The Centre’s decision to confer citizenship to the Chakma and Hajong refugees settled in Arunachal Pradesh deserves to be commended but depriving them of land rights, Schedule Tribe status and application of the Inner Line Permits on them, so to say, is somewhat ignoble on the part of New Delhi after years of indecision.

It also goes against the Supreme Court judgments to grant them citizenship in general. It appears to be a mere political accommodation and dubious interpretation of laws for political settlement.

Such kind of citizenship to those who had been living in the state for more than 50 years will, in fact, permanently deny them Indian citizenship. It will further institutionalise their statelessness and will create an apartheid-like system that will restrict their movement, employment, opportunities, and will also limit their access to state services.

The sin the Chakma tribe committed was to be with India during the 1947 partition, which took place on religious lines. At that point of time, the Chittagong Hill Tracts had more than 95 per cent population of Buddhists.

The Indian leaders assured them that the CHT will be part of India and Chakmas even celebrated India’s Independence Day and continued to do so until they realised they were cheated when promises were not kept.

Then Pakistan considered Chakmas as traitors. While the Pakistan government started work on construction of the Kaptai dam in CHT for a hydel project, they were helpless. Massacres and genocides were justified and this continued even after East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) got independence in 1971.

At the time of partition the CHT was divided into two. Overnight, one Chakma village was divided and its inhabitants became foreigners to each other. Since then India has failed to protect and secure their rights as a community. And they became brutal victims of partition.

In Mizoram the Chakmas, who became Indian citizens following partition, are treated and persecuted by the Mizos as illegal migrants. In the general perceptions and beliefs of the Mizos, the Chakmas belong to the CHT. In other words, with racially discriminatory policies and acts, Mizoram excludes the Chakma from the common conception of citizenship.

The recent denial of medical seats to four meritorious Chakma students by the state government was based on the belief that the Mizos are the only “sons of the soil”. Today, in Arunachal Pradesh, after the two judgments of the Supreme Court (1996 and 2015), the Chakmas and Hajongs are on the road to be recognised as citizens of India, yet without citizenship.

These people who entered through Mizoram to escape the nightmares of the Kaptai Dam after their land was submerged under water had no place to go. Then Assam governor, Vishnu Sahay realised that settling them in Mizoram would cause ethnic tension, because of the Mizos’ antagonistic attitudes towards the Chakmas.

The Tripura government expressed its inability to settle them because it had already accommodated thousands of refugees. The Centre then settled them in Bihar and Dandakaranya.

Finally, the Centre chose the North East Frontier Agency, now Arunachal Pradesh, in 1963, because the NEFA had surplus and vacant land in the MiaoVijoynagar valley of Tirap Frontier Division.

It is worth mentioning that, unlike the Mizos, the indigenous people of Arunachal Pradesh expressed their willingness to accept the Chakmas and accommodate them without any concern and ill-feelings.

This was recorded in the official correspondence among officers of the then NEFA. The Chakmas and Hajongs enjoyed facilities and opportunities just like any local people in the state. For instance, till 1980 their children received stipends, book grants, et al.

The Chakmas were also given trading licenses, agricultural assistance and so on. Most importantly, the local people treated them like any indigenous people of the state. It was only after 1980 that discrimination started and government facilities and services were gradually withdrawn.

Such a socio-political situation in the state can be understood as an impact of the Assam movement against illegal migrants. The divisive and jingoistic Assamese movement, led by the All Assam Students’ Union, to detect and deport “foreigners” was at its peak especially from 1978 to 1985.

Today, the decision to grant the Chakmas and Hajongs citizenship without rights also means denying them equality as citizens, and treating them as “foreigners”’ and thereby making a mockery of the Supreme Court judgments.

The question that arises, is the Centre and state playing politics of appeasement and undermining the principle of law and humanity by such nature of citizenship? If Chakmas do not get citizenship it will further lead to deprivation, marginalisation and subjugation by more systematic ways and means.

In the backdrop of the Rohingya crisis and the criticism the government is receiving from other parts of the world, is it India’s move to rescue its image in the name of Chakma and Hajong refugees?

Both the Centre and the state government know that the Supreme Court judgments has to be implemented — they are for equal rights and not differential treatment of citizens based on race, ethnicity, colour or caste.

Indeed, it is the duty of the modern democratic state not to discriminate between citizens and non-citizens (which Chakmas and Hajongs are not) under international covenants and human rights provisions, while in this case, Chakmas, deemed to be citizens by Supreme Court verdicts are denied their right to be citizens.

Such an ostensibly parochial and anti-democratic tendency endangers the very project of nation-building by drawing arbitrary social boundaries, which are not only unconstitutional but also precariously rife with a threat to life of others. Hence, granting citizenship without rights will not only set a precedence of injustice to the Chakma and Hajongs but also to humanity in general.

The writer is a doctoral scholar in development studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.