Exploring the Intersectionality of Indigenous Governance and Customary Law among Tribal Communities in Central Assam

This paper examines how indigenous governance and customary law interact with constitutional autonomy among the Karbi and Dimasa communities of Assam’s Sixth Schedule hill districts, referred to here, as a regional shorthand, as Central Assam. Drawing on legal pluralism, institutional theory, legitimacy theory and debates on group rights and gender justice, it argues that traditional governance and customary law are better understood as linked institutional processes than as two separate systems. They are joined by community identity, social legitimacy, rights over land and resources, kinship, dispute settlement and local autonomy, yet they also raise unresolved questions of jurisdiction, representation, gender equality and legal accountability. The study is qualitative, comparative and desk-based. It reads the Sixth Schedule alongside published scholarship, notably Das and Gogoi’s (2025) study of West Karbi Anglong and a gender-focused study of Dimasa customary law (Fernandes et al., 2008). It proposes a four-dimensional analytical framework (legitimacy, jurisdiction, inclusion and resource governance) and shows that the evidence base is considerably thicker for the Karbi than for the Dimasa. The paper concludes that the sustainability of indigenous governance depends less on preserving tradition unchanged than on combining traditional legitimacy with democratic participation, constitutional accountability and social justice. Priorities for field research are set out.

indigenous governance, customary law, legal pluralism, Sixth Schedule, Karbi, Dimasa, Assam

1. Athparia, R. P. (1996). Traditional political system: A case study of the Karbis of Assam. In S. Sengupta (Ed.), People of North East India: Anthropological perspectives (pp. 199–220). Gyan Publishing House. https://dspace.nehu.ac.in/handle/1/5951 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Cornell, S., &Kalt, J. P. (1998). Sovereignty and nation-building: The development challenge in Indian country today. American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 22(3), 187–214. https://nni.arizona.edu/publications/sovereignty-and-nation-building-development-challenge-indian-country-today1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Das, S., &Gogoi, C. (2025). From tribal chieftainship to autonomous council: Understanding the intersectionality of governance in West KarbiAnglong, Assam, India. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 21(4), 791–798. https://doi.org/10.1177/11771801251358554 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Fernandes, W., Pereira, M., &Khatso, V. (2008). Tribal customary laws in Northeast India: Gender and class implications (Legal Awareness Series 4). North Eastern Social Research Centre. https://archive.onlineministries.creighton.edu/CollaborativeMinistry/NESRC/Monographs/Customary-Laws.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Government of India. (n.d.). The Constitution of India: Sixth Schedule [Articles 244(2) and 275(1)]. https://www.mea.gov.in/Images/pdf1/S6.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Griffiths, J. (1986). What is legal pluralism? Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 18(24), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.1986.10756387 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. KarbiAnglong Autonomous Council. (n.d.). KarbiAnglong Autonomous Council [Official website]. https://karbianglong.co.in/2024/?p=7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Kymlicka, W. (1995). Multicultural citizenship: A liberal theory of minority rights. Clarendon Press. https://willkymlicka.ca/publications/books/multicultural-citizenship [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. MadhuKishwar v. State of Bihar, (1996) 5 SCC 125 (India). https://api.sci.gov.in/jonew/judis/15685.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Merry, S. E. (1988). Legal pluralism. Law & Society Review, 22(5), 869–896. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053638 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Okin, S. M. (1999). Is multiculturalism bad for women? In J. Cohen, M. Howard, & M. C. Nussbaum (Eds.), Is multiculturalism bad for women? (pp. 7–24). Princeton University Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7sxzs.5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807763 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Sarmah, J. K., &Nath, D. (2013). Local governance: Traditional construction and post-colonial contradictions in the Karbi community of Assam. Indian Journal of Public Administration, 59(4), 867–874. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019556120130408 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.2307/258788 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Tamanaha, B. Z. (2021). Legal pluralism explained: History, theory, consequences. Oxford University Press. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_scholarship/39 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. United Nations General Assembly. (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (A/RES/61/295). https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Vandekerckhove, N. (2011). The state, the rebel and the chief: Public authority and land disputes in Assam, India. Development and Change, 42(3), 759–779. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2011.01711.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Global Political Economy and Educational Reforms in the Global South: An Evolutionary Study of Ghana
• Electoral Militarization and the Challenges of Free and Fair Elections in Nigeria: A Focus on the 2023 Presidential Election
• Political Awareness and Engagement in Relation to Voting Behavior among College Students
• Role of Community Leaders in Ensuring Secure Electoral Process in Nairobi City County, Kenya
• Assessing the Delivery of Local Disaster Management Services and Client Satisfaction through SERVQUAL Dimensions