Q.Why did the Anandpur Sahib Resolution become controversial?

The mid-1980s witnessed one of the most turbulent chapters in Punjab's post-independence history. The state was gripped by militancy, communal tension, and a breakdown of law and order that had escalated dramatically after Operation Blue Star in June 1984 and the subsequent assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. By 1985, the new Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi faced the urgent task of restoring normalcy and reconciling with moderate Sikh leadership.

Against this backdrop, negotiations began between the central government and the Akali Dal, the principal political party representing Sikh interests. The Akali Dal was then led by Harchand Singh Longowal, a moderate leader who had been detained during the Emergency and had emerged as a voice willing to engage in dialogue rather than violence. Longowal understood that a political settlement was essential to end the bloodshed and bring Punjab back from the brink.

On 24 July 1985, Rajiv Gandhi and Harchand Singh Longowal signed what came to be known as the Punjab Accord, also called the Rajiv-Longowal Accord. The agreement addressed several long-standing Akali demands:

• Transfer of Chandigarh to Punjab
• Resolution of river-water disputes with neighboring states
• Rehabilitation of those affected by the 1984 riots
• Inquiry into the November 1984 anti-Sikh violence
• Withdrawal of cases against Akali workers

The Assam Accord emerged from one of independent India's most intense regional movements. Between 1979 and 1985, the All Assam Students' Union and the All Assam Gana Sangram Parishad led a mass agitation demanding the detection and deportation of illegal immigrants, primarily from Bangladesh. The movement paralysed the state, disrupted elections, and turned violent at times, culminating in tragic communal clashes. The Accord, signed in August 1985 between the agitation leaders and the central government under Rajiv Gandhi, was meant to be a comprehensive settlement.

On paper, the Accord addressed several core demands. It established March 24, 1971, as the cut-off date for citizenship: anyone who had entered Assam before that date would be regularised, those who came between 1971 and 1985 would be disenfranchised for ten years, and those arriving after 1985 would be detected and deported. The agreement also promised constitutional, legislative, and administrative safeguards to protect the cultural, social, and linguistic identity of the Assamese people. Economic development packages were pledged, and the government committed to sealing the international border and updating the National Register of Citizens.

The immediate political outcome was striking. The agitation ended, and many of its leaders, including Prafulla Kumar Mahanta, entered electoral politics. The Asom Gana Parishad, formed by movement veterans, swept to power in the 1985 state elections, riding a wave of popular legitimacy. For a moment, it seemed the Accord had channelled protest into democratic governance.

Yet the deeper outcomes proved far more ambiguous. The detection and deportation machinery moved glacially. Identifying and expelling illegal immigrants turned out to be legally complex, administratively cumbersome, and politically sensitive. Successive governments lacked the will or capacity to implement the process rigorously. The promised border fencing remained incomplete for decades, and the updating of the National Register of Citizens, though eventually undertaken, became a protracted and contentious exercise that would not be completed until 2019, more than three decades later.

The safeguards for Assamese identity remained vague and largely symbolic. No concrete constitutional amendments were enacted to protect the demographic or cultural character of the state in the way the agitation leaders had envisioned. Economic development packages were announced but often fell short in execution, and Assam continued to lag behind many other states in infrastructure and industrialisation. …