Tripartite talks have been going on for some time between the All-Assam Students' Union (AASU), the Centre and the State Government for the "full implementation" of the Assam Accord of 1985. The next round of talks will be held in New Delhi on May 31. The AASU is now demanding cent per cent reservation of seats for the "indigenous" people of Assam in the local bodies, Assembly and Parliament. Reportedly, the demand has already been accepted "in principle".

The AASU says its demand for reservation stems from Clause 6 of the Assam Accord which says: "Constitutional, legislative and administrative safeguards, as may be appropriate, shall be provided to protect, preserve and promote the cultural, social, linguistic identity and heritage of the Assamese people."

In a State with a complex population composition, the AASU's demand for cent per cent reservation of seats for indigenous people - rather its definition of the word "indigenous" - has opened a veritable Pandora's Box and evoked sharp reaction from different segments of the people. Plains tribals, hill tribals, religious and linguistic minorities, among others, have voiced their misgivings and apprehension on this issue.

According to the AASU, "indigenous" means those people (and their descendants) (a) whose names were recorded in the National Register of Citizens (NRC) of 1951 and (b) in the districts which do not have the NRC those who were recorded in the electoral rolls of the first general election in 1952.

The AASU has further stated that Indian citizens coming from other States of the country who are living in Assam will continue to enjoy all rights granted by the Constitution "except that they will not be able to contest elections in the State".

The AASU's stand has been supported by the Advocate-General of Assam, Mr. Panchu Gopal Baruah, who maintains that the objective of clause 6 of the Assam Accord can be best achieved by making provisions similar to those for Jammu and Kashmir where there are safeguards which ensure that political power will always remain with the permanent residents of the State.

Talking on the same lines, Mr. Deva Kanta Kakati, a retired IGP who is now a senior advocate, says: "Today, every Assamese is thinking of some safeguards so that only the Assamese can be elected as his representative" to Parliament and the State Legislature. He also wants legislation to be enacted for regulation of transfer of land "by sale, mortgage, lease, barter, gift or otherwise" to non-indigenous people in Assam for a period of 30 years.

However, Mr. Nishinath Changkakoty, a former DGP of Assam, thinks March 25, 1971, should be the cut-off date for the purpose of reservation of seats for the "indigenous" people.

The CPI, a constituent of the four-party ruling alliance, almost echoes the AASU view: those who settled in Assam on the day the Constitution came into force (January 26, 1950) and whose names appeared in the 1952 electoral rolls should be taken as "indigenous".

The PCC chief, Mr. Tarun Gogoi's definition is simple: those "`who accept the Assamese language and culture and Assam as their own land" should be treated as indigenous.

The BJP, however, wants the cut-off date for people to be considered indigenous as March 25, 1971, in terms of clauses 5.3 and 5.8 of the Assam Accord.

The strongest reaction to the AASU's definition of "indigenous" has come from the tribal people who claim to be the aboriginals/autochthons of Assam. The All-Assam Tribal Sangha has demanded that the cut-off date for identifying the "indigenous" people should be February 24, 1826, the date on which the Yandaboo Treaty between the East India Company and the King of Ava (Burma) was signed, marking Assam's annexation by the British. "Those people living in the State prior to this date are the genuine indigenous people" of Assam, the Sangha asserts.

The All-Bodo Students' Union (ABSU), powerful students' body of the Bodos, has rejected outright the AASU's definition and decided to convene a special meeting of experts to define the "indigenous" and the "non-indigenous" people of the State. The ABSU has said the understanding reportedly arrived at among the AASU, the Centre and the State, has created "lots of doubts, confusion and misunderstanding" among the people.

Mr. Daleswar Bodo, vice-president of the Bodo Sahitya Sabha, has said the AASU's move "is to deprive the aboriginals/autochthons of Assam, like Bodos and Misings, of their due protection and safeguard from the intrusion of the new-comers under the guise of `khilanjia', that is, indigenous."

The Autonomous State Demand Committee (ASDC), a party of the hill tribes of Karbi Anglong and North Cachar, has also opposed the AASU's unilateral definition of "indigenous" and called for a dialogue among different sections of the people for arriving at a consensus.

Mr. Hafiz Rashid Ahmed Choudhury, president of the United Minorities Front (UMF), has questioned the validity of the very concept "indigenous". Clause 6 of the Assam Accord (quoted above) he says, only speaks of the "Assamese people", not "indigenous" people or "Assamese-speaking" people.

The Bengali-speaking people of the Brahmaputra Valley also have misgivings. At a convention on May 14 at Guwahati, a "Forum for Linguistic Minorities of Assam" was formed "to safeguard the interest of the people belonging to the various linguistic minority communities". The Forum is against "imposition or forcible assimilation in any manner" and stressed the need for allowing all citizens of the State, irrespective of their language and religious affinity, to enjoy equal rights as guaranteed by the Constitution. The Forum will hold a State-level Convention in October or November to set up a "broad-based and permanent" organisation of all the linguistic minority groups in the State such as Nepalis and Chakmas.

The political significance of the AASU's demand is that it seeks to bar all people, including those who came from other States of India and settled down in Assam permanently, from contesting any election unless they satisfy its definition of an "indigenous" person.