencing along the border to prevent illegal immigration and any anti-India activities from the other side of the porous borders. In Mizoram, the India-Bangladesh border fencing project will displace not less than 5,790 Chakma tribal families consisting of 35,438 persons from 49 villages. They are facing enormous hardships to get even basic compensation from the government. Once displaced, the government usually refused to rehabilitate the tribal/ indigenous IDPs.
VIII. Failure of the affirmative action programme
The constitution of India provided an array of affirmative action programmes for the Scheduled Tribes and the Scheduled Castes, including reservation in the legislature, education, employment etc. These affirmative action programmes have been instrumental in bridging the social, political and economic disparities. Yet these programmes could have shown better results had the government of India and various state governments been serious about their implementation.
For instance, the state government of Madhya Pradesh has refused to issue Scheduled Tribe (ST) certificates to the children of tribal communities like Barela, Bhil, Bhillala, Patelia and Nagwanshi tribal communities living in 13 villages in Buxwaha block in Chhattarpur district and three villages under Batiagarh block in Damoh district although they are recognized as Scheduled Tribes in Madhya Pradesh. Due to non-issuance of tribal certificates, they have been denied all rights and welfare schemes such as education, scholarships, employment, land rights, etc to which they are otherwise entitled to under the Constitution as well as relevant laws. The government of India also failed to implement job reservations as provided under the Constitution of India.
IX. Status of the Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Groups
Seventy five tribal communities have been identified as socalled “Primitive Tribal Groups” by the government of India in 17 states and one Union Territory. Their total population was 2,412,664 in 1991 census.[32] The Central government has been providing assistance to these vulnerable tribal communities through Tribal Sub-Plan and the Special Central Assistance to the states. But these vulnerable tribal communities have not been benefited so much.
Today, many tribal communities such as the Singphos of Asom,[33] Birhores, Chero, Paharia and Malpahari in Jharkhand; Abuj Madias and Baigas of Chhattisgarh; Karbongs of Tripura, and the Great Andamanese, Onges, Shompens, Jarawas, and Sentinelese of the Andaman and Nicobar islands are on the verge of extinction due to the government’s apathy.
By the end of 2007, the government failed to implement the directive of the Supreme Court of 2002 to close down the Andaman Trunk Road that runs along and through the Jarawa Tribal Reserve as it threatens the survival of vulnerable Jarawa tribals.
X. Denial of voting rights to the Chakmas and Hajong of Arunachal Pradesh
The Chakmas and Hajongs of Arunachal Pradesh continued to be denied enrollment into electoral rolls. Electoral activities in the four Chakma-Hajong inhabited Assembly Constituencies of 14-Doimukh, 46-Chowkham, 49-Bordumsa-Diyun and 50-Miao continued to remain suspended for complaints of bias on the part of the local electoral officials. On 6 September 2007, the Election Commission of India revoked the suspension and ordered the conduct of Special Summary Revision of electoral rolls. The Election Commission issued specific guidelines as to how to conduct the revision of electoral rolls in the Chakma and Hajong areas. As earlier, the local electoral officials who are also employees of the State Government of Arunachal Pradesh did not comply with the guidelines and instead they imposed their own whimsical directions to ensure that even the 1,497 previously enrolled voters are deleted. As many as 36 out of 326 of them were deleted in 14-Chowkham Assembly Constituency even before beginning of the Special Summary Revision 2007.
XI. The state of the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes
In 2003, the Government of India though an amendment to Article 338 of the Constitution (89th Amendment) of India established the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST). The NCST is a constitutional body mandated to safeguard the rights of the Scheduled Tribes in India.
Despite being a constitutional body, the NCST has not been able to emerge as an effective and independent mechanism to safeguard the rights of the Scheduled Tribes. It is primarily because of inherent flaws in Article 338A which set up the NCST. Some of such inherent flaws are – appointment of Chairperson and other members is not based on defined criteria, lack of powers to enforce its rulings or recommendation, and lack of resources- finance as well as manpower. Even after more than 3 years of its coming into existence, the NCST does not have an adequate and well furnished office.
Its mandate, though broad remain fully unused. More often, it seems that the NCST is another agency of the Government instead of it being a constitutional body to safeguard the rights of the Scheduled Tribes.
XII. A critique on the National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy of 2007
On 31 October 2007, the government of India published the National Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policy of 2007 (NRRP of 2007) in the Official Gazette of India.
The NRRP of 2007 was supposed to be an improvement of the Draft National Rehabilitation Policy of 2006 which was drafted to address the admitted failures of the National Policy on Resettlement and Rehabilitation for Project Affected Families of 2004. But it once again failed to address the problems of the displaced peoples.
AITPN does not claim the report to be the authority on the situation of the indigenous/tribal peoples in India. It has not been able to capture many critical issues and regions. Yet, undoubtedly The State of India’s Indigenous and Tribal Peoples 2008 remains the only document that captures the essence of the issues/problems being faced by indigenous/tribal peoples in India.
