By Benjamin Lyngdoh
A lot has been said and written on the Meghalaya Reservation Policy 1972 and the roster system notified in May 2022. The society is divided on the issue on tribal community lines. Depending upon which tribe one belongs to, it is apparent that society is already opinionated and has already made up its mind as to the conclusion. The vision is blurred and the mind is blocked from nuances related to the issue. It is like the saying, ‘when the cup is already full it is impossible to fill it with new tea.’ As the readers are already aware of the technicalities in the reservation and roster system, this column will refrain from touching upon them. On the contrary, an attempt is made to highlight matters which are related to the discourse.
It is alright to love one’s own tribe, but it is problematic when it becomes the only factor in deciding contentious issues. In the true sense of the discourse, the reservation and roster debate is not a Garo-Khasi issue. It is a debate for development of the state based upon logical and sound basis such as population size and socio-economic status. That way the reservation policy is to be relooked and reworked with a rider that it would be re-evaluated 10 years hence. By that time the demographics of Meghalaya would have changed again. Looking at a Garo/Khasi student one sees the same desire and spark to come up in life and be a change agent. If the roster conflict was not there, both would have got on with their lives and doing what they do best. The only thing that the roster conflict is doing is flaring up communal feelings and animosity. If this continues the collateral damage will be too much to bear. Meghalaya will sink in this hatred of the other community affecting the peace that prevails. It would be wise for all communities to come together and dish out the differences and find a common path that can be worked on for the next five years. There is no one-shot immediate solution to the issue. Any solution, be it the reworking of the reservation ratio or the roster system will have to be gradual.
The role of political parties in the roster discourse is concerning. Almost all of them are playing safe. They are mostly explaining technicalities only to confuse society with the hope that the matter dies a natural death. For example, Paul Lyngdoh justifies non-tinkering with the reservation policy as they lost in 25 out of 36 constituencies in Khasi hills despite mentioning ‘change in reservation policy’ in the UDP manifesto. This is an attempt at misdirection through disinformation. It is political shrewdness while shifting blame to the voters. Some parties say that they do not want trouble. That is only alright if they walk the talk by trying to solve the conflict. Till date, nothing as such is forthcoming. Now, when the legislature fails to do its duty, it then spills into the streets and the pressure groups come in. Then it would become a different ball game of law and order. In particular, the claim by HSPDP that the only solution to the problem is separate statehood for the Garos and Khasis is short-sighted. Some Garo groups are harping on the same. It is opportunistic with the motive to remain relevant in politics. If all problems are to be solved by statehood then the mindset would continue to become narrower. For example, what are the guarantees that if the Khasis get a separate state that job/education reservation issues would never creep up again? Then the fight would be amongst the Khynriam, Pnar, Bhoi, War and you name what. Period!
The understanding of reservation in Meghalaya is dichotomous. When it comes to the state government jobs, it divides the communities and in case of central government jobs, it unites these very communities. In fact, the basic premise of reservation is to help communities come ‘at par’ with all others. It is a means to ensure adequate representation in jobs and education with the ultimate intention of helping a particular community scale up. This means it has to have a time frame. On the contrary, it has turned into a political vote bank and no political parties have the guts and gumption to appropriately structure and redefine its framework. The hammer of reservation falls hardest on the students. Reservation seems to work in an inverted manner. The well cherished and valued words/thoughts like ‘we need to study, work hard, sincerity, dedication, determination, etc’ are somehow lost in the wilderness of reservation and roster. Students seem to be planning and implementing their study and professional approaches by having reservation on the back of their minds. This is counter-productive as instead of motivating students to reach for the highest levels, the reservation cut-off seems to be the stimulus and deciding factor for the effort in studies and work culture. If this is what reservation does then society will need to have a good hard look into it and revisit this entire framework. As a silver lining, a recent piece by Shillong Mail portrayed a change in the mind-set of the students towards reservation and roster.
The best way to resolve the conflict is to actually address the inherent problems in Meghalaya education. If quality education is provided and backed with proper infrastructure the competitive spirit would be accelerated. The schools in the rural areas are in bad shape and the only comfort for the shortcomings in education is that at least there is reservation and roster as a saving grace. This thinking is flawed and it will not develop Meghalaya. In one discussion, it was found that while the residents of Shillong do want to gradually move away from reservation, the only concern which is holding them back from coming out openly is the condition of schools in the rural areas. If we look at the UG CUET issue, the only reason for exemption for Meghalaya is the sad state of affairs in the rural educational infrastructure. This protective mind-set has to change. As a society we cannot continue like this forever. These are the type of issues that the political parties and the government are supposed to look at and work on. The real problem is not reservation and roster. The real problem is systemic in nature. For example, the timeframe within which NEP 2020 is to be implemented is 2030. It is mid-2023, but we are yet to see a clear-cut road map from the government on its implementation strategy. We are all looking at the smoke and missing out on the fire!
In the end, the roster conflict has come as an opportunity to study and understand the real problems concerning human resource development in Meghalaya. It is the responsibility of all to come together and work towards this end.
(The writer teaches at NEHU; Email – [email protected])