Finding a middle path to controlling influx in Meghalaya
By Erwin K. Syiem Sutnga
The Government of India has categorically closed the chapter on the implementation of the Inner Line Permit in Meghalaya. The ILP in simple terms is ultra vires of the Constitution of India, period. However as with many things in Meghalaya, the matter has been given a political colour by no less than my good friend and brother Advocate Mr. Bindo M. Lanong of the UDP. In the midst of the confusion, the violence , agitations, petrol bomb assault and murder of innocent non tribals, this adds another dimension since the intention and direction is very clear with the Autonomous District Council elections and the General Elections to the Lok Sabha just round the corner. But per se in the end, the common people become the victims of the situation especially the economically needy and struggling. In the midst of the cacophony for and against the ILP and the new Tenancy Act, the majority of our tribesmen and genuine non tribal residents of the state are bewildered, many downright confused and many also are swayed by half truths, manipulations and disinformation. This must be cleared and the people be allowed to make their choice and decision by being properly informed of the legal, historical, constitutional and political implications and ramifications of any new law or imposition of old laws on their lives and future.
In order to understand the ILP one has to view it in the right perspective and that is the perspective of our erstwhile British rulers. The INNER LINE PERMIT (ILP) is derived from a British law made in 1873 known as the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873 also known as Regulation 5 of 1873. By 1864, the British Government in India had established Shillong Cantonment and by 1874 had made it the capital of the region. The main intention to bring in the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873 was to isolate various backward areas under British India. Therefore a line was drawn and demarcated beyond which these British subjects could not cross without a valid pass or permit. In doing my research I read Alexander Mackenzie’s “The North East Frontier of India” in which lays down the reasons for the passing of the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873. Sir Alexander Mackenzie (1842-1902) was a Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal. He joined Civil Service in 1862;was Under-Secretary to Local Government, Bengal in1886;Home Secretary to Government of India in 1882;helped to shape Bengal Tenancy Act of 1885;became C.S.I. in 1886 and Chief Commissioner of Central Provinces (1887-1890), and of Burma (1890-1895) and became K.C.S.I. in 1891.He suppressed hill tribe raids and restored order in 1892.As Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal (1895-1898) he did a sanitary survey of Calcutta, enlarged powers of Bengal Municipalities, co-operated with Assam in Lushai expedition of 1895-1896;expedited land settlement operations in Bihar and Orissa, dealt efficiently with the famine and the plague of 1896-1897.He published History of the Relations of Government with the Hill Tribes of the North East Frontier of Bengal in 1884 ( presently published as the North East Frontier of India). After his retirement he became the Chairman of the India Development Company. He died on Nov.10, 1902. The main aim of this Regulation was to protect those British subjects who came into areas where there was danger. Mackenzie writes as follows regarding the ILP:
“The INNER LINE REGULATION.
In 1872 -1873 the Statute 32 and 33 Vic, Cap. 3, which gives a power of summary legislation for backward tracts to the executive Government was extended to Assam.
The first use of the power of summary legislation given by that Act was to pass a regulation for the frontier districts.
It had been found that there was pressing necessity of bringing under more stringent control the commercial relations of our own subjects with the frontier tribes living on the borders of our jurisdiction. In Luckimpore specially the operations of speculators in caoutchouc derived by Government from the India-rubber forests in the plains beyond the line of our settled mehals, but threatening disturbances with the hill tribes beyond. The spread of tea gardens outside our questions with the hill men, and on the whole the Government came to the conclusion that it was necessary to take special powers and lay down special rules.
Accordingly a regulation was drawn up by the Lieutenant-Governor, and approved by the Governor-General in Council, to give effect to this policy. This regulation gives powers to the Lieutenant-Governor to prescribe a line, to be called “the inner line,” in each or any of the districts affected, beyond which no British subject of certain classes or foreign residents can pass without a license. This pass or license, when given, may subject to such conditions as may appear necessary. And rules are laid down regarding trade, the possession of land beyond the line, and other matters, which give the executive Government an effective control. The regulation also provides for the preservation of elephants, and authorizes Government to lay down rules for their capture.”
In so far as the Regulation was applied to the Garo Hills District the same was withdrawn by the Repealing Act, 1897.
With the coming into law of the Indian Independence Act, 1947, which de facto means that all laws including the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873 became null and void. The effective section relating to Meghalaya reads as follows;
7. Consequences of the setting up of the new Dominions.
(1)As from the appointed day- ………………………
(c)there lapse also any treaties or agreements in force at the date of the passing of this Act between His Majesty and any persons having authority in the tribal areas, any obligations of His Majesty existing at that date to any such persons or with respect to the tribal areas, and all powers, rights, authority or jurisdiction exercisable at that date by His Majesty in or in relation to the tribal areas by treaty, grant, usage, sufferance or otherwise:
Apart from this the subject matter under the said Regulation in present day India falls under the List 1 or the Union list under Entry No 81 in the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India and is not a subject under the State List. In order to address the question of influx, in 1979 an attempt was made in the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly to introduce a bill for extending this Regulation to introduce INNER LINE PERMIT but the same could not be considered by the House since the subject falls under the Union List. Another bill passed by the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly in 1973, the Meghalaya Residential Permit Bill was rejected by the President of India as being outside the scope of the State of Meghalaya to pass. Successive governments in the state have tried to address the problem of Influx, the two main committees being the Working Group Committee under the late Mr, T. H. Rangad and later the Committee headed by my friend Mr Bindo M. Lanong. It is interesting to note that the Khasi Students’ Union represented by Paul Lyngdoh, the Jaintia Students’ Union represe-nted by Colin Laloo, the Garo Students’ Union represented by Purno K. Sangma, the FKJGP represented by Ardent M. Basaiawmoit, the SSSS represented by Jemino Mawthoh, the KWADAM represented by Mrs. M. Suchiang and the KJWA represented by late M. R. Alya were members of this Committee. The findings and recommendations were detailed and well argued. This report will be discussed by me later in subsequent articles on this subject.
(The writer is Advocate, Former Public Prosecutor Jaintia Hills, Vice Chairman, Meghalaya State Law Commission. Advisor Meghalaya Home Guards and Civil Defence and KHADC).
Former Editor “The Implanter”, First Khasi Daily “Leilieh” and u “Pateng Mynta”.