On the Future of Indigenous Traditions - Munin

the state mechanism and its process there is the question of how the document was
obtained, and if obtaining of the documents was carried out in fairness. The cross
verification of the documents could be done by going to the original source itself,
which is not always easy due to bureaucratic formalities and complications.
Moreover, it is not in the domain of the Adivasis so the cooperation is not always
guaranteed. The Manki gave his decision on the basis of documents produced by Kui
with her appeal. The speculation here arises when Bodra argues that the documents
produced by Kui are forged. This challenge has not been taken up in the second case
as of now in the Manki’s court.
To conclude on the analysis of the cases, we first look at the merits and weaknesses of
the whole system closely. We find the strengths of the Adivasis governing themselves
within their own system. However, as a weakness, there is a newer problem. If we
look closely into its functioning, we can see what happens when witnesses don’t take
sides, as in both the cases they have not lied, but rather supplement useful information
as in the case of Laksmi. In the case of Kui, witnesses from both parties do not testify
legal document “obtained” which is the only proof, lest they be proven to have been
falsely forged. The Manki would have to take it as a challenge.
On the whole there is the issue of gender and equity that arises here. Since the
Adivasis community of Jharkhand is based on the patriarchal ownership of property,
the same is passed on to the sons, in which the eldest son takes a bigger proportion
than the younger ones. 141 It is not only the issue of equity, but also gender equality not
being the same, within the practice of the customary law which raises many question
today. Here it is important to answer why this is so. It is because of the centrality of
the community where the land may remain within the community, i.e. if an Adivasi
woman marries to a non-Adivasi she has no right over her parent’s property –
especially the customarily owned land. This is not always the same for Adivasi men.
However, to illustrate the centrality of community and what belongs to the
community, the entire matter could be seen the other way around. It is in the case of
the Khasi Adivasi groups in Meghalaya, a state in the northeast part of India. Among
the Khasis the youngest daughter of the family becomes the owner of her ancestral
141 S. C. Roy, Mundas and Their Country, 269, op. cit.
95