Editorial 1: Behind the Kudmis’ agitation in Bengal and Jharkhand for Scheduled Tribe status
Context:
- After about a week of protests, the Kudmi community, which is demanding Scheduled Tribe (ST) status and the inclusion of their language in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution, lifted their agitation following assurances from the West Bengal government.
How is a community added or removed from SC, ST lists?
- The process begins at the level of a State or Union Territory, with the concerned government or administration seeking the addition or exclusion of a particular community from the SC or ST list.
- The final decision rests with the President’s office issuing a notification specifying the changes under powers vested in it from Articles 341 and 342.
- The inclusion or exclusion of any community in the Scheduled Tribes or Scheduled Castes list come into effect only after the President assents to a Bill that amends the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950 and the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, as is appropriate, after it is passed by both the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.
Introduction: Who are the Kudmis?
- Kudmis are mainly a peasant community, with their population concentrated in the Junglemahal areas or the Chota Nagpur plateau of West Bengal, Jharkhand and Odisha.
- Some Kudmis are also found in Assam and northern West Bengal, who have migrated from the Chota Nagpur plateau region.
When were they excluded from the ST list?
- After 1950, when the Scheduled Tribe list was prepared in independent India, Kudmis did not find a place on it. Ever since, they have been fighting for their identity as a Scheduled Tribe.
Why they were excluded?
- According to community members, during the British rule, some affluent Kudmis wanted to elevate their social status as “kshatriya” in the Hindu caste hierarchy, while other members opposed this “sanskritisation”. Khitish Mahato, professor of Gour College of Maldah and visiting professor of Jhargram University, said, “It is true that some Kudmis tried to change their identity to “kshatriya” during the British period. Not only Kudmis, many other adivasi communities participated in that movement.
- But a majority of Kudmis still practise their traditional religion and lifestyle. Unfortunately, they were excluded from Scheduled Tribe list after independence. Now they are demanding their original identity. It is also true that, like other adivasi communities, their socio-economic condition has not changed.”
- Another section of the Kudmi population alleges that they were excluded from the ST list to show an increase in the population of the Hindu community.
What are their demands?
- Over the past year, in West Bengal, Jharkhand and Odisha, an intensified movement has been witnessed by the Adibasi Kudmi Samaj and its allied organisations, mainly led by former Jharkhand Movement crusader Ajit Prasad Mahato. Mahato joined the Adibasi Kudmi Samaj in 2015 and organised a Durku Mahajuruahi (great gathering) at Tamna in Purulia, West Bengal, where over a lakh of people gathered to hear him.
- Since then, the community has been vocally demanding inclusion in the ST list. Several social and political organisations also have emerged to champion the case, such as the Purbanchal Adibasi Kudmi Samaj, Kudmi Sena, Abga Kudmi Sena, Kudmi Samannay Samiti, Kudmi Unnayan Samiti, Kudmi Bikash Morcha, and United Kudumi Samaj.
Editorial 2: Jallianwala Bagh Fact-Check
Context:
- Amid crackdown on fake news, lessons from Jallianwala Bagh inquiries
Introduction: About Jallianwala Bagh massacre
- On Baisakhi day, a large crowd of people mostly from neighbouring villages, unaware of the prohibitory orders in the city, gathered in the Jallianwala Bagh, a popular place for public events, to celebrate the Baisakhi festival.
- Local leaders had also called for a protest meeting at the venue. It is not clear how many in the 20,000 odd people collected there were political protestors, but the majority were those who had collected for the festival.
- Meanwhile, the meeting had gone on peacefully, and two resolutions, one calling for the repeal of the Rowlatt Act and the other condemning the firing on April 10, had been passed.
- It was then that Brigadier-General Dyer arrived on the scene with his men. The troops surrounded the gathering under orders from General Dyer and blocked the only exit point and opened fire on the unarmed crowd.
- No warning was issued, no instruction to disperse was given. An unarmed gathering of men, women, and children was fired upon as they tried to flee.
- According to official British Indian sources, 379 were identified dead, and approximately 1,100 were wounded. The Indian National Congress, on the other hand, estimated more than 1,500 were injured, and approximately 1,000 were killed. But it is precisely known that 1,650 bullets were fired into the crowd.
CURBING INACCURATE INFORMATION
- This year, as the country considers the proposed Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2023, it is worth revisiting the story of two inquiries conducted over a hundred years ago in the aftermath of the massacre.
- The IT Ministry’s proposed rules will give the Press Information Bureau powers to remove any “fake or inaccurate information” about the central government from social media and digital news media.
- Now is an opportune moment to recall the fundamental principle the Jallianwala Bagh inquiries followed: No government must get a carte blanche to determine what is fake or inaccurate with respect to its own work.
Way Forward
- Fact-checking, fact-finding, exposing abuse of the law, and contesting official records, were vital tools of resistance in the nationalist movement. Exemplary patriots of this country have believed that the determination of facts cannot be left in the hands of the government alone.
- Are there enough avenues available to us today to scrutinise and probe government claims about its own work? A robust, diverse, and free information ecosystem — not just a free press — gives us a chance to know the truth of our circumstances, our country, and our governments. In proposing regulations for online communication and social media, we cannot forget that social media dramatically expands the possibility of people telling their truths. It has become a lifeline for civil society, journalists, and activists.
Conclusion
- If the leaders of the Jallianwala Bagh inquiry — Madan Mohan Malviya, Motilal Nehru, M K Gandhi, C R Das, Abbas Tyabji, M R Jayakar, and K Satnam — were alive today, they would condemn any unchecked executive control of the information ecosystem, as should we.