from their lands and territories, the dependency of their traditional way of life on land, and their vulnerability to loss of land. the ILO committee and the government of Bangladesh, which is unjust considering that some 30 ethnic groups live in the lowlands. As a ratifying country, Bangladesh is supposed to provide a report on the implementation of the Convention principles to the ILO supervisory body. Usually, the reports on the status of the recognition of IPs’ land rights fall under two broad categories – CHT and the plain land. One national law that applies to the plain land IPs is the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950 but it only identifies 18 ethnic communities that can theoretically claim their land rights. There are many ethnic groups not listed in the Act, thus there is a need to amend the law to cover all ethnic groups in the plains. For CHT, the communication between the ILO Committee and the government of Bangladesh covered issues such as the Bengali settlement, recognition of the IP customary land rights and management of the land through the IP headed Hill District Local Government Council, recognition of the traditional economy of the IPs’ right to practice shifting cultivation, and their inclusion and consultation in land-related development programs. The issue of the Bengali settlement and the denial of IP land rights in the CHT is significant considering that the CHT area covers one-eighth of the land area of Bangladesh, although only 1% of the population lives there. The government of Bangladesh settled in the 1980s almost half a million Bengali from the plain land, thus the indigenous peoples have been displaced and continue to face human rights violations. The ILO Committee even raised concerns over government plans to reforest land in the three hill districts. It strongly recommended that the government consult with the IPs to take advantage of their knowledge and experience and also to address their possible displacement of IP groups. Indigenous peoples in the plains have received far less attention in the communications between Moreover, the Act does not address the customary land rights except holding raiyats3 and transfer, purchase and acquisition of land only. Indeed, the application of the Act is severely limited and people are not protected against land alienation. Therefore, the IPs are demanding a separate land commission for the plain land indigenous peoples. The CHT Accord, meanwhile, is supposed to safeguard the indigenous peoples’ land rights. In the accord, the government of Bangladesh recognized traditional ownership rights and management of land, provision to resolve land disputes and the rehabilitation of the India repatriated refugees and internally displaced families. Despite these laws, however, the trend of land alienation in both the plains and the hills continues due to the absence of the rule of law and effective application of relevant Acts. Exacerbating the situation are government policies such as the social forestry program that will affect the Raiyat is a person who “has acquired a right to hold land directly under the Government mainly for the purpose of cultivating it by himself or by members of his family or by, or with the aid of, servants or laborers or with the aid of partners or bargadars, and includes also the successorsin-interest of persons who have acquired such a right” (Chancery Law Chronicles, 2011). 3 Lok Niti 17