Bablu Chakma

Bangladesh is a country of cultural and ethnic diversity, with over 54 indigenous peoples speaking at least 35 languages, along with the majority Bengali population. According to the 2011 Census, the country’s indigenous population is approximately 1,586,141,1 which represents 1.8% of the total population of the country. However, indigenous peoples in the country claim that their population stands at about 5 million.2 The majority of the indigenous population live in the plain land districts of the country,3 and the rest in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT). The Government of Bangladesh does not recognise indigenous peoples as “indigenous”. Nevertheless, since the 15th Amendment of the constitution adopted in 2011, people with distinct ethnic identities other than the mainstream Bengali population are now mentioned.4 Still, only cultural aspects are mentioned, whereas issues related to indigenous peoples’ economic and political rights, not least their land rights, remain ignored. The CHT Accord of 1997 was a constructive agreement between indigenous peoples and the Government of Bangladesh. But even after 19 years, major issues of the Accord, such as making the CHT Land Commission functional, devolution of power and function to the CHT institutions, preservation of tribal area characteristics of CHT region, demilitarisation, rehabilitation of internally displaced people, etc., remain unsettled.

Bangladesh often affirms its commitment to promote and protect human rights through its unequivocal pledge to uphold the principles and purposes of the UN Charter, international peace and security, respect for international law and rejection of colonialism and racism. However, different state agencies of Bangladesh have been directly engaged in interfering with the enjoyment of the human rights of indigenous peoples enshrined in the international laws for long, let alone the state authorities preventing violations of these rights by state agencies and other non-state actors. During the second cycle of review under the UPR mechanism on Bangladesh held at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva on 29 April 2013, for example, the government of Bangladesh provided incomplete and inaccurate information on implementation of the CHT Accord and constitutional recognition of indigenous peoples to the UPR session, which has proved non-compliance attitude of government’s commitment to the intern...

This paper examines livelihood strategies of Tanchangya culantro cultivators of the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh, in relation to their subsistence, risk-taking, and reciprocity practices, who have been embroiled in compulsive market participation due to paternalist state policies. It puts forward two propositions. First, the objectives of protecting subsistence and of improving familial situation drive Tanchangya peasants to employ flexible strategies in relation to risk management and income generation. Second, it proposes that reciprocity practices provide minimum security to village households in times of crises and exigencies, and work as a safeguard against the exploitation of capitalist Bengali traders. It concludes that subsistence struggles lead peasant families to choose most suitable crops and farming methods and remain open to diverse income sources. Village reciprocity practices, either as dynamic and evolving relationships between two actors or involving the larger community, having different forms, supplement this struggle of peasants for survival.

This paper examines livelihood strategies of Tanchangya culantro cultivators of the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh, in relation to their subsistence, risk-taking, and reciprocity practices, who have been embroiled in compulsive market participation due to paternalist state policies. It puts forward two propositions. First, the objectives of protecting subsistence and of improving familial situation drive Tanchangya peasants to employ flexible strategies in relation to risk management and income generation. Second, it proposes that reciprocity practices provide minimum security to village households in times of crises and exigencies, and work as a safeguard against the exploitation of capitalist Bengali traders. It concludes that subsistence struggles lead peasant families to choose most suitable crops and farming methods and remain open to diverse income sources. Village reciprocity practices, either as dynamic and evolving relationships between two actors or involving the larger community, having different forms, supplement this struggle of peasants for survival.

This research paper was commissioned by the SEU within the Equal Opportunity Commission of Western Australia. With a view to improve service outcomes for Aboriginal peoples and minority ethnic groups, this paper identifies the British Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) monitoring indicators and compares it with the types of data necessary to undertake similar monitoring for Substantive Equality in WA. This paper attempts to identify whether equality data captured for Britain can be easily readily identified and sourced by relevant government departments of WA. However, due to some constraints, this paper has selected a sample sized number of indicators in Britain to answer the research question.

Worldwide Indigenous peoples have experienced oppression, exploitation and subjugation since the colonial period began. The assimilationist and discriminatory policies implemented by the colonial rulers and subsequent states, which ranged from sheer negligence to acts of genocide, turned Indigenous peoples into the most marginalized and vulnerable groups worldwide. What is the reason behind such discriminatory behavior of the states? This dissertation locates the answer to this question in the debates regarding self-determination of Indigenous peoples. Through an analysis of historic evolution of self-determination of the Indigenous Jummas of Chittagong Hill Tracts the dissertation highlights that the ongoing oppression, suppression and subjugation experienced by Indigenous peoples are rooted in the sheer reluctance of the states to embrace the self-determination of Indigenous peoples within the state system. Due to this reluctance states often tend to implement assimilationist policies and impose their (state’s) preferred form of self-determination on Indigenous peoples, applying a top-down approach that undermines it instead.

This study examines the survival-cum-upward mobility strategies of indigenous Hill villagers in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) region of Bangladesh during the postCHT Accord (1997) period, focusing on the case of the Tanchangya villagers of Meyachara. These situated strategies are understood as a repertoire of actions towards a ‘good life’. The struggle for a ‘good life’ here is multifaceted, aimed at creating wider spaces in economic, social, and political spheres. This ethnographic research project examines three social contexts that are crucial for the contemporary indigenous villagers of this region. The first social context involves intracommunity relations within the immediate social world of the Tanchangya villagers. The analysis here is rooted in the struggles of Meyachara’s peasant families for secure livelihoods and the role of village-based relations in this regard. Their agricultural reproduction aims for secure ‘subsistence’ while remaining open to diverse opportunities for augmenting family resources. Tanchangya peasants exhibit calculated risk-taking behaviour in making their livelihood decisions. The analysis reveals that despite the growing dominance of market exchanges, village-based practices of reciprocity and redistribution continue to offer protection during crises and exploitation by external actors. The second context focuses on the processes of negotiations between Meyachara’s peasant families with Bengali trader-moneylenders in dadan loan contracts. On the one hand, the analysis sheds light on the mechanisms of control imposed by Bengali trader-moneylenders which creates ‘dependence’ of Tanchangya villagers on these trader-moneylenders. On the other hand, the analysis investigates the flexible and dynamic strategies employed by Tanchangya peasants to obtain fair prices for their agricultural produce. The third social context examines the situated strategies employed by Tanchangya villagers when encountering various manifestations of the state. The interactions with different manifestations of the state lead peasants to formulate diverse strategies, which encompass engaging, avoiding and resisting local state actors. Thus, this research demonstrates how a section of the Hill Peoples is persisting in its struggle despite being marginalised as a result of the nation-state building processes.