The denial of the right of the tribes mandated by the Constitution under Article 371-C continue to push tribals of Manipur to consider breaking the shackles of dominance.
Share
Adversarial stance negates co-existence: Many articles have been written by this social and political commentator on matters concerning the “hill areas” with the main thrust of providing a path for peaceful coexistence with the objective of inclusive development and inclusive governance for hill areas of Manipur. The articles include the Sixth Schedule under Article 244(2), Article 244-A and Article 371-C, all aimed at sharing of power and resources with the hill areas neglected by the dominant community who wields political and administrative power. However, the adversarial stance and denial of the right of the tribes for more than half a century for inclusive development and governance mandated by the Constitution under Article 371-C continue to push the tribes to consider extreme options to break the shackles of dominance.
In an article written on the scheme for inclusive development and governance for “hill areas” envisaged by the Government of India for post-statehood Manipur under Article 371-C and the Presidential Order of 1972, a rude shocker came from a tall leader belonging to the dominant community stating that “No one is disturbing Article 371(c) which divided the state. The dominant community is confined only in the valley.”
This comment mockingly implies that the Meitei leadership is thinking of doing nothing when it comes to implementation of Article 371-C for “hill areas”, but watch how the legislation drafted and recommended by the Hill Areas Committee (HAC) would become law without the cooperation of the state government and Assembly dominated by the majority community. This stance is an affront to the Constitution and is a challenge to be confronted head-on by all right-thinking citizens, the HAC and the tribes inhabiting the hill areas.
The constitutional provisions under Article 371-C and those emanating out from it mandate the state government and Assembly to process legislations recommended by HAC to its logical conclusion or outcome, and it does not include shelving HAC recommended Bill in cold storage, which the Manipur cabinet did by proposing two other Bills in flagrant violation of the Constitution. The provisions state that the Bill recommended by the HAC has to be enacted by the Assembly one way or the other and provide procedures and processes that result in an outcome. The “Manipur (Hill Areas) Autonomous District Council Bill, 2021” recommended by HAC in 2021 is still with the state government and it is mandated to refer the matter to the Governor if it has a contrary opinion, as evident from the tabling of two Bills of the government’s version when the HAC-recommended Bill is pending with them. The HAC Bill does not lapse and it has to run its course as provided under the Rules of Business of the Government of Manipur, 1972, and the Rules of the Procedure and Conduct of Business of the Manipur Legislative Assembly, 1964, modified by the Presidential Order dated 20th June 1972.
Tribal Ministers: Pawns under the CM
The inability of four ministers from the hill areas in the last Council of Ministers to stand up for the interests of “hill areas” on the “Manipur (Hill Areas) Autonomous District Council Bill, 2021” matter speaks volumes about the level of subjugation of tribal leaders. For 50 years, the tribes have been deprived and denied their due share of resources and governance. In respect of the HAC recommended Bill, the tribal ministers could not convince the cabinet to follow the procedure under Rule 12-A of the Rules of Business of the Government of Manipur, 1972. If powerful ministers succumb to pressure and are not able to assert themselves, one can imagine how ordinary people can resist any illegal actions of the government. Another plausible instance of capitulation by tribal ministers could be in respect of the Writ Petition seeking ST status for the Meitei community in the Manipur High Court, where the respondents (state government and Union of India) did not submit their comments or seek time on a highly sensitive matter and instead gave their consent for the court to pass its orders. These two instances are pointed out to show how easily tribal ministers in the cabinet are sidelined.
Had the provisions of Article 371-C been implemented during the last 50 years, the scope of legislation given to the HAC could have changed the lives of tribal people in the hill areas. There would have been enactment of laws recommended by the HAC on Scheduled Matters by the Assembly, thereby improving delivery of developmental benefits and administrative functioning. Sadly, the non-implementation of Article 371-C has contributed to backwardness in hill areas, resulting in a high fertility rate among the tribes, likely to become another flash point for conflict.
Building political consensus: the best way forward
Building political consensus is the constitutional duty of the Chief Minister (CM) and is paramount for unifying Manipur and restoring normalcy in the state. The ability to build political consensus for implementing the scheme of unique administrative arrangement under Article 371-C should be one of the criteria for selecting the next incoming CM of Manipur.
Chief Minister holds the Key
Building political consensus is the preferable path forward for the successful conclusion of legislation of Bills for hill areas recommended by the HAC. The HAC constituted for “hill areas” has the right of legislation under Article 371-C to draft Bills for “hill areas” on “Scheduled Matters” listed in the “Second Scheduled” of 1972 Presidential Order. The procedures laid down require the Council/Cabinet to normally table the Bill recommended by HAC in the Assembly and the minister concerned to refer the Bill to HAC. The HAC would then report on the Bill and send its recommendation to the Assembly for enactment of law. If the council/cabinet has a contrary opinion on the HAC recommended Bill, the council is required to refer the matter to the Governor whose decision is final. Further, if the Assembly rejects the Bill or deviates from the recommendations of the HAC and passes the Bill substantially different from the HAC recommended version, the Speaker is duty-bound by procedures to submit the matter to the Governor whose decision is final. Over and above this, if the HAC has grievances, it can approach the President who can issue executive directives for implementation by the state government based on the Governor’s report. The constitutional provisions also bind the hands of the Chief Minister to table the Bill drafted and recommended by the HAC for enactment in the Assembly and not to substitute it with a government’s version in violation of the Constitution.
The Chief Minister, as head of government and leader of the House, has the mandate under the Constitution to facilitate enactment of legislation drafted and recommended by the HAC by building political consensus. CM’s leadership is crucial for the successful implementation of Article 371-C of the Constitution.
The tedious route: Through the Governor and President
If the approach of the CM is non-cooperation and adversarial, the HAC’s right for legislation of laws for hill areas by the Assembly will have to take the tedious path. The constitutional provisions had anticipated the possibilities of obstructions at various processes and have built-in several safeguards for the HAC to take the matter to its logical conclusion. It includes special responsibilities for the Governor and intervention by the President to make the Assembly and state government perform their duties. The adversarial route is not the best route forward for fostering coexistence and this route is best avoided through political statesmanship of the CM. Confrontation only serves to widen the rift between the hill areas and valley thereby dividing the people.
Stalled for half a century; tribes need to strategise
Domination by the majority community over tribal people by denying the constitutional rights of hill areas for more than 50 years has become a pressing issue. Since 1972, the tribes have been facing an adversarial stance and that policy has not changed half a century later. Confrontationist attitude seems to be advocated even today in an already vitiated climate of ethnic confrontation and tension compelling the tribes to strategise and consider ways and means of freeing themselves from the clutches of domination.
Demographic dividend of tribes in hill areas
To free themselves from domination, the first priority for tribes in hill areas would be to wait for the Census 2027 population figures. Tribal population has been growing at a faster rate in all past censuses. The Zo (Chin-Kuki-Mizo) ethnic group has moved out of Imphal valley following the ethnic clashes. Naga tribes settled in the valley are worried and some are looking for safer areas at the foothills. All such internal movements from valley to hill areas will increase the possibility of a higher number of elected representatives for hill areas when delimitation takes place in 2028-29. At that juncture, the tribes in hill areas will be encouraged even by the Meitei community to break away from Manipur in order to retain political power. Such a scenario would afford the two major tribal groups the option of deciding either to stay together in a single entity as a state/UT or go their separate ways.
Enactment of laws for hill areas
To test the goodwill of the dominant leadership, the immediate strategy of tribes should be to pressurise the state government for the implementation of Article 371-C and 1972 Orders as soon as a popular state government is installed. HAC should convince the CM of the need to build political consensus for the smooth enactment of laws for hill areas. The first test would be the Manipur (Hill Areas) Autonomous District Council Bill, 2021, pending with the state government for four years. Failing this approach, HAC should be prepared to seek intervention from the Governor. The next priority of HAC should be land laws followed by laws on social customs.
Political agenda for Tribes
Towards this goal, the two tribal groups should make the implementation of Article 371-C an election issue for the 2027 general assembly elections and vote for the bravest candidate who will vow to fight for its implementation and take the extreme step of resignation, regardless of party affiliation, when they are urged to do so by their constituency if they fail to get Article 371-C implemented.
Question before Manipur leadership
Adversarial stance will not keep the state together but fracture it. The crying need for Manipur is for a tall leader to step forward to vie for the chair of CM with the bold agenda of building political consensus for facilitating the hill areas to have accelerated development and effective governance by empowering the ADCs and Village Authorities (VAs) along with plans for special schemes, programmes and projects to contain high population growth in hill areas. The colossal failure to implement the constitutional provisions given by Article 371-C during the past 50 plus years needs to be remedied by the next popular state government.
Path forward
The scheme for empowerment of hill areas is already provided and envisaged by Article 371-C and it appears to be sufficient if all actors carry out their roles and duties as assigned to them. What is needed is statesmanship and conviction by the next CM of Manipur for implementation of the scheme envisaged by Article 371-C, facilitate HAC to function properly and for the government to chalk out a special plan for bringing development at par with the valley and empower the ADCs and VAs to deal with the problem of rapid population growth in hill areas. Putting in place a proper mechanism to kick-start the engine of inclusive governance envisaged by Article 371-C will help ameliorate the ills and problems of the hill areas and this would be the best path forward for peaceful coexistence.
Ngaranmi Shimray
New Delhi