PESA delay in Jharkhand: BJP alleges religious influence, ruling alliance rebuts

The prolonged delay in implementing the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, or PESA, has reignited a political storm in Jharkhand. Senior BJP leader and former Chief Minister Raghubar Das has accused the Hemant Soren-led government of succumbing to “foreign religious influences” and deliberately stalling tribal self-governance.

Addressing a press conference at the BJP’s state headquarters in Ranchi, Das alleged that despite all procedural formalities being completed for state-specific PESA rules, the government is holding back their notification under pressure from individuals associated with non-indigenous religions who, he claimed, wield influence within the ruling coalition.

Advertisement

“Why is PESA not being implemented when even the Advocate General has cleared the draft? Who are these invisible powers blocking it?” Das asked. He argued that tribal self-rule—rooted in traditional governance models upheld by figures like Birsa Munda, Sidho-Kanhu, and Phulo-Jhano—is being systematically denied to Jharkhand’s tribal communities.

Although PESA was enacted in 1996, Jharkhand has yet to frame and adopt its own rules nearly three decades later. Das pointed out that a draft was finally published in July 2023, followed by legal vetting and regional consultations with Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, and the Union Ministry of Panchayati Raj—all of whom supported the move. However, the final cabinet approval remains pending.

Das also claimed that individuals who have converted to non-tribal religions prefer the Sixth Schedule model—which allows for nominated autonomous councils—over the Fifth Schedule under which PESA operates, empowering traditional tribal leaders outside the formal electoral system.

He further linked the delay to vested economic interests, alleging that sand and mineral mafias are manipulating political decisions. If implemented, PESA would shift control over minor minerals like sand and stone to Gram Sabhas and traditional village heads across Jharkhand’s 112 Scheduled Areas.

Reiterating a long-standing demand, Das urged the government to reinstate the religion column in caste certificate forms, arguing that its removal enables misuse of tribal benefits by individuals from other religious communities. He accused the current government of eliminating the clause to consolidate its vote bank.

Echoing these concerns, former Union Minister and tribal leader Sudarshan Bhagat accused the Congress of misleading tribals on religious identity issues. He referred to the removal of the tribal religion code in the 1961 Census under a Congress-led regime and cited a 2012 parliamentary reply by the then UPA government dismissing the Sarna code demand as impractical.

The ruling alliance, however, rejected the BJP’s allegations. Congress spokesperson Satish Paul Munjini dismissed the “foreign religions” charge, stating that Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism are all constitutionally recognised in India. He criticised the BJP’s stance as a narrow and divisive interpretation of tribal identity.

Munjini also pointed out that during its 14-year rule—including Das’s tenure as Chief Minister—the BJP made little headway on PESA. Instead, he said, the party attempted to dilute tribal rights through proposed amendments to the Chotanagpur Tenancy (CNT) and Santhal Parganas Tenancy (SPT) Acts, along with land acquisition reforms that triggered mass tribal protests.

JMM spokesperson Vinod Kumar Pandey accused Das of selective tribal advocacy, noting his opposition to the Sarna code and past alignment with corporate interests that allegedly undermined tribal autonomy and land rights.

Intended to empower Gram Sabhas in Scheduled Areas with local governance and control over resources, the PESA Act reflects the social and cultural systems of tribal communities. Yet in Jharkhand—where tribals account for over a quarter of the population—the law remains in limbo, stalled by a complex interplay of political brinkmanship, bureaucratic inertia, and ideological conflict.

While the government maintains that notification of the rules is imminent, the ongoing impasse highlights deeper struggles over identity, governance models, and control of natural resources in a state created to champion tribal empowerment. As parties continue to trade accusations, tribal communities remain on the sidelines—still waiting for a promised system of self-rule.