Dipak Kurmi
(The writer can be reached at dipakkurmiglpltd@gmail.com)
Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma’s announcement about the impending implementation of the recommendations made by the Justice Biplab Kumar Sharma Committee on Clause VI of the Assam Accord has come at a crucial juncture in Assam’s socio-political history. Signed in August 1985, the Assam Accord remains a landmark agreement between the Centre, the Government of Assam, the All Assam Students’ Union (AASU), and the erstwhile All Assam Gana Sangram Parishad (AAGSP), which sought to address the complex issue of illegal immigration from Bangladesh and safeguard the rights of indigenous Assamese people. However, nearly four decades later, the full implementation of its key provisions, especially Clause VI, which guarantees constitutional, legislative, and administrative safeguards for the protection of the indigenous Assamese people, has remained a contentious issue.
Formation of the Justice Biplab Kumar Sharma Committee: The Union Ministry of Home Affairs constituted the high-level committee in 2019, led by retired Justice Biplab Kumar Sharma, to make recommendations for the implementation of Clause VI of the Assam Accord. After hearing various stakeholders, including AASU, the committee submitted its report in February 2020. This report, which contains 67 specific recommendations, was seen as a comprehensive effort to address the long-standing demands of the indigenous Assamese for legal and constitutional protection. However, the report lay in limbo until recently, when Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma announced a decisive push towards implementing it.
The current government’s approach to implementation: In a significant move, Chief Minister Sarma stated that his government has decided to implement 52 of the 67 recommendations made by the committee. This development is particularly noteworthy because it marks the first serious attempt to operationalise Clause VI of the Accord since its inception. However, five to six recommendations that involve joint decisions between the state and central governments are still pending, and decisions on a few other issues lie entirely with the central government.
Sarma’s government has made it clear that it will prioritize the recommendations that do not present any major hurdles or potential conflicts. A pragmatic approach has been outlined, where the government intends to take into account the concerns of various stakeholders, including the people living in the Sixth Schedule areas (predominantly tribal regions) and the Barak Valley districts. It is crucial that any moves towards implementation avoid inflaming regional or ethnic tensions, especially in these sensitive areas, which have distinct socio-political dynamics and a history of ethnic conflicts.
The Role of AASU and Other Stakeholders: One of the significant aspects of the government’s strategy is its decision to take the AASU and other stakeholders into confidence. AASU played a pivotal role in the Assam Movement, which culminated in the signing of the Assam Accord. Its involvement is not only a matter of political necessity but also an acknowledgement of the deep-rooted public sentiment and historical context surrounding the issue.
Assam Accord Implementation Minister Atul Bora has emphasised that the government is adopting a holistic approach to the implementation of Clause VI. Speaking after a recent cabinet decision, Bora reiterated the government’s commitment to working closely with AASU and other stakeholders to ensure that the indigenous people’s interests are safeguarded. Bora also highlighted the political will displayed by Chief Minister Sarma, attributing the cabinet’s decision to the government’s resolve to honour the martyrs and those who suffered during the Assam Agitation.
Addressing Demographic Concerns: Clause VI of the Assam Accord, which seeks to provide constitutional safeguards to the Assamese people, is deeply intertwined with concerns about large-scale immigration and the demographic changes it has brought about in Assam. The Justice Sharma Committee’s recommendations touch upon these concerns, and the government has signalled its intent to engage patriotic organisations that view unchecked immigration as a threat to the state’s demographic composition and national security.
One of the most pressing issues at hand is the potential for demographic changes to alter the region’s political landscape. This concern is not new. In 2005, the Supreme Court of India struck down the controversial Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunal) (IMDT) Act, which was perceived as a tool to protect illegal immigrants. In its ruling, the apex court warned of a silent demographic invasion in the northeastern region, which could one day lead to demands for the merger of parts of Assam with Bangladesh. This fear has been echoed by the Indian Army, which has also expressed concern over the security threat posed by illegal immigration, particularly in the Siliguri Corridor that connects the Northeast with the rest of India.
A Historical Perspective: The apprehensions surrounding immigration in Assam can be traced back to the 1940s, when the Muslim League pushed for the inclusion of Assam in East Pakistan. The leader of the Assam Movement, Lokapriya Gopinath Bordoloi, fought tirelessly to prevent this from happening. His efforts, along with those of his immediate successors, ensured that Assam remained a part of India in 1947. However, subsequent governments, particularly those led by the Congress party, have been accused of following an appeasement policy, which critics argue has exacerbated the problem of illegal immigration.
The IMDT Act, passed during the Congress regime, is often cited as an example of such appeasement. The Act made it nearly impossible to deport illegal immigrants and was viewed by many as a law designed to protect the immigrant population rather than address the concerns of the indigenous people. The present generation in Assam must not forget this chapter of history, particularly as the state government moves towards implementing the Assam Accord’s provisions.
The Road Ahead: A GoM and Consultation Process: The Assam government’s decision to form a Group of Ministers (GoM) to prepare a roadmap for the implementation of Clause VI in consultation with AASU and other organisations is another significant development. This GoM will work towards ironing out any differences and ensuring that the implementation process moves forward without major hiccups.
Minister Atul Bora has assured that the government is committed to safeguarding the interests of the indigenous people of Assam. The cabinet has approved 57 of the 67 recommendations made by the Justice Sharma Committee, and while some of the recommendations require the central government’s approval, the state government has taken responsibility for implementing the majority of them.
The government’s approach to Clause VI implementation also reflects a broader effort to address longstanding issues of identity, migration, and regional autonomy in Assam. By involving AASU and other stakeholders, the government is attempting to build a broad consensus around the issue, which has often been a source of political tension in the state.
A Crucial Moment for Assam: The implementation of Clause VI of the Assam Accord comes at a critical juncture in Assam’s political history. Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma’s announcement has injected fresh momentum into a process that has been delayed for decades. By taking a pragmatic approach and involving key stakeholders like AASU, the government is signalling its intent to address the deep-rooted concerns of the indigenous Assamese population.
At the same time, the challenges posed by illegal immigration, demographic changes, and regional tensions remain formidable. The government will need to navigate these challenges carefully, especially as it seeks to implement the recommendations of the Justice Sharma Committee without triggering new conflicts.
The Assam Accord, and particularly Clause VI, represents a promise made to the people of Assam. The steps taken by the current government, if successful, could finally fulfil that promise and safeguard the future of the indigenous people in the state. However, much will depend on how the recommendations are implemented and whether the government can maintain the delicate balance between regional aspirations and national interests.