Tribal vs non-tribal faultlines deepen in Meghalaya, Garo Hills polls are postponed
High Court quashes notification that would have allowed only recognised Scheduled Tribes to contest the elections
Amid tensions over the participation of non-tribals in the Garo Hills Autonomous District Council (GHADC) election, earlier scheduled for April 10, Meghalaya Chief Minister Conrad Sangma has announced that the state government has decided to postpone the polls.
In a related development, the Meghalaya High Court has set aside and quashed a contentious notification issued on February 17 by the Chief Executive Member of the GHADC, declaring that candidates for elections must be members of recognised Scheduled Tribes in Meghalaya.
This notification has been at the centre of tensions in the Garo Hills, with Garo pressure groups pushing that this requirement be invoked before the polls. The Garo Hills districts have a mixed population, particularly in the plain belt in the region’s bordering area with Bangladesh, and two of its current members are Bengali-origin Muslims. The now-quashed notification would have meant they couldn’t contest the polls.
After tensions over this issue erupted into arson and a stand-off that left two people dead, once the process of filing nominations for candidature began on Monday, Sangma announced on Wednesday that the election had been postponed.
“Keeping the current prevailing situation in the Garo Hills and keeping the sentiments of the people in mind, the Government of Meghalaya has decided to postpone the GHADC elections. We will sit and decide how to further take this procedure ahead, but till then, the decision has been made to postpone the elections,” he said.
While the West Garo Hills district remains under curfew and a mobile internet ban, a single-judge bench Justice H S Thangkhiew of the Meghalaya High Court set aside and quashed the February 17 notification by the GHADC, ruling that it “cannot pass legal scrutiny”.
The court observed that under the rule-making powers of the District Council, the rules shall first be drafted by the Executive Committee and subsequently be placed before the District Council. After this, they have to be forwarded to the state government’s District Council Affairs Department and finally for assent before the Governor.
The court passed this judgment on a writ petition by Enamul Hoque, a resident of the West Garo Hills district, challenging the notification saying that it seeks to “disenfranchise legitimate non-tribal voters” in violation of the Assam and Meghalaya Autonomous Districts (Constitution of District Councils) Rules, 1951.
While passing the judgement, Justice Thangkhiew said that the court’s task in this case is limited to examining whether the notification can be considered valid and pass the scrutiny of law, “notwithstanding any other circumstances that may surround this issue.”
“This observation is being made in view of the fact that the participation of non-tribals in the District Council elections, which elect members to the Council, which has been primarily established for the benefit of the Scheduled Tribes, has come under fierce debate with its consequential fallout, which in turn affects the society as a whole,” he stated.
The court observed that Rule 8 of the 1951 Rules states that a person entitled to vote at the election to the District Council is also qualified to be a member, and that Rule 128 states that a person who is not from a recognised Scheduled Tribe in the state is qualified to vote if they are a permanent resident within the territorial limit of the autonomous district concerned.
“These two Rules, ever since the constitution of the District Councils, have remained unchanged, thus preserving the right of every enrolled voter, either tribal or non-tribal, to be qualified to be a member or voter,” states the judgment.
Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
Amid tensions over the participation of non-tribals in the Garo Hills Autonomous District Council (GHADC) election, earlier scheduled for April 10, Meghalaya Chief Minister Conrad Sangma has announced that the state government has decided to postpone the polls.
In a related development, the Meghalaya High Court has set aside and quashed a contentious notification issued on February 17 by the Chief Executive Member of the GHADC, declaring that candidates for elections must be members of recognised Scheduled Tribes in Meghalaya.
This notification has been at the centre of tensions in the Garo Hills, with Garo pressure groups pushing that this requirement be invoked before the polls. The Garo Hills districts have a mixed population, particularly in the plain belt in the region’s bordering area with Bangladesh, and two of its current members are Bengali-origin Muslims. The now-quashed notification would have meant they couldn’t contest the polls.
After tensions over this issue erupted into arson and a stand-off that left two people dead, once the process of filing nominations for candidature began on Monday, Sangma announced on Wednesday that the election had been postponed.
“Keeping the current prevailing situation in the Garo Hills and keeping the sentiments of the people in mind, the Government of Meghalaya has decided to postpone the GHADC elections. We will sit and decide how to further take this procedure ahead, but till then, the decision has been made to postpone the elections,” he said.
While the West Garo Hills district remains under curfew and a mobile internet ban, a single-judge bench Justice H S Thangkhiew of the Meghalaya High Court set aside and quashed the February 17 notification by the GHADC, ruling that it “cannot pass legal scrutiny”.
The court observed that under the rule-making powers of the District Council, the rules shall first be drafted by the Executive Committee and subsequently be placed before the District Council. After this, they have to be forwarded to the state government’s District Council Affairs Department and finally for assent before the Governor.
The court passed this judgment on a writ petition by Enamul Hoque, a resident of the West Garo Hills district, challenging the notification saying that it seeks to “disenfranchise legitimate non-tribal voters” in violation of the Assam and Meghalaya Autonomous Districts (Constitution of District Councils) Rules, 1951.
While passing the judgement, Justice Thangkhiew said that the court’s task in this case is limited to examining whether the notification can be considered valid and pass the scrutiny of law, “notwithstanding any other circumstances that may surround this issue.”
“This observation is being made in view of the fact that the participation of non-tribals in the District Council elections, which elect members to the Council, which has been primarily established for the benefit of the Scheduled Tribes, has come under fierce debate with its consequential fallout, which in turn affects the society as a whole,” he stated.
The court observed that Rule 8 of the 1951 Rules states that a person entitled to vote at the election to the District Council is also qualified to be a member, and that Rule 128 states that a person who is not from a recognised Scheduled Tribe in the state is qualified to vote if they are a permanent resident within the territorial limit of the autonomous district concerned.
“These two Rules, ever since the constitution of the District Councils, have remained unchanged, thus preserving the right of every enrolled voter, either tribal or non-tribal, to be qualified to be a member or voter,” states the judgment.
