From Accord to Action: Hagrama Mohilary’s Call to Fulfil the Promise of Bodoland Peace
Heramba Nath
Hagrama Mohilary, president of the Bodoland People’s Front (BPF), has once again drawn attention to what he describes as the slow and incomplete implementation of the peace agreements signed between Bodo groups, the Assam government and the Centre. His appeal is rooted in a deep concern that the historic promises made to the Bodo people, particularly through the creation of the Bodoland Territorial Council in 2003 and the signing of the Bodo Peace Accord in 2020, risk losing their moral and political weight if they are not translated into concrete action on the ground.
The Bodoland movement did not emerge overnight. It was the outcome of decades of political mobilisation, cultural assertion and resistance against marginalisation. For a long time, the Bodo people articulated a sense of exclusion from mainstream political power, uneven development and threats to their linguistic and cultural identity. These grievances found expression in mass movements, negotiations and, at times, armed struggle, leaving a complex legacy of hope and hurt across the region.
The establishment of the Bodoland Territorial Council in 2003 marked a significant turning point. It represented an institutional recognition of the Bodo demand for self-governance within the constitutional framework of India. The BTC was expected to function as a powerful instrument of autonomy, enabling local leadership to shape policies on education, culture, land, economic development and social welfare in accordance with regional priorities. For many, it symbolised a new beginning, where dialogue replaced confrontation and democratic institutions replaced violence.
Yet, over the years, the limitations of the BTC became increasingly apparent. Administrative bottlenecks, constrained financial powers and ambiguities regarding jurisdiction diluted its effectiveness. Discontent grew as sections of the Bodo population felt that autonomy existed more on paper than in practice. These frustrations were compounded by continuing episodes of unrest and the persistence of unresolved political demands, ultimately creating the conditions for another round of negotiations.
The Bodo Peace Accord of 2020 was therefore projected as a more comprehensive and forward-looking settlement. It sought not only to end insurgency and integrate former militants into the democratic process but also to redefine the contours of autonomy and development in the Bodoland Territorial Region. The accord promised expanded powers for the council, constitutional safeguards to protect identity and land rights, and substantial development packages aimed at transforming the socio-economic landscape of the region.
Mohilary’s present intervention reflects a growing anxiety that the spirit of this agreement is yet to be fully honoured. He has argued that peace accords must be living commitments, not ceremonial declarations. According to him, the credibility of both the state and the central government is intrinsically linked to their willingness to implement every clause of the accord with sincerity and urgency.
A major area of concern remains the question of autonomy. While the BTC continues to function as an elected body, its authority is still circumscribed by limited legislative and executive powers. The 2020 accord envisaged a more empowered council capable of responding effectively to local needs and aspirations. Mohilary has warned that delays in devolving these powers risk reinforcing old patterns of centralised control, undermining the confidence of the people in the autonomy framework.
Equally significant is the issue of constitutional protection. For the Bodo leadership, safeguarding language, culture and land is not merely a symbolic demand but a matter of survival. Demographic changes, economic pressures and migration have intensified fears of cultural erosion. Mohilary has emphasised that without strong constitutional backing, assurances made in peace agreements remain vulnerable to political change and administrative inertia, leaving the community exposed to future uncertainties.
Development, often described as the tangible dividend of peace, forms another critical pillar of the accord. The Bodoland region has suffered the cumulative impact of prolonged instability, which disrupted education, investment and employment opportunities. The 2020 agreement promised focused development initiatives, improved infrastructure, better access to healthcare and education, and programmes to create sustainable livelihoods for the youth. While certain schemes have been initiated, Mohilary contends that progress has been uneven and insufficient to meet the scale of expectations generated by the accord.
He has particularly highlighted the aspirations of young people, many of whom grew up amid conflict and uncertainty. For them, peace was meant to open doors to opportunity and dignity. Unfulfilled development commitments, he has cautioned, could deepen frustration and alienation, eroding the social foundations of peace itself.
The political resonance of Mohilary’s statements cannot be ignored. As a central figure in the Bodoland movement and a former chief of the BTC, he retains considerable influence among the Bodo masses. His call for action reflects a broader sentiment within the community that peace must be judged not by the silence of guns alone but by visible improvements in governance, livelihoods and social justice.
Beyond Bodoland, the implications are far-reaching. Assam and the wider North-East have witnessed several peace accords aimed at resolving ethnic and political conflicts. Many of these agreements faltered due to half-hearted implementation, creating a legacy of mistrust. The Bodo accord has often been cited as a potential model for negotiated settlement. Failure to honour its commitments could weaken faith in dialogue as a viable path to peace, not only in Assam but across the region.
At the same time, the current atmosphere of relative calm in Bodoland offers a rare and valuable opportunity. Former militants have entered mainstream politics, institutions are in place, and the people have demonstrated a willingness to embrace peace. This moment, Mohilary suggests, calls for decisive and visionary action from both the Centre and the Assam government. Strengthening the BTC, clarifying constitutional safeguards and accelerating development could consolidate peace and transform the region into a space of stability and inclusive growth.
Mohilary’s renewed appeal is, therefore, not merely a political demand but a reminder of unfinished responsibilities. Peace accords, as his words imply, are processes that require constant nurturing. For the Bodo people, the true fulfilment of peace will be measured by meaningful autonomy, secure identity and development that touches everyday lives, from villages and classrooms to farms and workplaces across Bodoland.