Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord Research Articles

Contested Peace: The Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord

Located in the south-east corner of Bangladesh, the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) have a history of a vicious conflict between its Bengali settlers and the Paharis, specifically the indigenous community, the Pahari-adivasis. The region’s already volatile background further escalated thanks to the nation-building approach that was being followed by the state after Bangladesh became independent in 1971. This inclination triggered an insurgency movement whose leaders demanded regional autonomy and a recognition of their identity so that people could lead a life of dignity. To quell the movement, the state resorted to military force. Later to introduce peace, the CHT Peace Accord was signed in 1997. However, though it did succeed in bringing about an element of stability, the accord failed in its larger objective as it excluded the engagement of the larger mass of Pahari people. Just over twenty years after the accord was signed, we examine, through a research study, why it neither lead to sustainable peace nor was it successful in its goal of conflict management.

Negotiating with the Other: Centre-Periphery Perceptions, Peacemaking Policies and Pervasive Conflict in the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh

Abstract Intrastate peace agreements tend to be drafted in situations of political chaos, multiple combatants and shifting allegiances within and between state and non-state actors. Despite this, such agreements continue to reflect a bilateral understanding of conflict, with the state on one side and the non-state on the other. Such an understanding was employed in the largely unsuccessful 1997 Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord in Bangladesh. This article argues that the failure of the Accord to secure a durable and lasting peace is due to the mistaken belief by the Bangladeshi government that the conflict was a ‘two sides’ war between the modern Bengali-Muslim state and it’s ‘primitive’ and ‘savage’ periphery. Soon after the Peace Accord was signed it became apparent that the Government of Bangladesh had made a fatal error in assuming that the communities in question were a simple, homogenous and unified group. Rather, the communities of the CHT are a collection of ethnically and ideologically distinct groups. This failure has led to division and competition of local politics in the CHT today, and continued warfare within and between many CHT communities. Violent actors have been polarized by the terms of the peace agreement and jungle warfare continues at great risk and cost to communities.1

Constitutionality of the Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord 1997: Is the Peace Process Valid?

Bangladesh attained sovereign statehood in 1971 through a war of liberation against Pakistan and adopted its Constitution in 1972. The Constitution of Bangladesh proclaims that it is a democratic country established on the notion of Bengali nationalism. ‘Bengali’ is the mother tongue of the majority of the people of Bangladesh. The Bangladesh Constitution contemplates a unitary state integrated on the basis of a common culture. The Constitution purposefully ignored the existence of a distinct ethnic culture practiced by the tribal indigenous people living in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) region. The Chittagong Hill Tracts region is comprised of the Rangamati, Bandarban and Khagrachari districts. It is the home of eleven different ethnic indigenous groups. Since Bangladesh's nationhood, the indigenous people living in the CHT region have been demanding recognition of their separate identity and autonomy from Bangladesh. They also wanted to ban Bengali settlement in the CHT region. The indigenous people organised themselves into an armed separatist group ‘Parbotya Chottogram Jono Sanghati Somiti’ (PCJSS) in a movement to attain autonomy for the CHT region. This movement was a serious threat against the sovereignty and indivisibility of Bangladesh as a unitary state. The Government of Bangladesh has implemented different initiatives over the last 42 years to resolve this movement including a policy of militarisation resulting in genocide. Indigenous people were denied civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. The Government of Bangladesh has also tried to resolve this issue through dialogue. However, both approaches have failed to settle this problem. In this context, the CHT Peace Accord (‘Accord’) was executed between the Government and the indigenous tribal people of the CHT region in 1997. Both parties agreed to end the conflict and establish peace in the region. Accordingly, the Government declared a general amnesty with the armed tribal persons on the condition that they surrender their arms. The Accord established a distinct administration for the CHT region which is completely different from other parts of the country. The local administration of the CHT region was given the power to autonomously function without interference from the Bengali Government. The Accord was successful in quelling the rebellion in the CHT region. It was acclaimed as a major peace initiative by the international community. New statutes were passed in order to implement the promises made in the Accord. These are the Chittagong Hill Tracts Regional Council Act 1998 and the Rangamati, Khagrachari and Bandarban Hill District Council Amendment Act 1998. The Hill District Council Amendment Acts 1998 brought changes to the original Hill District Council Acts 1989. Pursuant to these new laws, the Hill District Councils are no longer expressly characterised as local government institutions. At the same time, the amending acts also increased the power of the Hill District Councils to decide local administrative matters. Nevertheless, none of the promises made in the Accord has been realised. In the mean-time, the Accord itself has been challenged in the High Court Division (HCD) of the Supreme Court (SC) of Bangladesh for allegedly infringing provisions of the Constitution. The High Court Division has stated that some of the Accord provisions implemented through subsequent statues were also unconstitutional. The Court held that the Accord’s promise to established an administration framework was contradictory to the unitary nature of the Republic, which is a fundamental feature contemplated by the Bangladeshi Constitution. The judgment also held that provisions of the Accord and the implementing statutes result in discrimination against other citizens of Bangladesh, therefore violating the constitutional principle of equality before the law. The Appellate Division of Bangladesh Supreme Court granted a stay on the High Court Division judgment concerning this matter. Consequently, the Accord retains de jure validity. However, the HCD Judgment remains a threat to the legality and validity of the whole peace process that the Bangladesh Government is trying to establish in the CHT region. This paper critically analyses the constitutionality of the Accord in light of the HCD judgment. Firstly, it will discuss the contents of the Accord and its constitutionality. Sections two and three set out a detailed discussion of the administrative system in the CHT region and the main grounds of conflict between the Constitution and the provisions of the Accord as discussed in the HCD judgment focused on the issue of the unitary character of the Republic. The paper will then discuss the decision and reasoning of the High Court Division and critically analyse the arguments and counter-arguments. The underlying tenet of this paper is that the Accord and the implementing statutes are not unconstitutional.

The Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord in Bangladesh: An Overview

The Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord, signed on December 2, 1997 between the government of Bangladesh and the Parbattya Chattagram Jana Samhiti Samiti(PCJSS—Chittagong Hill People’s Solidarity Association) ended a long-standing armed conflict between the Bangladesh Army and the tribal people of the Chittagong Hill Tracts in the south-eastern region of Bangladesh. The treaty promised to bring stability in the region. But 15 years into the signing of the Accord, it has yet to bear fruit. The region is still the most unstable region of the country and resentment among the tribal people is increasing day by day due to delays in the full implementation of the Accord. The Accord has also produced a new conflict: after its signing, a group emerged from within the PCJSS movement and formed the United People’s Democratic Front (UPDF) a political party aiming at “full autonomy” rather than implementation of the Accord. The frequent clashes between PCJSS and UPDF and between the tribal and the ‘Bengali Settlers’ pose serious threat to the security of the country. In this situation this paper argues that the government of Bangladesh should take immediate and meaningful steps toward full implementation for the Accord. The costs of failure are high: disrupting activities, armed warfare, violations of human rights, losses of lives and resources, exposing the border regions to external threats—all of these are costs that the nation can hardly bear if lasting peace is not achieved. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2013.v4n4p123

The Elusive Peace Accord in the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh and the Plight of the Indigenous People

The Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord, signed in 1997, promised to end a long-standing armed conflict and grant a host of benefits to the indigenous people occupying the south-eastern region of Bangladesh. After a decade the accord has yet to bear fruit; it remains unimplemented and the suffering, misery, subordination, and exploitation of the indigenous people continue. Our study reveals that the accord has failed to protect the indigenous communities from harassment and violence inflicted upon them by law enforcement agencies and Bangali settlers. Political instability and the lack of a firm political commitment have crippled the accord, thus the hopes and aspirations that accompanied it have withered. This has resulted in serious consequences for the indigenous people: intra-group rivalry and conflicts, fragmentation within the communities, a dwindling economy and stagnating social and human development due to the poor healthcare and education sectors. This paper describes the political situation in the Chittagong Hill Tracts before and after the accord was signed, the political and social ills and suffering it promised to resolve, and concludes by outlining a possible way forward.

The Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord: A Landmark Model for a Viable Solution to the Refugee Problem

The Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) area of Bangladesh, home to the Chakma and eleven other major tribes, has experienced civil strife since the early 1970s. The demand for autonomy by the local tribal leaders and the settlement of Bengalees into the CHT sparked armed insurgency. The fighting between the tribal hill people and Bangladlesh army continued for almost two decades, resulting in a large flight of predominantly Chakma refugees into India. Talks between India and Bangladesh officials regarding these refugees resulted in the creation of tribally-Ied local governments in the CHT, and a rehlilbilitation package for Chakma and other refugees. This process laid the groundwork for the Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord signed on December 2,1997 between the Bangladesh government and the Hill Tracts People's Solidarity Association (PCJSS). Shortly after, about 60,000 refugees returned to the CHT from India, and guerillas surrendered their arms. The objective of this background paper is to examine the Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord and its role in providing a framework for a viable solution to the refugee problem in the CHT. It also highlights those aspects of the Accord which serve as a model for preventing refugee flight and displacement of people in any conflict situation.

Bangladesh's Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord: Institutional Features and Strategic Concerns

Research Article| July 01 1998 Bangladesh's Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord: Institutional Features and Strategic Concerns M. Rashiduzzaman M. Rashiduzzaman Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Asian Survey (1998) 38 (7): 653–670. https://doi.org/10.2307/2645754 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation M. Rashiduzzaman; Bangladesh's Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord: Institutional Features and Strategic Concerns. Asian Survey 1 July 1998; 38 (7): 653–670. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2645754 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter All ContentAsian Survey Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1998 The Regents of the University of California Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Bangladesh's Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord: Institutional Features and Strategic Concerns

Bangladesh's Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord: Institutional Features and Strategic Concerns