Shillong, July 31: Two pressure groups have disagreed with the recent statement made by BJP leader AL Hek that the Meghalaya Residents, Safety and Security Act (MRSSA) is adequate for controlling influx into the state.
The Hynniewtrep Youth Council (HYC) and the Hynniewtrep Integrated Territorial Organization (HITO) argued that MRSSA 2016 is just another tenancy Act, which is applicable to all residents of the State and will not ever serve as a ‘mechanism’ to control or regulate influx of people into the state.
The HYC in a statement issued on Wednesday said the council asserts that the MRSSA is a “toothless” law without specific provisions to regulate influx and that the ILP system is necessary to protect the state’s interests.
“We have seen the statement made by Bah A.L. Hek, Minister in the Government of Meghalaya stating that ‘MRSSA is a good mechanism and it can control influx’ and we failed to understand as to how MRSSA can check or regulate movement of people into the State when the act itself does not specify anywhere that it is meant for ‘checking influx’. Then, which MRSSA is Bah Hek talking about?,” asked HYC president Roy Kupar Synrem.
“We would like to request Bah Hek and all those who are in favour of MRSSA to check influx, to kindly read the Act of 2016 and the Orders of the Hon’ble High Court of Meghalaya in the case of PIL No. 13 of 2020, when the Act itself was challenged regarding the establishment of Facilitation Centres under Sections 17 and 18 of the Act. In fact, the State Government through the Chief Secretary while submitting a Report before the Hon’ble High Court has stated that these Centres were established “only” for verification of tenants and weeding out any “known’ anti-social elements and wanted criminals,” Synrem stated.
“HYC is very clear that MRSSA 2016 is a ‘toothless’ law in the absence of specific provisions to regulate influx into the State and demand that the State Government and all the MLAs take urgent and pro-active steps to ensure that the Resolution passed by the Assembly on December 19, 2019 for implementation of ILP system in the State is accepted by the Central Government at the earliest,” Synrem concluded.
Echoing similar views, HITO president Donbok Dkhar said the organization disagrees with Hek’s statement because the MRSSA is merely a governance measure that can be repealed by the High Court or Supreme Court at any time.
He emphasized that the Inner Line Permit (ILP) is essential for protecting Meghalaya’s unique cultural heritage and historical identity.
On Hek’s claim that the MRSSA grants full authority to village heads or headmen in their respective dorbar (village councils), Dkhar said that this reflects a lack of understanding of the intricate dynamics affecting the Hynniewtrep community.
HITO further added that the ILP is a national law that has been time-tested since the colonial period, while the MRSSA is specific to Meghalaya and may not withstand legal scrutiny.
