Reports from the Northeast which refer to the ‘Sixth Schedule’ and ‘Sixth Schedule areas’ may variously intrigue, frustrate or create puzzlement among readers, who may only sketchily understand what these terms mean. This has assumed greater importance in light of recent controversies in Assam involving specific districts where governing institutions, known as Autonomous District Councils, have handed over or proposed to hand over vast chunks of territory for mineral and herb extraction and production.

Let’s break it down simply.

The Sixth Schedule was designed in 1949 by the members, in this case a subcommittee, of the Constituent Assembly under the then Assam premier, Gopinath Bardoloi, to recommend and devise ways of protecting the traditional rights, customs and stability of upland tribal communities in Assam and contiguous areas. It should be noted here that at the time of Independence, Assam was virtually all of the north-eastern region barring Manipur, Tripura and what constitutes today’s Arunachal Pradesh. The protection was deemed necessary because upland groups were seen as marginalised and lacking the educational, political and economic heft of the larger population groups in the plains. This could render their lands, livelihoods and future vulnerable.

The committee itself was initially divided on the issue but finally agreed to adopt the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution. It gave special rights to hill tribes in the then composite state of Assam — the Khasi, Jaintia and Garo hills of what is today’s Meghalaya, Karbi Anglong and Dima Hasao districts of Assam and the Mizo hills of today’s Mizoram. The names of these areas have changed and Sixth-Schedule territories have grown to cover parts of Tripura as well as the Bodoland Territorial Region in western Assam.

A key figure in the scoping of the powers of the scheduled areas where Autonomous District Councils, as the governing units were described, were to be set up was the Reverend J.J.M. Nichols-Roy of Shillong. Bardoloi, then premier of Assam, supported Roy’s proposal saying, “There are certain institutions among these hill tribals which, in my opinion, are so good... [such as] the manner in which they settle their disputes… [and] their village administration. In other words, they are exercising a certain amount of autonomy which… should be preserved rather than destroyed. What is necessary for good government is already there.”

These proposals became part of the Constitution in September 1949.

Local councils have extensive independent legislative, judicial, executive and financial powers to govern their areas. In some cases, as many as 50 subjects are under their ambit, including roads, forests, water bodies, flood control, marriages, health and sanitation, cattle pounds as well as educational institutions. Central funds are provided by the Government of India through the State and the councils can also levy taxes and raise resources.

But the key point is one that Bardoloi made over 70 years back: do these
institutions have the basics of “good government”? Have they fulfilled their mandate of protecting the tribal communities?

Many would disagree with the efficacy of the autonomous council system. Some like Patricia Mukhim, the editor of The Shillong Times, have long argued for their dismantling, saying that they have outlived their utility. In Meghalaya, say Mukhim and other critics of the Sixth Schedule, the councils duplicate and undercut the role of the state government, which was installed over 50 years back after a campaign to separate Meghalaya from Assam. In numerous cases, the councils have functioned as the stepping stone for ambitious politicians to rise to state-level politics.

In the process, a highly visible, powerful and rich tribal elite has grown in the four states covered by the Sixth Schedule which has acquired extensive estates and businesses and proliferating wealth. In addition, all members of the listed tribes who reside in these areas are exempt from paying income tax on income from any source, including salary, business, and professional income as well as dividends or interest on securities. This adds another edge to the insider-outside perspective.

Indeed, it appears that some of those who were elected to protect the vulnerable have turned on their own. In addition, the visible ‘majority’ in other parts of India, which is a clear minority in these areas, finds itself vulnerable to numerous pressures. This is a significant under-reported story in itself.

Public attention has recently focused on developments in the Dima Hasao and Karbi Anglong Hills Autonomous District Councils and the allotment of thousands of acres of land to extractive industries from outside the region. There has been sharp criticism, a
series of protests, as well as a stinging rebuke from a judge of the Gauhati High Court. The judge whose remarks have ‘gone viral’ asked if “this was a joke” when the counsel for a Delhi-based industrial house said that the company had been allotted 3,000
bighas in the Dima Hasao district by the council.

The thickly-forested and hilly terrain is rich in mineral resources, including coal and limestone. There are reports of discoveries of rare earth elements critical to reducing India’s import bill in times of tariff, especially in the areas of consumer electronics, electric vehicles, and wind turbines. The merciless exploitation of natural resources by various corporates has come under recent judicial and public scrutiny, especially in Meghalaya. Yet, this hasn’t stopped illegal extraction, underscoring the clout of the political-mining nexus and its networks.

In Assam, the 2022-23 report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India provides stark statistics. The report is in the public domain and can be accessed on the CAG’s website on page 126 under the heading, “Submission of Accounts of Autonomous Councils/ Bodies” — “The CAG had not received 489 annual accounts of 75 Autonomous Councils, Development Councils and Government Bodies (due up to 2022-23) for audit as of September 2023. Out of 489 outstanding annual accounts, 10 accounts pertained to three Autonomous District Councils created under sixth Schedule of the Constitution.” The delays, the CAG report established, ranged from one year to more than 10 years! In fact, it said, “Several Autonomous Councils under Department of Welfare of Tribal Affairs (Plain) have accounts pending for 14 years.”

Need one say more?

Apart from media and oversight watchdogs, it is also for the state government and the Centre to crack the whip of fiscal discipline and demand accountability. For after all, these are public funds.

Sanjoy Hazarika is a writer who specialises on the Northeast and travels extensively in the region