In the midst of the collective national endeavor to transition to a healthy democratic culture and practices, the recent assault on aggrieved indigenous students in front of the National Curriculum and Textbook Board (NCTB) building in Motijheel will go down as an unfortunate incident under the current interim government. To bring out rally and procession is every group's democratic right. But on Wednesday when a group of students under the banner of "Aggrieved Indigenous Students" marched towards NCTB building to protest the omission of a graffiti from the cover of a textbook, activists of an organisation called "Students for Sovereignty" mercilessly beat them up. Even though police were present at the scene, they allegedly played the role of silent spectators. Later, in the face of public outcry, two of the attackers were arrested.
The incident stemmed from the NCTB's use of a graffiti of July-August uprising on the back cover of a book for class IX-X. The graffiti features a tree with five vibrant leaves, each representing a different socio-religious-ethnic identity: Muslim, Buddhist, Christian, Hindu and the indigenous people. The inscription below the tree reads, "Tearing of any leave is prohibited." This symbolises the core message of the mass uprising of building an inclusive and discrimination-free nation.
It is noteworthy that Chief Adviser Professor Muhammad Yunus was so deeply impressed by the catchy and thought-provoking graffiti of the uprising that he published a book on the subject and presented it to world leaders during his visit to the United Nations General Assembly. Regrettably, the government is now facing opposition from certain quarters regarding the inclusion of a graffiti of the uprising on the textbook cover. While constructive debate and discussion regarding the subject matter of any artwork are always welcome, forcibly removing them clearly goes against the spirit of the uprising. And, at a time when the government is striving to reform various state institutions and foster a more inclusive society, any attempt to suppress symbols of unity and inclusivity is deeply concerning.
The contentious issue has apparently been created from the long-standing debate of whether tribal groups based in Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT) are to be recognised as indigenous people or not. Many among the majority Bengalis do not want smaller ethnic groups to be designated as indigenous people. The argument is that if the smaller ethnic groups are to be called indigenous, it indicates that the mainstream Bengalis are foreigners. The larger Bengali-speaking group did neither come from any foreign land, nor did they colonise any land or extirpate any native inhabitants. Rather, some hill-dwelling or forest-dwelling tribes may have migrated to this country from neighbouring lands in the course of the last few centuries and found this country hospitable; but the majority of Bengalis never considered them foreigners or settlers. They in fact want all the people living in this country, irrespective of differing culture and ethnicities, to be known as Bangladeshis. They, therefore, are of the belief that there is no reason for this country to denote any particular group or groups as indigenous, or "Adibashi" (original inhabitants) in Bangladesh.
However, according to the United Nations, to be recognised as indigenous, certain characteristics must be met, including: strong ties to a specific territory or geographic area and its natural resources; distinct social, economic, and political systems; unique languages, cultures, and beliefs; existence as populations outside the dominant society; commitment to preserving ancestral environments and traditional ways of life; and self-identification as indigenous, with individuals and communities striving to sustain their tribal or cultural identity. These criteria indicate that being indigenous goes beyond merely a history of residing in an original area.
The small ethnic groups say they want them to be recognised as indigenous people so that they can protect their distinct cultural identity and rights within the geographical territory of Bangladesh under the UN framework for indigenous peoples. It is about time the government addressed their grievances with regard to constitutional recognition of their rights, discrimination and repression on the basis of equality consistent with the democratic and secular spirit of a country. Any continued attempts to oppress them through brute majority will only deepen their sense of alienation from the country.
[email protected]
