Suhas Chakma rebuts Arunachal CM on Chakma-Hajong relocation, calls move unconstitutional

Bordumsa: Human rights activist and Rights and Risks Analysis Group (RRAG) Director Suhas Chakma has strongly refuted recent statements made by Arunachal Pradesh Chief Minister Pema Khandu regarding the relocation of the Chakma and Hajong communities, calling the proposal unconstitutional and warning against divisive politics.

In a detailed statement titled “Stop ‘Manipurisation’ of Arunachal Pradesh,” shared on social media on Thursday, Chakma accused the Chief Minister of being “misinformed” by state officials and local legislators. He cautioned that attempts to displace the communities could trigger ethnic discord similar to the ongoing crisis in Manipur.

Chakma asserted that the relocation proposal violates both the Constitution of India and the Supreme Court’s 1996 ruling in NHRC vs State of Arunachal Pradesh & Anr (1996 AIR 1234), which directed the Union and State governments to process the Chakmas’ and Hajongs’ citizenship applications and barred any eviction or deportation.

“The settlement of the Chakmas and Hajongs in 1964 was approved by the Government of India when Arunachal Pradesh did not exist—it was part of the North Eastern Frontier Agency (NEFA),” Chakma wrote. “There is no legal authority for Arunachal Pradesh to revoke this decision six decades later.”

He further emphasized that even Parliament cannot overturn this established legal position.
Chakma also dismissed the frequent reference to Arunachal Pradesh as a “tribal state,” saying that no such term exists in the Indian Constitution. He noted that Article 371(H), which governs Arunachal Pradesh, contains no mention of “tribal status,” and similar provisions for Nagaland and Mizoram under Articles 371(A) and 371(G) do not classify them as tribal states either.

“A ‘tribal state’ is a political phrase, not a legal one,” he said, calling the repeated use of the term “misleading and unconstitutional.”

The rights activist accused the state government of ignoring Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s directive of December 2, 2021, which, following Chakma’s intervention, instructed authorities to stop a special census aimed at relocating the Chakmas and Hajongs.

“The Prime Minister personally intervened. Any move to conduct relocation or enumeration now would amount to contempt of his directive,” he said.

Chakma also cited Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma’s clarification on September 23, 2024, that there had been no discussions or proposals to relocate the Chakmas and Hajongs to Assam. “I do not expect contempt of Prime Minister Modi by a BJP Chief Minister,” Chakma remarked pointedly.

Reiterating the Supreme Court’s 1996 ruling, Chakma warned that no Chakma or Hajong can be evicted until their citizenship applications are processed. “If the State proceeds with relocation, any Indian citizen can move a contempt petition before the Supreme Court,” he said, noting that the matter remains under judicial consideration in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 510 of 2007.

Chakma urged restraint and dialogue, saying politicizing the Chakma-Hajong issue could fracture Arunachal’s social harmony. “Despite over sixty years of coexistence, there has been no violence between the Chakmas, Hajongs, and local communities. The issue is often politicized by outsiders,” he observed.

He criticized recent meetings between the Chief Minister and self-proclaimed Chakma representatives, calling them “MLA workers” with no legitimacy to speak for the community. “Any agreement signed with such individuals will be legally meaningless,” he said.

Concluding his statement, Chakma reaffirmed his commitment to the Constitution of India and the rights of all citizens.

“I bow before the Constitution to protect every person in this country, including the Chakmas and Hajongs of Arunachal Pradesh,” he declared.

The Chakmas and Hajongs, originally from the Chittagong Hill Tracts of present-day Bangladesh, were settled in NEFA in the 1960s after displacement by the Kaptai Dam project and persecution.

Despite living in India for over six decades, their citizenship status remains unresolved, making it one of the country’s longest-standing human rights issues.