By H H Mohrmen
Dr Mukul Sangma is a man in hurry not only because his government is running a state which is in deep financial crisis but the government is also without any developmental activities that it can claim credit for. Dr Sangma’s government will therefore grab any opportunity that would help show that the government has accomplished something during his tenure and the High Court ruling on the issue of Rangbah Shnong and the NGT ban on unscientific rat-hole mining is a blessing in disguise. Both the issues have come at an opportune time and hopefully the long pending mining and mineral policy and the proposed bill on local or grassroots administration will help boost the credibility of the government.
Both these bills on the anvil are very important and need government’s immediate attention, be it the mining and mineral policy or the local or grassroots administration law. Of course it is not like the entire local administrative machineries in Khasi and Jaintia have gone haywire because of the December 2014 high court ruling. The Court’s ruling has only questioned the role, functions and authority of the Rangbah Shnong, hence most of the Rangbah Shnong particularly those who in the urban areas are now in a dilemma. In fact the High Court has not barred the Rangbah Shnong from performing their other duties like those involved with welfare of the shnong, but because it has questioned the authority of the Rangbah Shnong and the tradition, hence the confusion.
Therefore the state government without wasting any time took the opportunity to address this very important issue in spite of the fact (as some has pointed out) it has encroached on the power and function of the Autonomous District Councils. There are other ways at looking at this development too. The state’s taking over the responsibility of making the bill which has to do with one very important aspect of tradition only goes on to prove the fact that the Autonomous District Councils are becoming redundant after the creation of the Hill State. It is also true that only the state can make a uniform law for both the Khasi and Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Councils or for all the three Autonomous Councils in the state. Only the state can make laws not only for the office of the Rangbah Shnong, the Waheh Chnong, or the Nokmas and the Goanburahs; it can also make laws for the office of Sirdar like in the case of the Biates of Saipung area of East Jaintia Hills.
Unlike the Autonomous District Councils the state can also (hopefully) make modern democratic laws which are sensitive to gender issues too. The state can make laws wherein women who constitute more than half of the population of the state are given equal opportunity with men. The state government can make a forward looking local or grassroots administration law which does not blindly rely or tradition(s) even if it is undemocratic and illegal. Perhaps the new local or grassroots administration law should do away with the tradition that only a male can occupy the office of the Rangbah Shnong and also do away with some tradition that is still prevalent in many areas where only males ‘of certain clans’ can hold the office of the Rangbah Shnong. And as mentioned in my previous article we should also do away with the tradition of the priest of one religion holding the office of the Rangbah Shnong as this is against the secular aspect of the Constitution.
The Court order is also a blessing in disguise for the government because it can now make laws that the office of the Rangbah Shnong/Goanburahs/Nokmas etc (like in the case of Panchayati Raj) has one universal term of office and the state government or the respective ADCs can be given the responsibility for conducting the election to the office of the Rangbah Shnong etc. at the end of every term of office. With this new law the state government can also kill two birds with one stone. It addresses the lacunae brought to light by the Hon’ble High Court order and at the same time it can now conduct election in the urban areas like Shillong, Jowai, Tura etc where people opposed Municipal election. The state can then avail funds under Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) which was earlier denied to it for the simple reason that it was unable to conduct regular elections to local administrative bodies in the urban areas.
With regards to laws for controlling and regulating mining in the state, one is bewildered to see a report in the newspaper that the government and the MP of the Shillong Parliamentary Constituency are toying with the idea of inviting foreign institutions or agencies to help the state come up with its own mining policy. Of course this is not a bad idea, but why now? It has been almost one year since the National Green Tribunal banned unscientific rat-hole mining in the state, so why on earth did it take the state and Vincent H. Pala so long to come up with this bright idea? The other equally important question is also what happened to the already prepared mining and mineral policy? Isn’t this just a ploy to convince the NGT to allow mining to continue since the state and the MP are in the process of inviting foreign agencies to come up with Meghalaya’s own mining policy? Isn’t it true that it is in the government’s scheme of thing that in the next hearing, the state will appeal to the NGT to allow mining to continue while government is still making its mining policy which will never see the light of day? Isn’t it true that the government is not serious in its efforts to control and regulate mining otherwise why this delay tactic?
On the other hand as an ardent advocate for the protection of the environment, I am pleased to see that the likes of Vincent H. Pala and other coal barons from the state have finally accepted the truth that coal mining has indeed polluted our waters. This has vindicated our stand and even those involved in mining have gradually accepted the fact that rivers in the coal mining areas and down-stream of the mining areas are dead. The next question is why are we talking only about those who lost their livelihoods because of the ban? Why are we not talking about the plight of the people downstream who had not only lost their livelihood but their way of life to acid water from coal mines? It was reported that the state exchequer has loss Rs 600 crore because of the ban, but how can we calculate or can we even estimate the loss when the entire live forms in the rivers are gone due to mining? Perhaps, we can get back the money that we lost but can we recover the hundreds of species of aquatic lives which have died due to acidic water from mining? Can we reclaim the aquatic life lost in the rivers and some of which are endemic to the waters in the area only? Can we even imagine the loss in the three major rivers of Jaintia hills the Kupli, the Lukha and the Myntdu?
And what about the water? Can we reclaim the acidic water in the streams and rivers? And how long will it take to reclaim the streams and rivers? Can we even estimate how much it will cost us to reclaim our rivers? How many times of Rs 600 crore will it cost to reclaim our rivers? It is therefore expected that the proposed mining and mineral policy will not only address the immediate consequences of mining, but it should also look into the long term impact of mining. It should also address the issue of closing the exhausted mines and how to prevent other rivers from getting polluted from mining. And it should also ensure that the caves which can be found in the state are protected.
Dr Mukul Sangma therefore already has his hands full at least for few months. It is yet to be seen if he can really live up to the expectations of the people. If he can deliver local area or grassroots administration law and a mining policy that is acceptable to all sections of the population in a short span of time then we can give him all the credit for the two bills. But with a gentleman who would otherwise be retired if he is in other job heading the committee on the Rangbah Shnong issue, it is obviously a race against time for the MUA II government.