By H.H.Mohrmen
The current impasse which is the outcome of the demand for implementation Inner Line Permit (ILP) is based on the threat perception that a small tribal group like the Khasi, and the Pnar are under imminent threat if the influx of people from outside is not checked. However, we all know that this is not a new concern; in fact the tribal leadership held this same view ever since the nation gained its independence. Based on this fear and the general understanding that tribal groups need special protection, the drafting committee incorporated the Sixth Schedule to the constitution with the hope that this constitutional provision would be able to protect the small tribal group from being overwhelmed by the majority in the country.
The District Councils which were created under the Sixth Schedule of the constitution were mandated to protect and promote tribal interest within such areas. Initially the Khasi Jaintia section was under the then United Khasi and Jaintia District Council of the erstwhile composite state of Assam. Later the United Khasi and Jaintia Hills District Council was further vivisected into the Khasi, Jaintia and Garo Hills Autonomous District Council.
The real question is whether the District Councils have succeeded in protecting tribal identity and tribal interest? Even after 66 years of independence the District Council has not been able to dispel this threat of being overwhelmed by non indigenous people from the minds of the tribal. In spite of the provisions of the Sixth Schedule and the entire machinery being at the disposal of the District Councils to protect the rights and interests of the tribal, yet the tribal in Meghalaya since the late sixties and in the early seventies felt the need for and demanded a separate hill state from the composite state of Assam to enable them to further protect the interests and the rights of the tribal people in the area. Is it not true to say that the hills state demand was necessary because the district councils have failed in their duty to protect and preserve the tribals as mandated by the constitution?
After the creation of Meghalaya the Councils should have abolished because the mandate of the newly created state too is to protect the interests of the tribal. How can we have two institutions serving the same purpose? But in spite of having two constitutional institutions to protect the tribal interest the moot question is what has become of the state and its people? After four decades of having our own state we are still live in this imminent threat that the Jaidbynriew will become a minority in our state if we do not control the influx of people from outside. This means that the creation of the hills state did not really help make people feel secure in their own land. If we instead look at the turn of events vis-à-vis the tribal non-tribal issue it looks like the problem has only aggravated after the separate hill state for tribals was created.
In spite of having the Sixth Schedule, the District Councils and a State of our own to protect us, yet the fear of being inundated by non indigenous pop-ulation still looms large over our heads. In other words it means that the two machineries have failed in their mandate to protect the interest of the indigenous people. If these two important, powerful and constitu-tional institutions have failed us, what is the guarantee that other mechanisms will succeed?
The supporters of ILP argued that ILP will be able to protect the interest of the tribal in the state, but the fact is even if we decided to implement ILP in the state; we would still depend on the two institutions – the state and the district council to implement ILP. The State and the District Councils are like two feet of clay, so how can we be so sure that ILP will succeed because we would still depend on the government machineries to implement the mechanism? If the two institutions were successful in the task, where is the need to demand for the implementation of ILP in the first place?
Ironically, both the District Council and the State are institutions run and controlled by our own people the Khasis, the Pnars and the Garos; yet we still feel insecure, so the question is, is there anything else that can protect us? If in spite of the fact that we already have our own institutions run by our own people (the people we elected) and still they cannot give us the sense of security in our own land, the question is who can save us from ourselves?
Apart from the two constitutional institutions we also have the dorbar hima/eleka and dorbar shnong that can decide who lives in the eleka or the shnong. We read articles in the newspapers about members of the community being ostracized or “behshnong” by the dorbar based on allegations that they are nongri-thlen or nongai-ksuid or nong-ri- taro. Of late some dorbar shnong have ostracized members of the community because they dared to file RTI against the dorbar shnong and we even read reports of people being excommunicated (behs-hnong) because they changed their denomination and decided to join another church. If the dorbar shnong has the power to ostracize left right and centre then how can these same dorbar shnong not check illegal immigrants? If they can ostracize their own people (often on false pretext) why can’t they check influx of illegal immigrants to their respective villages? The bottom-line is that the dorbar shnong can check and control the inflow of illegal immigrants even without any fresh legislation.
I often joke that ILP is already in operation in certain parts of Shillong. The only difference is that it targets certain sections of the indigenous population of the state. When people ask me ‘What do you mean?’ I said, ‘Well, it is an open secret that there are certain dorbar shnong in Laitumkhrah which have resolved to discourage their residents from selling land to the rich people from the coal mine areas of Jaintia hills. I was told by a member of the executive committee of this particular dorbar Shnong that the decision was that local residents who wished to sell their land would first have to offer the same to those domiciled in that shnong. The point is if these dorbar shnong can control the buying and selling of land in the jurisdiction of their shnong even to the indigenous people then where is the need for ILP or even the Land Transfer Act? But the most important point is that if we base our actions on the principle of hate and jealousy, then today it will be the Dkhar tomorrow it will be some other groups and the vicious cycle will never end.
We don’t really need outside protection. We already have mechanisms in place to check and control the inflow of illegal immigrants into the state. The government only needs to streamline these mechanisms so that they become effective mech-anisms to check illegal infiltration. Personally I feel that this is a false perception. Meghalaya with all the constitutional provisions and the institutions in place is in no threat of being overwhe-lmed by outsiders. The threat can only be from ourselves. If in spite of all the constitutional provi-sions and the institutions our own people decide to act against the interest of the autochthons of the state then there is nothing in this world that can protect us. The state and its people are destined to doom if all these institutions and machineries are only interested in another ILP (I Love Paisa). This is the ILP I dread the most because it can buy and sell anything under the sun and history tells us what it has done to persons like Jesus, Kiang Nangbah and others.