Opposition challenges Himanta Biswa Sarma's authority on Assam Accord panel report

The opposition in Assam has raised questions regarding Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma's legitimacy to comment on the implementation of the Justice (Retd.) Biplab Kumar Sharma Committee report related to the Assam Accord. They argue that as the report was commissioned by a central panel, Sarma may lack both constitutional and legal authority to discuss its recommendations.

At a press conference, Lurinjyoti Gogoi, president of the Assam Jatiya Parishad, asserted, “The report has not yet been submitted to the Centre. Unless the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) accepts it, how can the CM speak about its implementation? Does he even have the rights to represent the Centre?” He emphasized that the Chief Minister should not claim ownership of a report prepared by a committee established by the central government.

Gogoi, who served as a member of the high-level committee, highlighted procedural issues, noting that Satyendra Garg, the then joint secretary of the MHA and a central nominee on the committee, did not sign the report. He accused Sarma of diverting public attention from pressing concerns, such as allegations of corruption against his government, particularly regarding property holdings linked to Sarma's family.

The ongoing political discourse has intensified as the Assam government, in conjunction with the All Assam Students' Union (AASU), engaged in discussions about the report's recommendations for safeguarding the interests of the indigenous population. Assam Congress president Bhupen Kumar Borah pointed out that Sarma’s sudden focus on the Assam Accord appears politically motivated, coinciding with upcoming panchayat polls and the 2026 assembly elections.

Further complicating matters, Sarma indicated that the recommendations of the committee would apply only to districts within the Brahmaputra Valley, excluding Barak Valley and certain Sixth Schedule areas. Critics argue this undermines the committee's intent to address the situation across the entire state.

In response to the opposition's claims, Sarma defended the committee’s findings, stating that the definition of an indigenous Assamese should vary, despite the committee's suggestion to use 1951 as a cut-off year for certain contexts. The Assam Accord, signed in 1985 following a protracted anti-foreigner movement, aimed to identify and remove names of foreigners who entered Assam after March 25, 1971.

Also Read: Gaurav Gogoi at India Today Mumbai Conclave: We need a revolution of the male mind