Caso individual (CAS) - Discusión: 1987, Publicación: 73ª reunión CIT (1987)

Convenio sobre poblaciones indígenas y tribuales, 1957 (núm. 107) - Bangladesh (Ratificación : 1972)

The Government has communicated the following information:

(The information communicated included details of tribal populations in the country outside the Chittagong Hill Tracts.)

There is no substance behind the allegation of massacres of the tribal population in the Chittagong Hill Tracts. There is however no denying the fact that an unsatisfactory law and order situation prevails in some isolated areas due to illegal activities of misguided elements. These elements have resorted to violence without provocation and indulged in mass killings, rape, torture and wholesale burning of villages, which has affected both the tribals and non-tribals. Even the non-tribals who settled in the Chittagong Hill Tracts some 100 years ago were not spared from their atrocities.

Once again, it is reiterated that the requisite steps have been taken to implement the provisions of the Convention for promotion of the social, economic and cultural development of tribal populations and for integration of these populations into the mainstream of the national community.

According to the 1981 Census, the total population of the Chittagong Hill Tracts is 751,000. Of these, 442,000 are tribals. According to the 1974 Census, the total population of the Chittagong Hill Tracts was 508,000, of which 350,000 were tribals. There is a substantial increase in the tribal population during the period between two censuses. The growth rate of the tribal population stands at around 4 per cent while the national average growth rate is recorded as 2.32 per cent. The migration of non-tribals to the Chittagong Hill Tracts or to any other part of the territory of Bangladesh is an inalienable right of the citizens of Bangladesh, upheld by the decision of the High Court and the provisions of the Constitution which ensure the rights of free movement and settlement. As indicated in the report submitted in 1985, the Government has taken the necessary measures not only for the protection of the tribal culture and tradition but also for the economic and cultural development of the tribal people.

The Government is jealously protecting the balance between measures for integration and upholding the identity and institutions of tribal populations.

The detailed report on the tribal people living in the Chittagong Hill Tracts was submitted to the Office in 1985. Tribal people living in other districts and their number were enumerated in the table under article 1 of the 1985 report. Since these tribal people are located side by side with the non-tribal people and since there is no separate administrative arrangement for the uplift of the tribal population in other districts, the benefit of all measures taken for the development of those areas are shared by the tribal populations. In addition, preference is given to tribal people in matters of admission to schools and colleges, entry into the employment market as well as retention of their cultural heritage. Tribal institutions are planned to be located in areas having relatively more concentration of tribal population, as in Durgapur in the district of Mymenshingh.

Some missionaries are also allowed to operate programmes for education, health and employment of tribal people in areas of concentration. Five missionary agencies have been working in tribal areas. They are registered with the Ministry of Social Services and Women's Affairs. They are required to submit to the registration authority reports on their activities from time to time.

The Government is empowered to make rules under the Chittagong Hill Tracts Regulation, No. 1 of 1900. Such rules are adopted for implementing the provisions of the regulation, but no copy can be made available as they have not been compiled into a manual.

The acquisition of land by non-tribal people is authorised as per laws of the land which provide different conditions for such acquisition. The suggestion of the tribal leaders, whom an ILO official met during his visit to Rangamati, to the effect that a formal prohibition on the acquisition of land be imposed, is not acceptable to the Government. The Chittagong Hill Tracts occupy approximately one-eighth of the total area of Bangladesh, whereas 1 per cent of the people live in these areas. It is needless to mention that Bangladesh is the most densely populated country in the world and therefore migration of people from densely populated areas to sparsely populated areas is a natural phenomenon.

A high inter-ministerial committee is already in existence in conformity with Articles 2 and 27 of the Convention, which looks after the implementation of policies and programmes for tribal population.

The policy of land settlement encourages the tribals to own specified areas of land for settled cultivation and assured living.

The specific characteristics of the tribal populations of the Chittagong Hill Tracts are kept in view when development activities are initiated. A special development programme was adopted in view of the fact that normal sectoral allocation of development resources was found to be inadequate for expansion of modern facilities and services to the sparsely populated and difficult terrain. It was also designed to accelerate economic development of the area.

Although the majority of the people belonging to tribes want to live in peace and participate in various development programmes of the Government, a limited number of misguided elements continue their efforts to create disturbances and disrupt law and order for personal gains.

It may also be mentioned in this connection that in order to bring back the misguided tribals who have taken up arms and to allow them to lead a normal life in the society and also to enjoy the fruits of development activities, the Government has declared an amnesty as well as certain concessions for those who will surrender to the administration.

It may be noted that in persuance of the amnesty declared by the Government, a good number of the misguided tribals have come back and settled in their places of origin. Others are coming back gradually in batches. Arrangements for their rehabilitation are being made accordingly.

Reception camps for tribal refugees are arranged temporarily for ultimate rehabilitation.

A Government representative drew the Committee's attention to the information provided by his country in writing. In its observation, the Committee of Experts had pointed to the need for a re-evaluation of the Government's policy towards the tribal population, an analysis of population distribution and movement in the Hill Tracts, an analysis of land ownership, an examination of whether development activities in those areas took sufficient account of the specific characteristics of the tribal populations, an investigation of the allegations of massacres and other abuses against the tribal population, and a clarification of the situation concerning tribal refugees.

The Government had taken note of the clarifications given by the Committee of Experts on the questions of population distribution and its concern for the lives and safety of the populations concerned. The Government representative wished to reiterate that all persons, irrespective of origin, caste, creed, religion or sex, were safeguarded under the country's Constitution. The Government had always taken a keen interest in the welfare of all tribal populations, including those in the Chittagong Hill Tracts, as was reflected in the detailed reports and enclosures submitted in 1985 and 1986. With the expansion of communications, education, agricultural development and industrial activities, tribal populations had joined the mainstream of society. In order to maintain that trend, the Government had already set up a Council Committee on the Chittagong Hill Tracts, with the President as its Chairman. A massive development programme had also been launched. The Council Committee was not only in conformity with the suggestion made earlier by the Committee of Experts regarding the establishment of an inter-ministerial committee, but also operated as the highest forum for the re-evaluation of policy needed in the light of the provisions of the Convention. It was the Government's firm policy to protect the balance between measure taken for the integration of tribal populations and the need to uphold their identity and institutions under the terms of the Convention.

The point relating to population distribution had already been met in the detailed information communicated in writing by the Government, where it was pointed out that the tribal population had a growth rate of 4 per cent as against the national average of 2.32 per cent.

Under the national Constitution, the Government had the sovereign right over the ownership of the land. In the past, tribal populations that had migrated from place to place had had no substantive ownership in any area. Nevertheless, under the provisions of Regulation No. 1 of 1900, the Government had adopted rules for the registration of documents and the regulation of transfers of land to the tribal population and had taken further steps to give tenancy rights to them. Thus a process had been initiated to enable tribal populations to reap the benefits of the Government's development efforts.

The Government had taken care to retain the characteristics of the tribal population in general and had adopted measures for upholding their cultural heritage. The tribal institutions noted in the report and some non-governmental institutions and missionaries were working out a system of writing for some of the country's tribal populations. That measure was likely to bear fruit in the coming years and to give the tribal populations an additional means of retaining their traditions and heritage.

The speaker also said that the alleged massacres and abuses against tribal populations were without any foundation. The Government had already given appropriate replies to the agencies which had raised those issues. The Committee's attention was drawn to the fact that misguided elements had been found forcibly collecting tolls from the tribal populations, resorting even to mass killings, rape and torture. That had created an unsatisfactory law-and-order situation which the Government had had to contain for the safety of the people in the area. The misguided elements concerned were armed and were affiliated to an alien ideology; they seemed to have taken refuge in territories outside Bangladesh.

The question of tribal refugees was also related to the forced eviction of settled tribal population by the same misguided elements. Refugees who has crossed the borders and taken shelter in camps were now being persuaded to return to their homes. The Government was in touch with the authorities in neighbouring countries with a view to arranging for their early repatriation. As indicated in the information provided above the returnees were given adequate support for their rehabilitation.

Since Bangladesh's ratification of this Convention in 1972, the Government had taken steps to organise, within the Ministry of Labour and Manpower, a small unit for interacting with the ILO on standards matters. It had also arranged for the establishment of focal points in different ministries and employers' and workers' organisation in order to be able to meet the Organisation's requirements. With ILO's assistance, it had already organised a national tripartite seminar on standards and would welcome further assistance so as to strengthen its administrative capacity. Since several Government agencies were involved in the development of tribal populations, time was needed to give an effective response to the Committee of Experts, to whose requests the report of 1987 was geared. The Government shared the Conference Committee's views on the usefulness of dialogue and offered its full co-operation.

The Employers' members noted that this Committee had been dealing with the protection of indigenous and tribal populations in Bangladesh for several years. Like the Committee of Experts, it had grounds for concern. It also had had the impression that not all the information required had been forthcoming, although the Government had recently supplied a certain number of answers in writing, and its representative in the Committee had just clarified certain other points. According to the Committee of Experts, there were six problem areas, and in 1986 the Conference Committee had felt obliged to express its concern in a special paragraph of its report. It was necessary for the Government to submit a full written report on the subject, and a further direct contacts mission to deal with the tribal situation on the spot might also be useful, since the direct contacts mission of 1986 had apparently been a failure. In view of the great importance of the problem, the Committee needed to be reassured. It realised that Bangladesh was a low-income developing country, but the Government ought to intensify its efforts to comply with the provisions of the Convention, with the support of the ILO.

The Workers' members said that in 1987, as in previous years, the Committee must emphasise the seriousness of the problem, since it had a duty to protect minorities and the weak, in Bangladesh as well as in any other countries where the problem arose. In the case under consideration, an end had to be put to the persecutions, oppression and brutality to which, according to reports, the tribal populations had been, and unfortunately still were being, subjected. In 1986 the Committee had decided to include a special paragraph on Bangladesh in its report. In 1987, at the end of its discussion, it would have to decide what it should do to help the Government to take account of the comments made by the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee. Although the case had been discussed at length in previous years, the Government had not sent in the report requested, and only at the last moment had it supplied a written reply. Furthermore, as the Employers' members had stated, neither the Government representative nor the information communicated had mentioned the suggestion that had been made concerning the dispatch of a direct contacts mission to Bangladesh to examine the problems on the spot, especially given the failure of the first mission. All the information contained in the Government's written reply was rather vague. The reply also asserted that the report of the Committee of Experts contained exaggerations and inaccuracies, but the information had originated from reliable sources such as Amnesty International or certain United Nations bodies. A further source of concern was the assertion that the Government was taking the necessary steps to secure the protection of tribal populations when other sources indicated that such protection was being provided by the army, whose methods were by no means peaceful. The Government had indicated that most of the tribal populations wanted to live in peace and to participate in the Government's development programmes, but that a small number of misguided elements continued to foment trouble with a view to deriving personal advantage. In that connection, the question arose as to whether the tribal populations could not have their own police; if the forces that came to restore order were outsiders, they would always be poorly received. The question was not, of course, a simple one, and the coexistence of different groups in the same society posed problems in many countries, both developed and developing. Nevertheless, the application of the Convention was an inescapable duty. Consequently, more must be done to ensure that the poorest and weakest members of society were protected and to secure conformity with the Convention, which, in the case under consideration, was still far away. The Committee ought to give the Government of Bangladesh further encouragement and to consider in what way it could assist it.

The Government representative explained that it had endeavoured to facilitate the investigations made by the direct contacts mission sent to Bangladesh in 1986, However, the mission had had its reservations concerning the arrangements made for it to bring its work to a successful conclusion. The Government had felt that, if it gave a detailed reply, as it had done in the 1986 report, some of the misgivings expressed by the Committee at its previous session would be allayed. Apparently, as the Employers' had pointed out, it would be wise to submit a full written report. The detailed report already submitted to the Committee was quite long and covered almost all the points raised in the direct request made in 1986, as well as in the observation made by the Committee of Experts. For example, the report indicated that tribal returnees received cash awards for surrendering their arms, an allotment of five acres of land free of charge, and a grant of agricultural and horticultural loans at a lower rate of interest, as well as help with the building of houses, the provision of agricultural inputs and a supply of food for one year. Several of the points raised in the present Committee had also been dealt with elsewhere in the United Nations system. For instance, a detailed report had been submitted to the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities in August 1984, as well as to Amnesty International.

As far as the involvement of the army was concerned, it should be borne in mind that until May 1986 the entire country had been under martial law, not just the Hill Tracts. A subcommittee of the cabinet under the chairmanship of the President himself was looking into matters relating to tribal populations as an expression of the Government's concern for the need to protect them from those who had so far disturbed law and order.

His Government's 1985 report had contained a comprehensive supplement on the development activities undertaken in the Chittagong Hill Tracts. As early as 1978 the Tribal Cultural Institute had been set up in there at a time when the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee had not been involved in the dialogue with his Government. A special effort was being made to promote the education of tribal children and their subsequent entry into the labour market. In fact, per capita expenditure on the development of tribal populations in the Hill Tracts and elsewhere was higher than that allocated to the rest of the population. His Government was willing to co-operate with the Committee of Experts and the Secretariat and to give further detailed information as and when required. Since focal points capable of supplying the necessary information existed within the various government agencies concerned with the tribal populations, the Government would probably be able to respond to the Committee's requests in future.

The Worker member of the United Kingdom thanked the Government representative for the detailed information supplied orally and in writing to the Committee. It was encouraging to observe that the Government recognised that the Committee of Experts and the present Committee were competent to deal with the particular matter under consideration. The problem was that the present Committee was not in a position to examine so much information. The information supplied appeared to contradict that issued by human rights organisations such as Amnesty International. Consequently, it would be advisable for the Government representative to give serious consideration to the possibility of immediate direct contracts, so that the complex matter could be clarified and an exhaustive report could be prepared for subsequent consideration.

The Government representative said that his Government had made quite elaborate efforts to respond to the questions put by the Committee of Experts and to follow up on the decisions adopted by the Conference Committee in 1986. Also, his Government had recently started a fruitful dialogue with its neighbours with a view to securing the repatriation of tribal persons who had crossed over into their territory. In its concern to demonstrate its position to the world at large, the Government had even arranged for the ambassadors of various countries to see for themselves the conditions of the tribal populations in the Chittagong Hill Tracts. Consequently, it would be correct to say that a consistent effort had been made to respond to the Committee's wishes. In any case, the Committee's recommendations would be transmitted to Dacca, and contact would be established with the Standards Department as soon as possible.

The Workers' members said that they had a duty to reiterate their serious preoccupation and to insist that reports should be transmitted, that measures should be taken, and that a direct contacts mission should be sent to Bangladesh, which had offered no response, in order to assess the situation and to verify the sometimes contradictory information that had been received. The case should again be mentioned in a special paragraph.

The Employers' members stated that, in view of the many problems and uncertainties that were still outstanding, they considered that direct contacts constituted the best way of dispelling their doubts. The information supplied by the Government representative in his reply was contradictory, since he had stated that contact would be made with the Standards Department but had given no indication as to the possibility of requesting a direct contacts mission. The Committee therefore ought to express its concern in its report. Next year it would be necessary to review the case again in order to determine whether any substantial changes had taken place.

The Government member of Czechoslovakia said that, in view of the very detailed information provided by the Government representative, he did not consider that the case ought to be mentioned in a special paragraph of the report. Since the Government had made considerable efforts to co-operate with the Committee, it was doubtful whether a special paragraph would offer the best form of encouragement. It was his understanding that the Government representative was not rejecting a direct contact mission; he had merely stated that he was going to consult his Government.

The Government representative stated that the proposal of a direct contacts mission would be transmitted to Dhaka for a response. He said that the proposal to mention the case in a special paragraph may be reviewed in view of the interaction between the Committee of Experts and the Government, as well as in view of the information submitted in the detailed reports submitted in the last three years.

The Committee took note of the information communicated by the Government and explanations provided by the Government representative on the application of the Convention. It reiterated its concern regarding the situation of indigenous and tribal populations in Bangladesh. It urged the Government to adopt concrete measures along the lines of the comments made by the Committee of Experts, with a view to ensuring that the Convention is fully applied. It suggested that the Government should reconsider the possibility that a representative of the Director-General should make a further visit to the country, with a view to examining on the spot all the questions raised by the Committee of Experts. It urged the Government to supply information on all questions raised. Finally, it decided to mention the case in a special paragraph of its report.