The Assam Jatiya Parishad (AJP) on Thursday said the Centre’s proposed delimitation of Lok Sabha constituencies could reduce the Northeast to a “political footnote” and act as a tool for “political and cultural colonisation by the Hindi heartland”.
AJP president Lurinjyoti Gogoi and general secretary Jagadish Bhuyan, in a text message to The Telegraph, said that while delimitation is a constitutional requirement, “the process must not be used to dismantle the unique political identity of Assam”.
The Centre on Thursday introduced three bills linked to 33 per cent reservation for women and delimitation in the Lok Sabha, including the Delimitation Bill and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill. The draft proposes increasing the strength of the Lower House from 543 to 850, along with a rise in seats in state Assemblies — a move opposed by the Opposition.
Articulating their concerns, the AJP leadership said the proposed expansion — based on the 2011 census — was a “deliberate strategy to consolidate power in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar”.
They warned that “North Indian dominance” could turn the Northeast into a “political footnote”, allowing national parties to ignore regional interests if they dominate the Hindi heartland.
Gogoi and Bhuyan said Assam “must not become a dumping ground for the political ambitions of UP and Bihar” and called for a united front of regional parties to oppose the bill in its present form.
Citing a media report, Bhuyan said the Northeast’s share of Lok Sabha seats would fall from 4.4 per cent of 543 seats to 3.8 per cent of 850 seats after delimitation, while the share of Hindi-speaking states would rise from 38.1 per cent to 43.1 per cent. The eight northeastern states currently have 25 Lok Sabha seats, including 14 in Assam.
The AJP has repeatedly warned against the “Hindi-fication” of Assam, saying the growing influence of candidates from states such as Rajasthan and Bihar — who may not speak Assamese or understand local values — threatens the state’s language and culture.
The party alleged that by allowing non-indigenous individuals to contest in several Assembly constituencies, the BJP was “outsourcing” Assam’s leadership and turning locals into “second-class citizens in their own land”.
The leadership also referred to the 2023 delimitation exercise in Assam, alleging that it was influenced by minister Ashok Singhal.
They claimed constituency boundaries were redrawn not for administrative convenience but to favour the BJP electorally by fragmenting “indigenous” vote banks.
Describing the 2023 exercise as a “failed experiment”, the AJP said it sidelined the interests of khilonjiya (indigenous) Assamese people, pointing to a reduction of seats in Upper Assam and retention of seats in migrant-heavy Lower Assam as evidence.
To restore indigenous representation, the party proposed implementation of Clause 6 of the 1985 Assam Accord, which provides for reservation of seats in the Assembly and Parliament for indigenous Assamese people.
Like southern states, the AJP said population should not be the sole basis for delimitation and suggested a mechanism to reward states that have controlled population growth while protecting smaller states’ representation.
It also proposed that candidates contesting from unreserved or indigenous seats in Assam must be proficient in Assamese and have a verifiable history of residency.
The party further called for a legal definition and registration of indigenous Assamese inhabitants to safeguard their demographic clusters and land rights during delimitation.
Reiterating their stand, Gogoi and Bhuyan said Assam “must not become a dumping ground for the political ambitions of UP and Bihar” and urged regional parties to unite against the bill in its current form.
