By Paritosh Chakma
I. Introduction
Tugged in a corner in the Directorate of
Information and Public Relations, Government of Mizoram’s website are two
interviews given by Chief Minister Lalthanhawla to two magazines in which he
listed his vision for a prosperous Mizoram.
“Mizoram of my dream is a vibrant,
prosperous State where peace prevails and the people, irrespective of caste,
creed or religion, live side by side in harmony and prosperity” – he proudly
announces in an interview with North East Sun magazine, 15 January 2010. (http://dipr.mizoram.gov.in/uploads/featured_magazine/file1.PDF)
But how can prosperity of its people “irrespective
of caste, creed or religion” take place when the state structure is seemingly
working against its own minorities? In a State like Mizoram where religions
identify the ethnicity of its people (for example, Mizos and its sub groups are
Christians, Chakmas are Buddhists, half of Brus are Hindus), ethnic
considerations can easily become religious divisions and vice versa. This in
turn affects the way the government funds are being spent.
II. Minority funds
are diverted
In 2008, the Government of India
introduced Multi-sectoral Development Plan (MsDP) to address the “development
deficits” in the minority concentrated districts of India. The Ministry of
Minority Affairs selected 90 Minority Concentrated Districts (MCDs) in 20
states/UTs which “have a substantial minority population and are backward, with
unacceptably low levels of socio-economic or basic amenities indicators,
requiring focused attention and specific programme intervention.” The Central
Government provides funds to “address the ‘development deficits’ that were
either not met fully by existing schemes/programmes or catered to by any
scheme/programme of the State or Central Government.” Amongst the 90 Minority
Concentrated Districts are two Mizoram districts namely Mamit and Lawngtlai. (http://www.minorityaffairs.gov.in/sites/upload_files/moma/files/pdfs/mcd_90districts.pdf) The schemes
and programmes for poverty alleviation, education, health and other welfare
schemes of government are focused in these districts.
The “Minority” in India is defined under
the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992
as “a community notified as such by the Central Government”. The Central
government notified five minority communities – Muslims, Sikhs,
Christians, Buddhists and Parsis. In some states, a minority community may be
in majority and its members can enjoy the fruits of development in all spheres
because of its dominance in polity, bureaucracy, social and economic prowess.
Therefore, in order to ensure the equitable development of “the other
minorities” in those certain states, the government of India made some special
provisions for “the other minorities” in the implementation of some of its
schemes in those states.
One such scheme is the Multi-sectoral
Development Plan (MsDP). At Para 1.7 (viii) of the MsDP Guidelines,(http://www.minorityaffairs.gov.in/sites/upload_files/moma/files/pdfs/dist_planprep_guide.pdf) it is
unequivocally provided that “In the minority concentration districts in the
States of Jammu and Kashmir, Meghalaya and Mizoram, where a minority community
is in majority, the schemes and programmes should be focused on the other
minorities.”
However, this very crucial note escaped
notice for a long time in the case of Mizoram where the state government
systematically deprived the “non-Christian” minorities of benefits of MsDP
scheme. The trend continued and continues even today but for an intervention
before the NHRC by an NGO on behalf of the Buddhist minority, the Mizoram
government today has been forced to do a re-think.
While clarifying the doubts about the
applicability of the MsDP in Mizoram, the Ministry of Minority Affairs (MoMA) vide
letter No. 3/16(2)/2008-PP-I dated 13 May 2011 informed that “The focus for the
minority concentration districts of Lawngtlai and Mamit in Mizoram would be for
minority communities (Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists and Parsis) other than the one
in majority (Christians) in that State.”
Therefore, there should be little doubt
with respect to the intended beneficiaries of the Central funds in Mizoram
under MsDP. The Census of 2001 makes it clear that the actual beneficiaries of
minority funds in Mizoram should be mainly the Buddhists. And, Buddhists in
both Mamit and Lawngtlai districts are the Chakmas. As per Census 2001, in
Mamit district, Christians constitute 80.53%, Buddhists 13.66%, Muslims 1.75%
and Sikhs 0.04% while in Lawngtlai district, Buddhists constitute 52.17%,
Christians 44.66%, Muslims 0.31% and Sikhs 0.1%
But Mizoram has a unique mechanism to scuttled
development of non-Christian minorities. In recent months, evidence to prove
that minority funds have been diverted to non-minority areas (under MsDP) have
come to the fore and lies of the Mizoram government nailed.
The responses of the Mizoram government
were bizarre. First it sought to provide “incomplete” information about the
locations of the projects when grilled by the MoMA. When fund diversions were established,
Mizoram government took the position that “claiming of the benefits of
Multi-sectoral Development Programme Schemes by only one section of the
minority community i.e. Buddhists may not be fair and just.” But Mizoram
government should know that this position is antithetical to the very purpose
of the MsDP. Yet, interestingly, Mizoram government did not oppose the MsDP
Guidelines, including Para 1.7 (viii) which excluded the Christians, and always
got the projects approved on the condition that the projects will be
implemented in villages/habilitations having the largest concentration of
minorities! However, once the funds are released, the projects are implemented
in non-minority areas. Worst, the Ministry of Minority Affairs has no mechanism
to verify the location of the projects and it sanctioned the funds solely on
good faith which the Mizoram government betrayed.
Second, the state government of Mizoram
highly exaggerated the population of Muslims and mysterious “others” in order
to justify the projects in Christian areas. The officials have quoted the
population figure not as per any official records like Census report but as per
their whims and fancies.
Third, Mizoram government has shown
substantial Buddhist population in several locations where there are no
Buddhists at all.
Fourth, wherever lies could not be
concealed, the Mizoram government plainly admitted the guilt. In its letter to
the Ministry of Minority Affairs, the Secretary to the Government of Mizoram,
Social Welfare Department, vide letter No. A.14014/78/2010-SWD dated 8th
June 2011 has submitted a list of “Villages/Locations at Lawngtlai district
where the Desired Percentage of Minority Population are not Attained”. The list
included 12 villages selected for construction of Anganwadi Centres, 9 villages
selected for construction of additional classrooms, girls’ hostel at Lawngtlai
town, 3 villages selected for construction of health facilities, and 10
villages selected for Indira Awas Yojana.
Example
of fund diversion: The case of Girls Hostel at Lawngtlai town
The MsDP Empowered Committee in the
Ministry of Minority Affairs at its 38th Meeting approved
construction of two girls’ hostels respectively at Lawngtlai town (district
headquarter) and Kamala Nagar (headquarter of Chakma Autonomous District
Council) in Lawngtlai district. The girls’ hostel at Lawngtlai town was
approved based on the false claim of the Mizoram government that Lawngtlai town
has “more than 30% minority population of Buddhist community”.
However, it was pointed out by the NGO
that were only six Buddhist families consisting of about 25 persons (0.13% of
Lawngtlai’s population) living in Lawngtlai town.
Not knowing how to defend its case, the Mizoram
government pleaded with the Ministry of Minority Affairs that the proposed
50-beded girls’ hostel at Lawngtlai town “will also cater to the need of
accommodation of minority communities who often visit the district headquarters
for medical treatments and other official purposes.” This is despite fact the
hostel is totally an educational project which is clearly mentioned at the 38th
Empowered Committee (EC) Meeting whose minutes stated, “It was confirmed that these
hostels would be located in the premises of Government schools and will be used
only by school students.”
Mizoram also brought down the minority
population of Lawngtlai town (despite clubbing together “Buddhists, Muslims and
others population”) to 15% from earlier 30% of “Buddhist” alone. The Ministry
of Minority Affairs sought a clarification as to what communities constituted
the “others” and kept the project “on hold”. The Mizoram government came out
with the reply on 8 June 2011 that the term “Others” was meant for Santals and
Gorkhas but itself clarified that “on verification it is found that the
percentage of population projected could not be acceptable because Santals are
not recognized Minority Community.”
III. “No” to inclusivity
The state government of Mizoram has firmly resisted
any attempt to promote inclusivity. It has been resisting the setting up of
State Minority Commission as desired by the National Minority Commission. In a
response, the Mizoram government told the NCM that “the State is not in a
position to set up neither State Minorities Commission nor Minority Cell as the
entire populace of the State comprises of mostly tribals”! (http://ncm.nic.in/pdf/Agenda%20%202011.pdf ) This is an
absurd argument, for the simple reason that the proposed State Minority
Commission will be for the protection and promotion of the rights of the
minorities, not of the tribals per se.
The Buddhists, who are the second largest
minority in Mizoram, after the Christians, lack representation in the selection
committees/commissions such as Mizoram Public Service Commission. One of Prime Minister’s New 15 Point Programme for
the Welfare of Minorities relates to
“Recruitment to State and Central Services”
which states that “In the recruitment of police personnel, State Governments
will be advised to give special consideration to minorities. For this purpose, the composition of
selection committees should be representative.” (http://www.minorityaffairs.gov.in/sites/upload_files/moma/files/pdfs/pm15points_eguide.pdf )
But when asked about measures taken by
Mizoram to include a member belonging
to the minority community in selection committees for public appointments, the
Mizoram government gave this absurd response - “No community is declared as Minority in Mizoram and inclusion of a
Member belonging to the Minority Community in Selection Committee for Public
appointments etc. could not be entertained by the Government of Mizoram.” (http://ncm.nic.in/pdf/Agenda%20%202011.pdf )
The question is: if there is no Minority
community in Mizoram, for whom are the Minority Scholarships and minority funds
received every year from the Central government?
Yet, no one has taken the Mizoram
officials to tasks for such illogical, absurd and irresponsible responses.
One thing is therefore very clear: when
it comes to the rights of the minorities (read the non-Christians), the state
government denies existence of any minority community within Mizoram, but when
it comes to receiving Central funds, the Mizoram government will not mind even
inflating the population of Muslims and Buddhists in areas where theren’t
Buddhists or Muslims.
Will
it therefore be correct to conclude that to exclude members of the minorities other than those
in majority is a State-sponsored policy in Mizoram?
Postscript: In an interview to NAMASKAAR
magazine, Chief Minister Lalthanhawl has stated, “I plan to have Mizoram grow
into a model state.” (http://dipr.mizoram.gov.in/uploads/featured_magazine/file2.pdf ) If that is
the dream of our leader, then surely the ongoing systematic exclusion of the
non-Christian minorities from the developmental process as part of
State-sponsored policy must go.
