The early 60’s
of the last century can be considered as the concluding segment of the tug of
war that was prevalent between the political parties of Sikkim and the Sikkim
Durbar. It can be articulated that, the period had accurately witnessed “King
can do no wrong” as far as the Sikkimese administration was concerned. The
Executive Councillors had served for seven years without any break. However, as
per the provision, there had to be an election in 1962; but, was postponed for
an indefinite period due to the “Chinese encroachments”. From the study it
appears that, there was no political party except the Sikkim National Congress
of Kazi Lhendup Dorjee which repeatedly clamoured for the political reforms. The
political situation of the erstwhile Himalayan Kingdom was thence standing on
the edge which is evident from the reports of Kanchenjunga. The monthly Nepali news based journal states:
“…The Chogyal
had in accordance to the advice rendered by different political parties, said
that political reforms will be carried out or else like 1958’s law of election
will be conducted....while looking at the demands of the political parties, all
the parties are unanimous in one matter of election which was to be conducted
in 1961 and was not be postponed further.....but, when it comes to the
formation of the Council, rules regulating election, administration etc., the
parties are not unanimous. If the ruler and the different parties do not listen
to each other this critical situation will definitely harm the multi-faceted
progress of the country”
[i]
Though, Kanchenjunga [ii]
blamed Sikkim National Congress along with other political parties for
maintaining silence against the introduction of reservation on the basis of
caste and race, it appears that, the Sikkim National Congress had made some
clatters. But, as usual their opposition went unheard as the other two parties
namely Sikkim National Party and Sikkim State Congress remained hushed and
muted and were busy in proving them as
good and obedient parties to the Durbar.
The photograph attached
with this post is a letter from Kazini Eliza Maria of Chakhung to late Mr.
Brihaspati Parsai of Namli village East Sikkim. The latter was one of the
founding members of Sikkim State Congress founded in December 1947 with a
purpose of liquidating feudalism from the very root of Sikkim. It is evident from
the letter that late Brihaspati Parsai had invited the Kazi couple for the
marriage of their son to his residence at Namli village. However, the Kazini
was unable to make her presence with her husband due to ‘ridiculous attitude of
Sikkim Durbar’. It is interesting to note that the letter was dispatched from
Chakhung House Kalimpong; the unofficial headquarter of Sikkim National
Congress. It indicates that the entry of the Kazi couple to Sikkim was banned at
that juncture for some unknown reasons and she is hopeful to meet her relations
in Sikkim after the riddance of “nonsense”.
I am quite sure
that the Kazi couple was not allowed in getting into Sikkim after the publication of
Bulletin No.2 of 26th January 1972 through which the Sikkim National
Congress had a mocking criticism against the Chogyal and the Sikkimese administration. A line published in
Bulletin No.2 of the Sikkim National Congress says:
“It should always be borne in mind that there can be
no King without people, but conversely there are many countries today which
have people without Kings”.[iii]
 |
| Document acquired from Mr. N.B. Parsai of Namin village East Sikkim |
The line quoted
above from Bulletin No. 2 was more than adequate to get exiled in a monarchical
set up. However, it materializes that the earlier banishment, indicated in this
letter was certainly for raising the voices of the majority, where the Kazi probably
was reluctant to accept the Durbar diversion of “divide and rule”. Probably he
could sniff the tang of prejudice in the approaches of the palace and remained
unbending with his democratic ethos and in all probabilities his democratic
values were responsible for ‘ridiculous attitude of Sikkim Durbar’.
If we compare British Imperialism in India with the native feudalism of Sikkim than one can notice Sikkimese feudal system was much tough and cruel. The Sikkimese feudalism became more severe and cruel after the interference of the British Government in the politics of Sikkim. In short, the responsibility for the introduction of feudalism in Sikkim also goes to the British. The Indians in the plains were directly exploited by the British authorities, who were foreigners and were concentrated in a profit making process. Of course, the pricks and pains which the Indian masses received from the colonial rule were also incomparable. But, the Sikkimese peasants were exploited by their own people, who behaved like “the very apt pupil of the British”. In Sikkimese feudalism we find the elements of French feudal system of the mid 18th century. There also the society was divided into three estates namely, the nobility, the clergy and the common people in Sikkimese society very similar kinds of elements are amply found. The only difference between the French feudalism and Sikkimese feudalism is that the peasants of France had to pay Thithe as religious tax, which was not to be paid by the Sikkimese peasants. Moreover, the story of a poor and destitute either he may belong to Sikkim or France is almost similar, as poverty and suffering does not have a common language, race, caste or even the boundaries. But, in every revolution, some signs, some symbols, comes to occupy a pre eminent position and those signs or symbols become the watchword for the masses. In Sikkim, people’s sufferings, their woes, trials and tribulations came to be symbolized by Kalo Bhari, Jharlangi, Theki Bheti, and Kuruwa.
Posts
