Potential spark

  After the All Assam Students Union (AASU) went public on August 11, in releasing the confidential report of the government-appointed ‘high level committee’on implementation of Clause 6 of the Assam Accord which it signed on August 15, 1985 with the then Rajiv Gandhi government; it sparked furious debate in the state. The report is the latest of several attempts made over the years to finalise the contours of Clause 6 of the Assam Accord signed at the end of the Assam Movement in 1985. The Clause is pivotal to the Accord – it promises “constitutional, legislative and administrative safeguards” to “protect, preserve and promote the cultural, social, linguistic identity and heritage of the Assamese people.” AASU appeared to have been piqued with action of the the panel set up by the union home ministry in July 2019 headed by retired Justice Biplab Sarma over the Accord. The panel submitted its report with the Assam government instead of the Centre. AASU went ahead in letting the cat out of the bag on August 11 as it felt that the union home ministry was sitting over the file. As per Clause 6, Constitutional, legislative and administrative safeguards, as may be appropriate, shall be provided to protect, preserve and promote the culture, social, linguistic identity and heritage of the Assamese people. The Clause 6 of the Assam Accord defines “Assamese people” as all persons residing in the territory of Assam on or before January 1, 1951, and their descendants. It has selected 1951 as being selected as a cut-off year, and in its wake, has left minority groups worried. The bone of contention since the signing of the pact on August 13, 1985 has been the definition of Assamese people, which the committee tried to fix as the tribal, indigenous and all other Indian citizens residing within the territory of Assam as per the First Schedule of the Constitution on or before January 1, 1951 along with their descendants. According to the Assam Accord, those who came to Assam on or before March 24, 1971 are Indian citizens. This is also the cut-off date that Assam’s National Register of Citizens (NRC) operates on. Therefore, if and when Clause 6 report is implemented, those who came to Assam between 1951 and 1971 would be stuck in a strange midway place – Indian citizens (many of whom have lived in Assam for two decades) but not ‘Assamese’. This will also mean that lakhs of citizens would become stateless. In addition, attempting to implement the committee recommendation would also mean another round of paperwork verifications, bureaucratic frenzy, political squabbles and misery for the common people and another huge cost on the exchequer. The other recommendation of the committee was that Assamese be kept the “official language throughout the state with provisions for use of local languages in Barak Valley, Hill Districts and the Bodoland Territorial Area Districts.” It also suggested reservation of 80-100 percent in Parliament seats from Assam should be reserved for the “Assamese people” as defined above. The report also suggested a similar percentage of posts in the Central government, Central public sector units, and private sector companies operating in Assam should be reserved for the “Assamese people”. Clearly, the committee recommendations based on interpretation of the Assam Accord has the potential of causing more turmoil than it seeks to remedy.