No Refuge

The Plight of Conflict-Induced Internally Displaced Persons in India

The growing international concern for the world's internally displaced persons (IDPs) is encouraging. The challenge now lies in developing legal and institutional frameworks to address their plight and in getting governments to formulate policies to protect the rights and welfare of their displaced citizens. With over 500,000 conflict-induced IDPs and a relatively good precedent, India has the opportunity to take a leading role in this new, yet long overdue, area of humanitarian protection. It is clear that the main weakness in the Indian Government's IDP policy concerns inadequate protection and insufficient food and medical aid.

Throughout the 1990s, ethnic conflict based on demands for greater autonomy or secession generated hundreds of thousands of IDPs in India, primarily in the country's northeastern areas of Assam, Tripura, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram, and in the northern state of Jammu and Kashmir. Estimates vary, but in 1998, the US Committee for Refugees reported the total number of displaced persons in the Northeast to be between 170,000 and 230,000. There are reportedly 80,000 ethnic Santhals (and a small number of ethnic Nepalese) displaced in Assam; around 60,000 Bengalis in Assam; more than 20,000 ethnic Paite, Kuki, and Naga displaced in Manipur; 39,000 ethnic Reangs displaced from Mizoram to Tripura; 25,000 Bengalis in Tripura; and 3,000 ethnic Chakmas in Arunachal Pradesh. In Jammu and Kashmir state, 350,000 have been displaced, primarily Hindu Pandits but also including Sikhs and Muslims.

Though internal displacement in these areas is a fairly recent phenomenon, the origins of the conflicts that have induced displacement go back decades. Over the past 150 years, the Northeast's population swelled from around one million to more than 20 million. In response to labour shortages in the nineteenth century, British administrators encouraged migration from East Bengal, and between 1947 and the present, hundreds of thousands of Bengali-speaking Hindus streamed into the Northeast from what is now Bangladesh. Feeling threatened by the mass influx of "outsiders," members of some indigenous groups established militant, secessionist organisations. In the effort to establish their ethnic supremacy in certain areas, insurgents have attacked villages, massacred residents, and burned houses to compel other ethnic groups to vacate disputed territory, leaving the latter little choice but to move into ill-equipped and inadequately defended displacement camps.

In Assam, Santhal, Bengali, and Nepali communities have been attacked by militant members of the Bodo tribe, who seek to claim majority status in the Bodo Autonomous Council area of western Assam, which was delineated in a 1993 agreement with the central government. Bodo resentment is inflamed by the fact that the flood of outsiders has turned Bodos into minorities in some areas of their homeland.

Over 200,000 IDPs now live in 78 relief camps in Kokrajhar and Bongaigaon districts of Assam. Conditions are very poor. Shelters consist of rows of temporary sheds made of polythene and aluminium sheets. People sleep on the ground on makeshift beds of bamboo; and there is a lack of clean drinking water; and diseases such as malaria, jaundice, dysentery, diarrhoea and influenza pose a serious threat. Groups of five to six people are forced to share essentials. To supplement food rations, which are adequate for at most 10 days a month, they are compelled to consume snails, insects and wild plants. Pregnant women, children, and the elderly suffer the highest health risks in the camps. Over the past couple years, camps have been attacked repeatedly, leaving several dead and dozens injured.

Displaced Bengalis in Tripura live in similar conditions. In response to the Bengalis' rapid attainment of majority status in the state, tribal militant groups such as the National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) and the All Tripura Tiger Force (ATTF) have sought to establish autonomous areas by attacking Bengali communities. Bengalis are thus forced to flee to displacement camps which are inadequately defended, as evidenced by the slaying of 32 people in a 1997 attack.

In spite of government efforts to find a compromise to the long running Naga dispute, renewed strife between the Nagas and the Kukis in Manipur has resulted in the death of over 1,000 people since 1992 and large-scale population movements. Additional tribal tensions reinforce instability in the state. Kukis and Paites have clashed since 1997 and friction persists between the Nagas and Meiteis. Violence between these groups has reportedly left 50,000 people homeless as entire villages are burned to the ground. Militants have also burned granaries, putting thousands of people at risk of malnutrition and starvation. Eleven thousand people now live in displacement camps and the government of neighbouring Mizoram has restricted the displaced from crossing into its territory.

In Mizoram fearing persecution from the ethnic majority Mizos, 15,000 to 50,000 Reang tribals have fled their homes since 1997 and found shelter in north Tripura, border villages of Assam and the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh. In order to accelerate the repatriation process, the Tripura government discontinued food rations and medical services in some camps, causing at least 16 people to starve to death. At least 260 IDPs died as a result of inadequate shelter and unclean water, and around 1,400 reportedly became seriously ill. Additionally, displacement camps are susceptible to attacks and mismanagement, for which the National Human Rights Commission castigated the Mizoram government in a 1998 report.

Similarly in Kashmir, Muslim militants have also sought to preserve and assert their identity by acting against minority groups such as Hindu Pandits and Sikhs. The presence of these groups obstructs the insurgents’ decades-old goal of a self-determined Muslim area. Most IDPs from Kashmir live in Jammu (some 240,000 people) or Delhi (around 100,000 people), where the government aid they receive is substantially greater than that given to their northeastern counterparts. Displaced Kashmiri Pandits receive a monthly allowance, food aid, semi-permanent housing, medical and educational facilities, and many former government workers are still paid their full salaries. Nevertheless living conditions are poor; the dwellings are mere ‘cardboard rooms’ lacking proper drainage systems and other basic amenities.

It is clear that the Government of India must do more to protect the fundamental rights to life, security and dignity of the IDPs. Not only is current assistance and protection inadequate, government policy towards IDPs is inequitable, with Kashmiri Pandits receiving more assistance than their tribal Northeastern counterparts. Additionally, through the reduction of food rations and medical assistance, the government ignobly pressures IDPs to return to areas in which they feel unsafe.

To redress these problems the Government needs to develop a strong legal and institutional framework. The Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, submitted to the UN Commission on Human Rights in 1998, provide a sound ethical and pragmatic foundation for such a framework for IDPs. Drawing heavily from existing international treaties and conventions, the Guiding Principles include the rights of IDPs to assistance and protection without discrimination. The Constitution of India also affirms basic rights to life, food, and shelter. Together, these legal obligations can help structure a workable solution to these problems.

The Government should also strengthen its institutional capacity to assist IDPs by enhancing communication between vulnerable populations, their state governments and the central government. Displaced women, as household managers, must be involved in decision-making and assistance distribution to IDPs. Existing channels between displaced groups, administrations and security forces must be made more transparent in order to improve protection and prevent army abuses such as rape, arbitrary arrest and murder.

Finally, assistance and protection for IDPs in India must be supplemented by the vision and political will to bring lasting peace to the Northeast and Kashmir. Causes of conflict should also be addressed along with the symptoms of conflict such as internal displacement.

Future wars and internal conflict are likely to produce more IDPs than official refugees. In addressing the plight of IDPs in the Northeast and Kashmir, India can become an important frontrunner for future international law and policy developments.

-Human Rights Features

Top / About SAHRDC / Action Alerts / Online Resource Centre / Publications / Home