Toilets on temple land and our treatment of minorities

In Patuakhali stands Srimangal Buddha Bihar, a 240-year-old temple, which is regularly frequented by local devotees and those visiting Kuakata sea beach. Suffice to say, local residents hold immense respect for this establishment as it has become an embodiment of their faith over two centuries. But for the local authorities, this is not a good enough reason to protect the temple's sanctity. They would rather cater to the tourists, in an utterly disrespectful way, by encroaching upon the establishment's land to build public toilets.

Naturally, officials of the Kuakata municipality have drawn flak from the local Rakhine community, who have been vehemently protesting the move. And yet, the municipal mayor has not budged from the decision, saying that the land belongs to the municipality. He reiterated his commitment to tourists, neglecting the people who likely elected him to serve local interests.

There's a long-standing land dispute between the temple authorities and Bangladesh Water Development Board (BWDB), with a case waiting to be disposed of. In February 2021, a court issued an injunction prohibiting the construction of any structure on the contested land. But the municipal officials have decided to pay no heed, with their workers already building the structure's roof.

This blatant disregard, of local sentiments and the law, has prompted the local ethnic minority community to conclude that vested interests are at play. The move is motivated, stated an application filed with Patuakhali's deputy commissioner. "Some influential people are trying to grab our land on the pretext of constructing toilets," said a local. It's a ploy to evict the community, reads the aforementioned statement.

Such apprehensions definitely have merit, because time and again, we have observed how land of ethnic and religious minorities has been coveted and grabbed. These groups are not only losing their homesteads, gardens, trees, forestlands or lakes, their cremation grounds are also being grabbed by the state or people patronised by the state, said rights activist Sultana Kamal.

In 2022, Garo and other ethnic minority communities stood against the Forest Department's decision to create a lake in Tangail's Madhupur area by excavating their agricultural land, a move undertaken to attract tourists. The year before, the Mro community protested the construction of a five-star resort and entertainment centre on their ancestral land in Chittagong Hill Tracts. Let's not forget that the Madhupur Eco Park Project, undertaken in 1966, and Sajek Tourism Complex, created in 2012, forcefully displaced Indigenous communities from their traditional lands.

There is a clear pattern here. For some reason, the welfare of tourists supersedes that of the local residents. Because at the heart of it, those with power seem to care little about rights and values; it's all about ensuring economic gains—in whichever way possible. And since tourists bring the money, the choice is simple.

Let's remind ourselves that for many Indigenous communities, land is sacred; for tourists, it's just another travel destination to check off their bucket lists. A temple on such a land, with ancient idols buried underneath, is the epitome of sanctity. And yet, for the authorities, it's the tourists' convenience that dictates what these sites should facilitate.

An opinion piece by Myat Moe Khaing states, "To many outsiders, such invasions make sense because the CHT is being 'developed.' The 'backdated' paharis are finally coming in touch with 'civilisation.' The very categorisation justifies intervention through development policies. Is it really development if you are constructing an amusement park?"

Indeed, experts say such actions are just part of settler colonialism, the evidence of which is overwhelming. How many times have we heard about attacks on Indigenous communities? Last year, over a dozen homes in a Mro village in Bandarban were attacked, allegedly by a rubber plantation, to drive the locals away. The year before, land grabbers reportedly linked with the ruling party confined Munda families in Shyamnagar's Dhumghat village at gunpoint and destroyed their crops.

Despite many espousing the local benefits of such "development," locals clearly are not of the same opinion. Hence, one can safely assume who the real beneficiaries are.

While the temple's land in Kuakata is contested, the fact remains that a structure of reverence sits on top of it. Any attempt to undermine this fact will be deemed communal—as has been done. Are the authorities not aware of this? Surely, they have heard about the countless arson attacks and vandalism temples around the country have been subjected to. Surely, they know this is a sensitive matter. So, even if the land belongs to the municipality, why are they hellbent on continuing with this disrespect? As an editorial of this newspaper put it, "Would the authorities have done the same if there were, for example, a 200-year-old mosque in its stead?"

Did the municipal authorities, out of courtesy, even ask whether building toilets on the temple land would be okay? Most likely not, because historically, the opinions of minorities have fallen on deaf ears. Dipayan Barua, a member of Bangladesh Adivasi Forum, said, "Many places are lying idle where toilets can be constructed. But they [the Kuakata municipal authorities] have chosen the temple's land." Why? This event is just the latest example of how our country caters to the needs, values, opinions and welfare of the minorities—disgracefully. The land, however, deserves all the attention.

Shoaib Ahmed Sayam is a freelance journalist.

Views expressed in this article are the author's own. 

Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.