Why the right to land for tribal women is secondary?
Certain changes were brought in to this administrative system under the Permanent Settlement Act of 1793 which undermined the customs of the tribal communities as it introduced land revenue and 'ghatwals' to local chief who maintain law and order.
THE TRIBAL society was a collective society residing in the proximity of woods and forest. They had their own periphery where their lives social, cultural and political system ran smoothly. Men and women had equal responsibility towards the family and society and played equal roles.
In Jharkhand, land was then into a collective system, where a territory was defined and the control over the territory by the village self governance system such as Manki Munda of Ho tribes, Majhi parha of santhal and Parha panchayats of Munda. Not only these but other tribes like Oraon, Birhor and Paharia have their own administrative system which was unique in nature. This was the oral tradition and was functional on certain believes and myths. The women enjoyed equal opportunity and played role of village head in the administrative system.
Certain changes were brought in to this administrative system under the Permanent Settlement Act of 1793 which undermined the customs of the tribal communities as it introduced land revenue and ‘ghatwals’ to local chief who maintain law and order. The strict revenue assessment resulted in huge arrears to local chief which resulted in auctioning of the land. The auction encourages the new settlers, the zamindars mostly the non tribals in tribal areas. As a result it became a threat to the traditional system of administration.
Consequently, there was a series of uprising from tribals from 1767 to 1833, and again from 1845 to 1920, in almost in every parts of Jharkhand. The prominent among is Tilka Majhi’s war (1780-1785) and Birsa Munda’s movement (1895-1900). All these uprisings resulted to Chotanagpur Tenancy Act of 1908 (CNT), Santhal Pargana Act of 1949 (SPT), and Wilkinson Rule (under Bengal Regulation XIII of 1833). These all were the written laws by Britishers to protect the tribal land and cultural traditions.
But, on the contrary, Britishers introduce patta system or ‘Khatiyans’ (land title deed) in Jharkhand. The communalism is replaced by individualism. Common property became private. Here, came the introduction of the strong patriarchy by writing the names of the male members in the patta or ‘Khatiyan’. The entry of the women name was restricted. This was more so done by the Britishers in order to create a dispute within the tribal family. This was the start of disintegration of the women in the traditional governance system. Now there are hardly any women as village head.
The struggle of the land did not stop in the tribal belt. The ignorance of CNT, SPT and Wilkinson Rule had resulted in massive treachry, betrayal by the outsiders specially the migrants from outside states. The tribals had welcomed them as the guest but they were ignorant of their motives, consequently many lands were taken illegally by these migrants, who came to settle in the new area. The land reforms under the forest department had also resulted in lost of the tribal lands.
The motives of the migrants were so intense that they lured the tribal girls to marry them. Many tribal girls got married which had resulted in to wide spread torture for land. This created anger among the tribal communities and strengthen them towards being more patriarch. Newly, infested thought just ignored the women entitlement to land. This was more so massive that, the traditional system of respect to women through administrative system broke down.
The struggle of the land did not stop in the tribal belt. The ignorance of CNT, SPT and Wilkinson Rule had resulted in massive treachry, betrayal by the outsiders specially the migrants from outside states. The tribals had welcomed them as the guest but they were ignorant of their motives, consequently many lands were taken illegally by these migrants, who came to settle in the new area. The land reforms under the forest department had also resulted in lost of the tribal lands.
The motives of the migrants were so intense that they lured the tribal girls to marry them. Many tribal girls got married which had resulted in to wide spread torture for land. This created anger among the tribal communities and strengthen them towards being more patriarch. Newly, infested thought just ignored the women entitlement to land. This was more so massive that, the traditional system of respect to women through administrative system broke down.
Though there were other factors for the loss of traditional system in tribal belt but presence of women became negligible. Even the traditional practice of ‘Tamen Jom’ in Santhal tribe where a daughter is given the share of family land was not practiced in a large. The tribal communities like Munda, Ho and Oraon totally ignored the right over the family land by women.
The role of the women was reduced to ‘care taker’ of the ancestral land but there was no entitlement with their names. The single unmarried women got the land of their father as the caretaker but not as owner. Similarly, the role of the widower became more prominent as caretaker until only her sons got through the land rights. Still today, the practice is same and tribal women’s right to land is not in mind of tribal men or women.
There was lot of resistance from the tribal men when asked about giving land to women. This is more so because there have being much of struggle of land by the tribals in the past and still it is present. The term ‘Dikus’ has been attached to all invaders whether to be outsiders or multinational companies who are reaching to grab the tribal land for their profit. In such a situation how can tribal men think to give a share to women? This issue of land struggle of tribals with corporate or multinational companies was attached with women being betrayed through marriage for land in the past.
One thing that was ignorant from the past happening was that men were also being part in the losing of land to outsiders which was never narrated in large. They through their easy going and wrong habits gave many lands to others. They even encourage having marrying non tribal girls but they could not tolerate a tribal women marrying a non tribal man.
The land for the urban tribal women also emerged from same history which restricted the share to daughter creating differences. The history was repeated again and again to women so that they could live peacefully with the realisation that outsiders were present only to grab their lands. And land right to women does not exist for tribal girls. Even the property right to daughter by the Indian law did not fit to the traditional laws in tribal society.
This was not at all in the mindset of tribal men that women are strong enough to deal with all situations. They have seen the women participating strongly for land struggle right from the Brtishers to present day against the multinational companies. But, when comes land right to women they are silent and narrates traditional values and norms.
The advocacy was done on right to land to women by many organisation and activists but due to the reluctance by the tribal political leaders it did not worked. The other alternatives are being worked out such as introduction of names of the wives in the Khatiyan’ (land deed) but still the organisation and activists are struggling with this matter.
There are changing patterns in the tribal society where the acceptance of the daughter is getting reduced. It further more weakens the right to land to women. Hence, mass awareness is needed among the tribal society starting from the traditional groups to urban habitats. Only then can right to land for tribal women be accepted.
The role of the women was reduced to ‘care taker’ of the ancestral land but there was no entitlement with their names. The single unmarried women got the land of their father as the caretaker but not as owner. Similarly, the role of the widower became more prominent as caretaker until only her sons got through the land rights. Still today, the practice is same and tribal women’s right to land is not in mind of tribal men or women.
There was lot of resistance from the tribal men when asked about giving land to women. This is more so because there have being much of struggle of land by the tribals in the past and still it is present. The term ‘Dikus’ has been attached to all invaders whether to be outsiders or multinational companies who are reaching to grab the tribal land for their profit. In such a situation how can tribal men think to give a share to women? This issue of land struggle of tribals with corporate or multinational companies was attached with women being betrayed through marriage for land in the past.
One thing that was ignorant from the past happening was that men were also being part in the losing of land to outsiders which was never narrated in large. They through their easy going and wrong habits gave many lands to others. They even encourage having marrying non tribal girls but they could not tolerate a tribal women marrying a non tribal man.
The land for the urban tribal women also emerged from same history which restricted the share to daughter creating differences. The history was repeated again and again to women so that they could live peacefully with the realisation that outsiders were present only to grab their lands. And land right to women does not exist for tribal girls. Even the property right to daughter by the Indian law did not fit to the traditional laws in tribal society.
This was not at all in the mindset of tribal men that women are strong enough to deal with all situations. They have seen the women participating strongly for land struggle right from the Brtishers to present day against the multinational companies. But, when comes land right to women they are silent and narrates traditional values and norms.
The advocacy was done on right to land to women by many organisation and activists but due to the reluctance by the tribal political leaders it did not worked. The other alternatives are being worked out such as introduction of names of the wives in the Khatiyan’ (land deed) but still the organisation and activists are struggling with this matter.
There are changing patterns in the tribal society where the acceptance of the daughter is getting reduced. It further more weakens the right to land to women. Hence, mass awareness is needed among the tribal society starting from the traditional groups to urban habitats. Only then can right to land for tribal women be accepted.
 | Previous Post |
Login
 Login through Social ID
|
Not finding what you are looking for? Search here.
