Contribution short abstract:

Indigeneity in the context of Adivasis in India contributes to a shift from the universalising settler-colonial discourses on Indigeneity. The paper discusses how asymmetric federal structures and constitutional safeguards does very little without sanctions of rights over land and resources.

Contribution long abstract:

Indigeneity in global parlance have been hijacked by settler colonial experiences thereby excluding certain communities from their claims to Indigeneity. Reassessment in the Anthropocene sees a shift for an expansive definition allowing for claims to Indigeneity. The experience of the Adivasis/tribes of India is one that can be highlighted here. The Constitution of India acknowledges the unique cultural and social identity of tribes creating affirmative policies for their integration and development yet refusing to accept the category of Indigenous. Xaxa (1998) argued for recognizing tribes of India as Indigenous highlighting that the aspect of rights and self-determination given by the UN and its agencies acts as a major deterrent for the Indian state to deny the claims, rather the State claiming everyone in India as Indigenous.The recognition of Scheduled Tribes in the Indian Constitution is based on characteristics such as ‘backwardness’, ‘isolation’, ‘closeness to nature’ among others. These concepts inform the policies rolled out in the post-colonial national building processes. The Indian State continues to perpetuate the colonial model of governance and the ensuing policies resulted in the extraction, exploitation and appropriation of their life and lifeworld.

This paper attempts to understand State policies as a means to assimilate Tribes into the mainstream at the cost of erasing their identities and lifeworld. It questions the paradoxical positioning of the State claiming to safeguard and protect the tribes yet failing to recognize their rights over land and resources resulting in tribes as the most exploited and displaced communities in India.