Struggle for Survival

Triple Burden
John Samuel



INTRODUCTION: Displaced from their land, livelihood and culture by big dams, forestry projects, sanctuaries and industrial projects, tribals are forced into bonded labour or urban slums




"How can you buy or sell the sky, the warmth of the land? The idea is strange to us."

That was how Chief Seattle commenced his letter to the President of the USA in 1854, when the US government wanted to take over the common property resources of the indigenous people of America. And though his words were spoken 150 years ago, and have been repeated so often, they are still the most touching response to the dehumanising tendencies of a modernised world.
The organic relationship between cultural identity, the ecosystem, natural resources and community self-rule is most evident in the lives of tribal communities. There is an inherent contradiction between the communitarian value system of the adivasis (the first settlers) and the individualistic value system of modern power structures.


In India, tribal communities account for almost 8 per cent of the total population, with a rich, creative and diverse socio-cultural spectrum. But these communities have been condemned to remain in the backyard of Indian history as kiratas, girijan or vanvasis. Such an erroneous perception of tribal communities as savages and wild people was perpetuated by the mainstream: it helped them displace tribals from their systems of livelihood. The government of India is yet to recognise the indigenous status of tribal communities, though, historically, they have been considered the first settlers of the subcontinent. The middle class response to tribal communities is either to romanticise their traditions or to attempt to civilise them.
So on the one hand we have a set of academicians and activists who eulogise the great virtues of the tribal traditions and imply that tribals should remain in splendid isolation as museum pieces, and, on the other, we have activists and organisations which patronise the struggles of adivasis.
Over the last 20 years, there has been a growing political self-awareness among the adivasis of India as they struggle to reclaim their human dignity, habitat and political space. There is a new resurgence among the people on the periphery to assert their cultural identity and to negotiate change based on cultural autonomy and self-rule. Their struggle for survival and dignity is crucial at a time when the state is trying to mortgage or sell natural resources like forests, land, minerals and water to big corporations and international financial institutions.


It is the adivasis who bear the brunt of most big industrial, mining and development projects, primarily meant to ensure the comfort of the middle class. The modern development paradigm has not only robbed them of their dignity but also eroded the very basis of their livelihood resources, such as forests, land, minerals and water. The striking convergence between tribal areas, forest cover and poverty-stricken areas of India is not an accident of history. When adivasi communities are thrown out of their natural habitat, in the name of industrialisation, sanctuaries, forest projects and big dams, the very fabric of their socio-cultural life and political identity is fragmented. The multiple displacement from land, livelihood and culture forces them into the wretchedness of bonded labour or the miseries of urban slums. While cutting off their lifeline, the establishment, ironically, chooses to showcase tribal songs, dance and dresscodes. The government doesn't seem to realise that the cultural identity of the adivasi communities is intrinsically linked to the natural environment and historical context.

The political identity of adivasis cannot be divorced from their cultural identity and control over natural resources. Usurping their rights over natural resources jeopardises their culture and very survival.


The questions of cultural and political identity can be better understood in the historical context. The relationship between the adivasi communities and the more dominant stream of society changed with the changing character of the mainstream political system. Upto the medieval period, adivasi communities living in vast tracts of relatively inaccessible forest area co-existed with established states and empires. Populations with different levels of material development and cultural perception could live in harmony without impinging on each other's territories and resources. The adivasi communities remained outside the caste-based mainstream Hindu society and there were no organised efforts to integrate adivasi communities into mainstream Hindu society. However, wherever there was more interaction between adivasis and the outside world, there were instances of them gradually being co-opted into caste-based society. The untouchable castes Cherumar and Panyar in north Kerala are examples of such co-option of adivasi communities into the lowest strata of the caste hierarchy. Mainstream Hindu society did not bother much about the social and cultural separateness of adivasis. This co-existence might have been facilitated by a lack of population pressure and lack of any particular economic incentives in depriving adivasis of their land and forests.


However, the centralised colonial regime extended its control over the regions endowed with natural resources. To exploit these natural resources and earn revenue, the British established an administrative machinery which existed in sharp contrast to the socio-cultural ethos and livelihood pattern of the adivasis. In the virtually unadministered areas, traders and moneylenders established local vested interests under the protection of the British administration. Along with these traders and moneylenders, new settlers succeeded in acquiring large tracts of common property resources and the lands of adivasis. The active marginalisation of tribals by an oppressive state machinery and an exploitative trade-moneylender-feudal nexus began in the first half of the 19th century and was accelerated after the British left India. Recommendations for reforms in numerous reports prepared by British civil servants and, later, the government of India could neither arrest the rampant violation of their dignity and rights nor stop the growing alienation of the adivasis from their livelihood systems and cultural identity.


The response of the diverse adivasi communities to these factors has varied from local resistance against the might of the colonial forces to a meek withdrawal into the deep forests and hills. As the adivasis were forced to give up their subsistence patterns, they were reduced to landless labourers bonded to the new upper-caste settlers. In the Dhanbad area of Bihar, adivasis were reduced to bonded labourers in the first half of the 19th century. The British mining companies made their situation worse. Moneylenders became suppliers of adivasi labour to the tea gardens in Assam and mining companies in central India. In the North-East, where the British did not have immediate interests in the comparatively inaccessible natural resources, they devised a system of administration that left the local adivasi communities such as the Nagas, Garos and Mizos alone to run their local affairs. The forest and other natural resources, once considered community resources, were forcibly taken over by the British administration through a series of legislations such as the Forest Act of 1865 and 1878 and the Forest Policy of 1894. Overnight, the adivasis lost their ancestral and traditional rights over forest lands.

The resultant poverty, malnutrition and indebtedness paved the way for the earliest resistance to the colonial powers in India: amongst them were the resistance of adivasis during the Santal Rebellion of 1855-56 against dikhus (non-tribals or foreigners), the Bhil Rebellion in Khandesh, and the Rampa rebellion in East Godavari district. Various Mizo and Naga tribals went on head-hunting raids against the hegemony of the alien state machinery.


Though there was some sympathy from Christian missionaries and British civil servants, the incremental reforms were always overshadowed by the British interest in exploiting natural resources. The efforts of missionaries like Lievens and John Batist Hoffman and anthropologists like Verrier Elwin helped to highlight the problems of the tribals. But they were not enough to make a substantial impact on the well-entrenched process of marginalisation and exploitation.


After Indian independence, the marginalisation of adivasi communities continued, notwithstanding the lip service and token developmental programmes of the government. The Nehruvian policy towards tribals was strongly influenced by Verrier Elwin. The Tribal Panchsheel became the guiding principle for tribal development in India. The Constitution provided a framework for the socio-economic development of tribals. Article 46 of the Constitution required both the central and state governments to prevent the exploitation of tribals and promote their development. Though such a policy was progressive in spirit, the government response made little difference to the marginalisation of tribals. On the contrary, adivasi communities were systematically displaced in the name of industrial projects, big dams and mining operations. The tyranny of forest officials and moneylenders increased. Though political parties consistently paid lip service, particularly in states like Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Orissa which have a substantial adivasi population, the adivasi communities were systematically uprooted from their land and forests.


The diversity of adivasi communities, spread across six regions, and the fragmentation of their cultural identity, stood in the way of the emergence of a pan-Indian political mobilisation of adivasis. Unlike the more politically organised dalits, therefore, the adivasis have no political bargaining power at a national level. This situation is fast changing with a new political awareness and a sense of solidarity among adivasi communities across India. The resurgence of adivasis is being spurred by the increasing displacement caused by the new liberalisation policies and the development paradigm.


The process of multiple displacement has been highlighted by the recent social mobilisation against the Narmada Dam Project in the western region, Koel-Karo, Netrahat and Subarnarekha in the east. The struggle against land alienation in different parts of India, and local resistance against mining in Orissa, Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh signify a resurgence against the new forces of marginalisation. More than 90 per cent of around 500 coalmines are in the adivasi area. The new mining projects promoted by the big transnational corporations will further marginalise the adivasis. The various forestry projects like the Madhya Pradesh forestry project, funded by the World Bank, will displace hundreds of thousands of adivasis from forest land. Almost 40 per cent of the displaced people in all the development projects are adivasis. As a result of the new bout of alienation, adivasi communities across the country are increasingly realising the need for social and political mobilisation.


The work of social action groups in the last 25 years has helped build a sense of dignity and social consciousness among the adivasi communities. Some of the best examples of voluntary social action initiatives in the last 20 years are among the adivasi communities. The attempt of social action groups to build up awareness and solidarity, coupled with people-centred advocacy to influence public policies, brought the adivasis' struggle for survival to the centre of political discourse. Successful advocacy campaigns and grassroots mobilisation succeeded in advancing the New Forest Policy, the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Atrocities (Prevention) Act of 1989 and the implementation of the Bhuria Committee recommendations for tribal self-rule. The positive impact of non-party political processes is manifested most in the emerging resurgence and solidarity among the adivasi communities across the country.




More Information:

Tribes living in an extremely underdeveloped stage

Andhra Pradesh: Lingadhari Koya, Chenchu, Yenadi
Assam: Mikir, Abore
Bihar: Birhor, Asur, Korwa, Kharia, Sauria, Paharia
Karnataka: Kadu-Kuruba, Jenu Kuruba, Koraga, Irular
Kerala: Kadar, Irular, Paniyan, Kattunayakan, Vishavan
Madhya Pradesh: Pahari Korwa, Baiga in Baigachuk, Abuj Madia (Bastar), Birhor, Sehariya, Binjhwar
Maharashtra: Katkari, Hill Gond (Chanda district)
Orissa: Birhor, Bonodo Proraja, Juang, Kotia-Khond, Hill Bhuiya of Bhuiya Pirh, Lanjia Saora, Koya, Paidi Bhuiya of Bonai
Rajasthan: Sehria
Tamil Nadu: Kadar, Irular, Paniyan, Malayali
Uttar Pradesh: Raji
West Bengal: Asur, Birhor, Sauria Paharia, Toto, Rabha, Lepcha
Andaman & Nicobar Islands: Jarwa, Onge, Sentinelese, Shompen

Legal and constitutional provisions relating to tribals




The colonial policy of non-interference in the life and thinking of tribals kept tribals away from the prevailing trend of socio-economic development, resulting in a wide gap between tribals and non-tribals in the economic and cultural aspects of their life. After India's political independence in the light of the spirit of the Constitution, Jawaharlal Nehru laid down five fundamental principles to be followed in relation to the development of tribals in India. These principles, popularly known as the Tribal Panchsheel, guide the government in matters relating to tribal administration.

Tribal Panchsheel

1) People should develop along the lines of their own genius and we should avoid imposing anything on them. We should try to encourage them in every possible way to develop their traditional arts and culture.
2) Tribal rights in land and forest should be respected.
3) We should try to train and build up a team of their own people to do the work relating to their administration and development. Some technical personnel from outside will no doubt be needed, specially in the beginning. But we should avoid introducing too many outsiders into tribal territory.
4) We should not over-administer these areas or overwhelm them with a multiplicity of schemes. We should rather work through and not in competition with their social and cultural institutions.
5) We should judge results not by statistics or the amount of money spent but by the quality of human character that is evolved.

Constitutional Provisions:

The following are some of the constitutional provisions relating to tribals.
* Article 14 ensures individuals equality before the law and equal protection of the laws in the country, hence nobody, including tribals, can be deprived of any protection or benefits under the law.
* Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. Thus it ensures that there will be no discrimination against tribals. Article 15 (4) permits the State to make any special provisions for the advancement of Scheduled Tribes in addition to other socially and economically backward classes of society. Seat reservations for STs in matters relating to education fall in this category of provisions.
* Article 16 deals with equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. It does not provide anything specially for STs, but clause 4 of Article 16 permits the State to make laws relating to matters of public employment for members of the Scheduled Tribes if they are not adequately represented in that category of employment.
* Article 19 ensures freedom of speech, expression, assembly, and movement to the citizens of India. However, under clause 5 of this Article the State can impose reasonable restrictions on the general public with the objective of protecting the STs.
* Article 23 prohibits traffic in human beings and forced labour including bonded labour. This provision is important from the point that many tribals are seen living as bonded labourers.
* Under the Directive Principles of State Policy, Article 38 places a duty on the State to strive to secure a social order minimizing inequalities in status, facilities and opportunities to individuals.
* Article 39A ensures free legal aid. The inequalities arising out of access to justice can be eliminated by free legal aid.
* Article 46 guides the State to promote the educational and economic interests of STs and protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation.
* Article 330 and Article 332 ensure to the STs reservation of seats in the Lok Sabha and in the legislative assemblies of the states respectively.
* Article 342 ensures incorporation of tribes or tribal communities as Scheduled Tribes. The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976 provides for inclusion or exclusion of tribal communities from the list of SCs and STs.
* Article 244 provides for administration of Scheduled Areas and Tribal Areas. The Fifth Schedule and Sixth Schedule are to be read with this Article.
* Article 275 of the Indian Constitution ensures that the states will receive grants-in-aid from the Union to meet the costs of such schemes of development which will promote the welfare of the STs in that area.

Legal Provisions:

* The Bonded Labour Systems (Abolition) Act, 1976 provided for the identification, release and rehabilitation of bonded labourers.
* With the amendement of the Constitution in 1990 the National Commission for SCs and STs was constituted. This Commission investigates and monitors all matters relating to the safeguards provided for them. The Commission has the authority to conduct inquiries, write reports and make recommendations as to the measures for the effectiveness of the implementation of the safeguards. The Commission enjoys all the powers of a civil court. The union and every state government must consult on all major policy matters affecting the SCs and STs.
* The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 provides for special courts for the trial of offences committed against members of SCs and STs. The Act imposes a duty on the government to ensure effective implementation of the Act.
* The National Forest Policy evolved in 1988 has specific provisions relating to the rights of the tribals living in forests.