Tripura CM Saha dismisses claims of human rights violations against families residing beyond the barbed-wire fencing

Tripura CM Assures No Rights Violations in Border Fencing Areas Amid Growing Concerns

Tripura Chief Minister Dr. Manik Saha has strongly refuted allegations of human rights violations against families living near the India-Bangladesh border fencing, calling such claims "misleading and politically motivated." The statement comes amid growing concerns from activists and opposition parties about the plight of residents, particularly from tribal communities, who they say face severe restrictions on movement and access to basic amenities due to the barbed-wire barriers.  

The Chief Minister emphasized that the border fencing, a critical security measure to prevent illegal crossings and smuggling, has been implemented with careful consideration for local residents. "Our government is fully committed to protecting the rights and dignity of every citizen while ensuring national security," Saha said during a press conference. He pointed to special entry-exit points established along the fencing to allow residents access to their farmlands and essential services, dismissing reports of harassment or neglect as exaggerated.  

However, ground realities tell a more complex story. Farmers like Ratan Debbarma from Sepahijala district describe daily struggles to reach their fields, now separated by the fencing. "What used to be a five-minute walk to my paddy field now takes over an hour because I have to go through a designated gate that isn't always open," he said. Similar grievances have been echoed by families cut off from local markets, schools, and healthcare facilities, with some alleging that security personnel routinely subject them to intrusive checks.  

The opposition has seized on these issues, with CPI(M) leader Jitendra Chaudhury accusing the government of ignoring humanitarian concerns in its zeal for border security. "You cannot treat citizens living near the border as collateral damage," Chaudhury argued, demanding immediate corrective measures. In response, the state government has announced plans for a fresh survey of affected areas and promised to address legitimate complaints, though skeptics question whether this will translate into meaningful action.  

As the debate intensifies, the Tripura administration faces mounting pressure to prove its assurances are more than just rhetoric. For now, border residents remain caught between the imperatives of national security and their fundamental rights to livelihood and freedom of movement – a balancing act the state has yet to convincingly achieve.