Dr. Koyel Basu

Assam is a unique case. Its violence has been mostly ethnic, more a function of the complex ties between state interests and demographic patterns. Assamese sub-nationalism started as a linguistic movement where reduced cultural heterogeneity has sharply heightened tensions between the Assamese and other communities. The cultural complexity here demanded a different type of governance. Secessionist movements occurred here and through the 1970s and 1980s massive acts of violence that included massacres/harassment of ‘outsiders’ blockading of oil pipes and damage to state property became part of the movement. The violence of the ULFA and the Bodo militants have also been rampant and violated political and human rights of people with impunity. Assam has witnessed massive sub-national and ethnic violence since the 1980s and it is one of the starkest cases of democracy and human rights violation proceeding hand in hand.

However, what needs to be asserted is that the state cannot be wholly blamed or made responsible for the situation of human rights violations in all these regions. Human rights are the bedrock on which a civil and democratic society rests. The Indian Constitution acknowledges this. Federalism and the highly segmented character of Indian society enabled the Centre to function when some states were in political turmoil. Conflict that broke out in one state rarely spread to neighboring states. Claims are often mutually exclusive and not easily aggregated.

KEYWORDS: ethnic mosaic, violence, human rights violations.

Journal Name :
EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review(JEBR)

Published on :

Vol : 5
Issue : 12
Month : December
Year : 2017
Copyright © 2024 EPRA JOURNALS. All rights reserved
Developed by Peace Soft