By Toki Blah
Governance in the ultimate analysis is the ability of the political system (modern or traditional) to usher in a general feeling of wellbeing and sense of security in society. Does it apply to grassroots governance? In days gone by, our village communities were isolated pockets of human habitation located on hill tops far from each other. The Dorbar, composed of elected male elders of the kur (clan), emerged as the most viable platform for good governance. In an oral based knowledge system, experience served as qualification and age the best criteria for leadership. Hence the adage that only men with moustache were qualified as dorbar members. Issues of governance before Traditional durbars were limited to a few subjects only such as maintenance of social order, agricultural practices and security of the village. Today in the 21st century, requirements in governance have changed drastically ranging from creation and maintenance of infrastructure to management of the environment. Dorbars are no longer isolated, self sustaining, hilltop entities. Today they are linked by modern communication to the rest of the world, collaborate with equal or more powerful partners; they demand and receive funding to sustain their activities and knowledgeable persons run their day to day affairs. Of concern is the fact that Meghalaya’s traditional institutions (TIs) appear hesitant, reluctant and positively scared of the development responsibilities they are now expected to shoulder.
Grassroots governance concepts of the 21st century demand empowered institutions yet run and managed by ordinary people. The belief that people themselves know what is best for them is now universally accepted. The whole world is moving towards a bottom up, demand driven village administration. The 73rd and 74th Amendment of the Indian Constitution is India’s step towards this direction. The approach strategy is to provide people with development institutions of their own and to capacitate them on the management of such institutions. The village and its community institutions (both modern and traditional) demand and require capacity building. In Meghalaya’s case the village dorbar and its institutions. In Meghalaya the onus of developing and empowering village administration was entrusted, through the 6th Schedule and by the 73rd Amendment, in the Autonomous District Councils (ADCs). For sixty long years ADCs have intentionally ignored and neglected this constitutional responsibility. The focus of the ADCs and their elected MDCs instead focused on two issues of self interest. The first is to use the district Council as a springboard to the state Assembly. The second is to exploit all natural non- renewable resources by whatever means available. To cover up their incompetence at empowering the traditional institutions under their charge, the ADCs projected the illusion that their mandate was to simply protect tradition and culture. Tradition and Culture were in turn projected as something sacred and inviolable; something rigid and inflexible; something that should never be improved upon. This excuse forestalled any action at TI empowerment and durbars were for 60 long years left to their own devices. They were simply left to rot as history found them! Lots of people might not like this statement but sadly it happens to be the bitter truth!
Today there is this current hullabaloo over the High Court order on the need for legislation on the legal status of the Dorbar and its elected office bearers. It produced total chaos. There is no clarity as to what is really needed; what needs to be done and why. The Dorbars have formed themselves into a long-winded tongue twisting apex body which then needlessly plunged itself into the internal squabbles and power struggles of the Congress party. The need to do so has never been satisfactorily explained but the real issues confronting the Dorbar system were totally lost sight of. The focus instead has been on toppling the Govt; over MUDA jurisdiction; the ability of the Rangbah Shnong to issue NOCs and exemption for Govt servants from rules and regulations of the Govt they work for. The real issue of turning our TIs into grassroots decision making platforms for sustainable development of the future; of transforming them into viable and relevant institutions of the people, by the people and for the people, has once again been swept under the carpet.
There is a second truth that the people of Meghalaya have to accept and that is our reluctance and inability to differentiate between governance (ka synshar ka khadar) and tradition (ka riti ka dustur). Many believe they are one and the same. In fact they are poles apart and to club them as one is the actual cause for all the confusion prevailing. Parochial politics and narrow minded politicians are mainly to blame. Within the context of this writeup, governance (ka synshar ka khadar) needs to keep up with the times so as to bring in equitable development for our people. We need to bring in a development paradigm where the people themselves take charge of their own wellbeing. This can only happen if our dorbar system is properly empowered to facilitate people, ie the electorate, to start thinking and planning for itself. It’s what politicians fear the most as it is a direct threat to the politics of patronage where money plays such a pivotal role during elections. Not surprising to note the rising hysteria of desperation from decrepit politicians whenever they hear talk of participative governance. They will oppose it tooth and nail.
The third truth that we need to accept is in relation to the authority that has been most responsive in empowering our traditional grassroots Institutions. It’s not the District Councils let me tell you. Fact is they have not done it. Fact is they have not done anything. Fact is they have utterly failed in their constitutional mandate to uplift Traditional Institutions. The empowerment of our durbars; the attempts to make our grassroots institutions relevant to the needs of the common man in both Municipal and 6th Schedule areas, has come instead from the state Government and its district administration. That is the bitter truth that many have failed to recognise! Both rural and urban development are vivid examples of Govt encouragement to involve our traditional institutions in the task of nation building. Dorbars have been walking side by side with the administration in delivering both social and economic services to the people. Socio-economic schemes be it through DRDA, NEREGA, PMRY, fishery development, ration card distribution, MLA scheme implementation or the empowerment of women has always been the administration working hand in hand with the decision of the people. Roads, bridges, school buildings, PHCs and hospitals or community halls has always come up with the active cooperation of the village with the administration. In the process local dorbars were empowered. The truth is that the ADCs preferred to sit by as mere spectators to the process of empowering local self government. ADCs have always shied away from empowering our TIs be they durbars, akhings, raid or himas. It is only when the possibility of direct funding came up that ADCs stepped forth as champions of the communities. An excellent example of this is the VAB which in essence is all about routing direct funding through the ADCs, nothing more nothing less.
The recent interim ruling of the Supreme Court in the special leave petition filed by the KHADC is an eye- opener. The Court has not given a stay nor adversely commented on the Meghalaya High court ruling on the desirability for State Legislation on a uniform system of grassroots governance for the whole of Meghalaya. It was not what the petitioners wanted. The court has simply stated that “Until further orders, the persons occupying the post of headman may continue to function… …… as per law under the 6th Schedule”. The traditional role of the durbars was upheld but the Court has not shown its aversion either towards the desirability for a uniform improved and empowered system of governance for our grassroots institutions. The only question that remains to be answered is ‘Who is constitutionally competent to make such laws?” A certain regional party sees the attempt of introducing a uniform system of local self government as a threat to its own identity. A closed political mindset once again at play as no logical reason has been given as to why our people should be deprived of the blessings of good governance. One doubts whether these political gimmicks will divert the attention of the Apex Court from the two Constitutional options available before it. Para 3(e,f) of the 6th Schedule or para 5, List II of the 7th Schedule read with Para 12A of the 6th Schedule. One doubts whether the court will remain indifferent to the need for a viable, up to date and empowered village administration for the people of Meghalaya. The time has come to end Meghalaya’s confusion and agony over what is tradition and what is governance. Hopefully the Supreme court will this time settle the question once and for all.
(The author is President of ICARE)