Reviewing The Enclave Exchange

                                                                                                                *Dr. Saumitra Mohan

            Boundaries between nation states are reflections of the interplay of the forces of history, politics and wars but oftentimes they could be simply a manifestation of a shoddy and hasty job as transpired in the wake of recommendations of the Boundary Commission led by Sir Cyril Radcliffe. The malformed borders between India and Pakistan became a curse for the people living in the enclaves between India and Pakistan or Bangladesh since 1971. Even though the enclave residents did not leave their homes and hearths, they, however, lost their countries. They lived in territories legally belonging to India, but never qualified as Indian citizens. The same happened to the people who lived on Pakistani and subsequently, Bangladeshi territory but would have none of the citizenship rights.

            They were not stateless people in terms of international law of territorial sovereignty, but that was merely a cold comfort for them. They had no access to the laws or services of the land to which they technically belonged. The piquant situation created an ontological crisis for these people sans the benefits of citizenship and sans the protection of the state. With the Land Boundary Agreement (LBA) of 1974 between India and Bangladesh finally coming into force on 1^st August this year, the historical hardship for the people living in 51 Bangladeshi and 111 Indian enclaves eventually came to an end.

            The enclaves were exchanged on the midnight of 31^st July this year. The Indian flags were hoisted at midnight to mark the historic moment.  A total of 111 Indian enclaves with an area of 17158 acres inside Bangladesh became Bangladeshi mainland and 51 Bangladeshi enclaves with an area of 7110 acres within Indian Cochbehar district of West Bengal became official Indian Territory. In practical terms, it simply meant that the boundaries around these little pockets of foreign land disappeared as they merged with the host countries.

            Against expectations of around 13,000 people in 111 Indian enclaves moving into India, only 979 or .02 per cent of the 37,000 dwellers in these enclaves inside Bangladesh plumped for the Indian citizenship during the joint survey conducted by the two countries. This was surprising given the attraction for Indian citizenship among Bangladeshi citizens. Many of these residents in Indian enclaves in Bangladesh who wanted to become Indian citizens were disappointed as they were allegedly threatened and intimidated against opting for the Indian citizenship by the Jamaat-e-Islami in Bangladesh. In stark contrast, all the 14,854 people staying on Indian soil in Bangladeshi enclaves have sought Indian citizenship.

            Indian political leaders belonging to several parties have made strong allegation regarding several thousand residents in Indian enclaves in Bangladesh being unable to exercise their option freely owing to intimidation by extremist organisations. They have also pointed to a methodological hitch during the joint survey resulting in flawed results. A list of over 5,500 people, who were left out of the purview of the survey, has been submitted to the state government recently. Already, over 2000 of these left out Bangladeshi enclave dwellers who always wanted to opt for the Indian nationality but could not do so during the joint survey in Indian enclaves due to assorted reasons including extremist threats, recently submitted their applications to the Indian authorities praying for Indian citizenship.

            “But nobody knows what will be the fate of those people, who want to quit Indian enclaves and settle in India but failed to enrol their names during the recent census,” said an Indian official. Though the matter was discussed among the officials associated with the Joint Working Group (JWG) in the meeting held in Dhaka on 23^rd July this year, nothing has yet been finalised as to how this section of people will be able to register their names. A group belonging to the United Council for Indian Enclave (UCIE) helped in the collection of applications from those sufferers who want to settle in the Indian part but whose names don’t figure in the joint survey list.

            Members of the India Bangladesh Joint Working Group examined the complaints lodged by Indian politicians against the procedural problems as were faced during the joint survey in Indian enclaves. The survey conducted through 6-16 July, 2015 was part of the Land Boundary Agreement-1974 to exchange the enclaves. Officials of both the countries held a meeting in Dhaka on 23^rd July, 2015 to review and finalize the report as collected during the said joint survey in 162 enclaves. The crucial meeting discussed the modalities for exchanging information including the land records and the respective list of families opting for the two countries.

            Even as S K Chakraborty, the Assistant Registrar General of India and a member of the India-Bangladesh Joint Working Group, claimed that people in the Indian enclaves had no grievances despite reports that they were allegedly deprived of their right to choose their nationality, a human rights organisation has said that it has collected many examples of such deprivation and that it has intimated the matter through letters to the Prime Ministers of both India and Bangladesh. Copies of the same have also been forwarded to the Chiefs of the National Human Rights Commission of both the countries and other Indian officials.

            The Manabadhikar Surakhsha Manch (MASUM), a human rights organisation based in West Bengal, has alleged that the Joint Working Group had not functioned transparently during the survey. ‘They created a few procedural complications to exclude or include names whimsically,’ it alleged. ‘Procedural violations, omissions and commissions of duty have raised questions over the legalities and state’s accountability. It will again put thousands of enclave dwellers in a stateless situation’, they added. MASUM has also urged the authorities concerned to recall that India and Bangladesh both have taken a voluntary pledge before the UN Human Rights Commission to protect and promote human rights for all.

            Subsequent to the enclave exchange, many of these residents who opted for the Indian citizenship have been visiting India for an exposure visit on receipt of a multi-visa for their families from the Indian High Commission to make preparation for permanently settling in India as well as to interact with close friends and relatives here. As their citizenship related formality still remains to be completed, all of them are to pay over Rs. 500 taka against the travel pass issued to them at Changrabandha and Burimari immigration check posts in Cooch Behar as admissible for a foreigner. All these enclave dwellers who have opted for the Indian nationality are supposed to finally leave Bangladesh during November.

            Both India and Bangladesh have agreed to their exposure visit to India as part of their preparations for permanent settlement in India as has also been allowed for those who have opted for Bangladeshi citizenship. All these citizens are being issued travel passes to visit anywhere in India to finalize their settlement plan. As per the agreement, the Indian government will bear all the cost of transportation when they eventually arrive in November from different Indian enclaves, which have now been incorporated into Bangladesh.

            The local administration has been directed to provide with food and shelter for the new Indian nationals. The visits are also being facilitated by a non-governmental organisation called the United Council of Indian Enclave as it has maintained a liaison all along between the new nationals and the administrative officials. During their interactions with the Indian officials, these dwellers have pleaded for taking up the land sale matter with the Bangladeshi government for getting the right price for their lands.

            Having waited over six decades for the establishment of their citizenship rights, these enclave residents still have to grapple with many of the existential problems before finally settling down in India. The foremost among them is to find a reasonable price for their farm and homestead lands. Most of these problems arising out of enclave exchange between the two countries were discussed in detail during an interaction between the delegations of Bangladesh and India at Siliguri in January this year as well as during the Dhaka interactions as mentioned above. The Government of India is said to have earmarked Rs 3000 crores for the liabilities and responsibilities arising out of the exchange of enclaves. The fund shall be used not only for the rehabilitation of the people moving into India but also for carrying out various development works in these enclaves.

            These developmental works and activities will be almost like laying out a virgin country, for no government agency has ever existed in any of these enclaves. Schools, colleges, hospitals, police stations, roads – everything will have to be created for the welfare of the people in them. As per the Notification issued by the State Government, a land survey has been conducted in the erstwhile enclave areas to officially demarcate and delineate their geographical status vis-a-vis bordering Indian areas. In case of small patches of land accrued, these will be integrated into the existing mouzas, the smallest cartographical entity on India’s map. In case of big stretches, e.g. a big enclave, a new mouza will be created. This will be followed by their incorporation into the extant panchayat system.  The new areas will also need to be allocated police stations and post offices. In some cases new police stations or post offices will have to be formed.

            Another tricky area relates to the redistribution of land among the individual owners as per their entitlement as figured out during the joint survey done for the purpose. As they leave for their new country, they also seek corresponding return of their lands as owned in the erstwhile enclaves but have no supporting papers. Most of these residents have lived in enclaves with forged and false identity documents.  

            The basic principle of land allocation namely ‘possession backed by documents’ or ‘documents backed by possession’ may prove tricky, especially if one person’s claim is contested by another. Hence, a big challenge pertains to identity verification of the incoming Indian citizens. The residents in many cases don’t have any legal papers in support of their claims or to prove their identity.  The processing of identities will, therefore, be an onerous task which would require careful handling because the same has serious implication for the national security.

            The government will also need to keep some land aside for the sundry developmental activities including infrastructures, school buildings, anganwadis, health centres, roads, space for electricity lines and water supply. The same would also require the consent of the residents in these areas. The entire rehabilitation work is going to be a long-drawn complicated and humongous task, requiring intricate planning and execution. The Indian government shall also need to factor the concerns of the incoming young citizens whose educational interests would warrant safeguarding. The local administration would have to ensure continuation of their education in India as per their eligibility and requirements.

             The Indian law enforcing agencies including the Border Security Force (BSF) heaved a sigh of relief as the enclaves were finally exchanged between the two countries. According to sources, the Bangladeshi enclaves on the Indian side had become safe havens for the Indian criminals who would often take shelter therein after committing a crime in the Indian Territory. Technically being a foreign territory, the BSF and other Indian officials found it difficult to enter and take any action against these anti-social elements. The Indian law enforcing agencies including BSF and local police authorities are now relieved as they can crack down on the criminals in the enclaves now that these areas have legally come under total Indian control.

            Besides, there are many other issues which need serious attention of the two countries as discussed during the July conclave between the two countries.           The newly introduced quarterly meetings would now be convened on a regular basis at the levels of District Magistrate and Collector of the two countries bordering these enclaves. The flag meetings on a regular basis as per a mutually agreed calendar of the Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB) and BSF have also been institutionalized. The success in the enclaves issue has its lessons for leaders of both the countries. They need to realize that India Bangladesh relations should no longer be held hostage to their domestic politics.

            There are other issues that the two countries need to resolve. They inter alia include poppy cultivation in border areas, cattle smuggling, construction and improvement of land customs station and land port, movement of militants along the border, sharing intelligence to curb the menace of terrorism, women trafficking, illegal arms smuggling, exchange of prisoners languishing in each others’ jails, setting up immigration centres at the border, survey, construction and repair of missing border pillars, exchange of Cadastral Survey records (Some CS records of Bangladeshi Dinajpur district are in Indian South Dinajpur and some CS records of South Dinajpur of West Bengal are in Bangladeshi Dinajpur.), export-import issues, promotion of tourism, border management of common rivers and sharing of their waters including that of Teesta.  A new bus service between the two countries has already started.

            Both India and Bangladesh must continue to show more of the pragmatism that made the exchange of enclaves ultimately possible though it took the two countries 41 years to complete the job of enclave exchange has much to do with the changes in Indo-Bangladesh ties over the years. One hopes that the relationship between the two countries shall only grow stronger on the strength of the recent warmth as emerging in the wake of resolution of the enclave exchange issue. The flagging of a new bus service between the two countries is only one of the many positive breakthroughs waiting to be made as a result of the new-found bonhomie between them.

*The views expressed here are personal and don’t reflect that of the Government.

The Beef Battle: Nation-Building in Danger

                                                                                                *Saumitra Mohan

            I am a Hindu and I love to proclaim as much. My family taught me to relish Hindu non-vegetarian delicacies since my childhood and I continue doing so with lip-smacking panache. In my puerile iconoclastic bid to establish my credentials as an enlightened and liberal Hindu, I have tried my hand at consuming both the Indian political meat namely beef and pork. However, I failed miserably in my foolhardy gastronomic expeditions by throwing up every time I attempted. My own increasing disenchantment with non-vegetarian food notwithstanding, the fact remains that one’s affection for something as basic as food can’t be changed overnight. But as a sovereign citizen of a modern liberal democracy, it is me who has taken all my decisions regarding ways to please my palate.

            So, what has lately become fashionable in this country is not in order and definitely not legitimate. Article 48 of the Indian Constitution says, “...the State shall take steps for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle.” So, the Constitution actually does not talk only about prohibiting slaughter of cows, but also of other milch and draught cattle whose meat is relished by the Hindus. So, those asking for banning beef because it is mentioned in the Constitution should demand equal prohibition for other milch and draught cattle including goat and buffaloes. A country whose citizens’ nutritional and employment status is already compromised just can’t afford to ban meat eating of one or the other kind.

            Pandit Thakur Dass Bhargava who suggested article 48 relating to cow slaughter in the Constituent Assembly had said, “I do not want that, due to its inclusion in the Fundamental Rights, non-Hindus should complain that they have been forced to accept a certain thing against their will.” As the founding fathers of our Constitution did not want to force a decision on citizens, the end result of the debate in the Constituent Assembly was Article 48 in its extant form as one of the Directive Principles of State Policy. The Supreme Court in several cases including Mohd. Hanif Qureshi v. State of Bihar (AIR 1959 SCR 629), Hashumatullah v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Abdul Hakim and others v. State of Bihar (AIR 1961 SC 448) and Mohd. Faruk v. State of Madhya Pradesh has ruled against a total ban on cattle slaughter on grounds of public interest. Though there is a lack of uniformity among provincial laws governing cattle slaughter, no state law explicitly bans the consumption of beef.

            Almost all the Committees and Commissions, formed from time to time, including Cattle Preservation and Development Committee (1947-48), Uttar Pradesh Committee (1948), Nanda Committee on the Prevention of Slaughter of Milch Cattle in India (1954-55), Gosamvardhan Committee (1960) and Special Committee on Preserving High-Yielding Cattle (1961-62) have recommended against the ban on cattle slaughter including beef on one or the other ground. The Nanda Committee felt that ‘measures like legislative ban on slaughter and cruelty or salvage of animals...will only be treating the symptoms and not curing the disease’ and recommended against a total ban on slaughter of cattle. It, inter alia, reasoned that, as India had little fodder and cattle feed, it could only maintain 40 percent of its cattle and, therefore, the remaining 60 percent should be culled.

            As a religion, Hinduism does not prohibit meat eating. Historians claim that ancient Hindus including Vedic Brahmins, Buddhists and even early Jains used to consume meat including beef. Old scriptures including Manusmriti and Arthashastra have been quoted to confirm this. Renowned historian D N Jha, in his book, ‘Myth of the Holy Cow’ has talked extensively about beef eating by ancient Hindus. Historians have suggested that the Hindus stopped eating beef as a cultural assertion and reaction to the presence of beef-eating rulers of the times than for any religious reason.

            Arguably, if beef eating is bad just because cow is treated holy by Hindus, then the same reason hold for many other animals treated as holy or non-eatable by other communities. If bruised sentiments of a section of Hindus could be the ground for banning beef, then eating meat of other animals including chicken, goat, buffaloes, lamb, pig et al should also be banned as they too hurt the sensibilities of the vegetarians. Stretching it further, we should also not eat garlic, onions or tuberous vegetables because the same is forbidden to be eaten by a section of the Hindus and Jains. And if the ground for ban is to stop killing a living being for food, we should actually not be eating any botanical products as they too have life if we were to believe Jagdishchandra Basu. So, if religion be the ground for banning one or the other food item, there would hardly be anything left for us to eat.

            One wonders whether these people approve of ‘animal eating animal’ or a ‘tiger killing a cow’ if we were to continue stretching the argument. After all, as per Hinduism every living being has God in it; so none is supposed to kill and eat anyone for food. Mind you we Hindus believe that nothing happens without God’s desire. So, the loony fringe has to understand that the nature’s food cycle has also been willed and designed by Him. Theologically speaking, if we were to believe that it is the Almighty God who has designed every detail in this universe, then it must be the God who made the human being a carnivore otherwise he would not have created the possibility of humans eating meat product.

            At a time, when we are talking about ‘minimum government, maximum governance’, venturing into prescribing food for the citizens would actually translate into ‘micro-governance’. Important political leaders and intellectuals including the Prime Minister have rightly denounced the intolerant behaviour of a section of Indians including the recent Dadri lynching. However, return of state awards by litterateurs and artistes is not the right approach; the intellectuals should rather speak up against such deviant behaviour by some Indians rather than indulging in tokenism and symbolism because the awards were actually given on behalf of the country that the government represents.

            The intemperate and revolting statements like, ‘beef eaters have no place in this country’ have the potential to balkanize this country because finding a country for more than 20 crore Indians (including many Hindus who eat beef) would be a herculean task. So we are left with no choice but to cut a piece from our body politic to create a new country. Maybe this is the unfinished agenda of partition that these people are referring to. Again, it is such intolerant statements and behaviour, as on display in recent times across the country, which create disaffection in a section of our citizenry and negatively compromise our doddering nation-building process. Thankfully, the ‘loony fringe’ remains what it is namely ‘loony’ and ‘fringe’; the predominant majority still remains embedded in the Constitutional ideals of liberal pluralism to cushion our ‘salad bowl’ culture.

            Amidst all this nonsensical controversies, if the self-proclaimed defender of the faith were to do something for our milch and draught cattle including cows, I would only request them to ensure that this country has more and more scientific slaughter house with hygienic conditions, something we sorely need. Battle of the beef, if at all it is to be waged, could be better fought scientifically and ideologically by proving the benefits of vegetarianism rather than dictating people what they ought to eat. For the moment, we definitely have much greater issues to be preoccupied with. The very fact that we are still mired in such mindless debates only shows that our nation-building project is still far from complete. India’s existence as a nation-state very much depends on the outcome of this ideological churning we are going through.

*The views expressed here are personal and don’t reflect those of the Government.