Customary Law and Customary Practice: Changkija’s Criticism of the ‘Customary’ Against Gendered Experiences

Monalisa Changkija interrogates two significant aspects of the ‘customary’; as law grounded in jurisprudence/justiciability in the court and as practice grounded in tradition/tribal belief systems. Within the Naga context in which she writes and speaks, these aspects of ‘customary’ structure both the village and worldview. This article explores the political functions of the ‘customary,’ which regulate the life and living of women, and often subjects them to various forms of disenfranchisement and discrimination. The regulation of the state/village is androcentric and justified through what is, or is not, considered ‘customary,’ restricting women both at the levels of decision-making and political participation. Changkija views such injustices as political, reflecting systemic gender discrimination and violence in society, and personal, as a woman victimized by these laws and practices which are ‘customary.’ Such blurring of a strict distinction between the ‘political’ and ‘personal’ in Changkija’s criticism is discussed through feminist approaches in the investigation of Naga laws and practices. Employing a feminist approach to politics, this article argues that, by drawing attention to the political function of custom, Changkija contributes to theorizing the diverse forces that constitute and shape politics and political participation. It further argues that the difference between customary law and practice is determinable in Changkija’s writing, and comprises multiple sites of women’s victimization, which Changkija gives the name ‘customary victimization.’ I argue that these aspects of the ‘customary’ produce both gender constructions and gendered experiences, which are central to Changkija’s criticism.