Editorial 2:Subject to recent protest, history of Kolhan Tribe's Manki-Munda system
Context: Recently the tribal belonging to Ho tribe in Jharkhand’s West Singhbhum district protested against the District collector. They accused him of interfering with their traditional self governance system by removing traditional hereditary village heads known as Mundas and Manki.
Traditional self governance system:
- Before the arrival of British, the Ho tribe has traditional, decentralized system of self governance that resolved various social and political disputes.
- There was hereditary-appointed Munda at the village level who was responsible for resolving socio-political disputes among its members.
- The Manki headed the pidh, which generally comprised of eight to 15 villages, handled disputes that could not be resolved by Munda.
- This was purely internal dispute resolution set up, with no responsibilities of collecting revenue or resolving land ownership issues.
East India Company (EIC) era:
- After the Battle of Buxar in 1764, the EIC signed the Treaty of Allahabad with Mughal Emperor Shah Alam II in 1765. This granted the right to collect revenue in present –day Bengal, Bihar, Odisha, and Jharkhand.
- The Company enacted Permanent Settlement Act in 1793. This allotted land to Zamindars and fixed the revenue that had to be paid to the Company.
- These revenue demands were very high, putting immense pressure on Zamindars to collect revenue.
- In Kolhan, Zamindars began seizing the lands of Ho community. This led to many revolts in nineteenth century including the Ho (1821-22) and the Kol 91831) revolts.
- British changed their strategy after this.
Wilkinson’s rules:
- Thomas Wilkinson was appointed as political agent in the Kolhan Government State (KGE), an administrative set up created in 1837 to control the Ho-dominated area. He realized that it was important to co-opt the local leaders in the British system of Governance.
- He framed the set of 31 rules in 1833- called the “Wilkinson’s Rule”. They were meant to be the “guiding principles” for the traditional ho community leaders. This codification of powers of Mundas and Manki has effectively turned them to British agents from the traditionally appointed leaders to resolve disputes.
- The population of outsiders increased by almost nine times in 30 years from 1867 to 1897 as these rules led to their partial integration with the Ho community members.
- The Ho community members were now designated as ryots (tenants) of the state. They were issued the pattas of land. This led to fostering a sense of individual property and ownership, which was absent till now.
System continues:
- These rules continue to be in operation at present times.
- In Moro Ho vs. State of Bihar in 2000, the Patna High court has held that these rules are customary in nature, not the formal law. The Bench allowed these rules to continue since no alternative existed.
- Overtime these laws have become outdate and clashed with the realities of modern democratic nation state.
- There have been complaints by non-tribal that Ho tribe Munda denying the livelihoods beyond traditional occupations to the livestock-rearing Gope community members.
- There have been instances where villagers have been denied access to official documents due to the prolonged absence of Mundas from the village.
- These instances have forced DC to issue nine-point directive to bring transparency to the Manki-Munda system mentioned in Wilkinson’s rules. This was interpreted as interference, triggering protests.
Challenges with the Manki-Munda system:
- There are demands, especially from young members of Ho community, to end the hereditary rule of Mundas and give more liberty to non tribal tenants.
- Many Mundas who inherit the role are not formally educated, making it difficult for them to adapt to modern document-based administrative system. It also burdens the district administration as these villagers often raise these issues before it.
Way Forward:
The government is entrusted with the constitutional responsibility to protect the alternative dispute resolutions of tribal communities such as the Manki-Munda system. This protects the rights of these communities over their livelihoods, and their customs, rituals. While this system must be preserved, it must be reformed to align it with modern democratic principles. This will also enhance the trust of Mundas among non-tribal people and help in the assimilation of Ho community to modern lifestyles.