Editor,
Apropos the article, “The District Council: an avatar of “Ka Dorbar-ki-Bakhraw” by Fabian Lyngdoh, (ST an 17, 2015), the writer has dealt extensively and aptly on the subject and I am in sync with his opinion. The British officers for their colonial interests have abused their powers in the guise of Westminster parliamentary democracy acting solely for the interest of the East India Company. They were not here to teach democratic values for which the early Khasis are known for but distorted the traditional system for their personal gain. The British officers were responsible for all the ills in our traditional system. But thanks to the wise elder Late Rev .J.J.M.Nichols Roy, the architect of the Autonomous District Councils for his farsightedness in restoring the democratic process by introducing a resolution for merging the Khasi and Jaintia Hills with the State of Assam through the Autonomous District Councils under the provisions of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution of India. If the MDCs really love and think for the jaidbynriew they need to function strictly within the four corners of the Sixth Schedule of the Indian Constitution as the real “Bakhraw” and the people should elect only those (Bakhraw) who would administer the traditional system in accordance with the provisions laid down in the Constitution and not according to their own whims and fancies and their self made rules which do not have the sanction of the Constitution.
Yours etc.,
VK Lyngdoh,
Via email
Can’t keep extending GHADC’s term
Editor,
On January 6, the Mukul Sangma-led government decided to extend the term of the Garo Hills Autonomous District Council (GHADC) by another six months. This is the fourth time that the election to the Council has been postponed. Its tenure was first extended for six months on February 18, 2014 on the plea that the ANVC and ANVC (B) had demanded increase of seats in the Council. The six months expired on August 17, 2014, and since the “agreed text for settlement” with the ANVC and the ANVC (B) was yet to be approved by the Central Government, the state government had extended the tenure till February 17, 2015.
Again on December 17 last year, the cabinet, which announced to hold elections to the council in February 2015, extended the tenure of the council for the third time by one month up to March 19, so that the District Council Affairs department had enough time to prepare for the proposed elections.
The reason given for the latest extension is that the Centre has promised to increase the number of seats in the Council by amending the Sixth Schedule in the next session of Parliament. Now we know that the process of constitutional amendment takes time. A Bill has to be introduced in Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha. Both the houses have to pass the Bill. It is then sent to the President for his assent. How is the government so sure that the Bill will be introduced and if the Bill will be passed by both houses? Will the President give his assent? Will the whole process be completed within six months? Then why extend the council’s tenure? Is it not better to hold elections now and if and when the constitutional amendments take place, dissolve the house and conduct fresh elections? Or we can even wait for the Council’s tenure to expire and then hold elections for the expanded House accordingly. Is it absolutely necessary to have election to the expanded house as soon as the parliament gives the green signal?
The government has been taking people for a ride. It has been fooling the public more than once. Each time the promise was reneged. How could the twin ANVC demand for increase of seats to the indigenous house be sorted out in just six months? The process required the signing of a peace agreement, to be followed by constitutional amendment. Did the government not know this process? Did it not know that the completion of the process would not be possible in half a year? Then what is the point in extending the council’s tenure in the first instance itself? The same line of argument could be given for the subsequent extensions. We the citizens too remain spectators. Each time the Government has met with little opposition. The opposition parties too did not see simple foreseeable consequences. Now the beneficiaries are the members of the Council. They have been drawing free salaries and enjoying perks (and status) without ‘being elected’ for more than one year. The expenditure could run into crores. Those crores come from the tax payers’ money. But we don’t mind.
Under what legal provision could an elected body’s tenure be extended for the fourth time? For a lay person it sounds bizarre. Provisions may be there but there is the question of ethics and propriety. If the present set of MDCs are men of principles and upholders of propriety in public life, they should resign after such repeated extension. But this expectation may be too much. The opposition has termed the present decision of the government as illegal and unconstitutional. Hope they use the rare “all party meeting” on Jan 20 to strongly oppose the avoidable move of the government.
Now we have an unexpected and surprising development. The disbanded ANVC and ANVC-B have demanded that they run the GHADC for the extended term. If questions are raised with regards to the extension of the term of the Council under what legality and constitutionality will such a demand be ceded? In The Shillong times’ poll of Jan 17 an overwhelmingly 87 percent said that the former militant groups are not within their rights to demand a say in the GHADC’s affairs. The long and short of all of this is: don’t complicate things further; hold elections to GHADC at the earliest. We can’t continue extending the term of an elected house for unconvincing reasons. The dignity of the house itself has taken a hit.
Albert Thyrnaing
Mendal, North Garo Hills