By Toki Blah
All of us love to talk about development yet the term apparently carries a different meaning for different people. Often overlooked is the fact that development just doesn’t happen by accident, wishful thinking or long-winded prayers. Growth and development are the outcome of judicious investments based on visionary roadmaps. Development in turn is measured by the yardstick of a rise in GDP or through the manifestation of social happiness (the Bhutan Model). Whatever the yardstick, the advent of meaningful development can be simply gauged by the incidence of social transformation.
The transformation of society from one level to another is a clear indication of developmental impact. Based on this premise we suddenly realise that for the Khasis, Jaintias and the Achiks, the last time such a transformation occurred was 150 years ago with the introduction of the written script and the western system of education. It completely changed our communities from what they were then to what they are today. A visionary investment in education by someone transformed our societies forever.
While saying this, we are struck by the wisdom and self confidence of our so called illiterate forefathers who welcomed on our behalf, this investment made by outsiders – the first missionaries to these hills. One has yet to be enlightened that there was then any cry of outrage over an alleged dilution of our culture and tradition. Perhaps patriots (men ieit ri) were then yet to be born to protest against the establishment of schools as a betrayal of tribal interests (die duh ia ka jaitbynriew). One has yet to hear that there was then a demand for the handing over of education to the Syiems or the Himas. On the contrary, the hima, durbar and akhing in their collective foresight championed and welcomed the winds of change then. Change for the better was actually allowed to happen. We are what we are today because of that foresight and vision. Today this foresight and visionary leadership of wise elders has sadly degenerated to that of rowdy individuals and groups whose only apparent objective is media coverage in the evening news; cheap political mileage and perhaps to make some pocket money on the side.
The traditional political institution of U Hynniewtrep was the clan (kur) implemented through the Dorbar. Issues that influenced political thinking of those times were community management of the land for food security, governance through consensus democracy and security of the realm. A social value system founded on principles of social justice (Kamai ia ka hok, Tip briew- Tip Blei ) guided traditional administrative thinking and it is something we all are proud, comfortable and at ease with. This has unfortunately been allowed to once again degenerate. In its place, party based politics, with all its exploitative qualities for power, money and corruption has now taken root in our socio-political system.
The traditional service oriented political system has been replaced with a modern system where power to the party and the individual takes precedence over everything else. The higher echelons of Traditional Institutions (TIs) have not remained immune to this corrupt modern culture. Today the office of the syiem and the hima are but skeletal relics of a once proud democratic practice. Today they simply demonstrate the sad takeover of oligarchy whose only focus is to spend without public accountability. The village durbar is perhaps the only TI with any semblance of traditional governance left, yet even here drastic steps are needed to make it relevant and pertinent to community needs for the 21st century.
The main threat to our grass-roots Traditional Institutions is not from advancing modernity. It is not from new and emerging trends in developmental administration. The main threat is from the belief that tradition is carved in stone. Something inviolable! Something sacrosanct. Rigidity is making our TIs irrelevant, obsolete and outmoded as they increasingly fail to deliver on the needs and demands of the 21st century community they serve. This rigidity has created the self destructive demand that we withdraw and isolate ourselves from the rest of the world. This only promotes low self esteem. Meghalaya was exempted from the provisions of the 73rd and 74th Constitutional amendment because of the expectation that our TIs are able and capable of adjusting to the demands of time. The exponents of sanctified tradition have not allowed this adjustment to happen.
In view of the indictment above it has become necessary to evaluate Traditional Dorbar performance vis a vis the demands of modern day development in Meghalaya. Let us start with Urban Governance where waste disposal, both solid and liquid, safe drinking water and effective commuting has become a daily nightmare for the common citizen. Both the PHE and Municipality continue to supply faecal contaminated water, certified unfit for human consumption. Yet we have no other option but to drink it! If floods and landslides were the agony of Uttarakhand, unthinkable and indescribable epidemics might well be the inevitable future disasters for urban Meghalaya. The political leadership remains a mute spectator to the growing catastrophe. The Dorbar the only institution with any grass-root connectivity, refuse to converge on a common strategy for urban management. Who will speak and act on behalf of the people? In the absence of authentic representation for urban governance, people are left at the mercy of inward looking groups and individuals whose only vision is to drag us all, back to the dark ages.
Meanwhile in the rural areas of the state reside the remaining 80% of Meghalaya’s population. Is their fate any better than their urban brethrens? One would like to hope so but regretfully their plight is actually worse. Education, health-care, sanitation, connectivity, transport, housing, livelihoods, name it and rest assured that it is as dismal as it can be! Ours is an agrarian rural economy and it’s growing at not more than 3%. The MGNREGS is a powerful catalyst to fast track rural development (RD) but by no stretch of the imagination can it be described as anything more than what it is, a guarantee for rural employment especially in the lean seasons. The real bottleneck for RD in Meghalaya is the continued reliance on an anachronistic top-down approach, development paradigm long discarded by everyone else.
So what prevents Meghalaya from adopting a bottom-up, participatory developmental approach? Why can’t role of Government and its departments change from a benefactor to that of a facilitating stakeholder in development? Why can’t the communities be capacitated to formulate, execute and monitor their own development? This write-up is not to advocate for the replacement of our Dorbar with Panchayat. We don’t need the Panchayat. Period! But under the umbrella of the Dorbar or the Akhing, an empowered, gender sensitive Village Development Council (VDC) can be formed. This body should look after the development needs of the community. This would add to the sustainability of RD since people can then claim ownership over developmental activities. Development will no longer be seen as ‘Sarkari’. Why hasn’t Government looked at such an enabling paradigm?
To be fair to Government it should be acknowledged that during the time of Mr CD Kynjing as Principal Secretary RD, a bill designed to include our communities as active stakeholders in development but without dismantling the structure and profile of the Traditional Dorbar was proposed. It was vigorously denounced by entrenched advocates of tradition who saw in it a belittling of the so called Khlieh Nongshyshar or Hima; institutions that were averse to modernisation. The bill was sacrificed at the altar of demand for direct funding to these oligarchic outdated institutions. Meghalaya lost out on effective bottom-up participatory development because the State was deliberately misled to miss the wood for the trees!
As a corollary to the above, the author has often been asked about the presence of any replicable model where such a unique example of participatory development has ever been successfully implanted in rural Meghalaya? People are curious to know if the concept of an empowered village working in tandem with the Government, in sustainable Rural Development, is possible? The answer lies in the effective and successful working of the SHG and NaRM concept in the NERCORM ( IFAD) Project of West Khasi and West Garo Hills Districts. The NaRMs working as VDCs are supplementing the traditional Dorbar and Akhing without any loss of power to the latter. NaRM and Dorbar complement each other. It’s the best example of sustainable village development where communities proudly claim ownership over all development work and Government agencies are equally proud in having facilitated such activities. It’s a win-win situation for all. It’s time to have a second look at this successful experiment in sustainable Rural Development.