The High Court of Meghalaya has accepted a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that challenges the participation of non-tribals in the elections for the Garo Hills Autonomous District Council (GHADC). The PIL was initiated by Niksrang Ch Marak, with the hearing set for March 9 after the respondents requested more time. This legal action arrives against the backdrop of a GHADC notification issued on February 17, which mandates that all candidates vying for council seats on April 10 must produce a Scheduled Tribe (ST) certificate from the Meghalaya government.
Defenders of the notification, including various Garo tribal organisations, argue it is essential for preserving indigenous identity. Conversely, non-tribal leaders criticize it as unconstitutional and an infringement on democratic rights. Compounding this issue, the GHADC has recently used its authority under the Sixth Schedule of the Indian Constitution to bar non-tribals from acquiring or claiming land in the Garo Hills, aiming to protect the land and traditional rights of indigenous communities.
The new directive prevents non-tribals from acquiring, holding, or transferring land and declares invalid any land transactions involving non-tribals, addressing concerns over the alienation of land ownership from indigenous groups. However, it provides exceptions for non-tribals who inherited property before the directives were enacted, as well as transactions approved by government authorities.
These regulatory changes have ignited a heated debate in Meghalaya, with tribal stakeholders advocating for stronger protections of their rights and identity while non-tribal representatives maintain that any alterations to the provisions of the Sixth Schedule must come from the central government. The GHADC’s argument emphasizes the safeguarding of customary laws and socio-political identities of indigenous groups as the rationale for these measures.