Bhangar Violence: Land Storm Threatens Mamata’s Development Plans

A spate of incidents of violence over land disputes across West Bengal threaten Mamata’s ambitious investment plans.

A bus torched by people staging a demonstration against a proposed power substation project in West Bengal’s Bhangar on 17 January 2017. (Photo: IANS)

About a fortnight into the new year, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, her party and its government found themselves haunted by a spectre it had helped raise, and possibly thought had exorcised as well: The spectre of land acquisition.

Violence Erupts in Bhangar

Violence erupted in Bhangar, on the eastern periphery of Kolkata, on 17 January over the acquisition of land by the Power Grid Corporation through purchase, with the help of the state government, to build a power substation. Though the transaction had taken place in 2013, agitation against it began on a low key in 2016, and exploded last month due to various reasons.

On the heels of this agitation, violence erupted near Birbhum district’s Bolpur town (twinned with Santiniketan, the seat of Visva Bharati University) on 30 January over Banerjee’s plan to build a university on land that was already acquired.

Ausgram, in Bardhaman district, witnessed violence on 28 January over the construction of a stationery shop on government land adjoining a school campus. It was said to have been built by a civic volunteer with the connivance of local Trinamool Congress leaders.

What was interesting in all these instances was the response of the state government. In Bhangar, although Banerjee immediately assured the agitators that the project would be shifted out, the movement was met initially by a violent police reaction.

People participate in a rally organised to condemn police firing on villagers protesting against the proposed power grid in Bhangar, in Kolkata on 18 January 2017. (Photo: IANS)

Govt Eerily Similar to CPI(M)‘s Earlier Stand

Two people died in police firing amidst swirling allegations of a campaign of physical intimidation orchestrated by Arabul Islam, a much-discredited local Trinamool leader and thug, who had been expelled from the party a few years ago but readmitted because of his electoral indispensability.

The agitation was kindled by rumours that the project was part of a larger project and would involve the installation of a network of high-tension power lines, connecting the substation to distant places. This would have an adverse impact on crops, fisheries, cattle and, indeed, human beings.

The agitational tactics were eerily reminiscent of those employed in Nandigram – felling trees to prevent police vehicles from entering the area, some of which were set on fire, and widespread violence.

Peace initiatives followed through the intervention an influential pir and a local MLA, as also compensation for the families of the victims. But these were accompanied by the imprisonment of several people, including local agitators and members of an “ultra-left” group – the CPI-ML (Red Star).

The official rhetoric echoed that of the CPI-M in its final days in power: People were being misled by outsiders, mainly students and political activists, as if leading or “instigating” a movement is a criminal act. If that had been so, the CPI-M, which also jailed students and Maoist “agents provocateurs” during land-related agitations, could have jailed Banerjee as well.

No attempt was made initially to explain the details and benefits of the project to those who had given up their land, though the police were instructed to stay away and exercise restraint. The police managed to enter the area on 25 January, though the area remains tense at the time of writing.

Bhangar 2.0 in Bolpur

In the Bolpur case, the government’s attitude was similar. The proposed site of the planned university, set to come up on sixteen acres of land, abutted a fairly new residential township, and a spanking new building to house information technology firms. It was part of 300-acre sprawl acquired by the West Bengal Infrastructure Development Corporation to set up an industrial development centre, which failed to take off.

In accordance with the Chief Minister’s stated positions, the land should have been returned to its owners. But Banerjee took a unilateral decision without local consultation. The agitators, not unreasonably, want industrial units to be set up on the land to generate employment opportunities, which a university will be unlikely to provide for them.

Bolpur has witnessed a Bhangar reprise, although on a smaller scale. The police have been deployed to enable the construction of a boundary wall. The government has insinuated incitement by “outsiders”, CPI-M leaders, this time around, while villagers who were planning a rally at the site but were prevented from holding it, alleged the presence of hundreds of “outsiders” brought in to intimidate them.

The infamous district Trinamool chieftain, Anubrata Mondal, has invited villagers for talks, which they have in practice declined, to explain the benefits of the proposed university. That this offer raises the serious question of why the villagers who lost their land were not taken into confidence in the first place has apparently not occurred either to him or his boss, Mamata Banerjee.

Security was beefed up in Bhangar a day after villagers staged a demonstration against proposed power substation project on 17 January 2017. (Photo: IANS)

Clashes Don’t Bode Well for Investment

In Ausgram, there was no early hint of trouble. The principal of the school lodged a complaint about the illegal construction, receiving no response from the Block Development Officer. Subsequently, teachers and students went to the police to protest. The tension mounted and the inspector in charge of the thana apparently hit the school principal.

The inspector, however, claimed he had been injured when attacked by the ubiquitous “outsiders”. Two persons were quickly detained and Banerjee issued prompt instructions for the identification of the people involved in the protests, who had attacked the thana and damaged police vehicles, in line with her zero-tolerance policy in respect of riots and rioters. But no action has yet been taken against the person alleged to have illegally constructed the shop.

All this might not spell any immediate danger for Banerjee, her party or its government. But it should (but probably won’t) prompt her to reflect on the uses of demagoguery and the need to take somewhat more nuanced positions on critical public issues, especially as she chases foreign and domestic investment in forums like the recently concluded Bengal Global Business Summit.

(The writer is a Kolkata-based freelance journalist. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)

Also Read: Singur Order: Mamata’s Gain is Loss for Future Infra Projects