Jyotirindra Bodhipriya Larma, appointed to head the Regional Council in 1999, told AFP in an interview in April 2000 that he felt betrayed and frustrated by the slow pace of implementation of the 1997 agreement. Land disputes and land issues were again presented as one of the biggest problems. According to Larma, “A sense of frustration is again growing among the tribesmen as the government is yet to comply with the major conditions of the treaty, including settlement of land disputes.”¹

The first Chairperson of the Land Commission was appointed in 1999, a year after the signing of the Accord. Mired in the complexity of the land situation in the CHT, the Land Commission was not functional. Its mandate and responsibilities were, in many ways, incompatible. For example, the commission was mandated to settle disputes over who is currently entitled to tracts of land where indigenous inhabitants are said to have been displaced decades earlier, many without legal titles. Meanwhile, tens of thousands of Bengali settlers, who had been given a legal title to land in the CHT by the government, could not be expected to give up their familiesÕ land. Even if the Land Commission was able to legally annul land titles held by Bengalis, which the government, by all indications, would not allow to happen, there still existed no real enforcement mechanism to make them vacate the property. The police and civil administration of the CHT remained in the hands of the Bengalis and the military.

Reflecting the importance of land issues to the indigenous population of the CHT, one of the main themes of the 1997 Accord was land restitution and land use. Over the course of the last several decades, the indigenous peoples of the CHT had lost much of their ancestral lands as a result of armed violence forcing them to flee, forceful evictions, occupation by the military, and government-sponsored Bengali migration and settlement.

Implementation should be evaluated in light of the scope of powers over land issues transferred to the Council by the CHT Accord. Parts 1, 2, 3, and 4 of Amendment 26 were all changed in the Hill Council Acts of 1998. To understand the scope of land issues that the Accord transferred to the CHT, a few legislative changes should be discussed in detail.

The original Rangamati HDC Act of 1989 read as follows:

“Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, no land within the boundaries of Rangamati Hill District shall be given in settlement without the prior approval of the Council and such land cannot be transferred to a person who is not a domicile of the said district without such approval: Provided that, this provision shall not be applicable in case of areas within the Protected and Reserved forests, Kaptai Hydroelectricity Project, Betbunia Earth Satellite Station, land transferred in Government and Public interest, land or forest required for state purposes.”

Act number 9 passed in 1998 substantially changed this section with the addition and deletion of various phrases. The new section now reads as follows:

“64. Restriction on land transfer. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force- (a) no land including the khasland (sic) suitable for settlement within the jurisdiction of Rangamati Hill District shall be leased out, settled with, purchased, sold out or transferred otherwise with the prior approval of the Council; Provided that, this provision shall not be applicable in case of Reserved forests, Kaptai Hydroelectricity Project area, Betbunia Earth Satellite Station, state-owned industries land recorded with the Government. (b) No land, hills and forests under the control and jurisdiction of the Council shall be acquired or transferred without consultation and consent of the Council. (2) The Council shall supervise and control the functions of Headmen, Chainmen, Amins, Surveyors, Kanungos and Assistant Commissioners (land). (3) Fringe land in Kaptai lake (sic) shall be settled with the original owners on the priority basis (sic).”

Most notable among these changes were the new categories of land transactions that had come under the control of the Tribal Council. The original 1989 Act stated that no land could be “given in settlement” without the approval of the Council and if such land were given, the recipient had to be a domicile of the CHT (not a migrant). The new language inserted from the 1997 Peace Accord essentially put all land transactions, even private commercial transactions between CHT residents, under the control of the Council. Under the new language, no land could be bought, sold, or leased anywhere in the Chittagong Hill Tracts without the approval of the Land Commission. The 1997 Accord established a special Land Commission with a mandate to settle the land disputes, including the authority to deny rights of property ownership that were gained illegality. There were no reports of the Land Commission meeting in this year.

Another official government document issued by the Ministry of Health (31/2008/713) required tribal residents to show evidence of a permanent resident certificate issued by both the “Circle Chief” and the “Deputy Commissioner.” In contrast, Bengalis needed only to show one permanent resident certificate, which had to be issued by the DC. Hence, this suggests that the government had interpreted and implemented the statutes in such a way as to make it more difficult for a tribal to get a permanent residency certificate than a Bengali settler. A tribal person was not legally treated as a permanent resident if they only had a certificate issued by the Circle Chief.

The Regional Council unsuccessfully fought for the exclusive right to issue permanent resident certificates for over a decade, arguing that the Accord put this power in the hands of the HDCs.²

No developments observed this year.

No developments observed this year.

No developments observed this year.

No developments observed this year.

No developments observed this year.

No developments observed this year.