SHILLONG: An umbrella body of village heads and traditional chiefs, several NGOs and pressure groups formed the Meghalaya Indigenous Tribal Constitutional Rights Movements (MITCRM) with the aim to oversee the proposed amendment to the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution.
The organisation was formed after stakeholders, keen to protect the rights and interests of indigenous people, met on Thursday at the KSU’s office at Jaiaw and voiced their opposition to the proposed amendment, which they fear will affect minority tribal communities in the State.
Addressing reporters on Thursday, North East Students’ Union (NESO) chairman Samuel Jyrwa said, “The 2015 bill of the central government intends to amend some provisions of the Sixth Schedule. There are some provisions which we feel will have an impact on the indigenous communities of Khasi, Jaintia and Garo Hills.”
He maintained that the Sixth Schedule is meant for the people of the North East and the proposal to amend the provisions in the Sixth Schedule was driven by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) without consulting the stakeholders.
“If there is a need for a change in the provisions of the Sixth Schedule, the voice should come from us and not from the Home Ministry,” he said.
The meeting remonstrated against the intention of the MHA. He said, “We have formed a committee to draft a memorandum on Friday which will be sent to the Central Government and MPs representing the North East.”
He pointed out that some provisions that prove to be a threat to the indigenous community are found in Paragraph 3 (b), 2 (a) (1) of the amendment which envisages the establishment of village and municipal councils.
Jyrwa pointed out that village council other than Dorbar Shnong and municipal councils in urban area are not prevalent in the State.
Members to the village council will be appointed on the basis of adult suffrage which will witness the participation of all individuals. “This is a major threat to the prevailing customs and functions. The Dorbar Shnong will fade into oblivion and others will control the village council,” he said.
There is also opposition to the move to allow the State Election Commission to administer election process in the District Council.
“If the State Election Commission administers the election processes of the District Council, then people other than tribals will be able to take part in District Council elections,” he said.
Meanwhile, lawyer Erwin Sutnga said that there is a mix-up of the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution and the proposed amendment.
He added that there has to be a separate chapter for the states in the Sixth Schedule, District Councils of Meghalaya should be under Meghalaya chapter and the same should be the process with other states.
Sutnga termed the amendment as a political and financial amendment although he admitted that the funds that will come will enhance development in the State.
Asserting that issues of land, identity, culture, traditional institutions were not addressed in the proposed amendment, he said, “The financial assistance and development should go hand in hand with the protection of our rights.”
NCST proposal
Sutnga said “another disturbing” aspect is that the Centre ignored the recommendation of the National Commission for Schedule Tribes (NCST) as in the 2012 report on good governance. It had stated that there has to be a chapter on tribal rights which should be incorporated in the Constitution or the Sixth Schedule.
Voicing the resentment to the proposed amendment, Sutnga said there is no preservation of identity in the Sixth Schedule. “The proposed amendment did not address the issues of our rights to livelihood, environment,” he said.
