The Indian Express explains the
events and divide leading to protests targeted at a nomadic group.
Why are lawyers’ groups
protesting in Jammu?
The protests are over a number of
issues that underline a communal divide in Jammu. Among these is a police
chargesheet, which concludes that the alleged rape and murder of an
eight-year-old Bakherwal girl in a Kathua village was committed to evict the
Bakherwal, a nomadic Muslim group; the alleged motive has triggered protests.
The protesters have also demanded a rollback of a purported decision by the
state government on Gujjar-Bakherwal rights
to forest land, alleging a conspiracy to change the demography of Jammu.
What traditional rights do the
Gujjar-Bakherwal have over forest lands in J&K?
The two communities, together 11% of J&K’s population, are the single
largest Muslim group and were together designated a Scheduled Tribe in 1991.
Both groups are pastoral. The Gujjars
are in the dairy business, and settled in several parts of Jammu through to the
Chenab Valley. The nomadic sheep and
goat-herding Bakherwal migrate with their flock to Kashmir and Ladakh in the
summer and to Jammu in the winter, camping at forest sites they have used
for centuries.
What has happened now?
Recent eviction drives have left
both communities fearful that the PDP-BJP government is planning to take away
these traditional rights. The forest portfolio is with the BJP’s Choudhary Lal
Singh who has promised to retrieve hundreds of kanals of “encroached” forest
land and impose a blanket ban on cultivation inside forests. In response, Bakherwal and Gujjar leaders have demanded
that the central Forest Rights Act, 2006, be extended to J&K as well. The
ST and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act
provides for ownership and access rights to forest dwellers by giving them a
right to live in the forests and carry out their traditional occupations for
livelihood, access to collect, use and dispose of Minor Forest Produce,
conservation and management of forest resources, and the right of access to
biodiversity and community rights.
How do the ruling parties
stand?
Ironically, this is the one issue
on which the BJP holds dear the primacy of Article 370. With both Gujjars and
Bakherwals being Muslims, the party is feeding into fears of Jammu’s Hindu
community that the two communities are changing the demography. On the other
hand, the PDP views these two communities as a constituency. Tribal Affairs
Minister Chaudhary Zulfikar is a Gujjar.
Earlier this year, the government
decided to come out with a tribal policy. Following a meeting of the Tribal
Affairs Department on February 16, chaired by Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti,
news spread on social media that she had “taken a historic decision” and
provided a “sigh of relief” to J&K’s nomadic population by directing that
they should not be evicted from forest land. In Jammu there was widespread
anger that encroachment of forest land by the two Muslim groups had been
green-lighted. Later, an RTI activist in Jammu circulated the purported minutes
of the meeting, this time with the accusatory comment that the PDP was
implementing its “Kashmir-centric agenda” in Hindu-dominated Jammu.
What did the purported minutes
say?
That it had been decided not to
dislocate tribals until formulation of a tribal policy. In cases where their
dislocation was considered necessary, according to the purported minutes, it
would be carried only in prior consultation with the Tribal Affairs Department.
Signed by Special Secretary (Tribal Affairs) Mohammad Sharief Choudhary, the
“minutes” also recorded the CM’s instruction to all police and district
authorities not to provide any police protection for eviction of tribals
without approval from the department. The meeting was attended by PDP minister
Zulfikar and MoS (Forests) Ajay Nanda (BJP).
What has the government said
of this?
Officially, the government has
been silent on the minutes. But after the controversy broke, all BJP ministers
except deputy CM Nirmal Singh went to meet the CM, where Nanda gave a written
submission that no such matter had come up for discussion in his presence.
Later, at BJP headquarters, Nanda and Health & Medical Education Minister
Bali Bhagat claimed the CM too had said no such discussion had taken place and
there was no issue of her giving any such instruction to police and deputy
commissioners. The ministers declared that in any case, the minutes of the
meeting, in the absence of subsequent government orders, hold no legal
validity. No orders have been issued.
Then why the protests even
now?
In a state where both Hindus and
Muslims read between the lines of any government decision seen to be
facilitating one community or the other, not many were convinced by the BJP
ministers’ clarification. There has been no official explanation for why the
purported minutes record decisions that ministers claim were never taken.
What are Gujjars-Bakherwals
saying?
That the eviction drives against
them are driven by local misconceptions that they are responsible of
large-scale encroachment of forest land. They say they have been on the side of
Indian security forces since 1947. In Kashmir, they are perceived as helping security
forces against militants. Tribal leaders have demanded a government white paper
identifying those encroaching upon forest and state land and take action; they
say these are influential people, both Hindu and Muslim, who connived with
officials and sold such land to those who had migrated to Jammu during the
militancy-hit 1990s. Rather than a tribal policy, tribal leaders have sought
laws safeguarding the rights of nomads over forests.
Credit: Indian Express Explained
No comments:
Post a Comment