Tripura
Kanchanpur Subdivision
,
Jampui Hills
,
North Tripura
Published :
Jan 2021
|
Updated :
Mizo, Bengali Organisations in Tripura Oppose Large-scale Resettlement of Brus
Reported by
Sarup Sinha
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
35000
People affected
2019
Year started
Land area affected
Households affected
35000
People Affected
2019
Year started
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Land Use
Reason/Cause of conflict
Communal/Ethnic Conflict
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban and Rural
Ended
Sector
Land Use
Reason/Cause of conflict
Communal/Ethnic Conflict
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban and Rural
Ended
1
Summary

Tripuras current state of political turmoil is marked by a divide between its three major communities the Mizos and the Bengalis on one hand and the Bru tribe on the other. The root of the dispute lies in a recent decision to permanently settle 35,000 Bru migrants from Mizoram in Tripura as part of the quadripartite agreement signed among the Centre, the Governments of Tripura and Mizoram and the Bru leaders of Tripura on January 16, 2020. As per the new agreement, the Brus would be granted, among other things, equal political rights and social entitlements in Tripura. Each Bru household will receive a plot of land, two years of ration support, a onetime cash deposit of INR 4 lakh and a monthly cash support of INR 5,000 for two years. The agreement was signed with the hope that it would resolve a twodecadeold crisis involving the Bru tribal community residing as refugees in Tripura. At least 35,000 Brus were displaced from Mizoram in the wake of intense ethnic clashes between the Brus and the majority Mizo tribe in 1997. Since then, the Brus have migrated to Tripura and have been living in various relief camps in the state. The Centre and state governments made nine attempts to send the Brus back and succeeded to repatriate 8,573 Brus to Mizoram in the first attempt in 2017. Subsequent attempts were stalled by Mizo nonprofits, such as the Young Mizo Association, in 2011, 2012 and 2015. The Brus themselves have also refused to go back, fearing persecution at the hands of the Mizos. The agreement has had mixed reaction so far. While the political leaders involved in the agreement have hailed it as historic, the reaction of various organisations representing the Mizos and the Bengalis in Tripura, especially in the north of the state, have been lukewarm. The Mizo and Bengali populations inhabit Kanchanpur subdivision in North Tripura district, with the Mizos being concentrated in the villages of Jampui Hills. It is here that active protests against the resettlement of Brus have been staged since the start of 2020. In February and March, Nagarik Suraksha Mancha (NMS), an organisation formed in the aftermath of an attack on the Bengalis in Kanchanpur in December 2019, and the Mizo convention, an organisation representing the Mizos in Tripura, joined hands to collectively oppose the resettlement plan in the Bengali and Mizo inhabited areas of the district. They have staged multiple protests, road blockades and hunger strikes to draw the governments attention. These organisations argue that the local people have struggled to adjust with the Brus owing to their antisocial behaviour and fear massive social disturbances may arise from their resettlement. They also consider the Brus a threat to their demography and scarce natural resources. Mizoram Chief Minister P. Zoramthanga has requested his Tripura counterpart Biplab Kumar Deb to reconsider and cancel the proposal of resettling the Bru migrants in and around Jampui Hills. He highlighted the existing ethnic tension between the Brus and the Mizos, suggesting that their settlement in Mizodominant areas will defeat the purpose of the agreement. Further, the opposing parties claim that no prior discussion was held with the local organisations, that no consultation took place and that the interests of the local inhabitants were not taken into consideration during the land verification process for the resettlement. Various proMizo and proBengali groups have united under a collective called the Joint Movement Committee (JMC), comprising members of the Mizo Convention, NMS and other indigenous communities of Kanchanpur subdivisions. On July 21, 2020, they submitted a memorandum to the state government with their proposals: first, the number of Bru families to be settled in the Kanchanpur and Panisagar subdivisions should not exceed 500; second, the Brus must be settled only in six areas identified by the JMC Sakhan Hills, BandarimaPushporampara, Subalbari, Chaigarhpur, KalarambariBandarima in Kanchanpur subdivision and Kukinala in Panisagar subdivision; and third, at least a few members of the JMC must monitor the resettlement process. The JMC has clarified that they do not reject the resettlement of the Brus in Tripura in toto. Their only condition is that the resettlement plan ought to meet the criteria set forth by them if longterm peace is to be maintained in the district. Susanta Bikas Barua, JMC convenor, clarified his position by saying, We are not against the rehabilitation. All we are saying is distribute the burden of refugees across the eight districts of Tripura because our areas do not have the space or resources to accommodate more than 500 families." After a brief lull in protests during the lockdown period, agitation resumed in the Panisagar area in North Tripura district in November 2020. On November 18, the issue took a violent turn. A resident of Kanchanpur was seriously injured in an attack by a Bru refugee, after which the JMC called for an indefinite shutdown in Kanchanpur. A blockade on the National Highway was also enforced. On November 22, a contingent of police and paramilitary allegedly opened fire against the JMC in an altercation over the withdrawal of the blockade. Two persons died. Inquiry into the deaths and compensation to the families are still incomplete. In their defense, the police explained that the protest had taken a violent turn and the agitation had started to escalate despite repeated warnings to the crowd to disperse. On the same day, a fireman named Biswajit Debbarma was lynched by a mob allegedly comprising the protesters. The lynching provoked strong criticism from various quarters, such as the Indigenous People's Front of Tripura and The Indigenous Progressive Regional Alliance, who support the resettlement process. The government has ordered a magisteriallevel probe into the lynching.
On November 27, one Litan Nath was abducted and his decomposed body was recovered 50 days later. This again led to the JMC protesting, claiming that the Bru National Liberation Front is responsible for the murder. On December 1, the Brus refused to be settled across the state and demanded that at least 50 per cent of the people from their community be resettled in Kanchanpur. The Tripura government had ordered completion of the resettlement process within 260 days starting January 16, 2020, but the COVID19 pandemic and subsequent lockdown had significantly delayed the process. Land for resettlement is yet to be allotted, and the process if likely to take at least six months to complete, according to experts. As of now, the revenue department has sent a proposal to the Shillongbased North East Reserve Forest Office seeking approval to make the land unreserved.  Meanwhile, oneoff incidences of violence between the local populace and the Brus continue

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for rehabilitation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

1. Expediting the resettlement process 2. Resettlement only in areas approved in the quadripartite agreement.

Region Classification

Urban and Rural

Type of Land

Both

Forest and Non-Forest

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Council, Revenue Department, District administration of North Tripura, Sub-division administration of Kanchanpur and Panisagar, Ministry of Home Affairs

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Yes

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Indigenous People's Front of Tripura, Bharatiya Janata Party, Chief Minister of Mizoram, Indian National Congress Party, Young Mizo Association, National Liberation Front of Tripura, Bru National Liberation Front

5
Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Legal Supporting Documents

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Author
Reported by
Sarup Sinha

Sarup is a researcher and doctoral student in Political Science at the North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong. His research interests lie in the area of ethnic and land conflicts, political ecology and development and urban spaces of Northeast India. He has a Masters’ degree in Development Studies from the Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati. He has previously done research/internships with NABARD, Oxford Microfinance Initiative (renamed Oxford Development Consultancy) and CSDS (Lokniti Programme).

Show more work
Latest updates
Nagaon
Assam

Farmers in Assam resist land acquisition for solar plant, beaten by police

Surat
Gujarat

Surat farmers claim fertile land re-included in Gujarat's development plan without consent

Gadchiroli
Maharashtra

Villagers in Gadchiroli campaign to shut down Surjagarh iron ore mine

Biswanath
Assam

Encroachment, land dispute pose threat to newly designated Behali Wildlife Sanctuary in Assam

Krishnagiri
Tamil Nadu

Residents in Krishnagiri protest against takeover of land by SIPCOT

Lower Siang
Arunachal Pradesh

Tension in Arunachal's Lower Siang over Likabali-Durpai road project amid boundary disputes

Kanyakumari
Tamil Nadu

Tamil Nadu revives plan to construct Kanyakumari Port despite protests by fisherfolk

Koraput
Odisha

Bauxite mining at Mali Parbat in Koraput seeks to displace and disrupt local livelihoods

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for rehabilitation

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us