By Sonie Kharduit
The Mawlong Hat episode opens up a wide spectrum of thought provoking issues with regards to urban planning and management as well as overall socio-economic temper of the citizens of the city. This particular incident was more of a crack or fissure, oozing out the molten magma composed of accumulated distrust and incertitude of the native over time. The tension subsided eventually and we must thank the World Cup Football fervour for diverting the temperature from our city to Russia. But nevertheless the damage is done for sure, staining the image of a so called peace loving- Christian dominated state!
The question of rehabilitation vs relocation is highly debatable. These two terms imply two different approaches and render two different results; hence we need to understand this in depth. A macroscopic view of this incident beyond the boundaries of Mawlong Hat, will inform us how grave the problems is. The deplorable condition of Iewduh, the dirt, the feckless structural growth which violate inherent safety clauses, the rampant growth of roadside vendors is a problem waiting to explode. The whole ecosystem is full of risks and devoid of any concept of sustainability. Can we carry forward these two problems to the relocation issue as well?
The abject remark on sweeper colony as ‘slum ghettos’ is indeed the myopic vision of the mass disregarding the bigger bitter truth. The whole radius surrounding the Iewduh area is no exception from the definition of slum. No effective measures for redevelopment or retrofitting either in the form of Brownfield or Greenfield projects have been considered. Trade license are sold for a price to non-tribals, there are exorbitant user charges, so where does all the money go? The institutions, claiming the proprietorship of these areas whether they are the tribal institutions (Syiemship, Dorbar), the Autonomous Council and other urban local bodies (ULBs) have little or no commitment to maintain the glory of Iewduh. They have allowed this mess to be compounded. It has aggravated with time only to create more opportunities for multivariate conflicts. More so any righteous, leader who dares to shake these institutions got ejected in no time. This tells us how vitiated the system is. The point of jotting down this fact is to bring out the distinction between rehabilitation and relocation. I wonder if anyone would demand the relocation of Iewduh, to cure the mess. Or should we better understand the underlying loopholes and fix the problem in a rehabilitative manner, so as that the livelihoods of people are not affected and the issues are resolved peacefully and sustainably.
Another critical topic which can be subsumed within this debate is the issue of hawkers in our city. The issue has become a white elephant in the room, too big to ignore but difficult to address. Few decades ago the hawker’s issue was never perceived as a problem, but today pedestrians have a hard time finding space to walk. The whole concept of public footpath is now sub-ducted. Since the authorities took no preventive steps from the beginning, now the problems have escalated into a livelihoods issue. As witnessed earlier the tentacles of the Iew Mawlong crisis eventually extended to the hawkers because their earning got affected with the curfew and ultimately they became one separate chapter in the whole crisis when they barged into the State Secretariat. The struggle for a meaningful existence often pushes a person to initiate a business start-up even on the roadside. The intention is noble but the platform might not be appropriate. However the manner and pace at which public space got hijacked by this group, points to the laxity of our Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) and the rampant corruption, because I’m sure these hawkers could sustain their respective roadside stalls only by making periodic payment to the workers of the ULBs. Why did the authorities allow this to happen in front of their noses? Don’t they have the responsibility of maintaining the dignity of being the Scotland of the East or the pride of owning the cleanest village in Asia? In any case if the authorities wake up to undo the mess, will relocation serve the purpose? Will someone even dare to put out such statements? I suppose only the wisdom and integrity of that entity will determine the next move.
A social scientist or city planner would always prefer the rehabilitation formula. If in any case relocation is the last resort, rehabilitation measures must follow suit otherwise the outcome is futile. For example, in many metropolitan cities several relocation projects for slum dwellers have backfired because of one main problem i.e., deprivation of livelihood. The new allocated houses are too distant from their source of livelihood. These groups are mostly associated with informal jobs (domestic servants, artisans, owning small shops etc) hence their survival is intricately linked with the previous locality. Sometimes the newly allotted flat ends up being rented out to a third party while the beneficiary returns to the same spot. In simple words we can conclude that shifting of households without factoring in the livelihood aspect is bound to face resistance. Eventually it defeats the whole resettlement project. The same principles work behind the several failures in the relocating efforts of our government, whether of the tourist taxi stand or the hawkers. Ultimately the economics of the market govern peoples’ behaviours and the policy makers might have forgotten to anticipate this fact. Moreover ones need to understand the dynamics of political games in the form of vote banks. Such moves are politically unfavourable, hence no one like to pursue them after coming to power.
One fact which acts as a common denominator or the underlying factors in which the rehabilitation- relocation dilemma arise is the reality of economic hardships. This fact has close ties with the sweeper lane crisis. Since long, the natives have nursed the feeling of being economic sidelined by the outsiders in trade and craftsmanship. The accumulated anger and frustration of losing the importance of being the sons of the soil ultimately got exposed through such sparks and eventually transformed into a violent movement, since this is the easiest route to release the pent- up frustrations.
The next question is who is responsible for the economic hardships of our people. Is it the geography? Is it the failure of government policies or its half-hearted commitment? Is it the self-centred attitude of our people, the jealousy, and non-competitive character? Is it the inherent divisive propagation of church’s role or the evil of tainted politics? It’s hard to pin point one single cause because all factors act in unison to complement each other to break and fragment the aspirations towards progress and collective well-being. Even within this small tribal population, the disparity is apparent; the rich are getting richer and the poor getting poorer. It’s no secret that the wealth of our political leaders have increased manifold after assuming power. Various pressure groups use issues as the staircase towards the power game. A smart aspirant starts his journey as the torch-bearer of so called welfare unions only to reach the apex of power but with zero passion and commitment toward the people.
As to the causes of socio-economic disability of our tribes, we could do with self- introspection. What kind of attitude and morality are we our cultivating and integrating. When the disparity and inequality is evident, then the blame must be directed inwards rather than outwards. God has given us both heart and mind, equipping human beings to take conscious and responsible decisions. When we can steal away a poor man’s share, or when we lack the conscience to help a person in distress then this is a crisis of morality rather than of law. Law is ineffective when the moral compass of the society points south.
Coming back to the conundrum between the two R’s, it’s worth exploring more on the rehabilitative aspect because it assures greater acceptance and it supports the sustainability aspect as well. For example relocating the sweeper lane will be a legal nightmare for all the stakeholders and once it enters the court premises then seeing the light of the day for the final verdict will take a lifetime. So why not explore the rehabilitative approach? If we can transform the slum image of the area into a well planned colony, it would please all the parties and give scope for healing the bad blood between the two communities. The pro-activeness of law enforcers to bridge the security gap will also bridge the trust deficit gap. We need to realise that relocation is not a magic wand for every problem. Besides, the add-ons in the form of distrust generated in the process are worth considering. Relocation might end up just relocating the problems with no real solutions.