Why Himanta's enthusiasm over Land Act, Assam Accord is raising eyebrows

Assam’s political theatre is in a ferment following Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma's professed zeal in implementing the Assam Accord, with particular emphasis on the rights of the indigenous people.

The Assam Accord was signed in 1985 by the Centre, the Assam government, the All Assam Students Union and the All Assam Gana Sangram Parishad. But many of its key points are yet to be enforced. Now, Himanta is eager to implement them, based on the recommendations of the Biplab Sharma Committee.

The recommendations of the Biplab Sharma committee, constituted in 2019 by the Centre, describe how Clause 6 of the Assam Accord — which seeks to provide constitutional, legislative and administrative safeguards to the Assamese people — can be implemented.

On Thursday (October 17), a five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court will pronouce verdict on a bunch of petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act introduced in 1985 that extends the benefit of citizenship to illegal migrants from Bangladesh who settled in Assam after entering the country between January 1, 1966 and March 25, 1971.

In this background, the Himanta government's keenness to implement the Accord, and to amend the state's land laws, in a supposed bid to secure the land rights of the indigenous people, is raising eyebrows. 

Land legislation controversies

The autumn session of the Assam Assembly passed several Bills, one of which was an amendment to the Land Act, hailed by the state government as a historical milestone.

Watch: 'Assam Miya' comment | Himanta, Yogi showing signs of BJP desperation? 

The new Assam Land and Revenue Regulation (Second Amendment) Bill, 2024 contains an amendment to the 1886 legislation with a new chapter that provides protection to land possessed by indigenous people in and around iconic heritage institutions. It restricts the sale and purchase of land within the 5-km jurisdiction of such 'protected areas' amongst ‘original inhabitants’.

The 'institutions' include buildings or artifacts that are at least 250 years old, reflecting the socio-cultural and religious ethos of Assam. 'Original inhabitants' are defined as those who have been living in that area for at least three generations prior to the commencement of the Act.

Majuli left out of radar

Sibsagar MLA Akhil Gogoi of Raijor Dal urged the Chief Minister to bring the districts of upper Assam like Sibsagar, Jorhat, Golaghat, Dibrugarh and Tinsukia within the ambit of the new law.

Also read | Assam eviction firing: Deadly cocktail of fraud, govt apathy, procedural lapses

The entire district of Majuli, a river island in the Brahmaputra and the home of Vaishnavite monasteries (Satras), is an ideal candidate to be considered a ‘protected area’. But, it has been kept out of the Act’s purview till November.

Meanwhile, Himanta's wife Riniki Bhuyan Sarma allegedly purchased 18 bighas of land in Majuli months before the Assembly passed the Bill. Reportedly, Ekaa Estates LLP, a real estate company owned by Riniki Sarma and their son Nandil Biswa Sarma, bought that land parcel. 

When asked, Himanta hit back saying until the law is enacted, anyone can buy land anywhere barring in the protected tribal belts and blocks.

Row over Majuli

During a debate on the Land Amendment Bill, Congress MLA Bharat Narah raised the concern of the Mising people in Majuli, the largest tribe residing in the river island. A majority of the tribe does not have permanent land holding, he pointed out.

Himanta declared that Majuli would be brought under the purview of the Act, but only after November. He appealed to the people of Majuli to study the law ahead of its implementation. 

Also read | Assam’s Muslim population now 40%, matter of life and death: Himanta

Raijor Dal spokesperson Rasel Hussain told The Federal: “So, when Majuli is kept out for some time, can anyone be sure that the Chief Minister’s family won’t buy more land there?” He, however, welcomed the idea of protecting indigenous people's land.

Long-planned legislation 

The new law has been in the making for long. Since becoming the Chief Minister in 2021, Himanta has mentioned it on several occasions. In November 2022, while launching Mission Basundhara 2, a land records updation shceme, Sarma spoke about the need to act tough on encroachers into indigenous people’s land.

Last year, during an event marking the 575th birth anniversary of Srimanta Sankardeva, a Vaishnavite saint-scholar, Himanta made a similar proclamation. 

Also read | Old BJP vs New BJP conflict eroding saffron party's strength in Assam

More recently, he said that land transactions between Hindus and Muslims would need the CM's nod. He is alleged to have mentioned life-imprisonment for ‘Land Jihad’.

Opposition leader Debabrat Saikia told The Federal that the government's land amendment law is a political gimmick. "Everyone knows the indigenous people don't have land patta (title). Rather, the Chief Minister is trying to play the Hindu-Muslim card on the sensitive land issue of Assam," said Saikia.

Assam Accord is back in news

The Chief Minister's zeal in implementing several points of the Assam Accord — as recommended by the Biplab Sharma committee — has also drawn sharp criticism. The Accord was signed in 1985, marking the end of the Assam Movement against "foreigners".

The recommendations of the Biplab Sharma committee, constituted in 2019 by the Centre, described how Clause 6 of the Assam Accord — which seeks to provide constitutional, legislative and administrative safeguards to the Assamese people — can be implemented.

On September 7, Himanta announced that of the 67 recommendations of the Biplab Sharma committee, 52 will be implemented by April 2025. Those that come under the state’s ambit of power will be put into force, he said, later cutting the number of recommendations to be implemented to 40.

This has brought the spotlight on Clause 6, a key point whose non-implementation is being blamed on politics.

What Clause 6 says

The Assam Movement, in 1979-85, was based on identifying bohiragoto, or outsiders, with a strong emphasis on Bangladesh migrants. The movement took a toll of 850 lives. The Assam Accord was signed with March 25, 1971 as the cut-off — those who came in on or after the cutoff date are considered foreigners.

Speaking to The Federal, Gauhati High Court lawyer and rights’ activist Santanu Borthakur said: "Immigrants who came in before the cutoff date would get all the rights as Indian citizen. The Assamese people sought constitutional protection for their culture, language and identity, which was culminated in the Assam Accord”.

Clause 6 of the Assam Accord says: "Constitutional, legislative and administrative safeguards, as may be appropriate, shall be provided to protect, preserve and promote the cultural, social, linguistic identity and heritage of the Assamese people.”

In July 2019, the Centre constituted a 14-member committee chaired by retired Justice Biplab Sharma, comprising other judges, retired bureaucrats, AASU leaders, intellectuals and journalists. It was tasked with giving recommendations to implement Clause 6. As safeguarding Assamese people is the main thrust of the clause, the committee had to define who are the ‘Assamese people’ eligible for safeguards. 

The committee proposed January 1, 1951 as the cutoff date for defining immgirants as 'Assamese', while suggesting that the definition should also include indigenous tribals, other indigenous communities of Assam and Indian citizens residing in Assam’s territory on or before the cutoff date.

Gogoi’s criticism

Lurinjyoti Gogoi, the president of Asam Jatiya Parishad (AJP) who was also a member of the Biplab Sharma committee, has questioned the entire exercise pronounced by Himanta.

Also read | Assam comes face to face with an old question: Who is an Assamese

He said the committee was formed by the Centre, which had never accepted the recommendations. How could the state government then implement them, he asked.

The Congress has also questioned Himanta's declarations. It wants to know how the Assam Accord can be implemented now with the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in place. It has accused the Chief Minister of misleading the people.

The Asom Gana Parishad (AGP), the political party that emerged out of the Assam Movement, had held power twice over the decades, but never implemented Clause 6 of the Accord. The Congress government led by Tarun Gogoi between from 2001 to 2016, in which Himanta was a minister, did not implement it, either.

Lawyer Borthakur argued that picking up some recommendations while keeping the rest in cold storage will go against the spirit of the committee’s recommendations and the Assam Accord.

Two definitions of Assamese?

At a press address on September 25, Himanta said there are two definitions of Assamese — one a general definition, and the other based on Clause 6, with the cutoff date of January 1951. According to him, those who were born in Assam and embraced Assamese language and culture (like some Marwaris and Bengalis) are Assamese, but the Clause 6 cutoff date for 'foreigners' stays.

The Opposition contested this. Congress state president Bhupen Borah asked how 'Assamese' can have two definitions.

The Biplab Sharma committee put forward several recommendations including reservation for Assamese in Parliament, state assembly and local bodies. The report was submitted to the  Sarbananda Sonowal-led Assam government in February 2020. It was then placed in cold storage. The Union Home Ministry, which constituted the committee, never accepted its report. 

Out of the blue, on September 7, Himanta said that recommendations that come under the ambit of the state government wll be implemented by him by April 2025. 

CM criticised

Lawyer Borthakur said Clause 6 can be implemented only with a constitutional amendment. "Clause 6 of the Assam Accord provides constitutional, legislative and administrative safeguards to Assamese people. These cannot be seen separately. For legislative safeguards like reservation of seats in assembly, panchayat and the Lok Sabha, constitutional amendment is necessary. The Biplab Sharma committee proposed the inclusion of Section 371 (B) for the necessary constitutional amendment. If some of the recommendations are picked up while keeping rest out, it will go against the spirit of the committee’s recommendations and also the Assam Accord," he added.

“If the Chief Minister is dedicated to the cause, he should commit to take forward the constitutional amendments first, without which talking about implementing the Assam Accord is useless,” he said.