The relation of Indigenous people to the Adivashi people in Bangladesh and their conditions’’ Course Name: Indigenous Studies. Course



  ( courtecy;-   [1] A Study  conducted by Abul Barkat, Mozammel Hoque Sadeka Halim Asmar Osman on The Land Dispossession and Alienation of Adibashis in the Plain Districts of Bangladesh, Human Development Research Centre, Dhaka: July 15, 2008. 
A Term Paper
On
‘‘The relation of Indigenous people to the Adivashi people in Bangladesh and their conditions’’                            Course Name: Indigenous Studies.                                                  Course Code: - PACS; 227.
Prepared by:                                                                                         Shahadat Hossain,                                                                                                             BSS (Hon’s),                                                                                   Department of peace and conflict studies,                                                                          University of Dhaka.




  
                   Date of Submission: 12th June, 2013.
                    Content
Name of Topics …………………………………………………….Number of Pages.
v Abstarct……..………………………………………………               3.
v Introduction………………………………………………               3.
v Theoretical Framework of Indigeneity………        4.
Ø Primordialism.
Ø Constructivism.
Ø Instrumentalism.
v Normative Framework of determining the Indigenous people……………………………………………………              5.
Ø The approach by the ILO Convention 169.
Ø Martinéz Cobo's working definition in UN.
Ø Mme. Erica-Irene Daes' identification.
Ø The World Bank’s Definition of Indigenous People.
Ø UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP).
v Indicators of Indigenous people………………           9.
v Comprehensive Concept on Indigenous People.10.
v The relation of Adibashi to Indigenous people in Bangladesh……………………………………………..            11.
Ø Who are the Adibashi people in Bangladesh .
Ø The conditions of  Adibashi people in Bangladesh
v Conclusion………………………………………………..          17.



v Abstract:-
There are about 5000 Indigenous caste around the world where their amount about 30 crore . At first I endeavored to draw the few theoretical backgrounds on the construction of  indigeneity among the people of the particular society . Sundry internationally recognized conventions and definitions were described here on their recognition around the world such as the United nations , International Labor Organizations etc. along with the various working groups on the indigenous people. There are also mentioned various comprehensive indicators to identify indigenous people along with definition. I tried to describe the adivashi (indigenous people) of Bangladesh based on the criteria of those internationally definitions and conventions. I have also tried to mention The conditions of adivashi (indigenous people) people in Bangladesh are being faced by the government of Bangladesh. At last I tried to mention few suggestions in the conclusion as particularly land recognition problems faced by the adivashi people in Bangladesh.
v Introduction:-     
 The term ‘’ indigenous people ‘’ is used in anthropology to connote a non dominant group in a delineated territory. With a more or less acknowledged claim to aboriginality.  Aboriginal peoples are not necessarily ‘’first comers’’. Although the Germans and Russians may be the oldest extant ethnic groups in parts of their respective territories.   They are not considered indigenous peoples; indigenous groups are defined as no-state people and they are always linked with a non-industrial mode of production. This does not mean that members of indigenous peoples never take part in governments or work in factories but rather that they represent a way of life which renders them particularly vulnerable in relation to modernization and the state.  In recent years, particularly since the 1970s, many such groups have become politically organized in ways that enable them to promote their interests vis-a- vis the dominant. The formation of WCIP (World Council for Indigenous People) has been important in this regard.  Their main political project is often presented as an attempt to survive a culture bearing group but they rarely envision the formation of their own nation state. They are non state peoples.
In north-western Bangladesh are 35 Adibashi[1] tribes among of whom are the Barman, Koch, Monad, Orion, Sandal, and Rajbangshi, Munda, Paharia, Mahali, Malo, Karmokar, Muriari, Mahato, Rajowar, Gond, Badara, Bhumij, Bhugs, Lohar,Pahari, Muler, Khoira, Tali, Pal, Burma, Beel, Moliok, Khorwar, etc. Then there are the other tribal peoples in north-central and north-eastern Bangladesh, including the Garo (Mandi), Hajong, Khasi and Rakhaing. The other 11 adibashi are found in the Chittagong Hill Tracts including the Bawm, Chak, Chakma, Khumi, Khyang, Lushai, Marma, Mro, Pangkhua, Tanchangya and Tripura, who are also known as Pahari or Jumma. ‘’ Adibashis’’ of Bangladesh share similar concerns with other indigenous peoples of the world as stated in world indigenous conferences. Most often marginalized and disadvantaged from the rest of the mainstream population, they suffer lack of basic delivery of services on health, education, and livelihood. They face a number of issues which threaten their existence as a people and as citizens of the wider Bangladesh society. There were held various international conferences on the indigenous people such as   WCIP in which there have various similarities in the context of protracting the rights of Adibashi people in Bangladesh. But they don’t get the convenient rights in accordance to the World international conferences.
v Theoretical Framework of Indigeneity :  
According to the Oxford dictionary, the indignity as ‘’the quality of being indigenous, or indigenousness’’. The term indigenous is defined ‘’born or produced naturally in a land or region; native or belonging naturally to the soil, regions etc. The term is used primarily to denote aboriginal inhabitants or natural products[2].                                                                Territoriality is premised on originality, since inhabitants have more claims on a territorial space. Hence, ‘’indignity’’ becomes a field of contestation.  Some are ‘born with it; others ‘imagine it as an ethnic belonging’. Empirically, the claim of indigeneity is always contested since few human groups inhabit a space from the beginning. The groups that claim indigeneity associate themselves with the original inhabitants in quite imaginative ways through they exist many generations later[3].   There are mentioned few theoretical backgrounds below which denote the construction of Indigeneity lead to the imaginative communities and nations.
a.     Primordialism:-   
Primordialism agrues that indigeneity and national identity are the derived from human nature and are unchangeable –they are fixed or given. Group consciousness develops from language, culture, traditions and history. This group consciousness is reinforced over time through socialization as a result of shared cultural and historical memory, with the creation of myths and symbols[4]. For primordialist, this identity is a particularly important identity relative to others such as ideology and class as ‘’ few other attributes of individuals or communities are fixed on the same way as ethnicity or are as necessarily conflictual. Supporters of primordialism point to the tribes in Sub-Saharan Africa and the normadic tribes of the middle east as example of groups with ‘’untraceable , but sociologically real kinship.’’ In which identity as part of the community trumps other identities.
b.    Constructivism:   
In opposition to primordialism, the social constructivist approach claims that identities are molded, refabricated and mobilized in accord with reigning cultural scripts and centers of power. The various social categories to which people belong result from behaviors and speech .  Because the membership rules, content and valuation of social categories are the product of human behavior.  These social categories can and change over time, constructivist approaches see indigeneity or ethnicity as a social phenomenon that satisfies needs, whether political psychological or social-psychological. Importantly, the collective consciousness leads to the politically salient identity[5].
c.     Instrumentalism: 
This approach see that political elites, intellectuals and the intelligentsia draw on ethnicity or indigeneity in order to acquire the support of the masses for some political ends. As Anthony Marx asserts, elites construct group consciousness through the selective evocations of history to project an image of prior legitimacy and purposefully forget inconvenient images or experiences of past or present internal division. The images of a common identity, unifying ethnicity and shared language are gradually invented, constructed, and reinforced, often explicitly, to bolster social cohesion.  Thus the instrumentalist approach is rational choice in which individuals, especially among the elites, can use ethnicity or indigeneity for political benefit. Leaders bent on engaging in conflict can mobilize ethnicity or indigeneity , tapping into ethnic differences and perceived threats to the ethnic group by other ethnic groups[6].
v Normative Framework of determining the Indigenous people :  
There are mentioned sundry normative backgrounds to be recognized any group as indigenous people in any area of the world. Indigenous peoples do not necessarily claim to be the only people native to their countries, but in many cases indigenous peoples are indeed “aboriginal” or “native” to the lands they live in, being descendants of those peoples that inhabited a territory prior to colonization or formation of the present state. Indigenous peoples have their own distinct languages, cultures, and social and political institutions that are very different from those of mainstream society. While indigenous peoples face the same experience of discrimination and marginalization as other ethnic minorities, there are very important differences in terms of their rights and identity. There is no universal and unambiguous definition of the concept of 'indigenous peoples', but there are a number of criteria by which indigenous peoples globally can be identified and from which each group can be characterised.
The most widespread approaches are those proposed in the International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention no.169 and in the Martinéz Cobo Report to the UN Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination of Minorities (1986). Furthermore an approach suggested by the Chairperson of the UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations Mme. Erica-Irene Daes is widely used.
1.    The approach by the ILO Convention 169 :-
The ILO Convention no. 169[7] states that a people are considered indigenous either:
a.      because they are descendants of those who lived in the area before colonization; or
  1. because they have maintained their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions since colonization and the establishment of new states. 
Furthermore, According to Article 1 of the ILO Convention 169 says that self-identification is crucial for indigenous peoples. This criterion has for example been applied in a land-claims agreement between the Canadian government and the Inuit of the Northwest Territories.
2.    Martinéz Cobo's working definition in UN :-
According to the Martinéz Cobo’s Report to the UN Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination of Minorities (1986), indigenous peoples[8] may be identified as follows:
Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing in those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal systems.[9]
This historical continuity may consist of the continuation, for an extended period reaching into the present, of one or more of the following factors:
a.      Occupation of ancestral lands, or at least of part of them;
b.      Common ancestry with the original occupants of these lands;
c.      Culture in general, or in specific manifestations (such as religion, living under a tribal system, membership of an indigenous community, dress, means of livelihood, lifestyle, etc.);
d.      Language (whether used as the only language, as mother-tongue, as the habitual means of communication at home or in the family, or as the main, preferred, habitual, general or normal language);
e.      Residence in certain parts of the country, or in certain regions of the world;
f.       Other relevant factors
Self-identification as indigenous is also regarded as a fundamental element in Martinéz Cobo’s working definition:          
“On an individual basis, an indigenous person is one who belongs to these indigenous peoples through self-identification as indigenous (group consciousness) and is recognized and accepted by the group as one of its members (acceptance by the group). This preserves for these communities the sovereign right and power to decide who belongs to them, without external interference.”
3.    Mme. Erica-Irene Daes' identification:-
The identification outlined by the Chairperson of the United Nations' Working Group on Indigenous Populations, Mme. Erica-Irene Daes designates certain peoples as indigenous,
a.      because they are descendants of groups which were in the territory of the country at the time when other groups of different cultures or ethnic origins arrived there;
  1. because of their isolation from other segments of the country's population they have preserved almost intact the customs and traditions of their ancestors which are similar to those characterized as indigenous; and
  2. Because they are, even if only formally, placed under a State structure which incorporates national, social and cultural characteristics alien to theirs.

4.    The World Bank’s Definition of Indigenous People:-

A description of Indigenous Peoples given by the World Bank (operational directive 4.20, 1991) reads as follows:                                                                                                                       Indigenous Peoples can be identified in particular geographical areas by the presence in varying degrees of the following characteristics:  
a.       close attachment to ancestral territories and to the natural resources in these areas;
b.     self-identification and identification by others as members of a distinct cultural group;
c.      an indigenous language, often different from the national language;
d.     presence of customary social and political institutions; and
e.      Primarily subsistence-oriented production.
The World Bank's policy for indigenous people states:                                                                   Because of the varied and changing contexts in which Indigenous Peoples live and because there is no universally accepted definition of "Indigenous Peoples," this policy does not define the term. Indigenous Peoples may be referred to in different countries by such terms as "indigenous ethnic minorities", "aboriginals", "hill tribes", "minority nationalities", "scheduled tribes", or "tribal group[10].
5.    UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP):-
  The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was adopted by United Nations General Assembly during its 61st session at UN Headquarters in New York City on 13 September 2007 by a landslide affirmative vote of 144 States in the General Assembly. Four countries – the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand – voted against it, while eleven – Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burundi, Colombia, Georgia, Kenya, Nigeria, Russia, Samoa and Ukraine – abstained.    
According to a UN press release, it does "represent the dynamic development of international legal norms and it reflects the commitment of the UN's member states to move in certain directions"; the UN describes it as setting "an important standard for the treatment of indigenous peoples that will undoubtedly be a significant tool towards eliminating human rights violations against the planet's 370 million indigenous people and assisting them in combating discrimination and marginalization’’ [11].  This declaration “emphasizes the rights of indigenous peoples to maintain and strengthen their own institutions, cultures and traditions, and to pursue their development in keeping with their own needs and aspirations.                                                                                                                 According to article 8 of this declaration that, ‘’Indigenous people have a collective and individual right to maintain and develop their distinct identities and characteristics, including the right to identify themselves as indigenous and to be recognized as such.                      The Article 31 states that, there is a major emphasis that the indigenous peoples will be able to protect their cultural heritage and other aspects of their culture and tradition, which is extremely important in preserving their heritage.




v Indicators of Indigenous people:-
We can identify few criteria to determine the indigenous people around the world based on previous international declarations and conferences such as
a.     Non dominant group:
This implies victimhood, which not surprisingly, is what generally defines vulnerable and marginalized people. And it also implies the paralyses of the agency of the ‘’indigenous peoples’ around the world.
b.     The First People:
Indigenous Peoples refer to the first to settle in the country, with other names such as aborigines.  But this does not mean the first appearance in  the country.
c.      Cultural Differences: In Africa and Asia where processes of conquests and colonial structures took place, indigenous peoples refer to groups that clearly distinguish themselves in a socio-cultural context from the surrounding population. They are characterized by a common culture and language, common spiritual ideas, an identifiable territory and a certain economic structure[12].
d.     Historical continuity with pre-colonial societies and Ancestral Territories:
Indigenous people and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of societies now prevailing in those territories or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of societies and are determined to preserve, develop, and transmit to future generations their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patrons, social institutions and legal systems.
e.     Collective rights:
Contrary to other ethnic minorities, that struggle to protect their rights on an individual level, indigenous peoples have always stressed the need to recognize their collective rights. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) recognizes these collective rights. The UNDRIP was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2007.
f.       Self-determination:
Today, many indigenous peoples are still excluded from society and deprived of their rights as equal citizens of a state. Nevertheless they are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories and their ethnic identity, insisting on their right to self-determination.
g.     Self-identification:
Self-identification as an indigenous individual and acceptance as such by the group is an essential component of indigenous peoples’ sense of identity. Their continued existence as peoples is closely connected to their possibility to influence their own fate and to live in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal systems.
h.     Land rights and natural resources:
Indigenous peoples often inhabit land, which is rich in minerals and natural resources. Indigenous peoples have prior rights to their territories, lands and resources, but often these have been taken from them or they have been threatened to leave. Indigenous peoples face serious difficulties such as constant threats of territorial invasion and murder, plundering of their resources, cultural and legal discrimination, as well as a lack of recognition of their own institutions.
i.       Culture and Knowledge: Indigenous peoples are the holders of unique languages, knowledge systems and beliefs and possess invaluable knowledge of practices for the sustainable management of natural resources. They have a special relation to and use of their traditional land. Their ancestral land has a fundamental importance for their collective physical and cultural survival as peoples. Indigenous peoples hold their own diverse concepts of development, based on their traditional values, visions, needs and priorities. 
j.       Political participation:  Indigenous peoples often have much in common with other neglected segments of societies, i.e. lack of political representation and participation, economic marginalization and poverty, lack of access to social services and discrimination. Despite their cultural differences, the diverse indigenous peoples share common problems also related to the protection of their rights. They strive for recognition of their identities, their ways of life and their right to traditional lands, territories and natural resources.
v Comprehensive Concept on Indigenous People: -  
Throughout history different states designate the groups within their boundaries that are recognized as indigenous peoples according to international legislation by different terms. The indigenous peoples also include peoples who are regarded as indigenous based on their descent from the populations which inhabited the country at the time of inroads of non-indigenous religions and cultures or the establishment of present state boundaries, who retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions, but who may have been displaced from their traditional domains or who may have resettled outside their ancestral domains.             
The status of the indigenous groups in the subjugated relationship can be characterized in most instances as an effectively marginalized, isolated or minimally participative one, in comparison to majority groups or the nation-state as a whole. Their ability to influence and participate in the external policies that may exercise jurisdiction over their traditional lands and practices is very frequently limited. This situation can persist even in the case where the indigenous population outnumbers that of the other inhabitants of the region or state; the defining notion here is one of separation from decision and regulatory processes that have some, at least titular, influence over aspects of their community and land rights. In a ground-breaking decision involving the Ainu people of Japan, the Japanese courts recognized their claim in law, stating that "If one minority group lived in an area prior to being ruled over by a majority group and preserved its distinct ethnic culture even after being ruled over by the majority group, while another came to live in an area ruled over by a majority after consenting to the majority rule, it must be recognized that it is only natural that the distinct ethnic culture of the former group requires greater consideration[13].
v The relation of Adibashi to Indigenous people in Bangladesh:-
1.    Who are the Adibashi people in Bangladesh :-
Adivasi is an umbrella term for a heterogeneous set of ethnic and tribal groups claimed to be the aboriginal population of India[14]. They comprise a substantial indigenous minority of the population of India. The same term Adivasi is used for the ethnic minorities of Bangladesh and the native Vedda people of Sri Lanka. Although terms such as atavika, vanavāsi ("forest dwellers"), or girijan ("hill people") are also used for the tribes of India, adivāsi carries the specific meaning of being the original and autochthonous inhabitants of a given region and was specifically coined for that purpose in the 1930s.[15] Over time, unlike the terms "aborigines" or "tribes", the word "adivasi" has developed a connotation of past autonomy which was disrupted during the British colonial period in India and has not been restored[16].
Adivasi scholar ‘’Anathbandhu Chatterjee’’ points out that the Adivasi life is intrinsically linked with the forest. The forest in fact symbolizes the Adivasi life. Physical labor, community spirit and equality constitute the ethics around which the Adivasi life centers. These traditions are shared by Adivasi men and women alike. In the Adivasi society, emancipation of women is not required to be granted by anyone. The freedom is there as the most natural thing. The Adivasi woman is as free as the forest around her. She is a mother; at the same time she works as hard as the hardworking man[17].
For centuries Bangladesh is enriched with the culture of different adivashi ethnic communities. A good number of adivashi live here. The word’’ adivashi’’ is derived from the Sanskrit. ‘’Adi’’ meaning original and Bashi means inhabitant. The adivashi may also mean ‘’indigenous people’’. Most of the indigenous communities in Bangladesh draw their income from regular agriculture. The indigenous communities in Bangladesh have their distinctive ways of living. But the indigenous communities living in Chittagong Hill Tracts( CHT) are more distinctive than their own living culture, and they more closely to the natural contract livelihood and housing other communities in Bangladesh.
The adibashi people of Bangladesh are not allowed to take their food inside some restaurants. In the CHT , derogatory names which often one community uses for another, e.g. Chakku for Chakma, Mogh for Marma etc. were used as verbal abuse by security personnel and other people on the streets. Their racial features are not equally treated as Bengali rather they are seen as inferior. In the Muslim majority Bangladesh their culture are mostly considered as anti-Islam for their association with pig rearing and habits of eating pork that are forbidden for muslims. They are also placed at the lowest rank of social hierarchy. Their lifestyles, people from some groups usually do not wear any cloth on top parts of the body, is being represented as ‘uncivilized’ and their food habits or food items sometimes cause social stigma for them[18]. The contemporary public discourse of indigeneity in Bangladesh stands on the argument that Bengali is the adibashi of the land since most of the ‘’indigenous people’’ living in Bangladesh migrated to the region from different parts of the world later that Bengali peope settled here. Thus the argument goes’ the indigenous people cannot the adibashi people of Bangladesh since they are the original inhabitants of these lands. In this construction, the discourse of Hil peoples as adibashi people that they are the first settled people in the Hill region compare to the Bengali people but not in the country[19].               

According to some social scientists and anthropologists opined the Adivashi means such a group of people whose economy is characterized by food gathering and rearing of animals for their livelihood. More recently many countries of the world used a synonym word of ‘’Adivashi’’ is –‘forest dwellers’. Some characteristics of course, are found in ascertinning the description of adivashi.
a.     The adivashi live in such an area which is almost fixed. After the conclusion of procuring food they return generally to a fixed area go to a new place to start living there (Land rights and natural resources).
b.     The adivashi own the unchanging cultural tradition. The proof of cultural unity is found such a group of people. (Distinctive cultural traditions).
c.      Their food procurement system and production skill are of the same kind form generation (Historical continuity with pre-colonial societies).
d.     There prevails a sense of unity among the members of the adivashi- their sense of solidarity is very forceful (Collective rights).
  So, there are about 35 smaller groups of Indigenous or adibashi people communities in Bangladesh covering about two percent of the total population have been living in different pockets of the hilly zones and some plain lands of the country (www. Banlaembassy.com.). On the other hand according to the Bangladesh Adivasi Forum, there are 45 ethnic groups with approximately 2.5 million living side by side with the Bengali majority people. According to the government statistics the total number of Adivasi is 12,05,978 which is only 1.03 percent of the total population. However enough doubts remain about this number of Adivasis.
The indigenous communities along with the localities they live are mentioned here such as: Bawn, Chak,Chakma, Khyang, Khumi, Lushai, Marma, Mo, Pangkhoa, Rakhain, Tanchanga, Tripura in Chittagong Hill Tacts Regions; Bhuiimale,Lahre, Mahali, Monda, Noonia, Oraro,Pahan, Palia, Rabidas, Raybansi, Ranjoarh, Rana Klarmaker, Santal, in the North Bengal region and Been, Bhumig, Boraj,Barman, Dalu, Garo, Hajong, Halem, Kharja, Khari, Koch, Konda, Kurmi, Manjpuri, Nayk, Pangan,Patra, Shabar, in the Mymensing and Sylhet region.                                                                                                                                                             The hill tract indigenous communities are ethnically different from the settled populaces in Bangladesh. They  have close links with indigenous of the vast region that extends from Tibet to Indo-China. They are short in stature, have black hair, prominent check-bones and narrow eyes, features that are generally known as typical to the mongoloid type.  One of the largest concentration of the ‘’ethnic tribal/Adibashi groups of the country is the Chittagong hil tracts. About one third of the tibal peoples live here. The different ethnicities of the Chittagong hill tracts have their own traditional social  system, practices, customs, language, literature, heritage, religious practices, customs, food habit and festivals.  The indigenous people live in CHT are ; Bawn, Chak, Chakma, Khyang, Khumi, Lushai, Mrama,M ro, Pangkhoa, Tranchangya, Rakhaine, and Tripua[20].
2.    The conditions of  Adibashi people in Bangladesh :-   
The East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act of 1950 ("EBSAT ACT, 1950") uses the terms "aboriginal tribes and castes" to refer to the Adivasis of the plains. The CHT Regulation of 1900 uses the term "indigenous hillman" to refer to the adivasis of the CHT. Similar wording has been used in the national Budget Act of 1995 (Act 12 of 1995).  There are mentioned few conditions [21] which are still being faced by the adibashi people in Bangladesh.
Land alienation and the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act of 1950:                                       The overall situation of Adivasis in Bangladesh is far from good, as is even admitted by ruling coalition leaders. We can Ask a Santal or Oraon and she will tell us about the land alienation or social discrimination she suffers from. The Rakhaing of the south are on record for petitioning the current and previous prime ministers regarding land alienation, with little redress to date. This is so despite the restrictions contained in the constitutionally-protected EBSAT ACT, 1950, regarding transfer of aboriginal lands to non-aboriginals. Theoretically, an aggrieved aboriginal could go to court, but the impecuniosity of the dispossessed prevents any action to obtain legal redress. There are no viable alternatives to suo moto state action to implement this law.  
National park, Eco Park and the human 'Denizens':
The Garo in Madhupur are far from happy. A "National Park" has been created on their traditional land, with a concrete wall that attempts to keep them away. A local leader, Piren Snal, who led a peaceful protest against the wall, had to give his life for his people. westwards towards Sylhet, the Khasi in which the "Eco Park" created on their land, from which they are threatened with eviction. many Khasis were threatened with eviction by Forest Department personnel and Bengali villagers. The Khasis are not willing to be relegated to a status of human 'denizens' for the benefit of city-based visitors to the so-called Eco Park. Until the 1980s, many Khasi hamlets or punjis held formal leases from the Forest Department.  

 Land alienation & denial of Self-Determination:
Compared to the plains, the self-government rights of the indigenous peoples of the CHT are more secure, at least by law. However many Marma, Tripura or Chakma complain about not having their alienated lands restored. They may also complain about militarisation and human rights violations. Tanchangya, always complains about the non-acknowledgment of their people's self-determination right. Other members of the smaller indigenous groups may complain of inadequate representation in the district and regional councils. Yet others may say that the 1997 Accord cannot adequately safeguard the CHT peoples' rights.              In general, the situation of Adivasi women is worse than their men because they suffer as members of a disadvantaged minority and indigenous group, and also as women, even among their own people.  
 Indigenous peoples in Bangladesh and the UN year and decade:
On 9 August, 1993, the Bangladeshi indigenous peoples celebrated the International Year of the World's Indigenous People, even though the government had ignored the event. They demanded constitutional recognition of their cultural integrity and political status. Leading members of Bangladeshi civil society, including the greatest living Bengali poet, Shamsur Rahman, extended their solidarity to the indigenous cause. The impact of the international events was thus felt within the country in various ways. Firstly, the UN events led to the forging of greater unity among the country's indigenous peoples. Secondly, it instilled a greater sense of pride in the indigenous identity. Thirdly, it led to the growing currency of the terms "indigenous" and "Adivasi", which has also facilitated intra-indigenous unity.  

 Indigenous identity and Bangladeshi political leaders:
At United Nations fora, representatives of the Bangladesh Government have occasionally declared that there are no 'indigenous' people in Bangladesh, merely "tribals", or that all Bangladeshis, including Bengalis, are indigenous. The position is somewhat similar to that of the Government of India's, which too prefers "tribals" to 'indigenous'. However, barring some exceptions, the growing trend over the years has been to provide greater respect towards this identity. Both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have sent messages of goodwill to the Adivasis on Indigenous People's Day in previous years, addressing them as "Adivasi". More recently, the draft national Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper ("PRSP") has used the terms "indigenous/Adivasi" in the Bangladeshi context. History cannot be denied. The Bangladeshi indigenous peoples were living in and sustainably managing large parts of the country long before other ethnic groups settled in these areas. In any case, it is not the primordial basis of their identity that is important, but the fact that indigenous peoples have historically been denied a role in state-formation and state-building. International Treaty law and Customary International law on human rights and indigenous peoples' rights seek to reduce the unbalance, and do away with some of the legacies of these historical wrongs and inequities, including through affirmative action or protective discrimination.
Towards dialogue, peace and development:  
The overall situation of the indigenous peoples of the country is a case for serious concern and calls for concerted action through dialogue, mutual respect, and trust. The recent Government-indigenous dialogue on the PRSP was a positive example to be emulated. There may be differences between the two, but the gaps can definitely be narrowed down. Greater devolution of authority to the hill councils, and direct representation of the plains Adivasis in the Special Affairs Division that deals with Adivasi issues for the plains - would accelerate development in the long-neglected Adivasi areas.
That would instil a stronger sense of "Bangladeshiness" than to continue to keep them excluded from governance and development. Certain sections of the government occasionally react in a frenzied manner to Adivasi protests against the violation of their rights. It is a norm of healthy and democratic societies for such complaints to be made. This happens also in the case of other countries, and the Government of Bangladesh should not feel that people who so complain are acting against the interest of the state.
The Adivasis of the country seek peace and stability in their areas and in the whole country. In the CHT, the indigenous people have suffered much during the 20-year conflict and will not easily support any further violence in the region. Whatever violence there is, can hopefully be ended, through the joint efforts of all concerned. The indigenous peoples of the region are more than ready to co-operate with all sections of Bangladeshi civil society to bring forth a truly just peace in the region.  






Democracy and Self-Determination:
The long-term interest of any state is to foster contentment, peace and development. And that is possible only by respecting true self-determination. The right of self-determination should not only be equated with the creation of a new state. Bangladesh has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Article 1 of both covenants reads: "All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development." This right cannot be denied to indigenous peoples, including those in Bangladesh.
Speaking about self-determination, the UN Special Rapporteur on Indigenous Peoples' Rights, Dr. Rodolfo Stavenhagen, had this to say, among others: "The link between self-determination and democracy must be strengthened in theory and in practice. The violence we see around us is not generated by the drive for self-determination, but by its denial. The denial of self-determination, not its pursuit, is what leads to upheavals and conflicts. And the denial of self-determination is essentially incompatible with true democracy".


























v Conclusion:-    
Particularly, the land right of the adibashi peoples of Bangladesh has been denied. No government has properly acknowledged the land right of the adibashis in this country. All the plain-land adibashi communities- such as the Dalu, Garo, Hajong, Khashi, Mahato, Oraon, Patro, Pahan, Rakhain and Santal- have been severely affected by land dispossession. In addition to the undue political influence and local class-based hegemonic culture, government-connived initiatives have also been considered as major reasons for land dispossession of the plain-land adibashis. Laws apparently in order to stop such processes of land dispossession of the indigenous communities has also been enacted- but in practice, land dispossession goes on unabated. Various issues related to such traumatic incidents in the past- such as the Partition of India in 1947, the Indo-Pak War in 1965, the Liberation War of Bangladesh in 1971 etc.- have supported and encouraged the land-grabbers to surreptitiously grab the lands of the plain-land adibashis in Bangladesh.
Grabbing by local influential persons from other community mostly Banglaee, grabbing through forged documents, governmental acquisition, forgery during land record, lack of proper land documents, and land grabbing by settler Bangalees are important ways of grabbing land of the Adibashi peope.  So, there have been suggested various ways and means to mitigate their land dispossession and alienation. A consideration of viability and the hierarchy of prioritization suggest that the following steps should be taken by the concerned agencies in order to solve the issue of alienation and dispossession of land among the plain-land adibashis in Bangladesh[22]
a.       Establishing a pro-active Adibashi Land Reform Commission.                                                            
b.      Ensuring the adibashi people’s representation and active participation in the proposed
Adibashi Land Reform Commission.                       
c.       Assigning of adequate emphasis on the land and life of adibashi people by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Land.                                                                                                         
d.     Adequate advocacy efforts by the Government and the civil society toward improving the plain-land adibashi peoples’ life and livelihood.
They are also should be recognized in the constitution of Bangladesh government based on their distinctive identity as they have been living in their own territory.




[2] Oxford English Dictionary(n.d) for ‘indigenous’.
[3] Manjusha S. NAIR.’’ Defining indigeineity  Situatin Transnational Knowledge’. New Delhi, 31 January 2006. P.8. http:/rci.rutgers.edu/-manjusha.
[4]  Jesse,Neal G. and Kristen P. Williams,2011, Ethnic Conflict; A systematic approachs to cause of conflict (Washington, D.C.CQ, press).
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
[8]  The draft declaration is contained in UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1994/2/ADD.1 and is currently under consideration by a working group of the Commission on Human Rights.
[9] United Nations Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities and its Study of the Problem of Discrimination against Indigenous Populations, UN Doc. E./CN.4/Sub.2/1986/7/Add. 4.para 379 (1986). 
[11]  United Nations Declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples, New York, 13 September 2007.
[13]  Judgment of the Sapporo District Court, Civil Division No. 3, 27 March 1997, in (1999) 38 ILM, p.419.
[14]  Lok Sabha Debates ser.10 Jun 41–42 1995 v.42 no.41-42, Lok Sabha Secretariat, Parliament of India, 1995, retrieved 2008-11-25, "... Adivasis are the aborigines of India.
[15] Robert Harrison Barnes, Andrew Gray and Benedict Kingsbury (1995), Indigenous peoples of Asia, Association for Asian Studies, ISBN 0-924304-14-6, retrieved 2008-11-25, "The Concept of the Adivāsi: According to the political activists who coined the word in the 1930s, the "adivāsis" are the original inhabitants of the Indian subcontinent ..."
[16] Louise Waite (2006), Embodied Working Lives: Work and Life in Maharashtra, India, Lexington Books, ISBN 0-7391-0876-X, retrieved 2008-11-25, "The scheduled tribes themselves tend to refer to their ethnic grouping as adivāsis, which means 'original inhabitant.' Hardiman continues to argue that the term adivāsi is preferable in India as it evokes a shared history of relative freedom in precolonial times.
[17] The Article has been collected from “Bangladesh: Land Forest and Forest People”, Published by Society for Environment and Human Development (SEHD), Dhaka, Bangladesh.


[18] Nasreen, Zobaida, Journal of the Asiatic society of Bangladesh (Hum), Vol.57(2),2012,pp.325z
[19] Ibid. pp.342-343.
[20]  Bangladesh statistical year book 2002:33.
[22] A Study  conducted by Abul Barkat, Mozammel Hoque Sadeka Halim Asmar Osman on The Land Dispossession and Alienation of Adibashis in the Plain Districts of Bangladesh, Human Development Research Centre, Dhaka: July 15, 2008.

    

মন্তব্যসমূহ