14,000 eligible Chakma and Hajong voters waiting for enrolment in the electoral rolls in Arunachal Pradesh
Sydney, February 18, 2007: On the denial of the applicability of Article 1 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, India at the outset of its reports recognizes “diverse origin” (para 3) of its peoples and India's “ethnic, religious, linguistic and economic diversity” (para 6). After having recognized the existence of one of the grounds of racial discrimination i.e. discrimination on “ethnic” origin, it denies applicability of Article 1 of the Convention. The government of India cannot probate and reprobate at the same time.
The government of India's denial of the existence of racial discrimination is inconsistent with the directions of constitutional bodies like the Election Commission of India. In its report (para 74), the government of India referred to inclusion of names of 1,500 Chakmas into electoral rolls in Arunachal Pradesh. With regard to the exclusion of the same Chakma and Hajong eligible voters from electoral rolls in Arunachal Pradesh, the Election Commission of India in its order No. 23/ARUN/2003 of 3 March 2004 held that they “have not been included in the electoral rolls mainly for the reason that they belong to the Chakma tribe/race (emphasis ours)”.
The government of India's lack of coherence is reflected in many of its policies. In one hand, it promotes “where appropriate integrations multi-racial organisations and movers and other means of eliminating barriers between races, and to discourage anything which tends to strengthen racial division”; on the other hand, various regiments of Indian Army are named after their ethnic/caste origins as Rajput Regiment, Jat Regiment, Sikh Regiment, Dogra Regiment, Naga Regiment, Gorkha Rifles etc. Naming of various regiments in Indian army contributes to “race, ethnic, caste and regional consciousness” (emphasis ours). The colonial British named such regiments as a part of its “Divide and Rule policy”, and the government of India continues the practice. Having a Regiment of Indian Army means recognising the status/strength of the community/caste concerned. In fact, in May 2004 the present Minister of Chemical, Fertilizers and Steel of the government of India, Mr Ram Vilas Paswan demanded that forming a “Dalit Regiment on the pattern of Sikh Regiment, Jat Regiment or Mahar Regiment” should be included in the Common Minimum Programme of the United Progressive Alliance government.
The government of India in its report highlights enrollment of 1,500 Chakma and Hajong voters in the electoral rolls in Arunachal Pradesh. But it does not mention that over 14,000 eligible Chakma and Hajong voters continued to be denied enrolment in the electoral rolls because of the blatant violations of the directions of the Election Commission of India by the State government of Arunachal Pradesh. The government of India also failed to mention that out of 4,627 Chakmas and Hajongs who had submitted citizenship applications in 1997-1998 pursuant to the Supreme Court of India's judgement in the case of National Human Rights Commission versus State of Arunachal Pradesh & Another (W.P. (c) No. 720 of 1995) on 9 January 1996, the Union government of India failed to determine even a single application until today. This is a clear case of discrimination considering that the government of India has been granting citizenship rights to the Hindu refugees who migrated to Rajasthan much later than the Chakmas and Hajongs.
Sydney, February 18, 2007: On the denial of the applicability of Article 1 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, India at the outset of its reports recognizes “diverse origin” (para 3) of its peoples and India's “ethnic, religious, linguistic and economic diversity” (para 6). After having recognized the existence of one of the grounds of racial discrimination i.e. discrimination on “ethnic” origin, it denies applicability of Article 1 of the Convention. The government of India cannot probate and reprobate at the same time.
The government of India's denial of the existence of racial discrimination is inconsistent with the directions of constitutional bodies like the Election Commission of India. In its report (para 74), the government of India referred to inclusion of names of 1,500 Chakmas into electoral rolls in Arunachal Pradesh. With regard to the exclusion of the same Chakma and Hajong eligible voters from electoral rolls in Arunachal Pradesh, the Election Commission of India in its order No. 23/ARUN/2003 of 3 March 2004 held that they “have not been included in the electoral rolls mainly for the reason that they belong to the Chakma tribe/race (emphasis ours)”.
The government of India's lack of coherence is reflected in many of its policies. In one hand, it promotes “where appropriate integrations multi-racial organisations and movers and other means of eliminating barriers between races, and to discourage anything which tends to strengthen racial division”; on the other hand, various regiments of Indian Army are named after their ethnic/caste origins as Rajput Regiment, Jat Regiment, Sikh Regiment, Dogra Regiment, Naga Regiment, Gorkha Rifles etc. Naming of various regiments in Indian army contributes to “race, ethnic, caste and regional consciousness” (emphasis ours). The colonial British named such regiments as a part of its “Divide and Rule policy”, and the government of India continues the practice. Having a Regiment of Indian Army means recognising the status/strength of the community/caste concerned. In fact, in May 2004 the present Minister of Chemical, Fertilizers and Steel of the government of India, Mr Ram Vilas Paswan demanded that forming a “Dalit Regiment on the pattern of Sikh Regiment, Jat Regiment or Mahar Regiment” should be included in the Common Minimum Programme of the United Progressive Alliance government.
The government of India in its report highlights enrollment of 1,500 Chakma and Hajong voters in the electoral rolls in Arunachal Pradesh. But it does not mention that over 14,000 eligible Chakma and Hajong voters continued to be denied enrolment in the electoral rolls because of the blatant violations of the directions of the Election Commission of India by the State government of Arunachal Pradesh. The government of India also failed to mention that out of 4,627 Chakmas and Hajongs who had submitted citizenship applications in 1997-1998 pursuant to the Supreme Court of India's judgement in the case of National Human Rights Commission versus State of Arunachal Pradesh & Another (W.P. (c) No. 720 of 1995) on 9 January 1996, the Union government of India failed to determine even a single application until today. This is a clear case of discrimination considering that the government of India has been granting citizenship rights to the Hindu refugees who migrated to Rajasthan much later than the Chakmas and Hajongs.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home