Meghalaya: Centre still considering ILP and MRSSA implementation, no rejection yet

Meghalaya: Centre still considering ILP and MRSSA implementation, no rejection yet

The Centre has not rejected Meghalaya's proposal for implementing the Inner Line Permit (ILP) and the Meghalaya Residents Safety and Security (Amendment) Bill, 2020, according to Chief Minister Conrad K Sangma. He clarified that the Centre is still examining the proposal and the original MRSSA, 2016 is being implemented in 'letter and spirit'.

India TodayNE
  • Jul 20, 2024,
  • Updated Jul 20, 2024, 9:21 AM IST

Chief Minister Conrad K Sangma said that the Centre has not said ‘no’ to the proposal for implementation of the Inner Line Permit (ILP) and the Meghalaya Residents Safety and Security (Amendment) Bill, 2020 as it is still examining the same. 

According to CM Sangma, implementation of the original Meghalaya Residents Safety and Security Act (MRSSA), 2016 is taking place in “letter and spirit”.

Responding to a query about whether the Centre is saying 'no' to the long-pending demands of the state, Sangma said, "It is not like that. In fact this time also when I went to Delhi I have raised the issue of the Eighth Schedule, I have raised the issue of ILP and issue of MRSSA with the union home minister Amit Shah and home secretary and we have discussed this matter so it’s not a ‘No’ but it is not as yet confirmed and they are still examining the matter.”

The CM also informed that the state government had clarified to the Centre that the MRSSA will not at all infringe into the Article 19 of the Constitution.

“In the meantime as I said the whole concern of this MRSSA and Article 19 is something which we have also clarified to the Central government. We have mentioned that in our particular Act that we have put in that it is a registration and therefore, it is providing information by the concerned citizens, who are coming in. So that is not at all infringing into the Article 19 of the Constitution,” he said while adding, “That’s what we have clarified on that and now we are waiting for the Centre to reply back to our clarification.”

Furthermore, the CM said that it would be incorrect to say that the MRSSA, 2016 is not being implemented by the state government while reacting to a statement made by the delegation of the Khasi Students’ Union (KSU) after a meeting held in the city.

“In fact there was a small discussion. We give them the clarification on what the concerns from the Centre were and the fact that we are pushing it. In terms of the implementation of the original MRSSA, 2016 that we also informed them that the implementation is taking place in letter and spirit and in fact even now as we speak even in different localities in Shillong, registrations are taking place, the committees are being formed.”

Stating that the question of MRSSA, 2016 not being implemented is not true, Sangma said, “It is being implemented and the committees have been formed. Yes, there could be certain districts where the process is not as fast as in other districts but it will be incorrect to say that it is not being implemented.”

“If there are concerns, I have told them and other organizations also – if there are concerns and if there are issues let us know, we will ensure and obviously deputy commissioners and all there are lots of activities and lots of situations one has to handle so there could be certain situations and certain areas the speed at which things are happening may not be at the level of satisfaction but if that is the case then definitely we will push it but to say that MRSSA is not being implemented it is incorrect,” he further stated.

The NGOs have been questioning the Centre’s decision to grant ILP to other Northeastern states but not Meghalaya.

To this, Sangma said, “We have already asked for clarification from the Centre but more importantly the provisions that are there to protect the indigenous rights of the local people in many ways, many rules and many acts and provisions are there. And some of them are existing in our state like for example Sixth Schedule and the other Acts, our own Land Transfer Act and all these.”

“But in other states especially when the CAA had come out, the other areas like Arunachal Pradesh, they don’t have provisions of the Sixth Schedule and hence there was a demand that there should be some way to put in some kind of mechanism and therefore, Sixth Schedule could not be put as there are so many tribes so therefore, the alternative at that point in time is the ILP. Similarly, in Manipur also in the valley areas and even in the outer Manipur areas, there is no Sixth Schedule protection as such,” he said while adding “So wherever this kinds of situation were there, they have put in the ILP at that point in time in those areas to create necessary infrastructure or system to provide some kind provisions for the indigenous people out there.”

Read more!