A two day Regional Round Table on Federalism was organised by the Inter-State Council Secretariat, New Delhi along with the Forum of Federations, Ottawa in collaboration with the Centre for North East Studies and Policy Research (C - NES) on 12th & 13th June 2007 at Hotel Brahmaputra Ashok, Guwahati. The aim was to cover all the states of the North East and to identify representative case studies and presenters from the region for the 4th International Conference on Federalism slated for November 2007. Several key practitioners and experts from the Northeast and Central Government attended the Regional Roundtable.

June 12, 2007

Inaugural Session

Dr. Udayon Misra, former faculty at the Dibrugarh University, spoke about the diverse ethnicity of Northeast India in a federal state, and that the perspectives emerging from the region during the course of proposed deliberations would enrich the Inter State Council Secretariat’s knowledge base. He cautioned against too much centralization of power, quoting the late Assam Member of Parliament, Kuladhar Chaliha, who once said that “too much power to the Centre would have a disintegrating influence, and provinces could break away.”

Ms. Patricia Mukhim, social worker and columnist from Meghalaya spoke about representative democracy, the rule of law, livelihood issues, the need for health care, better schools, potable drinking water and basic needs. She felt that it was necessary to develop a public accountability body to oversee implementation of projects.

Mr Sanjoy Hazarika, Managing Trustee of Centre for North East Studies and Policy Research (C-NES), said that while some positive changes like sharp increase in the number of flights have taken place in the past decades, infant mortality rates and school drop outs have not dropped significantly. He wondered, in the context of the North Eastern Region which has seven small states, whether small states could “be financially viable if ruling elites were unaccountable and the states did not raise funds or show financial discipline.”
 

Assam Chief Minister Mr. Tarun Gogoi said that education was the key to change. He said that it was only “through education that people can be truly empowered and made aware of their rights and responsibilities to render federalism vibrant and resilient.” Referring to demands by armed groups for secession in the State, Mr. Gogoi remarked, “the vast majority of people do not want independence”.

“We have to give space to small ethnic groups; if their ideas are heard and accommodated, peace and development will follow.” He referred to the resolution of Bodo problem in the state as an example of this principle. He said that Bodo leaders who had fought against the state, were now members of the coalition government ruling Assam. 

Mr. George Anderson, President, Forum of Federations, spoke of the need to develop federalism in all forms of government, whether democratic or single party. Without federalism, chances of pressure points growing in nations were very high.

Session One

Challenges of Managing Ethnic Diversity, Militancy and Conflict in the Northeastern Region in a Federal setup

Chairman: Mr. Shyamal Datta, former Governor of Nagaland
Moderator: Mr. Dalbir Singh, Secretary, AICC

The session aimed to elicit perspectives as to how different leaders handle the issues of ethnic diversity in their states apart from challenges relating to law and order. The session also aimed at eliciting views on the dependence on the Centre apart from reviewing the role of key players (such as security forces and non-state players, including militants) and the internalization of conflicts.

Mr. Shyamal Dutta, chaired the session and related the relevance of the theme to the North-east. He hoped that a number of relevant points relating to centre-state relationship particularly in light of handling insurgencies and conflicts in the region would be raised during the presentations made in the session. 

Mr. KS Dhillon, former DGP, Punjab and Madhya Pradesh, who was the co-chair for the session in his introductory remarks, said that the idea of India is plurality in diversity. North East presents a case of ethno-cultural diversity. He also tried to explain why diversity invariably led to conflicts in different parts of the country. He said that all minorities whether cultural, ethnic or religious had certain in-built sense of insecurity that gets reflected in dissonance and disconnect with what is generally called the national mainstream. As an example he cited the case of the Northeast where the people looked up to many identities they belong to and cherish. Whenever, any of these identities is under threat whether real or perceived, situation gets aggravated and manifests itself in various forms of militancy, insurgency and conflict. He pointed out that it was the federal set-up which consists of solutions to address these insecurities, diversities and pluralities.  

Mr. PK Thungon, former Chief Minister of Arunachal Pradesh and former Union Minister, shared his experiences of conflict resolution in his state in the light of his experiences as a political and social worker; he started by citing the example of a strife between two villages over land and fishing rights being settled by the coming together of the village heads and elders. He also referred to the settlement of border dispute between Assam and Arunachal Pradesh through persistent negotiations amongst officers, experts and non-political people on both sides, in the face of constant threats of the dispute developing into violence. He traced the development of student movements like AASU, AGP and ULFA to not paying heed to emerging signs of discontent in time. He referred to the issue of deletion of names of foreigners from the electoral rolls. He recommended pragmatism, imagination and proper perspective as tools to handle ticklish issues in time. The cries for separate Bodoland he said could be attributed to delay in decision making on part of central leadership. There has to be a certain amount of give and take for solving a problem and that there was no substitute for dialogue. Mr. Thungon also attributed many of our ills to the inability of even our own people to appreciate the diversity of our nation. He emphasized that our leaders and administrators needed to be more responsible. “We have more diversity and hence more responsibility,” he said. In the end he commended the Inter-State council for its initiative to take the seminar to the Northeast and hoped that it would play an increasingly important role in solving inter-state disputes. 

I Imkong, Leader of Opposition, Nagaland Legislative Assembly, said that federalism or a decentralized form of government is not a new phenomenon. He said decentralization has gained a new dimension in the present context of globalization. With the process set in motion by technology, information and economy that form the “Global village” phenomenon, issues of freedom, human and civil rights are also becoming dominant. India has started a process of dialogue and negotiations with various insurgent groups of Nagaland and the scope of such negotiations should be enlarged to encompass the historical issues that lie at the root of the problems and find solutions for new forms of federalism. “While man cannot live alone, he finds it difficult to live with others,” he said. 

Dr. Thokehom Meinya, Member of Parliament, Manipur added that there was a need to understand the importance of diversity and state identities and to that extent there was a need to grant suitable autonomy to the states as they alone were in a position to appreciate the needs of the local populations and aspirations. 

Mr. Shyamal Dutta in his closing remarks said that a major problem in the approach of Government of India was that “we have always tried to deal with the North-east through the prism of security.”

Session two

Federalism and fiscal flows: State autonomy and central control

Chairman Dr. Jayanta Madhab, Financial Advisor to the Chief Minister of Assam

Moderator: Dr. Indira Rajaraman, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy, New Delhi

The issues that were flagged at the Session included a look at the fiscal structure in the country, with a focus on emerging issues in the current world context. The central issue was whether federal systems are structured to adapt to change, and the extent to which partners have a voice in guiding that process of adaptation and change.

P D Rai, Former member, Sikkim Planning Board, said that the political system in Sikkim was such that a national party would not be voted to power. He said that while the Sikkim’s experience with VAT was discouraging, the tourism sector was a major income generator. 

H S Das, Finance and Planning Commissioner, Assam spoke of the rising demand of people in the North - eastern States as their standards were relatively lower in relation to the basic services such as health, education, agriculture and social welfare. This demand, he said, has led to the provision for equalization grants to States including Assam. He pointed out the regional disparities existing within States e.g. Lower Assam, the river belt and the hills and border areas which were less developed than the rest of Assam, and required to be addressed. He conceded that even though there was not a mechanism to ensure absolute equalization owing to the resource advantages of some States, there was a case for ensuring better connectivity and infrastructure for all by the federal Government. This was required in the light of the fact that the inherent handicaps of the region like geographical insularity, distance from the mainland, has led to a steady decline in the standards of development of the Assam state in particular, and the region in general. Elucidating further, Mr. Das pointed the fact that Assam’s per capita income had dropped from being 4% above the national average to around 50% of the national level.

Sub-theme (b): Flow of resources within region and lack of fiscal autonomy for “local” governments and communities

Dr. BK Joshi, Chairman of the State Committee on the 11th Five Year Plan, Uttarakhand, emphasized that grant-in-aid was the bane of local governments. Functions must be rationalized and reallocated keeping in view the principle of subsidiarity i.e. delegating that to lower levels what is best done at those levels. This point found resonance with other participants. 

Mr. HS Shylla, Chief Executive Member, Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council, Meghalaya, said that the North-east of India was a region endowed with rich natural resources, ranging from oil, gas, timber, and water for hydel generation together with minerals such as limestone, coal, quartz, granite and lately discovery of uranium deposits in Meghalaya. Yet, there were difficulties in absorbing or utilizing these reserves within the region itself. There is a need to rectify the problem and this can only happen if the present top down approach to development is abandoned and replaced with a participatory paradigm which enables communities to actively participate in their own development and enable the region to utilize its resources for its own economic growth.

June 13, 2007

Session three

Natural Resources -- how far can Federations like India accommodate differences in resource endowments?

Chairman: J L Bajaj, Ex Chairman, UP Electricity Regulatory Commission

Sub-theme (a) Water and Hydro Power Resources: Managing inter-state differences

Issues: What are the roles of the respective upstream and downstream riparian states in a water- rich region like the Northeast, with enormous hydropower potential, especially in a federal set up where major water resources are Centrally controlled? At a time when the hunger for energy is growing, the Centre’s control extends to developments relating to project design, funding, building and power generation. There are lessons to be learnt from the experiences of other states in the country where water disputes have troubled neighbors for decades.

Mr. Tako Dabi, Minister of Water Resources, Arunachal Pradesh, presented his government’s view on water resources and sharing, saying that regional cooperation, a corner stone of federalism, ‘cannot take place at the cost of people in any state.’ 

Mr. Bajaj, the chair interjected to emphasize that people have to be consulted on issues such as projects and large dams. 

Prof Ghanshyam Singh, NALSAR, Hyderabad, presented a legal framework of water disputes, their challenges to the Centre and States as well as resolution opportunities. He referred to the Constitutional provisions on Inter-State water disputes, the role of the tribunals set up for dispute resolution and the role of the Supreme Court in resolving such disputes.

Sub-theme (b) Compensation / Resource transfers for financing mountain people as stewards of vital global assets

Chairman: P K Thungon, former Chief Minister of Arunachal Pradesh

Issues: At a time of global warming and future water shortages, there should be Centrally-funded incentives for practices, and groups which protect the environment, especially in areas where forest and water resources are not government-owned or controlled but under the jurisdiction of Traditional Institutions or communities, clans or even individuals.

Presentation by Dr. Vincent Darlong, NRM and Extension coordinator, NERCORMP - IFAD (North - Eastern Region Community Resource Management Project - International Fund for Agricultural Development).

Dr Darlong highlighted the importance of Payment for Environment Services (PES) for protecting the watershed, biodiversity, and landscape beauty, and for achieving Carbon sequestration / storage for mitigation of green house gases. He also mentioned about practices that can be compensated / rewarded or form environmental rewards “which would consist of community conserved areas, community forests, sacred groves, conservation agriculture, well developed traditional agro forests and villages managed on ecological principles.” 

L. Kire, Secretary Department of Forests, Nagaland, said that the world should not look at the Northeast region’s natural resources and tribal communities as a sector to be preserved for posterity and be circumscribed into a “time warp” and to be preserved only as a Repository of Biodiversity, Wildlife Preserves, Carbon Sink of the world, Conservation Museum or as Research and Development Preserve. The Northeast region also aspired for better quality of life, food security, and consumerism. He said that these aspirations could be met by developing sustainable use of existing available natural resources, exploitation of resource potential, e.g. hydro power which entail minimal submergence resulting in loss of habitat for flora and fauna, biotechnology application in medicinal plants & herbs, and exploitation of man made plantations.

He referred to the Supreme Court’s interim order of 12 December 1996 whereby it had imposed a blanket ban on all felling / transportation of plantation timber from the North Eastern Region to other parts of the country and said that it was an economic blockade for Naga tree-growers. Mr. Kire also said that at present timber/logs were being imported from African and South East Asian countries without much restriction. If the preservation and conservation of the environment were major objectives, then why should such unrestricted import of timber / logs be allowed?

He then stressed that if the ban was in the ecological interest of the country, these areas that suffered should be compensated monetarily. People deriving significant direct consumptive & non-consumptive benefits through preservation of forests, and indirect benefits such as carbon sequestration, biodiversity, watershed conservation etc should pay for it on the principle of “Beneficiary pays.”

Special session with Mr. Praful Kumar Mahanta, Former Chief Minister, Assam and Leader, Assom Gana Parishad (P).

Mr. Mahanta, said that an independent survey had shown that, after 60 years of independence, 70% of the people did not like politicians. Referring to the Constitution which he described “neither unitary nor federal,” Mr. Mahanta added that in the practice of federalism and multi-party democracy “reality is different from theory.” He said that both as a government leader and opposition figure, he and his allies had proposed, that only basic powers should remain with the Centre i.e. Foreign Policy, Finance, Defence and Communications. The remaining subjects should be under the autonomous jurisdiction of States.

He said that the States were like municipalities which were totally dependent on the Centre. He saw a major challenge in managing problems among ethnic groups in the Northeast.

Session Four

Theme: Bridging gaps – Role of Traditional Institutions (TIs), other Statutory Institutions and Civil Society Groups

Chairman: Mr. Suresh Keswani, Commissioner for Linguistic Minorities of India

Moderator: Mr. Amitabha Pande Secretary, ISCS

Issues: In an ethnically diverse - region as the North-east, what role do Traditional Institutions (TIs are not recognized by the Constitution) have in bridging gaps between national, state and local levels of government? If they have a role, what steps would they need to take to become more effective? Often TIs face the charge that they are not democratically elected, are exclusive organizations and gender insensitive: this makes cooperation with existing government institutions difficult.

Mr. John F Kharsiing, Chairman, Assembly of Hynniewtrep Nations, Advisor and Spokesperson, Federation of Twenty-five Khasi States, suggested that the State and local politicians had marginalized the traditional system of the Khasi Hills of Meghalaya. He urged for them to be given political and financial powers since the people respected them and their authority. 

Ms. Patricia Mukhim contested this view of the importance of traditional institutions by saying that they were not inclusive of women and ethnic minorities. They started off as regulators of social behaviour but in the present have become instruments for privatization of community resources of land, water and forests. She, however, said that they would assume importance if only they were restructured to become the link between the people and the state. They had the potential to become the building blocks for participatory governance. For this she listed the following as important: Women to be recognized as equal partners, ethnic minorities to be represented, public scrutiny of functionaries and auditing of accounts of traditional institutions, areas to be identified for funds could be collected by traditional institutions and creation of a system that pays for the services of the headman (which is in the present is largely honorary). She also emphasized the need to bring these institutions under some form of the already recognized Constitutional bodies like the district councils or the municipalities. She also said that the Traditional Institutions would be better suited for their clientele if they adopted elements of modernism as well. 

Mr. Moses Chalai, project director of NERCORMP-IFAD, also supported the view of Ms. Patricia Mukhim out of his experiences of a livelihood project he was heading covering Assam, Meghalaya and Manipur. He said that while the TIs were voluntary in nature and held a lot of traditional authority and undisputed stature, they were also gender insensitive and often “elitist”. He suggested a collaborative approach as seen in the IFAD strategy for water shed management in six districts of three states of NER which brought in TIs, ordinary people as well as authorities from constitutionally mandated groups into an effective form of transparent governance.  

Mr. NK Das, Superintending Anthropologist, Anthropolgical Survey of India also spoke about the anthropological origins of the traditional institutions prevailing in the Northeast and observed that if supported functionally and financially, they were the most suited to look after their needs of people, tribes and regions that have an insulated existence. 

In his Valedictory remarks Lt. Gen (retd.) V K Nayar, former Governor of Nagaland and Manipur, recommended a three-tier system of governance involving greater emphasis on grass-roots institutions. He also advised a regional approach to management of natural resources. He said that if the locals develop a stake in the maintenance of natural resources that would give a fillip both to conservation of and rise in economic status of the region.

The workshop ended with a vote of thanks to the chair