Abstract

Since British periods, tribal population had always been keeping a separate administration. They have their own ethnic identity and custom. The architects of Indian constitution were serious about the development and the way of living of tribes. They kept in mind of these all issues and subjects related to tribes and as a result of all those discussions and deliberations part X of constitution came as administration of scheduled area and scheduled tribes. Some pockets fall under the schedule V of the constitution which clearly indicates for special provision for the tribal population. In Jharkhand these districts are Ranchi, Lohardagga, Gumla, Simdega, Latehar, East-Singhbhum, West-Singhbhum, Saraikela-Kharsawan, Sahebganj, Dumka, Pakur, Jamtara, Palamu (Rabda and Bakoriya Panchayats of Satbarwa Block), Godda (Sunderpahari and Boarijor Blocks), and Garwa (Bhandariya Block). The Gazette of India (Wednesday, April11, 2007).

Tribal Concerns and the Jharkhand State

Jharkhand was constituted for the development of tribal population after the continuous struggle. On August 2, 2000, the parliament approved the bill for the reorganization of Jharkhand as a separate State. Jharkhand, the 28 th state of India was carved out of the southern part of Bihar state on 15 th November 2000. Jharkhand was brought into existence by the Bihar Reorganization Act on November 15, 2000. The Population of Jharkhand according to the 2011 census stands at about 32 million, making it the 13th most populated state in India. The state makes up about 3.5% of the country’s population a figure which was about 3% during the last census in 2001 . Jharkhand is a state always known in the country for its resources, distinct culture as well as various forms of deprivation and exploitation. Jharkhand has 24 districts and has adequate number of benign tribes spread over it. According to 2001 Census, the tribal population is about 85.29 million. Tribals constitute around 28% of total population of the state of Jharkhand, which is around 8% of total tribal population of India. The primitive tribals group (PTG) constitutes 3.9% of the total scheduled tribe population of India. Nine tribes have been identified as primitive tribal groups in Jharkhand.

Presence of Tribal Women in the PRI’s of Jharkhand

There is also political instability which has continuously been an obstacle against increasing the pace of development. Keeping in mind these all concerns and episodes, we should analyze the role of women in grassroots politics of Jharkhand. Because it is common notion that women play a significant role in their tribal world. For this we have to revisit and see the results of Panchayati Raj election of Jharkhand which was held in2010. The results have come with a positive note and in favour of women in that election. Women elected at enormous margin and their percentage were 58 in that election. That was more than the result of Bihar Panchayat election; it is considered as great in the sense of women’s participation in grassroots politics. It is believed that the women will be a change agent of society and will work for upliftmenting the condition of women. In this way tribal women of Jharkhand now have the opportunity to be a voice and image of the marginalized of the state. But it has been three years and there are rare evidences of significant development in all aspects of women particularly in the case of tribal women. Jharkhand Panchayati Raj Act 2001 was enacted for greater participation at grassroot level governance. Panchayati Raj Act empowers elected personnel to execute the planning and policy as bottom up approach of governance.

Henceforth, we need to scientifically inquire and investigate into the changes in the lives of Elected Tribal Women and its reciprocal impact on the improvement of governance mechanism at grassroots after this landmark initiative witnessing more than 56% women in the active decision making process.

Many countries that have enhanced the presence of women in their national parliaments have achieved this through quotas, either through legislative action or self-imposed regulations by political parties (Hust 2004:31). According to this school of thought quotas are seen as a mean to open up the spaces where women can acquire the necessary expertise that historically has been denied to them (Hust 2004:31). Proponents of quotas often argue that this first step will bring self-esteem and confidence for further entrance in political activity. As a proponent of quotas for women Hust therefore focuses on the effect- the representation- through reservation will have on the empowerment of women. As Hust reminds, representation in political decision-making bodies and the empowerment of marginalizedgroups are two quite distinct concepts. She also reminds that the specific nature of political representation is quite distinct from political participation (Hust 2004:27). Though bringing women into formal positions of power through quotas could be one path leading to their empowerment it is not even by proponents seen as a sufficient strategy (Hust 2004:48-49).

Panchayat (Extension to Schedule Area) Act (PESA), 1996

Following the recommendations of the Bhuria Committee, the Centre enacted PESA on 24 December 1996. PESA grants special status to adivasis in scheduled areas. Central PESA is an Act to provide for constitution of Panchayat Raj in the state of Jharkhand (including 8 other states in schedule V). It extends to the whole of the state of Jharkhand excepting the areas to which provisions of the Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 (Bihar Act XIII of 1952); Bihar & Orissa Municipal Act, 1922 (Bihar Act VII of 1922) or Cantonment Act, 1924 (Act II of 1924) apply (Ministry of Tribal Affairs).

The Jharkhand Panchayati Raj Act (JPRA) was enacted in 2001 in accordance with the provisions of the 73rd amendment to the Constitution and that of the Panchayat Extension to the Scheduled Areas Act (PESA) 1996 which is applicable to this state. JPRA was amended in 2003 and in 2005.

Fundamental Principles of PESA

At the outset it is important to see the 2001 Act for its definition of a Village, in Scheduled Areas, as village is the basic unit on which the entire formal structure of participatory democracy is built. – In tribal areas the villages should be drawn with reference to the community rather than the population, which is the official criterion of defining revenue villages. In this regard the 2001 Act retains both the spirit and the letter of the Central PESA, it provides “a village shall ordinarily consist of a habitation or a group of habitations or a hamlet or a group of hamlets comprising a community and managing its affairs in accordance with traditions and customs” (Sec 2.ii). Further Gram Sabha consists of all village adults registered in the voter’s list (Sec 3.ii). Ordinarily there shall be one Gram Sabha in a village, however in a Scheduled Area, there can be more than one gram Sabhas if the members of the Gram Sabha so desire. More than one gram sabha means that the size of the gram sabha will be smaller. A smaller gram is better placed to perform its assigned functions as it ensures effective participation of all members. However this provision of more than one gram Sabha may create confusion at some places, for example, sec 75 (B) of the 2001 Act vests the gram Sabha with the power to exercise control over gram Panchayats. If there is more than one gram Sabha, which one of them shall exercise control over the Village Panchayat is not clear. In Scheduled Areas the Gram Sabha has been made responsible for safeguarding and preserving the traditions and customs of the people, their cultural identity, community resources and the customary mode of dispute resolution. Unlike Central PESA the State Act does not use the term “competence”. There is an express mandate on the Gram Sabha to exercise theses powers. This power is however subject to the provisions of theconstitution. Further the Gram Sabha has been empowered to draft rules in this respect and present them before the Gram Panchayat, Panchayat Samiti, Zila Parisad and the State Govt. As regards natural resources including land, forest and water, the gram Sabha is being made responsible for their management in accordance with its traditions. This power is however subject to the tenets of the constitution and the Rules, presently in force here the guiding test is whether or not, the traditional management practices of the Gram Sabha are in congruence with the spirit of the said constitutional provisions and the Rules. One need not consider the literal or mechanical conformity between the two (Report PRIA, http://www.pria.org/publication/Tribal. Retrieved on 13.08.2013 ).

Politics of Presence: Shift from Representation to Participation

Synthesizing both the concerns of ‘identity’ and ‘interest’ together Phillips defines politics of presence. She highlighted repeatedly that in this mode of presentation both message and the messenger matter equally and this is how she differentiates it with the earlier theories on ‘politics of ideas’ (Squires, J, 2005). Phillips has four key arguments for a politics of presence; the importance of symbolic recognition, the need to tackle those exclusions inherent in the party-packaging of political ideas, the need for a more vigorous advocacy for disadvantaged groups, and the importance of a politics of transformation in opening up a full range of politics of presence (Phillips, 1995:25). Some objections have been raised against the concept of politics of presence. According these consist out of three main arguments; the fear of undermining social cohesion, the undermining of the basis for political accountability, and the turn to a more deliberative democracy (Phillips 1995: 22-24). Phillips own main caution is that a system of representation following the politics of presence is not enough on its own: “Changing the gender composition of elected assemblies is largely an enabling condition but it cannot present itself as a guarantee” (Phillips 1995:83).

The Politics of Presence: Problems and Development

Responding to the various critics on politics of Presence Anne Phillips discusses the following major issues in detail:

• Which group to deal with : Responding the critiques for her extensive selection on the characteristics of ‘gender’ Phillips argues that irrespective of other characteristics like ‘race’ or ‘ethnicity’ women as a marginalized group constitutes the half of total population and hence adhering on ‘gender’ as a characteristic feature is justified.
• Essentialism : Responding to the concern that why can’t the members of these groups be taken just as ‘individuals’ and not the members of a given social group as it may put danger to ‘social cohesion’. Anne Phillips argues in this regards that any such arrangement will lead to lose the capacity to theorize relations inequality, subordination and power existing through ages in the society. And hence it is desired as well as essential to divide them in social groups.
• Particularism : Another critique to ‘politics of presence’ comes as a possibility of breaking social cohesion and hence limiting the social groups to a narrow of group interest thereby undermining the broader concerns of social justice. Phillips proposes for the strong traditions of “deliberative democracy’ in this regards to minimize any such possibility by promoting an environment for free discussion of concerns and issues.
• Representation with Mobilization: Another critiqueto the concept comes in the form of gifted representation and hence possibility of detriment to local activism. Phillips admits this critique and emphasizes that the critique needs further enquiry on her part as it may become very well possible that the politics of presence end in providing greater scope and access to more individuals with the right kind of characteristics to enter the political elites.
• Pluralism : Phillips admits that none of us has just one identity but individuals are a complex set of identities. And hence women as members of the group women need not and can not be seen isolation but in complete harmony of other identities like class, race, ethnicity etc.
• Elitism: Phillips warns that politics of presence may end up with providing access to only certain members of the group in question- usually those who are most similar in status and class position to existing political elites.
• Sexual division of labour: Another argument which Phillips puts forth in the light of politics of presence is that focusing on political mechanism to widen women’s representation without first addressing the sexual division of labour is like a sad of putting the cart before the horse. (Young, M.I.1999).

Conclusion

The situation and condition of tribal population has been gradually upholding after the formation of Jharkhand State if we closely observe the political circumstances. The Panchayati Raj Institution played an important role in the all accounts and aspects of tribal life in Jharkhand. The political presentation and participation are the ways of their life to synthesize new ideas and open up new opportunities according to their own wills and determination. It has discussed the tribal women came with a huge number in the grassroot level politics in Jharkhand. That shows the political interest of all sections without any gender differences. Now time has come to renovate and recuperate the existing arrangement of the grassroot level politics after keeping in mind the contemporary days particularly in the tribal belt.

References

1. Baviskar, B.S. (2003): Impact of women’s participation in local governance in rural India, Paper presented at the Rural Network Conference, Inverness.
2. Béteille, A. 1986. “The Definition of Tribe with Special Reference to India”. European Journal of sociology, Vol.27.
3. Bhatt, Sanjai. (2004), 4ws (Water, Work, Waste and Women) Component In Development Paradigm: Relooking At Social Work Education In 21st Century , Paper presented at: Global Social Work Congress, Adelaide, Australia.
4. Bidyut Mohanty. (n.d.), “The daughters of the 73 rd amendment”, http://www.onlinewomeninpolitics.org/india/bidyut 73rd.pdf
5. Jharkhand state election committee a: The Jharkhand Panchayati Raj Act, 200 (Jharkhand Act-06 of 2001) http://www.jharkhand.gov.in/DEPTDOCUPLOAD/uploads/33/D201233014.pdf
6. Jharkhand state election committee b: State Overview of Jharkhand. http://www.jharkhand.gov.in/New_Depts/panra/panra_fr.html
7. Hust, Evelin. (2004): Women’s political representation and empowerment in India: A million Indiras now? New Delhi: Manohar Publications.
8. DEA (2006): Facts about worldwide quotas, continuously updated www.idea.int/quota/index.cfm
9. ISS 1995: Participation for women in Panchayati Raj: A status report, Submitted to National Commission for Women by the Institute of Social Sciences, New Delhi.
10. Kaushal, K. (2010). Decentralized Governance And Empowerment Of Women – A Case Study Of India. Paper presented atAligarh Muslim University, Aligarh
11. Kelkar, G. and D. Nathan and P.Walter. 2003. Gender Relations in Forest Societies in Asia. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
12. Mehrotra, Nikita. 1990. “Women’s Issues in India Anthropology”. The Eastern Anthropology, vol. 43.2.
13. Mitra, M,1984. “Women and Class Struggle: A Study of Tribal Movements and Women’s Participation in Bihar, India”. Geneva
14. Omvedt, Gail, (2005) Women in governance in South Asia, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 40, no. 44 – 45, October 29 – 4 November, pp. 4746–4753,
15. Phillips, Ann, (1995), The politics of presence, Oxford: Clarendon press.
16. PRIA, 2004. Tribal Self-Rule in Jharkhand: Implications of Jharkhand Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 2001 in Scheduled Areas (draft report). New Delhi: Society for Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA
17. Reddy, S.D. (1997), Women’s Empowerment Through Panchayati Raj Institutions in Andhra Pradesh, M. Phil. Thesis submitted to Delhi School of Social Work, New Delhi.
18. Saxena, Kiran (ed.) (2000), Women and Politics, New Delhi: Gyan Publishing House.
19. Shukla, Nidhi. (2004), Women’s Empowerment through Their Participation in Panchayati Raj, in Kota District; M. Phil. Thesis submitted to Delhi School of Social Work, New Delhi.
20. Singh, Hoshiar 1994: The constitutional base for Panchayati Raj in India: The 73rd Amendment Act , Asian Survey, Vol XXXIV. No 9, September 1994, Published by regent, University of California.
21. Singh, J.P., N.N.Vyas, and R.S.Mann.1988. Tribal Women and Development. Jaipur: Rawat Publications.
22. Singla, Pamela. (2007), Women’s Participation in Panchayati Raj Nature and Effectiveness, Jaipur: Rawat Publications.
23. UNDP. (2004), Decentralisation in India: Challenges and opportunities, UNDP India, Human Development Resource Centre, Discussion paper series -1, February 2004
24. Verma, Sudhir. (1997), Women’s Struggle For Political Space, Jaipur and New Delhi: Rawat Publications.