By Toki Blah
“One of the most cherished stories about this type of publicly accountable democratic demeanor has time and again been narrated on how the Dorbar of Hima Nongkhlaw under its leader, U Tirot Sing Syiem, deliberated and debated for days, the proposal of the East India Company for right of passage through the Hima.”
The preamble of our Constitution declares “WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved —————— GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION – that resulted in a Parliamentary Democracy. Political commentators who make observations on the issue and the subject of democracy, often quote the remarks attributed to Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose who was credited to have stated that “Those who want to know about democracy should come to the Khasi Hills”. This statement, if ever it was made, was supposedly made prior to Indian Independence. Now 75 years down the line, does this still hold true today? Would people still be impressed by the manner by which we Khasis practice democracy in 2022? Or to be more precise, what were the aspects, facets or features of Khasi Democracy that created such an impression in Netaji’s mind to make him burst forth with such exuberant praise on these noble democratic practices he witnessed in these Hills? Do they still exist in a Meghalaya that today acts within the framework of the Indian Constitution? I have often asked myself this question, because some of the vital Constitutional aspects mentioned in the preamble have a distinct resemblance to the value systems that guided governance in ancient Khasi democracy. Thus I would like to share my thoughts with others of my tribesmen, who perhaps like me in this 2022th year of our Lord, stand confused, bewildered and utterly perplexed by the deterioration of governance we see going on around us.
Most confounding however, especially on the eve of State Assembly elections, is to see and hear champions of political parties, especially those so-called regional parties, that proudly claim that they have been practicing democratic governance for the last 50 years! Question is – have they really? If yes, then from which fount of wisdom? From the Constitution? From our own neglected indigenous value systems? Or from a made-up chameleon version that changes colour with the demands of their own dubious indiscretions?
The Khasi democracy that Bose talked about was most probably about how Khasi Dorbars conduct and carry out their duties with equivalent responsibility. One of the most cherished stories about this type of publicly accountable democratic demeanor has time and again been narrated on how the Dorbar of Hima Nongkhlaw under its leader, U Tirot Sing Syiem, deliberated and debated for days, the proposal of the East India Company for right of passage through the Hima. Today an Assembly session lasting more than a week to discuss a dozen or more bills and Acts to benefit the entire people of Meghalaya is considered too long! The following are extracts from Dr. Hamlet Bareh’s book on the Khasi Dorbars based on the observations of a certain Mr. A. White who had accompanied Capt David Scott to the above deliberations. White then observes “I was struck with astonishment at the order and decorum which characterised this debate. No shouts of exultation, or indecent attempts to put down the orator of the opposite party; on the contrary, every speaker was fairly heard”. To quote this report further White proceeds to say that “I have often witnessed the debates in St. Stephen’s Chapel, but those of the Cossya Parliament appeared to me to be conducted with more dignity of manner”. He concluded with “The Durbar was conducted with a degree of independence, coolness’ and propriety which could not have been under similar circumstances by the inhabitants of the most civilised countries.”
To me this could only have been possible because of the ancient Khasis’ firm tenet on the concepts of liberty of thought and free expression of belief irrespective of social status. It is based on the principle of, “ban rai da ka nia, ka jutang ” (the belief that only arguments can lead to logical conclusions on which the truth can be established) and by the social value system of “ban pdiang ia kaba bha, ban bret ia kaba sniew” ( to accept therefore what is good and to reject what is wrong). Within a system based on such canons of self governance the magnificence of Khasi democracy of those times will not be hard to imagine. The question I have today for my fellow Khasis – “Is this system of democracy still practiced in our Dorbars? Is the voice of every member heard; patiently listened to and logic and reason applied to all Dorbar decisions? Or have we been swayed, bought over and converted by an alien belief that justice lies on the basis of a majority vote? More damaging is – have we allowed mob rule and the value of money to influence our recognition of the truth? Search your conscience my friends. The answer is already there!
The flummoxed reader is by this time perfectly entitled to ask “So how in heaven’s name did the ancient Khasi Dorbars in the exercise of their style of democracy ever reach decisions of equitable judgment in case of disputes between two equally afflicted parties but both incapable of producing conclusive evidence?” To search and reach the truth and to be able to come to a logical reasoning was the driving force in ancient Dorbar deliberations. Today “prior informed consent” is a recent motto especially employed on issues of governance imposed by a Government or authority on minority indigenous societies. Dorbars never attempt to impose decisions in such cases. The assistance or help of an independent unbiased witness to a dispute was therefore usually resorted to in such cases with the “Prior informed consent” of the parties involved. Such a witness was called a Saiphla and based on his/her statement or evidence a decision was reached; judgment passed and cheerfully accepted by all parties concerned.
In view of the above obsession of our ancient Dorbars for fair play, impartiality and logic, one would not be far off the mark to conclude that justice was the pivot on which the Dorbar worked and functioned. Seen against this background one of the most prominent of Khasi value systems and principles “ Ban Kamai ia ka Hok” would therefore point more to a Khasi’ s search for Justice ( Ban kamai ia ka hok – to strive for Justice, socially, individually for himself or collectively for his kur.) Here the word “hok” signifies justice more than honesty, contrary to popular belief that it is a call to collect brownie points of self-righteousness for oneself. It is my personal belief that self righteousness is an ego factor we aped from the West. The ancient Khasis were too practical and down to earth to be bothered with such castles–in-the- air nonsense.
In conclusion I would like to clarify that this writeup is no attempt to portray the Khasi as a perfect homo sapien. Far from it. The Khasis, both ancient and modern are as honest and as deceitful; as brave and as cowardly; as decent and as licentious as the next man. Left to themselves they loved their small yet brutal petty wars and internal skirmishes. We are no different from other humans and today to speak of Khasi unity is another pie in the sky dream. Here we are not discussing the Khasi as an individual per se but his practice of democracy which is based on truth; grounded on justice and decided by consensus rather than on the Western model of majority rule, which is similar to the rule of the jungle – where might is right; where the voice of the many, even if wrong and erroneous, overrule the voice of the weak, however truthful and justified that might be.
This essay is more on how we as Khasis have allowed party-based politics to override our better sense of fairness and tolerance and this is nowhere more explicit than in our interpretation of the meaning of fraternity or spirit of brotherhood among all mankind. It simply took 6 years after statehood for cosmopolitan Shillong and Meghalaya to lose its caliber of secular fraternity and turn into a state that conspired to rule through ethnic divide and hate. Accept this truth for its an ongoing political process. Today once again voices are raised for a separate Khasi as well as a separate Garo state. How long will it then take for the demand for a separate Jaintia state to emerge? Uncomfortable, troublesome questions but problems of our own making. Problems caused by idiots and morons with a vision for a 5 year Assembly seat rather than a vision or policy of how and where they want to take Meghalaya in the next 50 years.
So unless we rediscover the bonding and uniting factors of our ancestors, those universal value systems that for centuries guided their systems of governance and as long as we keep on encouraging cheap, populist and divisive tactics of party-based politics , I can safely predict that 70 or let’s give it a generous 100 years hence there will be no Khasi or Achik tribes as we know them today. This generation in its selfishness would have ensured their extinction.