Tuesday 30 July 2024

On Sixth Schedule for Ladakh

I can sense some red flags in this demand from Ladakh for inclusion in the 6th schedule of the constitution which is currently applicable to certain states in the north-east. I somewhat understand why center government is reluctant to do this. In negotiations with Ladakh representatives center had proposed art 371 instead.

One would prefer that all citizens irrespective of their background are all treated equal and equal fundamental rights are applied to all and that there be no special provisions, laws etc. which are discriminatory in nature in any way. Hence, I find even art 371 to be an aberration but it appears to be a lesser evil than the 6th schedule which I find to be encouraging sub nationalism and separatism.

It was under British legacy of keeping north-eastern regions separate which unfortunately led to a continuation of the policy by means of 6th schedule provision in Indian constitution. Our constitution makers were sold to this idea of separate identity, otherwise there was no need to have separate provision of 5th schedule for the "tribal" regions of other states, say central India. In the words of Ambedkar as I picked from Wikipedia " The tribal people in areas other than Assam are more or less Hinduised, more or less assimilated with the civilisation and culture of the majority of the people in whose midst they live."  This sort of civilizational distinction I can relate with Ambedkar, his world view and his strong belief in the Aryan invasion theory etc.

The effect of the inner line permit, Elviniasm and the likes on separatist politics in north-eastern states is well known. The inner line permit did not prevent westernization and christianisation but it certainly did prevent the "assimilation" and "hinduisation" that Ambedkar speaks of for the tribes. Shillong, I am told by some, is the most "westernized" city in India with its flourishing rock band culture. 

As far as tribal identities are concerned, I am of the opinion that we are all tribal after all. Every Hindu at least retains his tribal identity with his "Ishta" and "Kula". Are the westernized and Christianized (a "world" religion) residents of Shillong still considered tribal is a larger question in a domain which is above politics. One can certainly sympathize with the separate civilizational identity of the Sentinelese and the Jarawa (to some extent) of A&N but is the idea to keep tribals as such, in perpetuity? Can the normal governance structures of state, districts, block, panchayats etc. not guarantee rights, freedoms and governance in the same way as the rest of India? Do the tribals never aspire to linking with the larger population around them at all?

Anyhow coming to the demands of Ladakh from some news reports it appears that some in Ladakh lament the removal/dilution of article 370 and 35A and see the sixth schedule as a way to status quo ante. I am wary of any discrimination of Indian citizens and any restriction on the right to equality of Indian citizens. These fundamental rights I believe are sacrosanct and I am saying this from the perspective of an Individual and not any people group. Hence, I find such insertion of possible discriminatory tendencies in the governance structure of Ladakh as potentially damaging in the long run. I understand that arguments will be made about the patriotism and unique environment etc. of Ladakh. Can the environment protection not be ensured by a regular legislature?

Ladakh has never been so Isolated in history, after all, it has been at the crossroads of great civilizations. The ancient Silk Road passed through Ladakh. One reads about new reports of gold smuggling from China and the proximity to Tibet and Xinjiang shows the future potential of a flourishing trade in the region if by some miracle we see a political change in China some time in future. So, I am not so convinced about any civilizational Isolation of Ladakh as in Ambedkar's words which should call for any 6th schedule like provisions. I say " 6th schedule like ", rather than 6th schedule itself, since 97% population of Ladakh is tribal, this in fact actually makes the idea of applying 6th schedule quite illogical Once Nagaland and Mizoram became separate states the 6th schedule became irrelevant to the erstwhile "Naga hills" and "Lushai Hills" of Assam as such. The state within a state concept of 6th schedule became moot. 

Similarly, as already the population is overwhelmingly tribal what do the people of Ladakh envisage? It is not as if there is a small tribal population in a large state surrounded by a non-tribal population necessitating an autonomous region within the state. Do the people of Ladakh envisage a separate autonomous division of Kargil and separate for Leh? Is that really needed when a combined legislature can bring better integration between the two districts rather than overly complicating the system with autonomous councils, that can encourage creation of discriminatory laws by these councils, which may lead to perpetual separation of the peoples of these regions and create political problems in future where none exist at present.

With these facts especially that 6th schedule was specific to a unique situation of Assam at the time it was envisaged under very different circumstances which do not exist in Ladakh and even 5th schedule is irrelevant given that almost entire population of Ladakh is tribal, the question now becomes ensuring the rights of the 3% non-tribal population of Ladakh and continued integration and development of the region. I request the people of Ladakh to review their position on this matter and the representatives of Ladakh to reconsider and move towards a normal state-center governance relationship like any other state or union territory of India.

I understand that my views on this subject are limited by my knowledge as a layman, but I suspect few in Ladakh fully realize the implications of what they are demanding either. I only hope that lack of full understanding of the legal & constitutional reasons why 6th schedule is inapplicable now that J&K state has been split does not lead to unnecessarily hardening of positions to a point of no return and lead to public unrest in the region which is detrimental to the peace and security in Ladakh.

No comments:

Post a Comment