Syllabus: GS-II &V: Government Policies & Interventions

Why in the News?

During the ongoing Assam Assembly session, the State Government tabled the TP Tewary Commission Report and the TU Mehta Commission Report, both of which investigated the 1983 Assam violence, including the tragic Nellie massacre. Their conclusions sharply contradict each other, reopening debates on accountability, electoral processes, and security failures.

Background: The Assam Violence of 1983

Elections were conducted amid the Assam Agitation (1979–1985), which demanded detection and deportation of illegal immigrants.
Despite widespread opposition and a volatile atmosphere, polls were held in February 1983.
Massive ethnic and communal violence erupted, killing hundreds of people across districts such as Nagaon, Nalbari, Darrang, and Morigaon (Nellie).
The incident remains one of the darkest chapters in post-independence India’s internal conflicts.

Key Findings of the Two Commissions

1. TP Tewary Commission (State Government Commission)

• Stated that holding the 1983 elections “cannot be blamed” for the violence.
• Did not conclusively hold any group or authority directly accountable.
• Suggested that the violence resulted from pre-existing tensions, misinformation, and local conflicts, rather than the electoral process as such.
• Provided limited recommendations, leaving gaps in responsibility and institutional lessons.

2. TU Mehta Commission (Civil Society–led Commission)

1. Asserted that imposing elections in a hostile environment was a major cause of the violence.
2. Highlighted:
   Non-cooperation of the public.
   Misinformation, fear and mistrust across communities.
   Large deployment of security forces and outsider officials due to boycotts.
3. Criticised the Election Commission for failing to postpone polls despite the “ground reality.”
4. Pointed to the breakdown of administrative and political judgment.

Why Do the Reports Differ Widely?

• Different mandates: One commissioned by the State Government, the other by a civil society organisation.
• Different sources of information and community engagement.
• Different interpretations of constitutional duty vs. ground-level feasibility.
• Reflects a broader lesson on how official narratives and community narratives can diverge sharply.

Important Concepts to Understand

• Assam Agitation (1979–1985) – Mass movement against illegal immigration.
• Nellie Massacre (1983) – One of the deadliest episodes of ethnic violence in independent India.
• Election Commission’s Constitutional Powers (Article 324).
• Internal security management during elections.
• Role of Commissions of Inquiry – Their limitations and influence on public memory.

Conclusion

The two reports on the 1983 Assam violence highlight how the same event can yield contrasting interpretations depending on institutional perspectives. The episode remains a critical case study on the risks of conducting elections amid ethnic tensions, the importance of consultative governance, and the need for inclusive conflict resolution mechanisms in India’s diverse society.

Exam Hook – Prelims Question

Q. With reference to the 1983 Assam violence, consider the following statements:
1. The TP Tewary Commission held that the decision to conduct elections was responsible for the violence.
2. The TU Mehta Commission stated that imposing elections contributed significantly to the outbreak of violence.
3. The violence occurred during the peak years of the Assam Agitation.

Which of the statements are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3

Correct Answer: (b)

Mains Question

“Critically evaluate the role of the State, Election Commission, and civil society during the 1983 Assam elections. What lessons does this episode offer for conducting elections in conflict-prone regions?”

Source: Sentinel Assam