Recent debates on how far into the past can traditional institutions be placed and whether they are actually modern constructs that emerged during the British Raj have occupied the mind space of many. Most societies find a safe space and comfort in tradition because they can follow what was in the past since anything new is considered disruptive. Alsom its easier to follow the beaten track than to carve out a new path. That’s how the human mind works. But unless the past is tested against present knowledge systems how can it be certified to be the best practice? Culture and tradition are words mentioned in every gathering, sometimes to the point of making the past appear sacrosanct and unchangeable. But human societies evolve all the time. Khasi society has evolved from hunting gathering to an agrarian one and then from the slash and burn form of unsettled agricultural practice to a more settled form of cultivation. People have had to evolve and leave tradition behind because the cultural past was no longer tenable.
Yet, when it comes to governance the past with its deep-seated gender biases is always cited as a best practice that should not lend itself to change. The Dorbar Shnong in a modern society can no longer be a governance institution exclusively for the Khasis. In a democracy all citizens are equal and deserve equal treatment even in village governance. Non-tribal citizens cannot be excluded from participation in the Dorbar Shnong. When states like Mizoram, Meghalaya and Nagaland were excluded from the Panchayati Raj’s 73rd & 74th Amendment Acts, it was out of a lack of understanding of the functioning of traditional institutions that were exclusivist and included only tribals. Can a village governance institution legally and constitutionally exclude non-tribal citizens from participatory governance?
Considering that history now reveals that the Dorbar Shnong is a British era institution, it becomes even more important that it evolves and adopts modern governance practices and then seeks recognition from the government via legislation. Working with the government would make it more vibrant and involve many more areas of grassroots governance since funds would then not be a problem. The fact of the matter is that the Dorbar Shnong has to deal with modern complexities and cannot hang on to tradition. Their link to the District Councils too is tenuous since they get their mandate (Sanad) from the Syiem another retrograde traditional institution with no accountability whatsoever but wields considerable power over what are called community forests which are outside the purview of the state. If societies have evolved in the way they dress, socialise and in the various professions they pursue, why this penchant for selective aspects of tradition? Is this because traditional institutions are repositories of power without accountability? Tradition is reinvented globally to cope with a fast developing world and the technology available. Its time societies demand change rather than opt for a constructed past.
