ALSO

Brus:

Repression of indigenous peoples by indigenous peoples

Thousands of Brus fled from Mizoram to neighboring Tripura following attacks by some majority Mizo organisations. From 15 October 1997 onwards, Brus from Tungbagin, Kawnmun, Pheileng, Laxmicheraa, Kwartha, Rangdil, Fileng and Tuipuibari areas of then Aizwal district of Mizoram fled for their lives.

Since then they have been housed in six relief camps under Kanchanpur Sub-Division of Tripura.

i. Continued denial of the right repatriation to Mizoram

The state government of Mizoram has been refusing to repatriate the Brus on the ground that not all of them were genuine residents of Mizoram and due to the opposition from the influential Mizo NGOs including Young Mizo Association (YMA) and Mizo Zirlai Pawl (Mizo students union, MZP). Although the Brus themselves claim to be over 29,000 persons in the relief camps in Tripura, the government of Mizoram has claimed that only 543 Bru families comprising of 3,189 persons fled the state in 1997.1

In November 1997, the State of Tripura decided to stop rations and other basic facilities being provided to the Reangs/Brus in order to coerce them to return to their native place i.e. Mizoram. In order to protect the fundamental rights of the Brus, AITPN filed two petitions before the NHRC of India respectively on 27 November 1997 and 1 December 1997 seeking the NHRC’s immediate intervention especially for the protection of the life and liberty of the Reangs/Brus. On 26 December 1997, the NHRC issued notice to the State of Mizoram and the State of Tripura . This was followed by visit of a team of NHRC led by Mr Sudarshan Agarwal, Member of NHRC, to take stock of the conditions of the Bru relief camps and held talks with the Chief Secretaries of Mizoram and Tripura, among others. Following the on-the-spot investigation, the NHRC on 27 October 1999 directed the government of Mizoram to take back the Bru IDPs from Tripura as they were lawful inhabitants of Mizoram.

But the state of Mizoram failed to take back any Bru.

The Mizoram Bru Displaced Peoples Forum (MBDPF) also filed several appeals with the NHRC, the governments of Tripura and Mizoram for early solution to their problems but to no avail.

On 26 April 2005, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed between the Government of Mizoram and the Bru National Liberation front (BNLF), an insurgent group. In the MoU, the state of Mizoram admitted its obligation/duty to repatriate and resettle the Reangs/Brus, but again questioned the “genuineness” and/or bonafide inhabitance of the Reangs/Brus. The MoU was another deceptive tool to deny the Brus their right to return as it had no consent of the Brus of the relief camps.

About 1,000 members of the Bru National Liberation Front (BNLF) have so far laid down their arms after the signing of the MoU with the government of Mizoram in April 2005 and the government provided them rehabilitation in Mizoram.2 Yet, In March 2007, the state government of Mizoram entrusted three Mizo non-governmental organizations - the Young Mizo Association, Mizo Hmeichhe Insuihkhawm Pawl (the apex body of the Mizo women) and Mizo Zirlai Pawl (Mizo students union) -  which are known for their anti-minority stands - to verify the credentials of the former Bru rebels. The NGOs reportedly identified 40 former Bru rebels as non-residents of Mizoram.3

The contention of the state of Mizoram that these Brus were not genuine residents of Mizoram is completely false and an excuse not to take them back. In October-November 2007, the Mizoram Bru Displaced Peoples Forum (MBDPF) conducted an on-the-spot survey of 5,328 families residing in the six relief camps at Kanchanpur sub-division of Tripura. According to the survey, 94.22% of the Reangs/Brus in the relief camps have at least one document each, issued by the State of Mizoram , its local authorities as well as constitutional bodies, namely, the Election Commission of India to prove that their bonafide/natural place of inhabitance is Mizoram.

Since April 2007, the state government of Mizoram held a series of talks with the MBDPF, the last round of discussion being held on 21 November 2007, but no result emerged. In order to prevent the Brus and the AITPN from filing a writ petition before the Supreme Court of India for its intervention for early repatriation of the Brus to Mizoram, the Home Secretary, Government of Mizoram, who was the Chairman of the meeting warned the Bru leaders against going to the Supreme Court. The Home Secretary, Government of Mizoram warned the Bru representatives “not to file petition in the Supreme Court as it can create serious repercussion among the general public which may lead to further delay in the process of repatriation… ”

ii. Miserable camp conditions

Presently, a total of 29,545 Brus are living in six relief camps in Tripura. Their camp-wise population is as follows: Kashirampur – 15,499 persons; Longtraikami - 5,137 persons; Hazachara - 2,593 persons; Kashau A & B - 3,305 persons; Khakchang - 1,243 persons and Hamsapara - 1,768 persons.

They have been living in miserable conditions. Since 2001, the new-born babies have been included only in the census but not in the relief cards to make them eligible for food items. Those who have become adult in the last six years continue to be given rations as minor. The ration quota is so inadequate that the Brus do not even report death as it means further reduction of the rations being provided.

Presently, a Bru adult gets cash dole of Rs 2.90 per day and a minor gets Rs 1.45 per day. 450 grams of rice is being provided to per adult Bru per day while 225 gram rice is being provided to per minor per day. This ration is highly inadequate. Yet, on 15 October 2007, the Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department, Government of Tripura reduced the monthly rice allocation being provided to the relief camps under the Public Distribution System (PDS), inter alia, on the ground that there is no separate allocation of rice from the Government of India for them.

Medical facilities are almost non-existent. Only when the death of the Brus takes epidemic proportion, the doctors visit the camps. The conditions of children and pregnant women are the worst. As there are no primary health care centers, pregnant women are forced to deliver their babies at the relief camps. Maternal mortality is quite high and as are also the common diseases.

Most tube wells are out of order. The Brus are forced to drink water from the streams and ponds, thereby causing water-born diseases. Sanitation facilities are non-existent.

The Tripura government has made a mockery of the right to education, as it has failed to provide educational facilities to the children in the camps. Only primary education under the Sarva Siksha Abhiyan (Education for All) programme has been extended to the Bru relief camps in limited proportion. There is no scope for higher education for their children. Effectively, over 5,000 minors have been denied the right to education and an entire generation of the Brus has been kept illiterate in the last ten years.

The MBDPF in its letters dated 26.06.07 and 20.07.07 addressed to the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India and Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Kanchanpur, Tripura (N) respectively pointed out the lack of basic amenities etc. at the relief camps. But as of now no adequate relief has been provided. 

In addition, there is no security for the camp inmates. It has come to light that about 35 Bru children (aged between five and 15 years) went missing from the refugee camps during the last five years. The state government of Tripura has ordered an inquiry into the incident and to take all possible steps to trace the children.4

iii. Step children: Discrimination against the Brus

The government of India does not have any policy to deal with the problems of displacement due to ethnic conflicts or insurgency. Hence, ad hoc policies are applied while dealing with the IDPs and those who enjoy proximity with New Delhi enjoy more benefits while providing relief. This is however not to say or suggest that the conditions of any IDP community anywhere in India is up to the level of satisfaction.

But that the discrimination against the displaced Bru indigenous peoples is glaring. This comes to light when the facilities provided to the Brus are compared with that of the Kashmiri Pandits who have been displaced from Jammu and Kashmir .

Although the conditions of the Kashmiri Pandits are not satisfactory by any standards, yet they are being provided more benefits than the Bru displaced peoples. In addition to basic dry rations, the Kashmiri Pandits are being provided cash assistance of Rs 1,000/- per head per month subject to a maximum of Rs 4,000/- per family per month both at Jammu and Delhi relief camps. Other State governments are also providing relief to Kashmiri Pandits residing in their States as per scales fixed by them from their own budgets. In contrast, a Bru adult gets cash dole of Rs 2.90 per day (i.e. Rs 87 per month) and a minor gets Rs 1.45 per day (i.e. Rs 43.5 per month). In addition, merely 450 gram of rice is being provided to per adult Bru per day while 225 gram rice is being provided to per minor per day, which is highly inadequate. Yet, on 15 October 2007, the government of Tripura further reduced the ration supply to the relief camps on the ground that there is no separate allocation of rice from the Government of India for the Brus displaced people.

As for rehabilitation and resettlement of the Kashmiri Pandits, 5,242 two-room tenements are being constructed at an expenditure of Rs 270 crore under  the Prime Minister’s Reconstruction Plan for the State for all Kashmiri migrants residing in camps in the Jammu region;  Rs 20 crores has been approved by Government of India for construction of 200 two-bed room flats at Sheikpora in Budgam district; Rs 10 crores has been provided to the State of Jammu and Kashmir for reconstruction and renovation of houses and shrines at Kheer Bhavani and Mattan and 18 three-room flats have been constructed at Mattan for temporary stay of Kashmiri migrants till they are able to return to their houses in the Valley. On the other hand, the Brus do not get funds even to repair their bamboo huts.

In education, the benefits enjoyed by the Kashmiri migrant students include reservation of seats in technical/ professional institutions; extension of date of admission by about 30 days; relaxation in cut-off percentage up to 10% subject to minimum eligibility requirement; increase in intake capacity up to 5% - course wise; and facilitation of migration in second and subsequent years. But the Bru children are being provided only primary education under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) and they enjoy no reservation or other benefits in higher educational institutions, including professional/technical institutions.

To protect and restrain sale of properties left behind by the Kashmiri migrants in the Valley, the government of Jammu and Kashmir enacted two laws- The J&K Migrants Immovable Property (Preservation, Protection and Restraint of Distress Sales) Act of 1997, and J&K Migrants (Stay of Proceedings) Act of 1997. In addition, 50% of the loss of immovable property, subject to a ceiling of Rs 1 lakh, is paid as compensation for the property damaged in insurgency. Union Ministry of Home Affairs has constituted a Standing Committee to review issues concerning Kashmiri migrants on a quarterly basis; the government of Jammu and Kashmir has constituted an Apex Level Committee under the Chairmanship of its Revenue, Relief and Rehabilitation Minister; and the government of Delhi has constituted a Nodal Committee with representation from Kashmiri migrants to look after the welfare of the Kashmiri Pandit displaced peoples.

On the other hand, the state government of Mizoram has not taken any measure to protect the houses, land and other properties of the displaced Brus in Mizoram. No compensation has been ever paid for damage of immovable properties of the Brus. There is no committee, either formed by State government of Mizoram or Tripura or the Government of India for the welfare of the Brus and to determine their repatriation and resettlement in Mizoram.  

Many of these isues have been challenged by Asian Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Network in a writ petition before the Supreme Court of India.