RANCHI, India (UCAN) -- Church leaders in Jharkhand have expressed support for the eastern India state's controversial domicile policy that favors aboriginal people.

The new policy recognizes only people possessing records of ancestral land going back to 1932 as being domiciled in Jharkhand, a stand that has sparked off violent protests from various groups.

Settlers from other parts of India, notably those in government and schools, are against the policy saying it takes away their rights.

The issue has snowballed, with people destroying public property, and holding strikes and sit-ins. Some have threatened self-immolation.

Amid such troubles, all Catholic bishops and leaders of other Christian denominations in the state met July 22 in the state capital of Ranchi, 1,160 kilometers east of New Delhi, and expressed their support of the policy.

People opposing it fear that the domicile policy would give undue quotas for the state's aboriginals in education, politics and socio-welfare programs, which they say would adversely affect settlers' future.

However, Archbishop Telesphore P. Toppo of Ranchi, head of the state's Catholic Church, has hailed the policy as "the first good move" from the government headed by the pro-Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP, Indian people's party).

Details of the policy are "not very clear," the archbishop told UCA News after the Church leaders' meeting. But he said that "the government has taken a hard step, and we consider it a good work of the people of Jharkhand."

The state, he noted, was carved out of Bihar in 2000 purportedly to advance the welfare of tribal peoples, who have complained about being subjugated by a bureaucracy and political leadership in which "outsiders" dominate.

"Even today, a tribal has to beg for a tribal certificate from a Bihari bureaucrat, who is neither a tribal nor a Jharkhandi. It is something unbearable for the tribals," the prelate explained.

Maintaining that "all Jharkhandis are Indians, but not all Indians are Jharkhandis," the archbishop said the government has to draw a cutoff line.

"If the government has accepted the land survey of 1932 as a dividing line, and the majority in the state have accepted it, all people, including outsiders residing in Jharkhand, should respect it," the archbishop added.

He said that for the "adivasi" (tribals) and "moolvasi" (original non-tribal inhabitants) in Jharkhand, such a distinction is a matter of justice. "We know there is no peace without justice," he added.

Following the policy announcement July 16, Ranchi University closed for six days as tribal students began a strike demanding 73 percent reservation in admissions to general and technical universities.

Tribal leaders claim that at least 60 percent of the state's 26.9 million people are tribals, but non-tribals from outside the state form 90 percent of its government officers and businessmen. The 87-seat state assembly has only 27 tribal members.

According to government statistics, only 27.6 percent of the people are tribals, but tribal leaders say the census records are "manipulated."

Gagadish Lohra, a tribal student leader, told UCA News that the strike ended after the government assured them of "positive action within a time frame."

He said the strike would be resumed "if the promises are not fulfilled within the reasonable time frame" to which they agreed.

Niyel Tirkey of the opposition Congress party in the state legislature said that increasing quotas in government jobs and school admission "is fully justified to protect a people" in light of the "dwindling" tribal population.

Tribals, Hindus and Muslims who are original inhabitants of Jharkhand have accepted the 1932 survey as the right cutoff line, said Tirkey, a tribal.

He said the policy only reserves the quota for government jobs and educational facilities for tribals. "It would not disturb the non-Jharkhandis' right to live and work" in the state, he explained.

He said the government wants to develop the mineral-rich region as an industrial belt and "outsiders could easily find jobs" in private firms.

END