The Federation of Khasi, Jaiñtia and Garo People (FKJGP) has lashed out at the leader of the opposition, Dr Mukul Sangma, for his statement on the inclusivity of tribal and non-tribal alike when it comes to voting in the Garo Hills Autonomous District Council (GHADC).
The FKJGP’s Garo Hills unit was responding to Dr Sangma’s recent comment when he said that the founding fathers of the GHADC had it in mind to allow non-tribals to contest and vote in GHADC elections. The FKJGP and other pressure groups have called for a boycott of the GHADC’s April election and attacked political parties, like Dr Sangma’s Congress for fielding non-tribal candidates.
“The principle of inclusivity cannot be implied every time. In fact it is this understanding that has motivated a section of the society to demand the exclusion of non-tribals from the electoral process of the GHADC. We don’t intend on being inclusive when it comes to the GHADC,” said FKJGP unit President, Pritam Arengh.
Marak said that the intent of the GHADC under the Sixth Schedule was to strengthen the traditional institutions of the Garo tribe and to exercise autonomy to a certain extent by the Garo community.
“The Sixth Schedule deals exclusively in matters pertaining to tribal communities and there is thus no merit in the participation of non-tribals in the process,” added General Secretary Raksrang Sangma.
The FKJGP pointed to the electoral process of ‘Maharis’ in Garo Hills as an example to prove their point.
“It will neither be ethical nor possible for a person of another community to partake in the electoral process of any Mahari (clan) even if the person resides in the A’king (land) belonging to the particular Mahari. We are objecting as they (non-tribals) do not understand the way of life of the tribal people and thus should not be a participant in the GHADC, which deals in the traditional institutions of the Garo community,” added Arengh.
The pressure group added that the statement of deliberate accommodation by the founding fathers’ was a farce as Dr Sangma was not considering other reasons which may have led to the failure of introducing any laws with regards to the same.
“If his convictions are that simple he may as well care to answer why the GHADC is till date functioning without any service rules or finance rules? Maybe he cannot come to terms with the idea that successive governments have done little to nothing in terms of rectifying or augmenting the GHADC,” they added.
