IDETNTITY CRISIS AMONG THE ASSAMESE PEOPLE

Hira Charan Narjinari

A strange and most interesting debate with respect to the definition of Assamese people that is now going on in Assam is certainly a rarest of the rare episodes in the history of any humankind during the last hundred years. Why are the Assamese-speaking people so keen to define the term Assamese? When the language called Assamese is constitutionally recognised as one of the national languages of India since the time of the coming of the Constitution of India into force on 26^th January 1950 then why are there such deep apprehensions among the Assamese about their own security as a race? In fact, the older Assamese political leaders were so defiant of the contemporary events that they ignored the prophecy of C.S. Mullan when he prophesied saying, “It is sad but by no means improbable that in another thirty years Sibsagar district will be the only part of Assam in which an Assamese will find himself at home”. Many Assamese scholars made mockery of his prophecy. However they failed to perceive the actual meaning of the prophecy and considered themselves as the strongest nation in the area assimilating other communities into Assamese-speaking community which has now proved disastrous for their own identity.

The All Assam Students’ Union (AASU), established in January 1967, smelt something fishy in the voter’s list in 1979 which drove them to agitation against illegal immigrants.  After a 6 year (1979-1985)  long agitation, a Memorandum of Settlement known popularly as Assam Accord was signed in the presence of the then Prime Minister of India Rajiv Gandhi on 15 August 1985 between All Assam Students’ Union (AASU), Government of India and Government of Assam on the issue of foreigner’s problem. The Assam Accord contains 15 Clauses out of which Clause 6 is the most important one. It states about safeguarding the Assamese people constitutionally, legislatively and administratively and preserving and promoting the culture, social, linguistic identity and heritage of the Assamese people. 

About thirty years have elapsed after signing the Assam Accord but till date Clause 6 of the Accord could not be implemented in the absence of common definition of the term Assamese People as spelt out in Clause 6 of the Accord. There is no doubt about it that finding a common definition of the term Assamese People is very intricate and the road may not be so smooth so as to arrive at an ultimate conclusion. The multi-ethnic, the multi-lingual and the multi-cultural characteristics of the State of Assam is though unique but the Assamese people could not gratify different ethnic groups the way they should have been gratified.  In the 1891 Census it was stated that as many as 167 different languages were returned and in the 1901 Census it was reported that in the Province of Assam, Assamese was spoken by only 22 per cent while Bengali was spoken by 48 per cent. However, after independence, Assamese became the language of the new State of Assam.  In spite of being a dominant linguistic group, the Assamese people feared that unless constitutional, legislative and administrative safeguards are extended to them they would be overwhelmed by non-Assamese people.

Recently the issue for determining the definition of the Assamese People rocked the Assam Assembly on 3^rd March 2015 when the Speaker Pranab Gogoi recommended, after consultations with 53 different organisations, that the year 1951 be taken as the cut off period and the National Register of Citizens (NRC), 1951, be taken as the basis for the definition of the Assamese People for the purpose of reservation of seats and constitutional safeguards as required by the Assam Accord.[The Hindu, 1 April 2015]. The members of Asom Gana Parishad, Bharatiya Janata Party and the Bodoland People’s Front backed the Speaker’s definition of Assamese People and insisted that the Speaker’s recommendation be treated as a recommendation of the House. 

NRC was prepared in 1951 after the Census of 1951. The Register contains particulars of all the persons enumerated during the 1951 Census. In other words, the Register contains details of persons irrespective of caste, tribe, creed, language and religion. If so, then in what way NRC 1951 is going to help determine the definition of Assamese People? Will Bengalis – both Hindus and Muslims – love to be defined as Assamese? 

Meanwhile, the Assam Sahitya Sabha stated that those Indian nationals who irrespective of community, language, religion and place of origin, accept Assamese language as their mother tongue or their second or third language are the Assamese people. This does not appear to be the appropriate definition of Assamese people.

According to AASU and 25 other organisations, the word “Assamese” in Clause 6 of the Assam Accord of 1985 means all indigenous communities and all indigenous Assamese-speaking groups of the State of Assam.  Bodo Sahitya Sabha has suggested replacement of the word Assamese by the phrase indigenous people of Assam”. According to Dhirendra Nath Chakravartty, a veteran journalist and former President of Kamrup Mahanagar Zilla Sahitya Sabha, “People from all the castes and the ethnic groups that had figured in the census books from 1901 to 1951 and the communities like the Gariyas and Mariyas as well as the tea-garden tribes should be treated as Assamese people.”

Phrases like indigenous people of Assam, indigenous communities and indigenous Assamese-speaking groups do not appear to be appropriate to define Assamese People. The very term Indigenous Peoples is confusing because most people of the world are “indigenous” to their countries in the sense of having been born into them or having descended from people who were born into them. Indigenous peoples are clearly native to their countries in this sense too, but they also make another claim, namely that they were the first and are still there and so have rights of prior occupancy to their lands.

The government of India does not accept marginal peoples of India to be called by the term “indigenous”. The government opines that most of the peoples of Indian subcontinent have been there for thousands of years and hence none can reasonably be singled out as indigenous. The Constitution of India rather calls the marginal peoples of India as scheduled tribe and not as indigenous peoples.

In fact, there is no universal definition of indigenous peoples. However, for practical purposes the commonly accepted understanding of the term is that provided by Jose R. Martinez Cobo, Special Rapporteur, United Nations Economic and Social Council, in his Study on the Problem of Discrimination against Indigenous Peoples, June 1982. The working definition reads as follows:

“Indigenous communities, peoples and nations are those which, having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of the societies now prevailing on those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal system.”

In the light of the above definition, the Bodos and their cognates can only be considered Indigenous Peoples. Before the arrival of the so-called Aryans, Brahmaputra Valley was already under the occupation of the Bodos. In other words, when the Aryans arrived in ancient Assam they referred to the Bodos and their cognates of ancient Assam as Kiratas, Mlecchas, Asuras and Danavas. It was clear that these peoples were natives to ancient Assam.

The conquering peoples like the Aryans and the Ahoms were racially, ethnically and culturally different from the Tibeto-Burman Bodo and other cognate tribes who in the course of time were subordinated by the invaders. The Bodos speak a language which is entirely different from the Assamese language spoken by a majority of the population in the area. Bodo culture invariably differs from the ‘mainstream’ Assamese. Bodo language belongs to the Tibeto-Burman family while Assamese is of Indo-Aryan origin. More than a decade ago Bodo was called a dialect or an unclassified language. Bodo is now one of the national languages of India because it was adopted in the Eighth Schedule to the Constitution of India in 2003. Interestingly, in April 2014, Paramananda Rajbongshi the then vice president of Axom Xahitya Xabha sternly warned all the dignitaries and administrators of BTAD saying that insult of Assamese language is intolerable. He further said that Assamese is immortal and hence Assamese language has to be practiced as a State language along with developing Bodo language. This sadly demonstrates the Assamese intolerance towards other languages. The learned Mr. Rajbongshi may not be aware of the fact that Bodo language precedes Assamese language and that when the Bodo language was spoken in northern Bengal and north-east India, the Assamese caste and their language were not even born at that time.

It is accepted by scholars that the term Assam originated only with the coming of the Shan invaders to ancient Assam. “The word ‘Assamese’, says B. Kakati, is an English one based on the anglicised form ‘Assam’ from the native word “Asam”, which in its turn is connected with the Shans who invaded the Brahmaputra Valley in the 13^th century. Though the Shan invaders called themselves “Tai” they came to be referred to as Āsam, Asām and Acam by the indigenous people of the province. [ B. Kakati, ‘The Assamese Language’, in Aspects of Early Assamese Literature, Ed. 1953, p.1]. The Mughal historian who accompanied Mir Jumla in his expedition to Assam during the second half of the 17^th century A.D. refers to the Ahoms as “Asamiyans”. If the name Assam originated from the name Ahom, then it is reasonable to say that the name Assam and her language called Assamese began taking shape only after the arrival of the Ahoms. Shall we then take it for granted that the Ahoms are the actual Assamese People? Furthermore, the Ahoms invaded Assam and hence according to the construction of the working definition of indigenous peoples they cannot be called indigenous in the true sense of the term.  

An interesting conversation between Hilary Pais and his mother-in-law of Tezpur on who Assamese is may be cited here which will throw some idea about Assamese people. His mother-in-law was not an expert and emotionally involved with the definition of Assamese. But her replies are interesting to note. Pais asked his mother-in-law – who is Assamese? She replied, - “Ami Axomiya” – “we are Assamese”, “Ami Axomiya kom” – “We speak Assamese”.  What about Purna Narayan Sinha? She replies, - “Koch manuh, Axomiya koi”- he is a Koch who speaks Assamese. What about Attaur Rahman and his family? She replies, Mia manuh, Bongali koi – they are Musalman people who speak Assamese. What about Bahadur Basumatary? She replies, - Kochari manuh, Bodo koi – he is a Kachari who speaks Bodo. About Bishnu Rabha, she said, - Bishnu Rabha is a Kochari who speaks Rabha”.  From this it is clear that Axomiya are entirely different from the Koch, the Muslim, the Rabha, the Kachari, etc.

The Bodos have already declared that they are not Assamese. A song to this effect has already been composed which starts with Jwng nwnga Asomiya, Dabung jwngkhou Asomiya (We are not Assamese, call us not Assamese) which has become most popular among the Bodos. Recently, the Koch Rajbansis have also declared that they are not Assamese. Tomorrow all the Muslim population will say that they are Bengalis and not Assamese. Bengali Hindus, Hindi-speaking peoples, Nepalese, Santals, Adivasis of tea gardens, and all the Mongoloid peoples living in Assam, I am afraid, will not certainly be eager to bury their own ethnic identities dissolving themselves into Assamese ethnic group. In the long run, there will be a handful of Assamese-speaking community who would be found as prophesied by Mullan only in Sibsagar. And at the same time, Assamese language will be reduced to a minority language.

Instead of wasting time on the definition of Assamese People, we may seek a solution by changing the name Assam into KAMRUP which finds echo in Dr. Rajendra Prasad’s words, the First President of India, while speaking about the extension of the newly framed Constitution. He said, .....”a constitution for a democratic Republic which extends from Kashmir to Cape Comorin, from Kathiawar to Coconada and from Cuttack to Kamrup.”[O.P Aggarawala & S.K. Aiyar, The Constitution of India, 1^st Edition, 1950]. This will be in keeping with the region’s historical past as well as move past separatist debates on ethnic identities in the region. 

SOME THOUGHTS ON THE ORIGIN OF THE KALITAS OF ASSAM

                                                                     Hira Charan Narjinari

A few Assamese scholars like Kaliram Medhi, Kanaklal Barua, P.C. Choudhury, etc., tried to identify races like Colubae, Kudutai, Kalatiai as mentioned by the Greek writers in their works that relate India with the Kalitas of Assam. Some scholars even tried to establish the fact that the kings of the Naraka line of ancient Assam were Kalitas by race. One scholar claimed that as Assam is the home of the Kalitas the civilisation of Assam is predominantly Kalita civilisation. This study is, therefore, undertaken to find out whether these scholars’ claims are reasonable or not.

As to the racial origin of caste in the Brahmaputra Valley, E.A. Gait has clearly stated in the Census Report for 1891 in the following words:

“Now, what is the present position of caste in the Brahmaputra Valley? We have the Brahman and the Kalita, and we have also the different race castes, that is to say, we have the castes of Manu, except that the Kalita takes the place of the Kshettriya, Vaisya and Sudra. The modern profession castes, which have taken the place of the Kshettriya, Vaisya and Sudra in other parts of India, are none of them found here. There are, of course, gardeners, barbers, potters, blacksmiths, etc., but the persons following these occupations do not constitute separate castes. The oilman is generally Kewat, the potter a Kalita, a Kewat, or a Chandal, the barber is usually a Kalita, and so for all the rest. The profession castes are non-existent.”

This was the position of caste system in the Brahmaputra Valley during the Census in 1891. In other words, caste rigidity was not found in Assam even towards the end of the 19^th century. We have noticed above that the Kalitas performed the duty of a Kshatriya, of a Vaisya and of a Sudra and they were generally potters and usually barbers.

Now, writing about the Koch people B.H. Hodgson in 1849 conisdered the Kalitas as one of the divisions of the Koches. He says, “In Assam they are divided into Kamthali and Madai or Shara, and  Kolita or Kholta, and in Rangpur, &c., into Rajbansi and Koch. Their first priests were Deoshi, their next Kolita or Kholta, and their last, the Brahmanas or Mullahs.”[On the Origin, Location, Numbers, Creed, Customs, Characters and Condition of the Koch, Bodo and Dhimal People, JASB Vol. xviii, 1849, p. 706]. Referring to this statement of Hodgson, E. T. Dalton states that no one who has studied the physical characteristics of the Kalitas can for a moment suppose them to be relations of the Bodo, or doubt their distinct Aryan origin. [Descriptive Ethnology of Bengal, 1872, p.79].

As to the origin of the Kalitas, E.T. Dalton in 1872 said that no one knows how they got to Assam or where they came from. However, he infers that the Kalitas of Assam are the remanants of the earliest colonists of the Assam valley. Regarding the physical features of the Kalitas Dalton states that they are not only themselves a good-looking race, but they are the people to whom the Assamese population generally owe the softening of feature which has so improved those of the Mongolian descent. The Kalitas exhibit a geater variety of complexion, and, on the whole, are not so fair as the Ahoms and Chutias or as the people of the hills, but they have oval faces, well-shaped heads, high noses, large eyes, well-developed eye-lids and eye-lashes, and the light, supple frame of the pure Hindu.[Descriptive Ethnology of Bengal, 1872, p.79].

Lt.-Colonel L.A. Waddel of Indian Medical Service personally made precise measurment of the tribes of the Brahmaputra Valley to record their physical type so as to trace their racial elements and their affinities. Among these tribes he has also included the Kalitas. The result of his measurement of the Kalitas shows that they have a slight Mongoloid type of feature. He, however, presumes that they are the mixed descendants of the Kayasth who came up the Brahmaputra to officiate as priests to the Koch, Kacharis and others when these tribes were adopting Hinduism.[The Tribes of the Brahmaputra Valley, JASB, Vol. LXIX, Pt. Iii, 1900, pp.49-50].

In 1901, B.C. Allen has supplied us with more detailed account about the origin of the Kalitas. He writes thus: “The popular explanation is that Kalitas are Kshatriyas, who fleeing from the wrath of Parasu Ram, concealed their caste and their persons in the jungles of Assam, and were thus called Kul-lupta. Other theories are that they are Kayasthas degraded for having taken to cultivation, an explanation which in itself seems somewhat improbable, and is not supported, as far as I am aware, by any evidence, or that they are the old priestly caste of the Bodo tribe. The latter theory can hardly be said to account for their origin, as their feature are of an Aryan type, and though it is possible that Kalitas may have acted as priests to some of the early Kachari converts, this fact throws little or no light on the problem of what the Kalitas are. The most plausible suggestion is that they are the remains of an Aryan colony, who settled in Assam at a time when the functional castes were still unknown in Bengal, and that the word ‘Kalita’ was originally applied to all Aryans who were not Brahmans.” [Census of India, 1901 Vol. IV, Assam, Part I, Report, pp.132-133].

In the Hemkosa the Kalitas are described as degraded Kayasthas which according to Kali Ram Medhi is erroneous. He thinks that the Kalitas are pure Aryan and purer than the Kayasthas. He says that the Assam Kshatriyas concealed their caste from the axe of Parasuram who waged war against the Kshatriyas by calling themselves as Kula-lupta or Kalita. He also says that the Kalitas were the earliest Aryan immigrants.[Assamese Grammar and Origin of the Assamese Language, 1^st published 1936, 2^nd Edition 1978, pp.27-28]. He further states that reference to the Kalitas is not found in the Sanskrit literature and that they cannot be the same people as the Kiratas of the Sanskrit literature. Yet he thinks that it is possible etymologically to derive the word Kalita from Kirata.[Ibid, p.39].

According to M.M. Chatterji the Kalitas of Assam may have been the original Aryan settlers in Kamarupa who had adopted Buddhism and who were stigmatized by later Brahman immigrants, during the rule of the Pushyavarman dynasty, as Kula-lupta i.e. people who lost or dropped their caste or varna. [J.P.A.S.B. Vol. XXVI 1930, quoted in K.L. Barua’s Early History of Kamarupa, 1933, p.22 fn.]. K.L. Baruah supposes that “as the earliest Aryan colonists in Assam were the Kalitas the kings of the Naraka line were probably Aryan Kalitas.”[Early History of Kamarupa, 1933, p.25].

R.C. Muirhead Thomson says that the Kalitas are usually supposed to be the descendents of the first Aryan immigrants into Assam by women of the country. While many of them are indistinguishable in appearance from the typical Mongolid Assamese, others have a distinctly Aryan cast of countenance, resembling that of the classical Hindu type.[Assam Valley Beliefs and Customs of the Assamese Hindus, 1948, p15].

The authour of the Fathiya-i-Ibriyah Shihabuddin Talish who accompanied Mir Jumla in his expedition to Assam says that the “ancient inhabitants of this country belong to two nations, the Assamese and the Kulita.” The author states that the Kulitas were superior in all respects except in war to the Assamese while Assamese were far better in war than the Kulitas. [H. Blochmann, Koch Bihar Koch Hajo Assam, JASB, 1872, Vol.xli,(i), p.81]. Gait opines that this statement was apparently intended to apply only to the country round Garhgaon as the writer refers elsewhere to the Miris, Nagas and other tribes.[E.A. Gait, A History of Assam, 1906, p. 138]. If we are to believe Shahabudin Talish who had written the Fathiya-i-Ibriyah or the History of the Conquest of Assam between 9^th August 1662 and 13^th May 1663, then we are inclined to say that the Assamese and the Kalitas are two different races. If the present Kalitas are the descendants of those Kalitas referred to by Shahabuddin Talish then  the Kalitas cannot be called Assamese in the true sense of the term.

As I have referred to in the beginning that a few Assamese scholars tried to identify Colubae, Kalatiai etc., with the Kalitas of Assam I would deal with that subject now.

Dr. P.C. Choudhury opines that the classical writers from about the 5^th century B.C. have referred to the people and place names of ancient Assam. This statement appears to be entirely conjectural and not based on firm ground. Dr. Choudhury writes, “Hecataeus of Miletus (500 B.C.) mentions such people as the Indoi, Kakatiai, Opiai, etc., of India”  [The History and Civilisation of Assam etc. 1959, p.18]  and tries to identify Kakatiai with the Kalitas of Assam. However, Hekataeus has not at all spoken of Kakatiai but he mentioned the name of Kallatiai. In  the Geography of Hekataeus of Miletus are mentioned some Indian names like Indoi, Indus, Kallatiai, Argante, Gandarii, Kaspapyros, and Opiai who are a people on the Indus.[ J.W. McCrindle, Ancient India as Described in Classical Literature, 1901, p. xiv]. Herodotus mentions Kalantiai or Kalatiai and the Pandaioi along with Gandarioi. [J.W. McCrindle, Ancient India as Described by Megasthenes and Arrian, 1877, p.6 fn]. Since Kallatiai of Hekataeus and Kalantiai or Kalatiai of Herodotus are said to have lived near about the Indus or western Punjab then it is presumptuous to say that by referring to Kallatiai, Kalantiai or Kalatiai, Hekataeus and Herotodus intended to refer to the Kalitas of Assam.

Dr. Choudhury then referring to Pliny’s work, writes, “Pliny next mentions beyond the Ganges a number of people including Colubae or Koluta, Orxulae, Abali and others,” and then states “the Colubae or Koluta were the Kalitas.”[The History of Civilisation of the People of Assam to the Twelfth Century A.D., 1959, p.19]. It is not understood why Dr. Choudhury mentions Colubae or Koluta when the text does not mention Colunae or Koluta at all. Let us hear what Pliny(23-79 A.D.) says: “There is an Island in the Ganges of great size, containing one Nation, named Modogalica. Beyond it are seated the Modubae, Molindae, where standeth the fruitful and stately City Molinda; the Golmodresi, Preti, Calissae, Sasuri, Fassalae, Colubae, Orxulae, Abali, and Taluctae.” [Caius Plinius Secundus, Natural History, edited by Wernerian Club, 1847-48, p. 123]. In the text Pliny mentions only Colubae and not Colubae or Koluta. According to the 4^th book of the Ramayana, the Kâulûta or Kolûta are one of the races of the west. In the Varah Sanhita in the list of the people they were placed in the north-west. In the Mudra Rakshasa they were located somewhere near the Upper Jamna. Yule places the Kolubae on the Gandaki in the north-east of Gorakhpur and north-west of Saran. [J.W. McCrindle, Ancient India as Described by Megasthenese and Arrian, 1877, p.137]. If so, then Dr. Choudhury’s identification of Pliny’s Colubae with the Kalitas of Assam is entirely unfounded.

Referring to Pliny’s description of various races, Dr. Choudhury again states that Pliny has also spoken of “races from the chain of the Exodus, of which a spur is called the Imaus.”[Ibid. P. 19]. Interestingly, in the text of Pliny there is a mention of Emodi and not of Exodus. Pliny writes, “The Nations which is not irksome to name, from the Mountains Emodi, of which the Promontory is called Imaus, which signifieth in the Language of the Inhabitants, Snowy: there are the Isari, Cosyri, Izgi, and upon the very Mountains, the Ghisiotosagi: also the Brachmanae, a Name common to many Nations, among whom are the Maccocalingae.”[Caius Plinius Secundus, The Sixth Book of the History of Nature, edited by Wernerian Club, 1847-48, p. 121].  Neither has Megasthenese (c. 350-290 B.C) mentioned the name of Exodus. What he writes is: “The races which we may enumerate without being tedious, from the chain of Emodus, of which a spur is called Imaus (meaning in the native language snowy), are the Isari, Cosyri, Izgi, and on the hills the Chisiotosagi.” [Ancient India as described by Megathenese and Arrian, p.132]. McCrindle states that other forms of Emodus are Emoda, Emodon and Hemodes and that Emodus was generally designated that part of the Himalayan range which extended along Nepal and Bhutan and onward toward the ocean.[Ancient India as Described by Megasthenese and Arrian, 1877, p.132].

By Emodus was generally designated that part of the Himalayan range which extended along Nepal and Bhutan and onward toward the ocean. Other forms of the name are Emoda, Emodon, Hemodes. Lassen derives the word from the Sanskrit haimavata, in Prakrit haimota, ‘snowy.’ If this be so, Hemodus is the more correct form. Another derivation refers the word to Hemadri(hema, ‘gold,’ and ari, ‘mountain’), the ‘golden mountains, ‘- so called either because they were thought to contain gold mines, or because of the aspect they presented when their snowy peaks reflected the golden effulgence of sunset. Imaus represents the Sanskrit himavata, ‘snowy.’ The name was applied at first by the Greeks to the Hindu Kush and the Himalayas, but was in course of time transferred to Bolor range. [McCrindle, Ibid., p.132]. So, it is clear from the accounts of Megasthenese and Pliny that neither of them mentions Exodus.

Another scholar, B. K. Barua mentions that “Hiuen Tsiang refers to the name Kolika or Kolita”[ A Cultrual History of Assam, 1951, p.113] and there he stops without giving any explanation. It may be noted that Hiuen Tsiang visited a country of K’iu-lu-to (Kuluta) which country had situated to the north-east of Jalandhar. It would therefore be unjustified to say that by K’iu-lu-to or Kuluta Hiuen Tsiang intended to signify the Kalitas of Assam. Hiuen Tsiang writes, “Going north-east from this (Che-lan-tólo or Jalandhar), skirting along some high mountain passes and traversing some deep valleys, following a dangerous road, and crossing many ravines, going 700 li or so, we come to the country of K’iu-lu-to (Kuluta).”[Samuel Beal, Buddhist Records of the Western World, Tr. Vol. I, 1884, pp.176-177] The kingdom of Kiu-lu-to is placed by Hiuen Tsiang at 700 li or 117 miles, to the north-east of Jalandhar, whcih corresponds exactly with the position of the district of Kullu in the upper valley of the Byas river. The Vishnu Purana mentions a people called Uluta or Kuluta, who are most probably the same as the Kaulutas of the Ramayana and the Brihat Sanhita. As this form of the word agrees precisely with the Chinese Kiuluto, Alexander Cunningham, who is considered as the Father of Indian Archaeology, concluded that the modern Kullu, must be only an abbreviation of ancient name of Kíu-lu-to.[ Alexander Cunningham, The Ancient Geography of India, 1871, p.142]. In the Sabhaparva(II,24,4) the form Kuluta occurs the variants of which are Uluta, Uluka and Kauluta. Dr. Chandra opines that the Ulukas mentioned in the Mahabharata(M.B. I, 177,20; 56,23) without doubt represented the Kulutas or the people of modern Kulu Valley.[Dr. Moti Chandra, Geographical and Economic Studies in the Mahabharata: Upayana Parva, 1945, p.55].

There is a mention of gold coin called Caltis or Kaltis in the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea. Dr. Choudhury suggests that the coin bears the name of the Kalitas of Assam, who for a long time might have ruled Assam. [Choudhury, p.31]. In another place he states that if Benfey is right in deriving the gold coin ‘Kaltis’ mentioned in the Periplus, from the Kalitas, it may be held that these coins recall the ruling family of the Kalitas, probably of Bhagadatta. P.108.]. The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea records that the last land near the coast of the Ganges was Chryse. There was a market-town on the bank of the Ganges which had the same name as the river, Ganges. Through this place are brought malabathrum and Gangetic spikenard and pearls, and muslins of the finest sorts, which are called Gangetic. It is said that there are gold-mines near these places, and there is a gold coin which is called Caltis.[Schoff, The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, 47-48.]. Benfey thinks the word is connected with the Sanskrit Kalita, i.e., numeratum. [McCrindle, The Commerce and Navigation of the Erythraean Sea, 1879, pp.30-31]. So, according to Benfey Kaltis means number. If so, then in what way Kaltis (number) relates to Kalita caste of Assam is confusing.

Dr. Choudhury again picks up the name Kudutai from Ptolemy and tried to explain that the name Kodutai has been derived from Koluta which stands for Kalitas.[Ibid. p.108]. Gerini without hesitation takes Ptolemy’s Kudutai to be the same people as the Ká-to or Ká-t’o, whom Garnier found exactly in the territory of the Yuan-chiang. According to Lacouperie the Ká-t’o speak a language of the Lo-lo family, closely connected with that of the Ho-ni. If so, they would belong to the Tibeto-Burman group. Gerini opines that Ká-t’o appears to be the corruption of an older term, Khadu, Kadu, or Kudu; perhaps Kudut or Kuduta, in which case it might prove traceable to some toponymic or tribal name, Kuluta, Kulūta, etc., introduced by the early Indu immigrants. From Kulūta the derivation Kudutai could be easily accounted for, and with it could be eventually connected Kuo-lo or Kwo-lo, one of the names borne by the Lo-lo or Lu-lu. Ptolemy himself locates Kudutai people south of the Khalkitis, the Karajang, or Black Lolos of Eastern Yunnan, and makes them, together with the Barrhai, extend to the Great Gulf of Tonkin. In De Donis’ map they are marked, under the name of Codupe, to the north of Doana(Luang Phrah Bang) and between the Doanas(Me-Khong) and the Dorias (Nam Tau or Red Rover). Their habitat becomes thus fixed at about half-way betwixt the Me-Khong at Luang Phrah Bang and the head-waters of the Red River at Yuan-chiang, straight away north. [Col. G.E. Gerini, Researches on Ptolemy’s Geography of Eastern Asia, 1909, p.356-358]. Evidently, it may be presumed that by Kudutai Ptolemy did not mean the Kalitas of Assam.

As to the civilisation of Assam, Kali Ram Medhi claims that as Assam was the home of the Kalitas, the civilisation of Assam is predominantly a Kalita civilisation.[Assamese Grammar and Origin of the Assamese Language, 1^st published 1936, 2^nd published 1978, p.27]. How far this claim is justified I cannot say. But during the time of the composition of Yogini Tantra (16^th century A.D.) or before, the religion or dharma of Assam was not definitely of Kalita origin. Because the Yogini Tantra giving an account of the Sakta holy places and Sakta rituals in Assam frankly confesses that the religion of the Yogini Pitha is of Kirata origin: “Sidhesi Yogini pitha dharmah Kairatajah matah.” [“O Queen of all Siddhas(=Uma), in the holy shrine of the Yogini (i.e., Kamarupa) the dharma (ritual or religion) is considered to be of Kirata origin.”]. [Quoted by B.K. Kakati in his The Mother Goddess Kamakhya, 1948, p. 10]. In other words, in the matter of ritual or religion of Assam, the Kiratas or the Mongolian people of Assam had greater influence in the life of the people of Assam.

Can we ignore the civilisation of the Kacharis or Bodos of Assam altogether? At least one great Assamese scholar named Dr. Surya Kumar Bhuyan has frankly acknowledged the contribution of the Kacharis or Bodos when he made a glowing tribute to the Kacharis saying, “The Kacharis have left indelible traces of their civilisation in different parts of Assam. The ruins of Dimapur and the rock-cut temple at Maibong bear testimony to their attainments in sculpture, architecture and engineering. One king of Cachar was the patron of Madhav Kandali, who flourished before the age of Sankar Deva and who translated the Ramayana into Assamese. Queen Chandraprabha, consort of the Kachari Raja Tamradhwaj Narayan and mother of Suradarpa Narayan, commissioned the court-poet Bhubaneswar Bachaspati to translate into Assamese the voluminous Naradiya-Kathamrita. The names of Assam rivers with the prefix Di point to the fact that the Kacharis had lived almost in every place in the Brahmaputra valley.”[Dr. S.K. Bhuyan, Kachari Buranji, ed. 2^nd Edn. 1951, Introd. Xviii-xix].

What emerges from the above discussion is that a few Assamese scholars whose great intellect is certainly beyond dispute had rather opted for erroneous explanation of the words or names occurred in the Greek accounts relative to India. Their wild speculations also prove that they have paid least attention to the annotations made by the translators of the Greek works under reference. Whatever it may be, it is apparent from the above discourse that the identification of Colubae, Kalatiai, Kudutai, etc., with the Kalitas of Assam is in no way rationale or logical. 

ALL ASSAM TRIBAL SANGHA AT ITS WITS’ END

                                                                                                      Hira Charan Narjinari

The General Secretary of All Assam Tribal Sangha appears to be at his wits’ end as to the statements he made in his Affidavit-in-Opposition submitted before the Hon’ble High Court of Gauhati on 18^th July 2014 in connection with Writ Petition(C) 2580/2014. Therefore, he had hurriedly withdrawn the said Affidavit-in-Opposition and submitted a fresh Affidavit-in-Opposition before the Hon’ble High Court of Gauhati on 30^th July 2014. In his new Affidavit-in-Opposition, he removed the following words from paragraph 3 “then in the same breath the petitioners nos. 1 and 2, being “Basumatary” and “Brahma”, also not being enlisted tribes/castes under the scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders, 1950, cannot also claim to be members of Boro-Kachari community of Assam.” He must have perceived that his above statement was illogical and would invite severe criticism against him. In fact, his irresponsible statement has already aroused resentment among the Borokachari community.

    In his fresh Affidavit-in-Oppostion, Mr. Khakhlari has however, reiterated that “Basumatary”, “Brahma”, “Saikia”, “Majumdar”, “Das”, and “Deka” etc. who belong to Boro-Kachari community on account of their origin and place of residence without such surnames being indicated in the Constitution Order, 1950, the same is the case in respect of certain individuals having surnames like “Sarania”, as in the case of Respondent No. 7” (Naba Kumar Sarania). In order to prove that those persons bearing the surname Saikia, Sarania, Das, Deka belong to Boro-Kachari community, he annexed 6 (six) Tribe Certificates. It is interesting to note that All Assam Tribal Sangha’s Bajali District Unit had issued a Tribal Certificate to one Dharanidhar Sarania stating that he belongs to “Bodo-Kachary” caste, vide Certificate No. BDTS/STC/1105/92 dated 9/11/1992. It is beyond our comprehension as to what prompted AATS to use the term “Bodo-Kachary” while issuing a social status certificate to above-named person. Any individual could check the list of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in Assam in order to ascertain the fact. The Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, C.O. 19, Part II Assam does not contain the name “Bodo-Kachary” as a Caste. Neither has the community “Bodo-Kachary” been listed as Scheduled Tribe in the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, C.O. 22 “Part II Assam II”. It is not comprehensible as to where AATS has imported the above unscheduled tribe name from.  

    The Mangaldai District unit of AATS has issued a certificate to one Kamala Sarania, Certificate No. 308 dated 3 April 1990. In the Certificate Kamala Sarania’s caste has been written thus: “Sub-Caste Kachari under The Constitution (Scheduled Caste) Order, 1950”. Rangia Unit of AATS issued certificates to Miss Surabhi Baruah stating that she belongs to Kachari community (Certificate No. 916 dated 22 December 1984), to Debajit Saikia as Boro-Kachari (Certificate No. 8727 dated 3 August 1994; to Rabi Ram Deka as Boro-Kachari (Certificate No. 4599 dated 25 June 1992); and Nalbari Unit to Bhabendra Das as Boro-Kachari (Certificate No. 673 dated 26 June 1999). Usually, members belonging to Borokachari community use Narzary Basumatary, Boro, Brahma, etc. as their surnames while members of the Sarania Kacharis generally use Das, Deka, Mahalia, Saikia, Sarania, Deka Sarania, etc., as their surnames (According to Sarania Kachari Development Council). Therefore certifying members of Sarania Kachari with surnames like Sarania, Saikia, Deka, Das, etc., either as Kachari or Boro Kachari appears to be unjustified and unlawful.

In his Affidavit-in-Opposition dated 30 July 2014 at paragraph 6 Mr. Khakhlari states that “they (i.e. Sarania) squarely belong to Kachari/Boro Kachari tribe”. However, the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, C.O. 22, and subsequent amendments and modifications do not list “Kachari/Boro Kachari” as Scheduled Tribe as stated by Mr. Khakhlari. The Order under reference does list “Boro, Borokachari” at Serial Number 2, and “Kachari, Sonowal” at Serial Number 5 as Scheduled Tribes, but not “Kachari/Boro Kachari” as stated by Mr. Khakhlari.    

    It is equally mysterious as to why the Government of Assam, WPT & BC Department, Dispur, authorised AATS by a Notification No. TAD/BC/265/2009/07 dated 22^nd June 2009 to identify the status of Scheduled Tribes Communities and issue Caste Certificate to the Scheduled Tribes (P) and Scheduled Tribes (H) when Government of India had issued a number of circulars from time to time indicating the authorities who would issue Caste Status Certificates. As far back as 22 March 1977 Government of India issued a letter to all State Governments and Union Territory Administrations clarifying the position. A relevant part of the letter reads as under:

    “It is understood that some State Governments/ U.T. Administrations have empowered all their Gazetted Officers to issue such certificates and Revenue Authority issue certificates on the basis of the certificates issued by Gazetted Officer, MPs and MLA etc. If such a practice is followed there is a clear danger of wrong certificates being issued, because in the absence of proper means of verification such authorities can hardly ensure the intrinsic correctness of the facts stated in such certificates. In order to check the issuance of false certificates, the question of verification assumes all the more importance.”

    The Ministry of Home Affairs, which was earlier looking after the work relating to SCs/STs had issued a checklist for issue and verification of SC/ST certificate vide their letter No. 35/1/72-RU (SCT.V) dated 2 May 1975. According to the checklist, before issuing SC/ST certificate it should be verified that the persons and his/her parents actually belong to the SC/ST community as claimed by him; the caste/community is included in the official SC/ST list of the concerned State/UT; the person actually belongs to the State in respect of which the community has been scheduled; the person claiming to be SC should profess Hindu, Sikh or Buddhist religion whereas a person claiming to be member of ST  may profess any religion; the person or his/her parents should have been permanent residents of the place mentioned in the certificate on the date of notification of Presidential order applicable in his/her State. AATS has not followed this procedure or guideline which induces us to state that  it has shown its vindictive nature. 

    The Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 5854 Kumari Madhuri Patil vs. Government of Maharashtra, 1994, relating to a false certificate, had laid down the procedure and guidelines, which should be followed in issuing the caste/tribe certificates. Some of the important procedure and guidelines are being summarised below:

1. The application for grant of social status certificate shall be made to the Revenue Sub-Divisional Officer and Deputy Collector or Deputy Commissioner and the certificate shall be issued by such officer rather than the Officer at the Taluk or Mandal level.
2. The parent, guardian or the candidate, as the case may be, shall file an affidavit duly sworn and attested by a competent gazetted officer or non-gazetted officer with particulars of castes and sub-castes, tribe, tribal community, parts or groups of tribes or tribal communities, the place from which he originally hails from and other particulars as may be prescribed by the Directorate concerned.
3. All the State Governments shall constitute a Committee of three officers, namely, (i) an Additional or Joint Secretary or any officer higher in rank of the Director of the department concerned, (ii) the Director, Social Welfare/Tribal Welfare/Backward Class Welfare, as the case may be, and in the case of Scheduled Caste another officer who has intimate knowledge in the verification and issuance of the social status certificate. In the case of Scheduled Tribes, the Research Officer who has intimate knowledge in identifying the tribes, tribal communities, part of or groups of tribes or tribal communities.
4. Each Directorate should constitute a vigilance cell consisting of Senior Deputy Superintendent of Police in over-all charge and such number of Police Inspectors to investigate into the social status claims.
5. The High Court would dispose of these cases as expeditiously as possible within a period of three months.
6. In case, the certificate obtained or social status claimed is found to be false the parent/guardian/the candidate should be prosecuted for making false claim. If the prosecution ends in a conviction and sentence of the accused, it could be regarded as an offence involving moral turpitude, disqualification for elective posts or offices under the State or the Union or elections to any local body, legislature or Parliament.

    The Seventh Report (2001-2002) of the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, submitted to the then President of India Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam by Dr. Bizay Sonkar Shastri remarked that the false social status certificate is “serious problem which not only deprives but robs the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes of their rights and safeguards provided under the Constitution and various laws as well as the opportunities made available by the Government for their welfare.” The Commission, vide its D.O. No. 1/3/2003-ESDW/C. Cell dated 19 February 2004, recommended to the President of India stating, “In the case of elective offices such as Parliament/Legislative Assembly/Municipal Corporation/Panchayet the false Caste Certificate holder should be immediately sacked from the post/chair and must be debarred from contesting election for at least 6 years besides the punishment provided under law.”

    According to IPC 197 whoever issues or signs any certificate required by law to be given or signed, or relating to any fact of which such certificate is by law admissible in evidence, knowing or believing that such certificate is false in any material point, shall be punished in the same manner as if he gave false evidence. What is the punishment for false evidence? IPC 193 states: “Whoever intentionally gives false evidence in any stage of a judicial proceedings, or fabricates false evidence for the purpose of being used in any stage of a judicial proceeding, shall also be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine, and whoever intentionally gives or fabricates false evidence in any other case, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.”  

    It is known to all that Sarania Kachari is a separate community, independent of Borokachari community. Had it not been so the Government of Assam would not have sanctioned them a Development Council and named it Sarania Kachari Development Council which was formed on 12 October 2010 by a notification, vide, Notification No. TAD/BC/491/07/117 dated 4 May 2010 issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam, WPT&BC Department. Furthermore, the Sarania Kachari community considers Naba Kumar Sarania, Kokrajhar MP as one of the famous personalities among the Sarania Kachari community.

    According to the Representation of the People Act, 1951 Part II, 4(c) the required qualification for membership of the House of the People is that a person shall not be qualified to be chosen to fill a seat in the House of the People unless “in the case of a seat reserved for the Scheduled Tribes in the autonomous districts of Assam, he is a member of any of those Scheduled Tribes and is an elector for the Parliamentary constituency in which such seat is reserved or for any other Parliamentary constituency comprising any such autonomous district.” The Election Commission of India in its Handbook For Candidates, 2009, has also spelt out the same qualification for election to the Lok Sabha from a reserved seat for Scheduled Tribes.  In other words, only Scheduled Tribes are eligible for contesting election from a reserved seat.

    However, as Sarania Kachari is not recognised as Scheduled Tribe in the Bodoland Territorial Areas District, Naba Kumar Sarania was not qualified to contest election to the Lok Sabha from No. 5 Kokrajhar Parliamentary Constituency which is reserved for Scheduled Tribes. Hence, he managed to obtain an ST status impersonating himself as Borokachari which is recognised as Scheduled Tribe in Assam including BTAD, vide, his Caste Certificate No. 316097 dated 12^th October 2011, issued by All Assam Tribal Sangha, Tamulpur District Unit and countersigned by Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Tamulpur on 17 October 2011). Can a person claim to be a Sarania Kachari and a Borokachari simultaneously?  In his Affidavit dated 4 April 2014 filed before the returning officer to the House of People from No. 5 Kokrajhar Constituency, Naba Kumar Sarania declared that he was approximately 45 years old. In other words, he obtained his caste status certificate when he was about 42 years old in 2011. It appears that Naba Kumar Sarania never disclosed his tribe to be “Borokachari” for at least more than 42 long years and suddenly in 2011 he obtained a tribe certificate claiming himself as Borokachari.

    Since Naba Kumar Sarania contested election against a reserved seat on a fake Tribe Certificate and won the election, his membership from Lok Sabha is liable to be void as per the Representation of the People Act, 1951, Part II, 4(c) and the Election Commission of India’s Handbook for Candidates, vide Ch. II, 2.(4)(c). As he obtained benefit of reservation based on false tribe certificate, his tribe certificate should be cancelled immediately and necessary action be taken against him as per the relevant law of the land.

Caught in the Crossfire of Blame: The Bodos and the BTC Issue

                                                              Hira Charan Narjinari

The conflict between the Bodos and immigrant Muslims during July-August 2012 has completed almost one year now. Those were the days when common people from both communities had suffered greatly.  Since the immigrant Muslims failed in their desire to possess a plot of land illegally for an Idgah due to strong resistance by the BTC administration, there was a simmering grudge among the immigrant Muslims against the Bodos. That they wanted to teach the Bodos a great lesson is clear from the disclosure by one of the accused persons in his deposition. The final touch of hate-Bodo programme was activated on 20 July 2012 when four innocent Bodo youths were brutally assaulted that resulted in their death on the spot. In this regard Gauri Singh, TSI of Kokrajhar Police Station filed a complaint (ijhar) and a case FIR 212/2012 was registered under 341, 147, 149, 302 and 435 IPC on 20^th July 2012.

Right from the formation of Bodoland Autonomous Council in 1993, non-Bodos living within the boundaries of the Council have been vehemently opposing conferment of any geo-political power on the Bodos. Subsequently, the Bodoland Accord of 2003 gave the Bodos more power as Territorial Council created under the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution of India. The non-Bodos within the BTC area were unhappy with the creation of Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) and were envious of the geo-political hegemony of the Bodos which naturally drove them to be intolerant towards the Bodos Therefore, they have been constantly waiting for an opportunity to destabilise the BTC administration. Hindrance to build Idgah gave the Muslims an opportunity to rise against the Bodos and hatched a plot to take revenge against the Bodos and the 20^th July 2012 incident was the culmination of Muslim intolerance towards the Bodos.    

From day one of the conflicts, Muslims started alleging against the Bodos for ethnic cleansing. Not only the Muslims but also the Hindus became vocal against the Bodos. The tenor of some of the pundits belonging to non-Bodo communities in evaluating, analyzing, and criticizing the Bodo Accord of 2003 clearly point to a direction that empowering of the “uncouth, low-profile” Bodo people with political hegemony was a blunder on the part of the NDA Government. They perhaps never dreamt of that the Kirat-Mongloid Bodos will one day exercise their political power on the Indo-Aryan people living in the predominantly Mongoloid country of Assam. They were not even happy to see that Assam should be dissected and states like Meghalaya, Nagaland, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh should have been created. They considered Assam as their paternal Jagir over which they think they had absolute authority and Mongoloid people do not deserve capabilities to rule or exercise supreme power over them. But the irony is that the modern descendants of those Jagirdars fail to remember that all the Jagirlands enjoyed by their forefathers were free gifts from the Bodo kings only. Bodo king Bhaskarvarman granted large amount of land to as many as 119 Brahmanas of different gotras during his reign in the first half of the 7^th century A.D.[1] Ancient political history of Assam is stuffed with scores of such testimonies on this verity.

The most vocal person to demand scrapping of Bodoland Territorial Council was a Bengali-speaking Dhubri M.P. Maulana Badruddin Ajmal who is also the Chief of the All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF). He directly accused the Bodo MLAs and Chief of Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) Hagrama Mahilary, for inciting the Bodos against the Muslim inhabitants in BTC area. He demanded arrest of the Chief of BTC and scrapping of the Memorandum of Settlement of the Bodo Accord as he thinks that the MOS was meant only for the interest of the Bodos and not for others. He also urged Sri Manmohan Singh, the Prime Minister, to dissolve the Bodoland Territorial Council and place it under Governor’s rule.

Yet another MP from Hyderabad Asaduddin Owaisi during the Lok Sabha Debate on 8^th August 2012 emphatically warned the Central government and members of Parliament that if Muslims (Bangladeshi illegal migrants) are not rehabilitated, India will face third wave of radicalization amongst Muslim youths. Let Mr. Owaisi speak here: “Lastly, I warn the Central Government; I warn the hon. Members over here….if proper rehabilitation does not take place, you be ready for a third wave of radicalization of Muslim youth…” The tenor of warning here clearly absolutely and conclusively indicates to his utter disregard towards the very strong pillar of democracy and it concerns a grave threat to the security of the whole of India. He also demanded dissolution of BTC as it failed according to him to protect people living there and scrapping of Bodoland Agreement and failure to do so separation of those areas where 50% is non-Bodos. By demanding separation of those areas where 50% is non-Bodos (Muslim dominated?) Shri Owaisi has sent message to the Indian Parliament that Muslims in Assam should be given a geo-political power (a Muslim State?).

Interestingly, neither BJP nor Congress nor other regional political parties had uttered a single word of reprimand for Mr. Owaisi’s communal overtone.  They all yielded to the Hindu virtue of tolerance. R.K. Ohri, IPS (Retd.) has rightly estimated the moral fibre of the post-independence political leadership for their too reliance on the Hindu virtue of tolerance. He says, “The post-independence political leadership of India has for the most part remained a prisoner of the creed of meek submission to senseless aggression and violence by wearing the great Hindu virtue of tolerance on its sleeves. No one can dispute that tolerance is a great quality, a good civilizational value system but only up to a point and within responsible limits. Beyond that limit, any tolerance of tyranny and aggression becomes a liability, a curse.”[2]  

Asghar Ali Engineer, another columnist, has analyzed that the cause of clashes lies in “creating of BODOLAND TERRITORIAL COUNCIL in an area where Bodos are only 29 per cent and rest are non-Bodos including Bengali speaking Muslims settled there since the British period and the British had brought them for cultivation of jute more than 100 years ago.” He asks, “How can one create Bodo Territorial Council and give them powers for development and other matters when they are just 29 per cent. All non-Bodo people feel aggrieved and want the Council to be repealed. They feel they are not getting due share in development. The Bodos, on the other hand, want to increase their number in that area so that they become the majority and creation of Bodo Territorial Council could be justified.”[3]

In a Press Conference on 4^th August 2012 All Bodoland Minority Students’ Union Vice-President Sahabuddin Ali Ahmed said, “The BTAD administration is behind the recent flare-up of violence in the BTAD.” He further said, “Clearly the people who are in a hurry to form a separate Bodoland State are behind these clashes.”[4]

Some members of Indian religionists also did not lag behind in joining chorus with the so-called religious minority. Everywhere they made fuss over the creation of BTC for the Bodos. What makes them envy of the Bodos while they have been conferred the geo-political power under the Constitution of India? Will scrapping of BTC bring peace in Lower Assam? Will the Bodos without any resistance make over their rights to be trampled over? I am afraid, the more the Bodos will be harassed the more there will be tensions in the area.

Spiteful utterances on the Bodos by Dr. Devabrata Sharma, a lecturer of Jorhat College make one believe that his philosophy of love for dalit and opposition to caste oppression on Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is nothing but a political gimmick only. He is the chief advisor of a leftist organization called United Revolutionary Movement Council of Assam (URMCA). He terms the creation of BTAD as undemocratic and discriminatory. An intellectual person like Dr Sharma should have been more cautious to bridle his tongue when he said: “Nothing could be more undemocratic and discriminatory than the creation of the BTAD-BTC. Democracy is all about majority rule. BTAD-BTC is just the reverse of that principle. How can 20 per cent rule over 80 per cent? Because the Bodos do not enjoy numerical majority, they are resorting to ethnic cleansing, targeting Muslims, Adivasis, Rajbanshis and even Assamese caste Hindus. The Bodos have become a law unto themselves. We stand for the dissolution of BTAD and BTC to stop the rape of democracy. Bodos comprise a little over six per cent of the state’s population but are demanding 50 per cent of Assam for the Bodoland of their dreams. Muslims comprise over 30 per cent of Assam’s population. Yet they have so far displayed exemplary patience despite grave provocations. What will happen if Muslims and other victimized communities unite and retaliate?”[5]

Isn’t this statement provocative and full of venom against the oldest inhabitants of Assam? Dr. Sharma is probably well aware of the fact that his forefathers were migrants from the west. The statement that the Bodos have become a law unto themselves makes no sense if we consider the way the immigrant Bengali Muslims encroached government lands. Why is he silent on illegal encroachment by the Muslims? It seems that he does not consider illegal encroachment as illegal but to him the immigrant Muslims have every right to encroach government lands, forest lands, or any vacant space falling under tribal belts and blocks; and the Assam Land Revenue Act or any law of the land does not apply to them. His comment will encourage the Muslims to be bolder to defy not only the administration of BTC but also the government of Assam.

An experienced CPI (M) M.P. Basudev Acharia appears to conceive that there is not a single illegal Bengali Muslims in the State of Assam. According to him all the sufferers owing to the clash are all Indian and not illegal Bangladeshi migrants. To this effect he has given good character certificates in favour of the Muslims in the Lok Sabha Debate on 8^th August 2012 which has been recorded thus: “I visited the areas inhabited by the Muslim minorities in Kokrajhar District and its neighbouring areas like Bongaigaon, Chirang, Dhubri and Bilasipara. Should we call them Bangladeshi immigrants? They are the people who are staying there since 1940-41. In 1953 Brahmaputra got eroded. Villages after villages had got eroded. The Muslim population migrated from that area to Kokrajhar. Should we call them Bangladeshi immigrants and try to drive them away? They are the citizens of our country. They are there for years together.”[6]  He puts the blame on the Bodos for engineering the conflict between the Bodos and Bengali Muslims. He commented saying, “the intention behind creating this problem is to increase the percentage of Bodo population from 27 per cent to 50 per cent so that the demand for separate state can be strengthened.”[7]

Behind such clean-chit there is a smell of garnering of votes for political ends at the expense of the national security. T.V. Rajeswar, former Governor of West Bengal and Sikkim commented that vote-bank politics turned a blind eye to the Bangladeshi migrants both in Assam and West Bengal “because of the support it was getting from the minority-migrant population.”[8]  He further commented that when the Congress was in power in Assam and when the AGP replaced it the ministry’s survival depended upon the support of a group of MLAs who were against any serious action against the Bangladeshi migrants.  

Praful Bidwai, a former newspaper editor and now a researcher and Peace and Human-Rights Activist based in Delhi, writes that the Bodos drove the Muslims out forcibly in 1992, 1996 and 2010 but they failed in 2012. This is obviously an inflammatory comment and a derogatory statement pointing his finger towards the Bodos exclusively. He thinks that when the Bodos form only 20% and do not enjoy social-economic hegemony, creation of BTAD as homelands for tribals in western Assam was the Indian government’s misguided policy.[9]

Columnists Ratnadip Choudhury and Avalok Langer said that “the seeds of the current conflagration were sown in the 2003 BTC Accord.”[10] These columnists also appear to have allergy to see the Bodos prosper in their own ways.

A former Naxalite leader, Santosh Rana has called the BTC area as a “killing field” and urged both the Central Government and State of Assam to “dissolve the BTC and evolve a solution on the basis of equality of all identities.”[11] Naxal movement was an armed uprising to snatch lands from the jotedars and redistribute land to the landless farmers. It is well known that their history is replete with bloodshed. He might have eschewed the path of violence now, but his rhetoric is an anti-tribal and condemnable.  

Dr. Nani Gopal Mahanta an associate professor of political science at Gauhati University has discovered that “the very creation of Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) under the 6^th Schedule” is the origin of the July-August 2012 violence. He further stated that “BTC was born out of merciless killing and violence at the behest of the Bodo Liberation Tigers (BLT).”[12] In another article he,[13] having analyzed the recent violence in BTC area, states that as it is absolutely necessary for making the Bodos majority in their area so they are evicting people of other communities from Bodo areas in order to make  a ‘homogenous Bodoland’.  

Theses by non-Bodo intellectuals as referred to above have been proved baseless. The investigation by the CBI on the incident of 20^th July 2012 which had sparked violence in the BTC area has unearthed a different story totally contrary to their views. The CBI has found “larger conspiracy” behind the killing of four Bodo youths.

The Assam Government had ordered CBI enquiry into the incident that took place on 20^th July 2012 in which four Bodo youths were brutally hackled to death. By a notification No.PLA 432/2012/Pt./20 dated 9^th August 2012, the Government of Assam extended the powers and jurisdiction of members of Special Police Establishment (CBI) to whole of Assam. The Government of India, Ministry of Personnel by a notification No.228/45/2012/AVD-II dated 10^th August 2012 transferred the investigation of FIR No.212/2012 dated 20^th July 2012 of Kokrajhar PS under section 341, 147, 148, 149, 302 and 435 IPC to CBI for investigation. Accordingly the CBI re-registered the Case RC 10(S)2012/CBI/SC-1/New Delhi on 10^th August 2012 and began investigating into the incident of 20^th July 2012.  

Investigation by CBI discloses that on 20 July 2012 at about 8 pm Adam Ali Sheik who has been named as accused No. 2 in the Charge Sheet, and other villagers of Joypur were present in the Joypur Bazaar and they heard the sound of firing. He along with other unknown persons started raising the slogan of Allah Ho Akbar continuously for about five to seven minutes and the same was followed by the other villagers and persons present in the bazaar. Thereafter people from the Joypur, Namapara and Dangipara gathered in the Joypur bazaar. About 300 people gathered as it was first day of Roza and most of the people were already present in the nearby two mosques for prayers.

CBI investigation discloses that at about 8.50 pm four Bodo youths namely Pradip Boro, Zwngsar Boro, Jatin Goyary and Nipon Goyary reached Joypur bazaar from Bhatipara side. Adam Ali Sheik pointed his finger towards them saying that they were the same persons who had fired in the area earlier at about 8 pm. The crowd intercepted all the four Bodo youths and started thrashing them in presence of Assam Police officials. How come Adam Ali Sheikh was so certain that those four Bodo youths were the same persons who had fired in the air? It is obvious that the ABMSU had already taken decision that they would attack any Bodo passing Joypur area. The story of firing also appears to be a design to put their decision into action. It is not believable that those four Bodo youths would pass through Joypur if they had earlier at 8 pm fired in the area. As a rule they were supposed to take different route to reach Kokrajhar town instead they returned via Joupur. This leads us to presume that those four Bodo youths were not involved in firing in the air in that area and they had fallen victims of circumstances.

CBI has distinctly recorded that “they heard the sound of firing” only. Can this be taken to mean that Adam Ali Sheikh personally saw those four Bodo youths firing in the air? Hearing does not connote seeing, they mean differently. From this it is clear that the fanatic Muslims had already decided to start a communal riot in the BTC area. And the CBI had rightly sensed a “larger conspiracy” behind the killings of four Bodo youths.

CBI investigation reveals that after the incident when the dead bodies were lying on the ground, Kurban Ali, accused number 1 in the Charge-Sheet had removed the cellphone of the deceased Nipon Goyary. He had admitted the same in his disclosure statement and stated that he had used the hand-set from 29^th to 31^st July 2012 with his own SIM card of his personal connection No. 9954986373. The CDR analysis has confirmed that SIM card of the said mobile number was used in the hand-set of deceased Nipon Goyary. It is also revealed that Hashim Ali Rahman accused number 3 in the Charge-Sheet had used the stolen mobile phone number 9859941471 of the deceased Pradip Boro from 21^st to 29^th July 2012 to contact his close family members.

The accused persons namely Adam Ali Sheikh, Accused No. 2, Hashim Ali Rahman, Accused No. 3, Imran Hussain, Accused No. 4, Hashem Ali Sheikh, Accused No. 5, Ali Azam Sheikh, Accused No. 6 and Moinul Sheikh, Accused No. 8 had been properly and correctly identified by the witnesses during the investigation Test Identification Parade (TIP) conducted by the Court of Special Magistrate CBI Guwahati at Central Jail Guwahati on 29^th September 2012.

“During the investigation sufficient evidence, oral as well as documentary evidence has come on record against accused persons namely Md. Kurban Ali Sheikh(A1), Adom Ali Sheikh (A2), Hashim Ali Rahman (A3), Imran Hussain (A4), Hashem Ali Sheikh (A5), Ali Azam Sheikh (A6) and Moinul Sheikh (A8) to prove that they alongwith other members of the unlawful assembly committed the offences punishable under section 147, 148, 149, 302, 341, 379, 435 & 201 IPC. Besides the accused Kurban Ali Sheikh (A1) and Hashim Ali Rahman (A3) are also liable to be prosecuted for the substantive offences u/s 379 and 201 IPC.” 

Paradoxically, the All Bodoland Minority Students’ Union (ABMSU) is however not happy with the probe conducted by the CBI. ABMSU President Sahabuddin Ali Ahmed said, “We have serious doubts in the credibility of CBI as it has been proved that they work in the favour of the ruling government in the recent past.” He demanded a high level probe into the 2012 riots in BTC area. Supposing high level probe is ordered by the government and the high level probe committee also goes against the ABMSU activists will they still insist upon further probe?

It may be pertinent here to refer to the sentiments of the Assamese members of the Constituent Assembly about the tribal people of the then Assam. They openly expressed in the Constituent Assembly that the tribal people should not be given much autonomy through the Sixth Schedule. During the debate on 6 September 1949, Kuladhar Chaliha, member of Constituent Assembly, had strongly opposed to giving too much autonomy to the Hills Tribes. He went so far as to state that allowing tribal people to rule or run administration will be an injustice to non-tribals (Assamese). The same view was expressed by Rohini Kumar Chaudhuri. These civilised persons from Assam never wanted Tribal people to rule over them rather they wanted to dominate the tribal people perpetually. The same sentiment still prevails among many caste Assamese for whom rule by the Bodos is something unthinkable. They, however, forget the fact that their forefathers were the subjects of Bodo kings for centuries.

Interestingly, people today question the very creation of BTC in the strongest terms and allege as to how a minority community in the BTC area should enjoy such geo-political power depriving majority non-Bodos. However, they do not question how they became minority; they do not question how tribal lands were alienated; they do not question why despite protective measures envisaged in the Assam Land Revenue Act 1886 amended from time to time was not implemented in letter and spirit; they do not question why infiltration is still allowed to take place; they do not question why land within tribal belts and blocks should be settled with non-tribal people; they do not question why lands belonging to government are forcibly occupied by non-tribal people, mostly immigrant Bengali Muslims. Why these questions have not been put before the central and state governments by those who strongly spoke against the Bodo Accord of 2003?

Have they ever asked or studied how the Bodos have become minority in their own land? Occupying the land of the Bodos by stratagem the outsiders or foreigners drove them to the environs of the woods where they languished for generations. Today, the original inhabitants i.e., the Bodos have been outnumbered by outsiders be they Bengali Muslims (legal or illegal) or be they Indo-Aryan speakers. In their own homeland the Bodos are today uprooted. Modern civilization has opened up the eyes of the Bodos and their constant search for their antecedents made them re-assertive in claiming back their certain tracts for developing and safeguarding their own culture and language. This aspiration is guaranteed by the Constitution of India. What is wrong then if the Bodos are given a geo-political power within the framework of the Indian Constitution?

The Charge Sheet relating to the 20 July 2012 incident has now come to light and it has been established that behind the violent riots that had spread in the BTC area and Dhubri after killing of four Bodo youths, the ABMSU was solely responsible. Now where are those persons who were vocal in blaming the Bodos for starting the violence? Why are they now silent on the involvement of ABMSU in starting the violence? Let them now come forward demanding banning of ABMSU and write scores of articles condemning the sinister designs of immigrant Muslims. Will they do that?

Many intellectuals have alleged that the Bodos are out to make BTC area exclusively for themselves and that is why they are resorting to cleansing of other ethnic groups. Can this happen in a democratic set-up? They very often cite the carnage of 2008 at Udalguri without ascertaining as to how the incident had started. Incidents that took place at Rowta-Bhalukmari-Hatkhola in Udalguri district on 14.8. 2008 during the bandh called by the Muslim Students Union of Assam (MUSA) and subsequent clashes between the Bodos and Muslims have been termed by many as ethnic cleansing by the Bodos. That their allegation is utterly groundless can be testified by what Justice P.C.Phukan former Judge, Gauhati High Court submitted his findings on 15^th February 2010 concerning the incidents. Let Justice Phukan speak here: “MUSA officer-bearers and MUSA activists are squarely responsible for starting the violence by forcing the shop-keepers to close their shops and beating up those who refused to oblige and forcing the scooter/motor-cycle riders, cyclist etc to stay off the road and beating up those who resisted such use of force. If such shop-keepers, motor-cycle riders, Cyclists etc, while resisting use of force by the MUSA activists, struck them back in exercise of their right to private defence of persons and property, they cannot be said to be on the wrong side of the law.”  

Demanding scrapping of constitutionally created BTC certainly culminates into dishonouring the very sanctity of the Constitution of India and at the same time an intolerance shown towards the original inhabitants or the sons of the soil. Critics of the creation of BTC are perhaps not alive to the fact that the Bodos had ruled Kamrup (ancient Assam) for more than twelve hundred years while the Ahoms ruled only for six hundred years. They have not perhaps realized that any adverse criticism against the Bodos may one day become a boomerang for them. In this regard Dr. Prafulla Mahanta has rightly said that demanding dissolution of BTC means a bad omen for the entire people of Assam.[14] Now if the Bodos are universally blamed for acts they did not commit then should others expect them to remain patriotic?

---

[1] Epigraphia Indica, Vol. XIX, pp. 115-125.

[2] R.K. Ohri, IPS (Retd.), Long March of Islam the Future Imperfect, 2004, p.327.

[3] http://twocircles.nt/2012jul30/bodomuslim_clashes_reasons_and_analysis.html.

[4] The Sentinel, 5 August 2012.

[5] Cited in S.N.M. Abdi’s ‘The 50-50 Shot’, http://www.outlookinida.com/article.aspx?282078.

[6] Lok Sabha Debate on 8^th August 2012.

[7] Lok Sabha Debate on 8^th August 2012

[8] T.V. Rajeswar, Problem of Bangladeshi migrants Politico-economic study in historical context, The Tribune, Online Edition, February 17, 2003 available at http://www.tribuneindia.com/2003/20030217/edit.htm#3

[9] Praful Bidwai, Ethnic Conflict in India, http://www.thenews.com.pk/todays-news-9-128487-ethnic-conflict-in-india.

[10] Tehelka, Vol. 9, Issue 33, 18 August 2012

[11] Santosh Rana, ‘Bodoland: The Killing Field’, Frontier, Vol. 45, No. 13, October 7-13, 2012

[12] Nani G. Mahanta, A Kashmir in the Making, http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/nani-g.-mahanta-on-recent-ethnic-violience-in-assam-bodoland/1/221691.html

[13] Dr. Nani Gopal Mahanta, ‘Ashanta Borobhumi:Niti Jetia Hingsar Karak Hoy’ Amar Asom, 26&27 July 2012

[14] Dr. Prafulla Mahanta, ‘Sangharsa-jarjar Borobhumi Aru Boro Tatha Janajatir Surakshar Prasna’, in Bodoland, a monthly Bi-lingual Journal of Bodo Peoples’ Front, Vol. I, Issue – 6, December 2012, pp. 6-10