Western democracies are fortunate - the people are educated, they are
conscious, and this is what makes democracies tick. of the issues. In India,
literacy is very low, the percentage of people illiterate, poor, and backward so
large the function of democracy is onerous. So an organization like Asha, with a
focus on education has a very important role to play.
The constitution was forged by founding fathers who were very conscious of
the real state of the country - they were aware of the people who form scheduled
castes (SCs), scheduled tribes (STs) and backward classes and the social
problems associated with them. That is why they included special provisions for
the rights of these groups. We have to consider Constitution, the UN Human
Rights Declaration, IRO Commission 106, 169, and other relevant statutes to
understand the situation in India. The Constitution also laid down guidelines
which the State must follow in regard to these backward groups. In Article 46
the Constitution has said that the State shall protect SCs, STs and provide
means for their development and has laid down means for doing so.
Development was meant to touch various aspects of the life of the people -
agriculture, animal husbandry, infrastructure such as road building, dams,
mining, industries, social issues such as health etc. To implement these
development tasks, blocks of 100 villages (or in some cases less, blocks of 50
or so) were created. Involvement of people was sought for various committees.
This has been going on for decades. Even in the initial stages it was found that
those who came for these committees were from those who were from the powerful
and affluent sections of society, the upper castes mostly. They could
"channelize" development for themselves. In the 70s it was thought that the
generalized direction prevalent for development projects was not good, and focus
was necessary. The focus was to identify target groups, identify plans which
suited them, so that development schemes would not peter out or be appropriated
by affluent sections. Both community and target development are still in vogue
but to what effect ?
One major flaw was that the people were not included. Collusion between
bureaucracy and influential sections led to them feathering their own nests.
Bureaucratic efforts were not sympathetic to the people's cause in most cases.
We have not reached the stage where the influence of bureaucracy has lessened or
that the benefits are reaching the people as expected.
In the Rajiv Gandhi era, the 73rd and the 74th constitutional amendments
changed the government tier from central-state-district-block (at the lowest
tier the block was simply an appendage of the state govt. with no real power) to
bring about a radical change by having Panchayats at three levels: village
(Panchayat), groups of villages (Panchayat Union), district (district Panchayat)
purported to have elected representatives. In some states they have come into
being, but in some states they have not.
The central belt from Gujarat to Andhra Pradesh accounts for 80% of the
tribal population. This belt is rich in mineral resources. There are a variety
of tribes (about 250 in number) and they vary widely in culture and economy.
Some are advanced (for example, Nagas and Mizos) and have a high literacy rate.
At the other end the Andamanese, Onge, Jarwas are some examples of tribes who
had no contact with the outside world, were 'backward', not settled
agriculturists, live in the stone age etc. The Government of India identified 75
as the number of 'primitive' tribes.
In the VI plan 180 integrated development projects with a four-fold thrust:
health, education as a key to economic development and infrastructure sectors
were established. The tribal supplant strategy was worked out and it was
specified to involve MPs, MLAs, and other tribal leaders in various communities.
But people's involvement existed only conceptually, not in reality. The total
outlay so far has been Rs. 10-20,000 crores. And there has been an herculean
effort. But the benefit is not proportional to the money and effort put it in,
its far from it.
The human rights of the tribals have been trampled underfoot. A reappraisal
is necessary from many points of view. There are five parties in tribal
development: government, both central and state which are bound by
constitutional provisions, political parties who have not fulfilled their
promises and instead themselves exploit the tribals, 'mainstream' civil society
which is indifferent to the tribals )in their mind the tribals are in the
periphery), the bureaucracy which is apathetic, and the tribal groups themselves
- some want to be left alone, some are uunconcerned, some are mute, some are
stoic, some are sullen.
2. A committee has been formed with MPs. The guidelines stated that laws
are to be passed by the state government, and has to be done within one year
of the 1996 Act. Some tribal panchayats have come into being, but many of them
are yet to be formed.
3. The 73rd and 74th amendments have also contributed to the women's
movement. Women's cooperatives have come into being, women's panchayats are
coming up. All this will result in a movement to lead to reservation for women
in the parliament.
4. The thrust of the VI plan focusing on education for development has
resulted in some individuals rising to high positions, such as the Mr. Sangma
who was a speaker in the Lok Sabha.
Role of the State in the Development of Scheduled Tribes
Bhupinder Singh
Constitutional Provisions for the Scheduled Tribes (STs)
The provisions
in the Constitution make it incumbent on the State to "take care" of STs. In
articles 15 and 16 (which refer to fundamental rights of citizens) exceptions
are made to ensure that what is needed to be done for STs is done. For example,
though equality of opportunity is the policy of the State, an exception is made
for reservations. Article 244 enables the State to make special arrangements for
development of STs. Article 275-1 enables the State (the central government
particularly) to set aside financial provisions to be used for tribal
development. If there are any schemes from the state government and the central
government approves it then the central government is bound to finance the
scheme. So we get all ingredients for the State in terms of the legality and
financial arrangements. The State cannot have any excuse that they are not
empowered enough. The V schedule is a unique aspect of the Constitution - it
empowers the governor of a state to suspend any act of parliament or state
legislature if he thinks it is not in the interest of the STs. This he can do
even with retrospective effect. A similar aspect is not found anywhere else in
the constitution. The VI schedule enables an autonomous district level body to
be formed where there is a large percentage of tribal groups. This has been
formulated especially for northeastern region which is unique in many respects.
Districts in the northeast can be mini-states - they have a lot of financial,
legislative, executive, and judicial power.
Demography
According to the Indian Planning Commission, people below
the poverty line among STs are 30-35% (down from 50-60%). But Dr. Singh found in
Udaipur, Rajasthan that its about 50% or even 70%. One should take the
'sarkar's' figures with a pinch of salt.
Development
In the 60s tribal development group were set up. They
proceeded slowly with target-oriented schemes. The V plan was a special plan
where the steps laid down were: identify areas were tribals are concentrated,
identify what natural resources are there in those areas, make a project report,
and find financial resources for them and implement them. This strategy
continues up to the current plan (IX plan).
Some Negative Features of Development
In sparsely populated tribal
areas, there are some huge complexes: Rourkela, Durgapur steel plants are some
examples. The plants flourish in their mineral rich locations but its at the
cost of the tribals. They have been displaced and there has been no worthwhile
rehabilitation. Being neither skilled nor literate they are unable to take part
in that 'development'. The development effort has brought harm to the tribals.
Can we not have "smaller" developmental projects such as smaller dams ?
Where do we go from here ?
The prospects are not so gloomy:
1. The 73rd, and 74th amendments of the Constitution provides for people
involvement at the grassroots level. The governments did not want to share
power with the panchayats, but now they are here to stay.
But planners and educators have been lax in implementing the VI plan
focus on education. 3.4% is the provision in the budget for education. There was
a move to make it 6% but that has not been done yet. The literacy rates of the
tribals when compared to that of the general population is as follows (all
figures denote percentages):
| Year | General Literacy | Tribal Literacy |
|---|---|---|
| 1901 | 5.63 | Not known |
| 1912 | 5.92 | ,, |
| 1922 | 7.16 | ,, |
| 1931 | 9.50 | 0.75 |
| 1941 | 16.10 | Not known |
| 1951 | 16.67 | ,, |
| 1961 | 24.02 | 8.54 |
| 1971 | 29.45 | 11.29 |
| 1981 | 36.23 | 16.35 |
| 1991 | 52.21 | 29.60 |
The disparity between general and tribal literacy has been increasing.
2. Economic: they are too poor to afford education.
3. Terrain: Schools within the stipulated 1.6 km distance are hard to find, its difficult to travel long distances in many areas.
4. Teachers are not tribals: They have no empathy to the tribals and do not do their duty well - they are at the schools only for a week at the beginning of each month to collect their pay.
5. The school management is not familiar with the tribals and the cultures. The committees should be local.
6. Cultural issues: the qualities of the tribals are not taken into account. There are language issues (books have to be made available in the tribal language) and the syllabi should be appropriate to their environment.
2. The cultural question: Syllabi and textbooks should be in consonance with their culture. Advanced groups such as the Nagas appreciate modern education, but children of other groups are far behind. Its a very difficult problem. The NCERT has formed a committee to look at this. But that committee is languishing.
Q: Do the census figures refer to the literacy in English or regional
language ?
A: Literacy figures mean literacy in any language. Note
that literacy is different from education.
Q: Is literacy a correct indicator for development ? Since there is no
indicator for education.
A: Its inadequate, but has to suffice. We
know its limitations but we have to start somewhere.
Q: The bureaucracy is apathetic. What can an individual officer do to
effect a change ?
A: Its possible for individuals to bring about
change, but to a limited extent. A few individuals have brought about change.
Q: Tribals have lived in remote areas for thousands of years. There is
a big conflict between their values and 'mainstream' values. Should we destroy
their values and bring them to the 'mainstream' ? Or should we leave them alone
?
A: These are good questions. They are not really addressed now.
These issues should be studied. There are both sides to the question. We can't
just not give them education.
Q: Some of the issues with regard to tribal development are very
similar to Native American issues.
A: That is very true.
Q: Is the goal of India to become a primary player in a consumer
economy ? If that is the case, exploitation can't be helped.
A: I
agree.
Q: Development has been said to be 'bad'. I argue that it is
necessary. Is there a way a balance can be struck by the planning commission ?
A: There should be a reconciliation. Currently there is a lack of
coordination within departments.
Q: Who should "own" the natural resources of a country ?
A: So
far the assumption is the resources belong to the nation. But the question has
come up that those on the land own it. There is no resolution for that question.
Q: Your assessment about the reasons for failures is widely shared:
lack of political will, bureaucratic indifference, public apathy. One could go
deeper and question the assumption that the government in its actions is
non-partisan. Maybe NGOs can play a role to make government actions transparent.
A: The dynamics has to change. The State has to be less partisan.
Q: How are lands actually taken way from the tribals without their
signatures ?
A: Some acts enable the government to take the land -
these are indeed draconian acts.
Q: If we focus only on education aren't we ignoring everything else
like giving power over economic resources ?
A: We are not just
pursuing education. On the whole canvas everything exists.
Q: Who in India is going to make this happen - reconciliation and
amalgamation of tribal culture and identifcation with the mainstream ?
A:
The point of the issue is that we should take cognizance of that fact and
see what can be done.
Q: My comment is that all of education has the same effect of
alienation from the grassroots. My other comment is that the Constitution is
against the people. My question is: isn't the very sovereignty of the people in
question when decisions are taken without consulting them ?
A:
Sovereignty of people exists, I have faith in the panchayats in this regard.
Q: What is the expertise level of the planning commission ?
A:
There are different kinds of expertise - specialists, administrators, political
leaders.
Q: Who really calls the shots in the planning commission ?
A: Its a collective affair. The plan frame is first drafted by the
group which goes to the full planning commission chaired by the PM and all the
CMs are its members.
Q: How is continuity preserved between planning commissions ?
A: Continuity is preserved if there is no change in government.
Changes occur at the end of or beginning of a plan period.
Q: What can NGOs do to influence decisions in the planning commission
?
A: Each ministry draws a draft of a plan in its area. It consults
at different levels. NGOs can participate at this stage.
Q: We should be political in the developmental process.
A:
Yes.