View / Download - HRBA Portal

Towards Inclusive Governance: Promoting the Participation of Disadvantaged Groups in Asia-PacificDespite the limited degree of recognition ofAdivasi customary land rights under the CHTRegulation and subsequent legislation, majorproblems remain with regard to the enjoyment ofthese rights, particularly the practice of stateauthorities of disposing of Adivasis communitylands (including forests, graveyards, cemeteries andindividuallyheld homestead) as khas land, anddistributing it as part of a scheme of land reform.Customary land and resource rights are also oftenrelegated to mere usufructs rather than fullownership rights. Rights over hunting, trappingand fishing are similarly ignored.PlainsThe special status of Adivasi-owned lands isexpressly recognized in Section 97 of the EastBengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act (EBSATA)of 1950, which prohibits the transfer of such landto ‘non-aboriginals’ without prior permission of theRevenue Officer (usually the DC). Based on thisprovision, a convention developed in colonialtimes, and observed by the DC’s office in some ofthe northern districts (such as Dinajpur,Mymensingh and Rajshahi), required priorpermission of a civil society organization for thesale of land by an Adivasi to a non-Adivasi.These provisions are now regularly flouted,particularly in the cases of Adivasis who areconstrained for economic reasons or threats ofviolence to sell their land. Cases of forcibledispossession are widely reported among theRakhaines, Santals, Oraons and Garos), resultingfrom land grabbing by powerful members of theBengali majority, or by major economic interests,including those involved in ongoing construction ordevelopment projects.In addition, the abuse of the Vested Property Act,1974 (earlier the Enemy Property Act 1965) hasbeen a major cause for dispossession ofAdivasi traditional lands in various parts of theplains. A land study, carried out in 1940, showedthat the Garos, Hajong and Koch had owned 850acres, but that by 1990 Hajongs owned no moreland; the Garos only had about 50 acres left, and allthe others had been dispossessed.Plains Adivasis face different problems dependingon where they live. In the south-east, around themangrove forests of the Sunderbans where shrimpcultivation is widespread, many Adivasis are nowbeing dispossessed of their lands and onlyreceiving nominal compensation. In some areas,following illegal dispossession of governmentownedwetlands by powerful interests, fishermenfrom the Bagdi community and the general publicalike have no access to such areas, and are forced topay tolls to enter the area. Many instances ofland-grabbing are accompanied by false casesagainst the dispossessed, as well as physicalintimidation and harassment, but few affectedpeople are able to obtain legal redress.The government has not only failed to recognizecustomary/prescriptive rights to land in the plainsbut has continued to consider them as khas landsand has been distributing plots of land as part of ascheme of land reform, which may or may notbenefit Adivasis. In general, it fails to take actionagainst breaches of the EBSATA of 1950 for the saleand transfer of Adivasi lands to ‘non-aboriginals’(particularly when Adivasis are constrainedthrough economic need or under threat ofviolence). The absence of a one-stop mechanism,such as the CHT Land Commission establishedunder the 1997 Peace Accord, further inhibitsaddressing long-standing disputes in the plains.30