By H H Mohrmen
Much has been written about the recent survey which has brought to light the startling fact that a large section of the population in the state does not possess any land of their own, but the truth is landlessness is not new to the people, particularly the farmers in the villages. Citizens of the state particularly those who live in the villages in Jaintia hills, are surrounded by abundance of land and yet without any land of their own. By tradition they have land, but the land does not belong to them. They can farm and cultivate anywhere but the land does not belong to them.
I am going to share few stories that I’ve encountered while trying to promote livelihood in the villages in Jaintia hills. A major problem that any livelihood promoter would encounter when trying to help farmers access credit, to upscale their activity, is the absence of collateral. One would think that the only security the poor farmers would have at their disposal is the land where they work on, but that is far from true. Whenever banks or financial institutions ask for collateral from the farmer before providing loans to enable them to increase their productivity, the farmers would not be able to do so because they cannot even mortgage the land they farm on because it does not belong to them.
The reasons farmers do not own land is because of the prevailing land tenure system in the area. Added to that is the fact that different areas have different land ownership patterns. In the Nongkhlieh area till very recently land belonged to the community, and even if farmers were allotted land for farming or other purposes, people do not register their land with the district council because they only have usufruct rights over land. So in this case people do not own land and even if they owned any land it must be a small plot. People seldom register their land with any authority other than ‘the patta’ for their paddy fields. But it was when the cement giant Lafarge planned to setup a mega cement plant in the area that people realized the need to take ownership of the land and start registering it with the District Council. In the process the land ownership system in the area took a new dimension. In Nongkhlieh, because people reversed the land tenure system and because of the presence of huge mineral deposits rich people registered free land or bought land owned by the local people. In the process a large section of the locals become landless.
In the War Jaintia areas of Amlarem sub division, the traditional land owning system is still called Zamindari and the land owners are still called Zamindars by the locals. In this case a major part of the land in the area is owned by few clans and the hoi polloi depend on the Zamindar for all their land needs. If they want to cultivate in any plot of land, they have to seek permission from the clan and pay user fees to the clan for using the land. The tradition is that the clans are only the custodians of the land and they cannot deny anybody from accessing any free plot of land for cultivation, collecting firewood or any other non-commercial purposes, but that too has changed now. The Zamindars who are supposed to be mere custodians of community land become owners of the land. The classic case in point is the limestone mining in Nongtalang when mining rights were given even to outsiders by the clans who are supposed to be custodians of the land. So, even when people do not own land, their right to cultivate is being denied when cultivatable land is being given away for mining. If the mining continues land will be rendered uncultivable and it is the common people who will have to pay the price.
Then, even if community like Dorbar Shnong or the Dorbar Raid owns land, the people again do not have right to ownership of the land because it belongs to the community. In these villages by tradition, villagers were not allowed to register even the land on which they have constructed a home, with any authority, and in this case people will find it difficult to even get electricity connection because of the non availability of legal documents to prove their ownership of the land. There are very few villages where community land remains but their numbers are dwindling day by day.
In the eleka Narpuh landlessness is due to the fact that large tracts of land in the area are now owned by proxy by the cement companies. In the areas particularly in Lumshnong, Thangskai and other villages in the vicinity large chunks of land are in the procession of cement companies’ representatives. The locals are rendered landless. Perhaps it would be interesting if a study or a survey is conducted to see how much of the land in the area is still owned by the locals. I had walked several hours on the banks of the river Lukha and climbed up both via Lumshnong and Brichyrnot and found survey marks everywhere which indicates that the land is owned by certain companies. Even forests in the catchment areas of the Lukha are marked. In this case land is concentrated in the hands of few individuals whom the companies appointed as local representatives.
In the coal mine areas large tracts of land especially that which has mineral deposits is owned by coal barons and with the system of mining that is practiced, the poor land owners even if they owned the land would not be able to mine the coal. Hence they have no other option but to sell their land to the highest bidder. There are cases where community forests, government land and even church properties were bought or usurped by the coal mine owners.
Then in the eleka Nartiang and Nongjngi, in the area from Ksenrynchang till Khainduli local farmers are gradually parting with their agricultural land to rich people from coal mine areas. There is an increasing trend for people from the coal mines to invest their money in purchasing paddy fields and other agricultural lands in the area. This is another case of local people becoming landless not because of the tradition but because the rich bought the land from the poor.
The case of landlessness at least in Jaintia hills is due to two reasons; one is because of the traditional land tenure system that is being followed in certain areas where land is in the custody of either the community (dorbar shnong/Elaka) or of the clans and of course there is also private land. In this case although people make use of the land but they cannot claim ownership of the same. The tradition is that if they fail to tend the land for three consecutive years then ownership of the land will revert back to the community or the clan as the case may be. But even in the traditional land ownership system, where land is in the custody of the clans, there is increasing case of abuse of power by the clans without respecting the locals’ traditional rights to land. But of late there is also increasing number of cases of landlessness which is not because of the tradition but due to human greed.
The traditional land ownership pattern in the district is gradually changing as land is increasingly being privatized. In many cases even community land is being registered and their ownership claimed by those in power. These are some of the reasons for the growing landlessness at least in Jaintia hills, which has also led to change in traditional land tenure system in the area. This change in land ownership is a cause of serious concern because land which is a meager resource is increasingly being privatized and even community land is being allotted to individuals. What should be a cause of public concern is that this is happening with the district council’s support either by commission or omission. Due to this change of mindset, gradually rural areas will also become like urban areas where community/clan land will be privatized and land will increasingly be in the hands of the few rich people.