A regular visitor
Almost every year from the break of the monsoon, public life in South Assam pass through enormous sufferings due to torrential rains.
Bishway Chamak Goswami

Flood in Assam has been a regular feature over the last many years. This year the flood affected twenty out of the twenty seven districts in the State. The situation is worse in south Assam which was cut off from the mainland for several days. The three districts of Barak Valley — Cachar, Karimganj and Hailakandi were virtually afloat on flood waters, in the third consecutive wave this year since last April. Almost every year from the break of the monsoon, public life in South Assam pass through enormous sufferings due to torrential rains. Since last April, floods have occurred thrice and at some places four times in Barak Valley. With new areas getting submerged under the steady gushes, the effects of the deluge have been harrowing this year. A closer look at the official statistics of the three districts reveals truth. In Cachar the total affected population is more than few lakhs. Population who have taken shelter in the relief camps is 61,660. D.P. Goala, a cabinet minister in charge of the flood relief in Cachar district has described the situation as ‘horrible’ and  stressed for the need of more relief to meet the demands and of the affected people. In Karimgang and Halaikandi districts too the situation is not different. Consequently, questions are now being asked about the effectiveness of the water resources department, the flood regulatory body in South Assam. The water resources department is solely in charge of the surveillance and flood control in South Assam.

Questions are now being raised on the money spent in the three districts of Barak Valley on the flood relief in the past five decades where flood is a recurring problem. If these funds would have been properly utilised the problems of the people could have been minimised. Geographically, Barak Valley is a plateau surrounded by the mountains from all three sides, bearing crusts of alluvial origin. Unabated deforestation has prevented the soil from retaining water and weakens the same causing erosion which also flows down to the bottom of rivers.

Therefore, clearing the drossy river-beds and deepening them using dredges can prevent inundations. Water transport could be revived in this region to allow plying of dredgers or ships which had been in vogue in the 1960s. This will clear the river-bed and could serve as an alternative transport system too. Secondly, existing embankments could be sufficiently strengthened and heightened to prevent permeation and overflowing of river water. Thirdly, planning is must for afforestation on the mountain areas to gain back the strength of soil and the eco-climatic balance. Finally a dam could be constructed for flood water moderation in the down stream region of the Barak river. The Barak dam is long overdue. Way back in 1999 NEPCO had been entrusted with its construction which has received the techno-economic-clearance-certificate from the Government of India in July 2003. But the project has got tangled in a controversy between the Union Ministry of Power, the Union Ministry of Water Resources and Assam Government.

As a result t0he project has been indefinitely delayed due to official negligence. Therefore the Centre must prevail on its own agencies to give development a chance in the region.

Terrorism has also posed a serious challenge to the construction of the dam and though a security budget has been prepared by the concerned agencies, yet the funding of the same has been wrapped up in another major dispute between the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Ministry of energy. Peoples’ power Existing system of administration in the villages of Meghalaya is the example of true democracy. The Role of Autonomus District Councils The role of all the citizens in decision-making and implementation process is the ideal situation in a functional democracy. In the North East region many states opted out of Panchayati Paj ststem citing the reason that these are tribals are by nature democratic. Therefore in this part of the country only the central,state and district level democracy prevails. In Meghalaya the role of various organizational structures like Darbar Shnong,Syiems Elaka Chief in Khasi Hills,Dollois or the Elaka Chiefs in Jaintia Hills, Wahadader,the head of Hima, as it is called in Shella villages,Nokmas of Garo Hills, Sirdars, kur clans and such various bodies existed or still existing at various locations of this state since time immemorial. Autonomous District Council came later on, much later, after framing the Indian Constitution.

The existing system of administration in the villages was the example of true democracy as exercised by the villagers, though it has some flaws.  Empowerment of people is the essence of democracy, and that is why when the Constituent Assembly framed the Indian Constitution without giving importance to Panchayati Raj or Village Councils there was hue and cry raised by some members. A large number of members raised stong protest against the idea of ignoring the village republics. The Indian Constitution, at that time generally followed the Western Style of administration. mainly dealt with the two-tier system, i.e. Central government and the State Governments. That was not the idea what Mahatma Gandhi envisaged. He visualized a democracy where the Village Councils will function as self-governing autonomous republics. He was a true believer of what Abraham Lincon said,” Government by the people, for the people, of the people”. A democracy where all the people have there say and no one will be his or her democratic rights. In the system of Autonomous District Councils, in a cosmopolitan place like Shillong, this practice  though not appropriate and does not serve the true democratic principles.

Traditional Institutions versus District Council

One flaw of this practice is that while electing the local bodies like Syiemship or Darbar Shnong etc. the system of adult franchise is not followed properly, second flaw of the system is that there are so many contradiction within these bodies, third lacuna of this practice is that very often these structures come into conflict with one another, and the fourth problem is that from where the fund for running these institutions would come is not specified and the fifth and most acute question of the day is that, where the role of Autonomous District Council ends and these structures take over, or vise versa, is not clearly defined. During the British Raj such structures worked, though not very smoothly. But since the Autonomous District Councils came into being the conflict started. The conflict started since then itself and for clarification it went to the highest court of the country. The Autonomous District Council is a Constitutional body under Sixth Schedule of the Act of 1959 and the Supreme Court passed a judgment next year that Syiem is a functionary under the Autonomous District Council. As per the Act of 1959, (Appointment of Succession of Chief Act) Autonomous District Council wholly regulate the succession and appointment of Chiefs and Headmen. Whether the District Council has been doing this job or not is a separate issue.  The conflict between the traditional Institution and the Autonomous District Council is about power and authority. It started immediately after the Autonomous District Councils came into being under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution. The power of the village heads has been curtailed and this has forced the Traditional Chiefs to take on the District Council. Now the decisions of the Traditional Chiefs are no more full and final. They are the presiding officers of the Sub-ordinate District Council Courts but their decisions or judgments are subject to appellate jurisdiction of the Sub-ordinate District Council, court at its headquarter at Shillong. Instead of being over-sensitive the Chiefs should realize that there should always be a higher Court of Law to settle any issue. They have their own jurisdiction and authority and it might not be same as was before enactment of the Act of 1959, yet they have enough authority and power to serve the people. If the will is there the Traditional Bodies will still be able to discharge their duties.

Neglecting the Darbars

The conflict between the Khasi States and the non-Khasi States were in existence since long, the present tussle for power, within the Khasi institutions, are relatively recent in origin. Way back in 1906, the then D.C. of Eastern Bengal and Assam and Superintendent of Ethnography in Assam Major P.R.T. Gordon wrote” A Khasi State is a limited Monarchy, the Syiem’s powers being much circumscribed”. He also observed, “It is an executive council over which the Syiem presides, and also possesses judicial power”. He wrote, “In Khasi Hills there is no land revenue, nor are there are any tithes or other imposts levied upon the cultivators’ produce. The land , to a great extent is the property of the different clans and villages, although in some instances there are estates owned by private persons”. All that The Chiefs is entitled to receive the income that arises from what are known as the Raj or State lands only”. He also observed, “The principle source of income, however, in all

Khasi States is the toll or khrong, which he takes from those who sell in the markets in his territory”. Therefore traditionally there was no rule fixed for the income of funds for the Syiem or Darbar in the Khasi Hills. Now with the Autonomous District Councils and the State Government coming into existence ways and means are to be found so as to survive this institutions. While it must be admitted by this columnist, it should be appreciates, that the system and practice followed by the local level self governance, as existed in the Khasi Hills because of its collective farming and sharing of the produce among the villagers, with some aberration here and there. Collective functional democracy at the grass root level is the important for the success of democratic process and it should also be taken into account the changing situation. The Autonomous District Council, after came into being, created a new situation, which the Darbars and such Traditional Institutions must accept as a reality. The G.N.Bordoloi headed committee, which framed the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution along with Rohini Kumar Choudhury, Rup Nath Brahma, Rev. Nicholas Roy and Kuladhar Chaliha did not laid down any norms about the future status of the 25 khasi States existing then.

They were not even involved in this process.. they were not consulted even as it was considered these 25 Khasi States are already part of the then Assam and so of Indian Republic.Incidentally the Federation of Khasi States was formed by the Khasi Chiefs in 1956. It is obvious that the formation of the Autonomous District Councils eat into the role of Village Councils and curtailed and jeopardized the existence and role of Darbars. It is obvious. Earlier they were almost independent but now they had to function under the Autonomous District Councils, follow its rules and regulations and depend on it for funds. During his speech June, 23 on in response on the floor of the house of Khasi Autonomous District Council, to the motion raised by the opposition members on the earlier day the Executive Member of Elaka Administration Shri Hispreaching. .S.Shylla made some plain speaking. He repeated the same words on July 17 again.He said that the First Schedule pf the Indian Constitution has made it clear that the Indian Dominion comprised of 25 Khasi and Jaintia Hills, which later came to be known as United Khasi and Jaintia Hills.He further asserted that “the Supreme Court has clarified the issue, when it passed a judgment stating that all the administrative powers and status of the Syiems has come to an end when the Indian Constitution came into force on January 26, 1950”.

Confusion about the ADC

The Execuive Member of Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, In Charge of Elaka Administration Shri H.S. Shylla also stated to clarify the position of the Autonomous District Council vis-à-vis in this regard, that “ after the coming into force of the Constitution, the position is that the Chiefs lost whatever ruling or administrative powers they had by the merger of the 25 Khasi States in Assam and governance of the States was to be carried on according to the provision of the Sixth Schedule”. To substantiate his argument Shri Shylla referred the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case, related to this issue, between former Syiem of Hima Mylliem versus the Autonomous District Council in the year 1951. It appears that, The aim to bring democracy to the door step of the people of this state has failed, like some other states of India. But in Meghalaya the democratic set up of local self-governance had been in existence for a long time. In the name of protecting the tribal people, because of which Autonomous District Councils are formed, have done everything to disturb the self rule by the tribal people by neglecting the various structures. The area of formal agreement or annexation on merger of the 25 Khasi States, as at the time of Independence of the country these were treated as part of the Assam state, is not very clear in historical perspective.

The rulers of the 19 Khasi States signed Instrument of Accession on December 15,1947, later on another remaining six States signed the Instrument of Accession Therefore if some people now questions about the authenticity of signing the Instrument of Accession they are not letting the truth. However some gaps left about the future of these erstwhile States. They are part of the state, then Assam, but will they get any preferential treatment? It is a gray area. However it appears that the, leaders of the Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, has no clear vision about the issue. In the Budget session The Executive Member Shri Shylla also referred to the United Khasi Jaintia Autonomous District Appointment and Succession of the Chiefs and Headmen Act. 1959.  While this columnist admires the system and practice followed by the Village Councils, as existed in the Khasi Hills because of its collective farming and sharing of the produce among the villagers. Collective functional democracy at the grass root level is the important for the success of democratic process it should also be taken into the changing situation. The system was not perfect but involvement of the majority of the people of the state in democratic process is vital for the success of the democratic principles. Failure of Democratic Principles  The three-tier Panchayati system as has been in practice in almost all part of India, except in few states in the North East region, is not free from faults and lacunae.

The aim and objective of true democratic system is that where the villagers, who constitute over eighty per cent of the population of the country, are involved in decision-making process, plan for self development and implementation of the plans. Unfortunately the bureaucrats who are worshippers of the Western style of governance believe in the top to bottom approach or trickle down theory, where all the decisions are taken at the top by this bureaucrats based on the guidelines laid down by the ministers, the majority of the population of the country are existing simply to follow the policies adopted by these bureaucrats. Instead of decisions taken and implemented from grass root level to the top most level the system practiced was to take all the decisions at the top and implement these through government machinery. Thus the voice of the majority of the citizens was neglected. Is this the ideal situation expected in a democratic set up? This is has been the bane of Panchayati Raj system of this country.  This situation was not much different for the Tribal Areas of the country.

Bureaucrats behave similarly everywhere Even the politicians of the country has the tradition of being dependent on the advice of the bureau rates. However, it is expected that the politicians will know the pulse of the people and aware of the ground realities. Unfortunately this has not happened while dealing with the Khasi States. The continuous conflict about the power sharing between the Autonomous District Council and the other institutions of self governance has been going on for more than five decades.  As per the advice of the Cabinet Mission the Constituent Assembly of India an Advisory Committee was set up in January 24,1947, The committee later on divided into two sub-committees. One of these sub-committees was the North East Frontier (Assam) Tribal and Excluded Areas sub-committee Shri Gopinath Bordoloi was the chairman of this Committee. The five-member committee headed by Shri Bordoloi, the architect of Sixth Schedule of the Constitution of India was not different in his view than others members of the Committee. The aim of the committee was actually the accession the Khasi States, they utilized all the methods and recourses to achieve the aim. Therefore, in the Sixth Schedule Khasi states did not get a mention even. Even the Drafting Committee preferred not to consult Dr. G.S.Guha, the representative of the Khasi States in the Constituent Assembly.

 As mentioned in case of Meghalaya, in Indian Subcontinent as a whole has followed republican system of administration since the Vedic period. It is because of in spite of many foreign invasions and occupation for many years India did not disintegrated. The framers of the Indian Constitution, as a compromise under tremendous protest included a one-line statement, article (Article 31-A) was inserted in the Directive Principle of the State Policy. It is “The State shall take steps to organize Village Panchayats and endow them with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as unit of self -governance”. But Directive Principles of State Policy are not laws and are not enforceable by the Court of Law. But subsequently with the constitutional provision of delegating power to the system of Panchayet down to the villages or gram sabhas in 1993 and thereafter further elaborately through enactment of Provision of Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act 1996 power was delegated to the villages in many states, though much has to be done even now in this respect. The Articles 4(c) and 4 (f) laid down the areas where villagers can play their role.  Unfortunately, in Meghalaya, only in the districts the people enjoy self-governance through the District Councils and the people of the rest of other two-tiers of the Panchayati Raj are deprived of their due rights due to lack of clarity on part of the Autonomous District Councils or simply because of power struggle.

|  Headlines  |  Editorial   | From Other Publications  |
|  Travel Column   |   News Briefs  |
| OT Main Page | Nena  Home Page  |