Last month, violence erupted between hundreds of Ho Adivasis and the police in Jharkhand’s West Singhbhum district. Several mainstream media organisations, including Aaj Tak, Zee News, Prabhat Khabar, Hindustan, Dainik Bhaskar and News18 were quick to report it as a case of violence by Adivasis demanding a separate nation.
However, the case had nothing to do with demand for a “separate nation”. Rather, there is a fascinating story of a massive job scam behind this incident. It also exposed the continuous violation of constitutional and other legal provisions meant to protect Adivasi rights and the inherent biases in the non-Adivasi administration, media and society at large.
Recruitment for Kolhan Government Estate
Since the last few months, some Ho individuals have been organising camps to recruit thousands of Adivasis of West Singhbhum as rural Ho language teachers and village police for an erstwhile self-governance entity called ‘Kolhan Government Estate’. They also took an application and insurance fee from the applicants.
The Kolhan Government Estate was formed by the British in the early 19th century.
After the Kol uprising of the 1830s, the Kolhan region – currently covering large parts of West Singhbhum and some parts of East Singhbhum and Saraikela-Kharsawan districts of Jharkhand, and some areas of Odisha, and largely inhabited by the Ho Adivasis – was brought under the Estate. It was governed by Adivasi traditional heads and supervised directly by the political agent of the crown’s governor general.
To help them rule and ease revenue collection, the British formulated a set of rules, known as ‘Wilkinson rule’, in 1837 to formalise the traditional governance structure of the Hos and defined their role in administrative and judicial matters. The rules also aimed to protect the Adivasis and their land against exploitation by dikus (non-tribals).
Also read: The Alienation of Adivasis From Our Identity, or How I Unlearned My Hinduisation
The Ho Adivasis traditionally have had their own governance structure such as a head (Munda) at the village level and a Manki heading a cluster of villages. These traditional leaders were responsible for managing common lands and other natural resources, collecting revenue, resolving disputes, and ensuring the wellbeing of the villagers, among other tasks. Many of these roles of self-governance were formalised through the Wilkinson rules.
Over time, with the advent of post-independence governance structures, such as the creation of blocks and circle offices, the earlier administrative and revenue collection arrangements lost their relevance and faded away.
The roots of the current scam can be traced back to the Kolhan movement of the 1980s, led by the “Kolhan Raksha Sangh”. The group claimed that Kolhan should be an independent country as, before independence, it used to be governed directly by the colonial government as an estate. The claim did not stand legal scrutiny and eventually the movement lost steam. But ever since, the demand keeps cropping up in different forms.
In its latest avatar, the organisers of the scam claimed that the estate still exists and they were the primary owners of the estate. Interestingly, they did not revive the demand for a separate country.
Thousands of unemployed Adivasis fell for the scam and the organisers amassed lakhs of rupees from the application and insurance fee. The centre of the scam was the Ladurabasa village of the district’s Sadar block. On a typical recruitment day, Adivasi youths, with bows and arrows or baton, would manage a crowd of hundreds of applicants. Desks for document verification, submission of applications and distribution of recruitment letters were set up. People were not allowed to take photographs or videos of the camp.
On the morning of January 23, 2022 – a few months after the scam had started – the police and the local administration raided the recruitment camp and arrested the organisers present at the venue and also a few applicants. The police claimed that it had acted against the fraudulent recruitment. The apparent mastermind behind the scam was, however, not found at the venue.
By afternoon, many newly recruited applicants gathered at the police station in Chaibasa town to protest against the arrest. This was followed by violence between the villagers and the police. There were also reports of arrest of some Adivasis who were not part of the organising team and were just passing through the town during the incident.
Underlying issues
But why did a drive to recruit service providers for an erstwhile estate receive such an overwhelming support from thousands of Adivasis? Widespread unemployment among the youth was not difficult to exploit. While the estate may have ceased to exist after India’s independence, and the passage of laws such as the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950, there is lack of clarity among the people and the local administration on the current status of Wilkinson rules and the contours of the self-governance structures.
Also read: Why the Adivasis Must Seek to Redefine Themselves
Successive governments have not bothered to sort it out. The fifth schedule, and sixth schedule for some areas, of the constitution and other legal provisions, such as those of Panchayat Extension of Scheduled Areas (PESA) Act, provide the much-required constitutional space for autonomy, traditional self-governance institutions and checks against exploitation and marginalisation in the scheduled areas, primarily inhabited by Adivasis, of the country. But these provisions have been violated to the hilt by all Union and state governments so far.
From the creation of the estate in 1837 till the last land settlement exercise of 1958-65 in this area, Mundas and Mankis, as per their traditional role, were administratively empowered to control and manage the common lands under their jurisdiction. Wilkinson rules and the earlier land-revenue system provided protections against the appropriation of Adivasi land by non-Adivasis. After independence, the eventual loss of traditional control of Adivasis over common lands and collection of revenue is a long-standing grievance. The increasing influx of dikus and continuing land alienation further deepens it.
West Singhbhum has the second largest iron ore reserve in the country and sees rampant mining. But a large proportion of Adivasis living here continue to live in poverty and are denied even basic services such public healthcare, quality education, irrigation facilities and so on. The district also gets hundreds of crores of rupees in its district mineral foundation fund every year. The fund is to be used for development works, mainly in the mining-affected areas and also in other parts of the district. A common grievance in the villages is how Adivasis have little control over the funds and they are being looted by contractors and the administration. The organisers of the estate had promised the applicants that the estate is entitled to get all these funds for the development of Adivasis.
The situation is not unique to just West Singhbhum. In 2016-18, Munda Adivasis in and around Khunti district erected stone slabs (pathalgadi) inscribed with their interpretations of the constitutional and legal provisions for Adivasis. The interpretations included the autonomy of the traditional governance systems, rights of Adivasis over their land, restricted rights of non-Adivasis and outsiders to settle and work in the scheduled areas.
The movement was triggered by the erstwhile Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government’s attempts to change the land laws, for instance, the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act, to ease forced acquisition of Adivasi land. The pathalgadi movement was painted as seditious by the government and the mainstream media. Thousands of Adivasis were booked for sedition for their alleged participation in the movement.
Political apathy
The pathalgadi movement and the demand for re-establishing the estate in Kolhan are based on similar grievances. The exploitation of labour and natural resources of the Adivasis by non-Adivasis, such as traders, contractors, company owners and so on, has continued in post-independence India and even worsened in many ways.
The top echelon of the bureaucracy is still largely non-Adivasi. There is growing marginalisation of Adivasis’ languages, cultural practices and traditional governance systems. Harassment and violence by police and security forces and the increasing number of police camps tell their own tales. And the blatant violations of constitutional provisions meant to safeguard Adivasi interests instil little confidence among the people.
Along with Jharkhand, other states with significant Adivasi population, such as Chhattisgarh and Odisha, also stand witness to this situation. The mainstream media, dominated by non-Adivasis, often fails to understand these issues.
The current dispensation at the Centre, with its hyper-nationalism, Hindutva-driven politics and policies favouring corporates, has worsened the situation. Some examples of easing forceful acquisition of natural resources for corporates include attempts to dilute the safeguarding provisions in the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, initiating commercial auction of coal mines, digitisation and centralisation of land records, effectively bypassing local land laws such as the Chhotanagpur and Santhal Paragana Tenancy Acts, and so on.
The space to even discuss the sub-national issues and demands of Adivasis and the need to deepen provisions for protection of their languages, cultural practices and traditional governance systems is rapidly shrinking. The need of the hour is to at least implement the constitutional and legal provisions for Adivasis in letter and spirit.
Manki Tubid and Siraj Dutta are activists based in Kolhan, Jharkhand.