Vested Property Act in Bangladesh has affected the Hindu population dwelt on the figures that indicated a continuing silent exodus of Hindu population from Bangladesh from the time of Partition to this day. The relative share of Hindu population declined from 18.4 per cent of the total population in 1961 to 12.1 per cent in 1981, to 10.5 per cent in 1991 and further down to 9.2 per cent in 2001. There was a corresponding rise in the relative share of Muslim population from 80.4 per cent in 1961 to 86.7 per cent in 1981, 88.3 per cent in 1981 and 89.7 per cent in 1991. It was estimated in 2007 that the Hindu population may have gone down to a further 8 per cent and the corresponding Muslim population risen up to 92 per cent. The 2011 (8.5 per cent) and 2022 (7.95 per cent) figures cite further decline in the rate of Hindu population over the years.
This could be because of a silent and steady out-migration. For this, the figures quoted are as follows: Assuming the percentage of Hindu population in 1961 was 18.4 per cent, given comparable mortality and fertility rates, the absolute size of the Hindu population in 2001 would have been 22.8 million instead of 11.4 million as reported in the census i.e. twice the actual size. This meant that mass out-migration (mostly to India) was a reality during this period. There were some 1.8 million missing Hindu population during 1981-1991, and 2.8 million missing Hindu population during 1991-2001.
When the two-nation theory was accepted by the Muslim League in the 1930s, it gave rise to a Muslim identity politics that became part and parcel of an official discourse in the state of Pakistan. In East Pakistan, such a discourse had consequences for a large part of the Hindu landed gentry residing within the borders of what was to become Pakistan after the partition of the sub-continent. The violence that accompanied the Partition caused many Hindus to flee in large numbers, mostly on the Punjab front, but also in waves on the Eastern flanks i.e. the Bengal border. As many accounts of Partition recount, the movement in the Bengal border occurred in waves and peaked during the communal riots of the 50s and 60s, just prior to and after the 1965 Indo-Pakistan war. This massive flow of out-migration created a serious administration problem of managing the leftover properties of evacuees. Using this as an excuse and with the growing hostilities with India, the Pakistan state promulgated some detrimental acts and Ordinances, which were to leave behind the legacy of communal politics for many years to come.
The Act which helped to destroy the fabric of communal harmony in East Bengal was made under an executive order on September 9, 1965 (during the Indo-Pakistan War) and was called the Enemy property (Custody and Registration) Order II of 1965. Preceding this Act there were many smaller Acts promulgated to administer the properties of the evacuees and which paved the way for this ultimate Act. These were the Government of East Bengal requisition of Property Act (Act XIII of 1948) as a temporary measure of 3 years, which indirectly through the Ordinance No. V/80.5.2 has direct or indirect continuity through this present day. Other such Acts were the East Bengal Evacuees (Administration of Immovable Property) Act 1951 the East Pakistan Disturbed Persons Rehabilitation Ordinance 1964, Ordinance I of 1964. All these Acts created the pretext for the State to intervene, supervise, manage and later even transfer the property of evacuees and persons dislocated and affected by communal disturbances. The consequences of such Ordinances were that it alienated the Hindu minorities in Bangladesh, and later other religious and indigenous communities as well from their ownership, entitlement and right to manage their own property. Such a legal regime also laid the system wide open for manipulation by vested interest groups and the adoption of corruption and malpractice by administration.
With the independence of Bangladesh, the Enemy Property Act should have been logically abolished, as it was not in line with the spirit of the 1972 Constitution, nor the proclamation of Independence (April 10, 1971). But, immediately after liberation, the government of Bangladesh enforced on 26th March, 1972, the Bangladesh Vesting of Property and Assets Order, 1972, by virtue of which properties left behind by the Pakistanis and erstwhile enemy properties were considered to be a single category. In 1974, when the Government repealed the past 1969 Ordinance, it only meant that all enemy properties of firms which were entrusted to the custodians of enemy property in the then East Pakistan, remained vested in the government of Bangladesh under the banner of Vested Property.
In 1976, the government of Bangladesh repealed the previous Act only to consolidate it even more. The government was not only to administer and manage the vested properties, but also to dispose of or transfer the same on a long-term basis. Such developments indicate that the political and legal regime was getting increasingly hostile to minority communities and the dispossession of land was a game being played out with big stakes and at a high administrative level corroborating strongly with vested interests at the political level.
A study estimated that the “true amount of lost assets for an average affected Hindu household due to EPA/VPA, for the whole period between 1965 and 2006 would be Tk. 889,517”. The dispossession took place by various means, illegal occupants conniving with land officials, through violence relating to control of harvest, use of forced eviction techniques by administration, by using forged documents by bribing relevant authorities, using the death or migration of family members as a pretext for occupation and the grabbing of land by officials themselves!
The Awami League when it came to power in 1996 under the pressure of internal lobby groups, did adopt the vested Property Restoration Act 2001 in the 22nd session of the Jatiyo Sangsad (National Parliament) on 11th April, 2001 repealing the Vested Property Act. This Act ensured the return of vested properties to their rightful owners and described procedures in which this could be done. The Act, though welcomed, did not escape criticism by civil society groups, who suggested amendments to make it more fool proof for victims of land dispossession. As it stands now, the new act is yet to be properly implemented and experts and civil society groups be consulted for further proposed amendments.
(Deepak Kumar is a New Delhi-based foreign and strategic affairs analyst. Views expressed are personal)
*Except for the headings & sub-headings, this story has not been edited by The enewstime.in and has been published from IANS feed.
