By Toki Blah
Meghalaya is currently caught up in a debate over the nature, profile and structure of its Dorbar Shnong. No doubt, the Dorbar Shnong (Village Council) system (within the context of this article, the term Dorbar is loosely used to cover all the three systems of grassroots governance prevailing in all the three District Councils of the state of Meghalaya) is an integral part of the culture and identity of both the Achik and Hynniewtrep people. We have been carrying on with the system since time immemorial; it’s our way of life and many sincerely believe that it would be a sacrilege to tamper, amend or even improve upon the traditional roles, function and overall characteristics of this traditional system. As a matter of fact many senior and revered politicians; policy makers and youth NGOs included, become totally disoriented and agitated even on the simple issue of calling the Dorbar a Village Council. (Shnong is village & Dorbar is Council, so where is the problem God only knows).The traditionalists would have nothing to do with change! Well there is nothing like a crisis to jolt one up from an ill deserved conservative complacency and the Covid 19 crisis has managed to reveal, the warts and all the faultlines within the Dorbar system. Albert Thyrniang’s article, “Critiquing the institution of the Dorbar Shnong,” (ST Sep 16, 2020), has managed in no small way to illustrate the fallings and shortcomings of the Dorbar system within the context and administrative demands of the 21st century.
Thyrniang has rightly pointed out that our Dorbar system has been exempted from the provisions of the 73rd Amendment and the Panchayat System of grassroots governance. He further adds that “This “recognition” of the state’s grassroots governance structure ………does not necessarily mean that parliament has given a legal stamp on the institution of the Dorbar Shnong and the Nokmaship ….”. He is correct and Justice SR Sen’s 2014 ruling over the legality of the Dorbar system remains unanswered till today. Our grassroots governing institutions need to be endowed with Legislation. Meghalaya lacks a uniform, standardized and identical system of grassroots governance. Garo Nokmas act on their own. Jaintia Hills and Khasi Hills Rangbah Shnongs are as arbitrary as they wish to be. Each district council however is so obsessively possessive of its stranglehold over its respective traditional grassroots bodies that the overall need to revive our traditional bodies; make them relevant to today’s needs and for a uniform system of grassroots governance for the whole of Meghalaya has been deliberately ignored, blocked and thwarted by the very institution of the 6th Schedule created to safeguard and promote the interests of the Dorbar system.
There has to be a standardized and regulated system on the election of these grassroots bodies. This is not a call for infringement on tradition but simply an attempt to bring traditional practices at par with the demands and needs of a democratic society of the 21st century. First, we can’t have a Rangbah Shnong holding office arbitrarily for as long as he wishes without elections. Second, we can’t allow only persons from a certain clan to hold public office of the Shnong and neither can we prevent any longer the participation of women in the affairs of the Shnong. Such traditional practices might have had validity and public acceptance in the dim and distant past. Today they are at variance with the concepts of modern democratic practices and are constitutionally void. They continue to exist simply because no one has cared to challenge them before a court of law. And this is the point I wish to highlight. As a conscious and thinking society we simply cannot just depend on legal interventions to improve on every aspect of our day to day lives. We need to consciously legislate laws that are relevant to our social and economic well-being. We have elected representatives and it is their constitutional duty to interpret the legal and legislative requirements of society. Disbursing MLA funds is just an incidental part of administration. Sadly the very opposite is happening with our legislators.
What has the Covid pandemic revealed about our grassroots bodies? Aside from the critical aspects critiqued in Albert Thyrniang’s article mentioned above, the current plague has also un covered some very interesting but positive characteristics of the present day Dorbar. Mainly because of its non political profile, the Dorbar still carries the respect and confidence of the community it serves. Because of its participatory nature it still has the trust and faith of its constituents. Believe me this is a huge social capital which other grassroots institutions in the country, the Panchayat included, are yet to attain or achieve. The way in which the Dorbars have been able to produce front line volunteers in the fight against Covid; the manner in which important announcements of the Government are disseminated; the Dorbar approach towards Covid quarantine; all of this with minimal facilitation from the Government is something to be appreciated rather than to belittle. It is to be noted that Dorbars working in tandem with Government are a blessing for the people. Dorbars require simple tweaks and assistance to make them world class institutions of grassroots governance.
Lack of Accountability and Gender Sensitivity are however some of the main drawbacks of Dorbars especially those that lie beyond the pale of urbanised centres. Some believe and practice the principle that accountability lay simply in meetings of the Executive Committee. Office bearers feel they are answerable to no one but themselves. Some even believe that they are a sanctified body answerable to no one else but God the Creator ( ka Dorbar Shnong, ka Dorbar Blei). The General Body is never called and major policy decisions are taken without its approval or knowledge. In a society governed by the rule of law and the Constitution, it is not uncommon for such believers to find themselves in unnecessary trouble with higher constitutional authorities. This sort of behaviour contradicts the very concept of simplicity and transparency, issues that are the mainstay of traditional governance. With some Dorbars the participation of women in Dorbar affairs continues to remain a thorny issue despite the fact that within that very Dorbar there might be women more highly educated and more articulate than its men folk. In such cases male ego triumphs at the cost of good and participatory governance.
Governance today, be it at the village level or the national level, depends more on the management of resources than any other factor. Traditional resources at the disposal of our grassroots institutions were limited and few, limited perhaps to land only. Today the resources to be managed are numerous and most important of all are the financial resources that come our way. Since these involve public money, the need for proper financial accounting systems is a must to ensure transparent financial transactions at the Dorbar level. But proper financial management is one of the drawbacks of the Dorbar system. Most Dorbars do not even maintain proper books of accounts let alone proper auditing and assessment of income and expenditure. This must change if Dorbars are to remain relevant and meaningful to the grassroots governance systems of the 21st century. This will of course call for an in-depth review and relook at the manner in which we have managed and handled our Dorbar systems.
A realistic review, especially within the context of the Covid 19 pandemic, will reveal that the Dorbars have more to do with; have greater interaction with; and have more in common with the functions of the district administration than with any other entity. This is because both the State Govt and the Dorbars carry the same mandate – providing equitable service to the people. Viewed from this perspective the ADCs are an interloper with very little constitutional powers to serve the general interest of the people, aside from their singular mandate to preserve tradition and culture.
To therefore allow the District Councils to control the constitution, role and functions of the Dorbar is to perpetuate disservice to the people and the community at large. Unfortunately this is what is actually happening. Now under List II, Para 5 of the 7th Schedule of the Constitution read with Para 12 A of the 6th Schedule, the State Government can step in to bring in Legislation for a uniform standardized format for the role and function of grassroots institutions throughout the state of Meghalaya. It will streamline governance. It will uplift our grassroots institutions. It will bring in modernity to tradition. It will be the greatest service done to the people of the state. It is the felt need of 21st century Meghalaya.