Central Land Act : exemption!
By Morning Star Sumer
The news report published in The Telegraph and The Shillong Times on the same date – 18th November, 2011 – on the State Government’s decisions to seek exemption from the application of the proposed Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement (LARR) Bill, 2011, on the ground that the State has a “unique land tenure system” (The Telegraph) and “… due to the complex land transfer system being followed in the State” (The Shillong Times), is a clear indication that the government is inept : hence it is incapable to clarify why or to what advantage exemption from the application of the proposed Act will bring. The reasons given as published in the newspapers are far-fetched. We do not think that our land tenure system is unique. We can only admit that it has stayed where it was millennia ago as those of other nations had reached; earlier or later than ours. It is uncontradictable that each nation had reached the same stage that we are in now; but after that we stayed put while others had the misfortune to undergo the experiments of feudal systems, autocracy, monarchy / dictatorship etc. from which they had to free themselves with considerable difficulty. Even now there are nations that are groaning under the yoke of those systems of land possession and hence of governance; governance hinges on land possession. Today we are witnessing the emergence of insurgency in various forms like what we now call the Arab spring in Tunisia, Egypt, in Libya, Syria etc. because of deviation from the system that we still cherish.
About the “… complex land transfer system being followed in the State”, our only reaction to this averment / assertion is amazement at the naivete displayed by the powers that be in believing that the intelligentsia would let that pass. For one thing, who and what was or is the cause of this complexity in our land transfer system? Our native land transfer system is the simplest in the world but it is being made complex by the powers that be who had chosen to shackle us to the current Transfer of Land (Regulation) Act, 1971 of their liking. The principal Act itself was almost flawless except for one or two flaws which we had pointed out earlier.
So, it is sheer hypocrisy to seek exemption from the application of provision of the proposed Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act (LARRA) Bill, 2011, when, under the head of “Application of the Act”, a proviso to Section 2 (1) of the proposed Act clearly states and provides that “… no land shall be transferred by way of acquisition, in the Scheduled Areas in contravention of the law relating to land transfer, prevailing in such Scheduled Areas”. This proviso puts the onus of applying the provision of the Act on the State Government who is expected to have had in place a strong Land Regulation Act which should be accepted by the people of the State. Now, it is hypocrisy to tell us that the current Land Transfer Regulation Act is strong enough to satisfy the people. We see clearly that inspite of the Act, land has been alienated to Lafarge and to Anish Ranjan – both non-tribal entities! The government has not yet clarify the position of the alienation inspite of their having been exposed in the media!
Now we frequently hear politicians, including Cabinet Ministers asserting that the people are the land owners in the State. Not very long ago the government gave a statement that it has leased land to the UCIL to mine uranium in West Khasi Hills but when it was pointed out in newspapers write-up that government has no land to either sell or lease out they changed their stance to say it was the clan that had leased out the land to UCIL. This speaks volumes of the lack of understanding of the powers that be about the land holding system in the State they govern. We recall that in December 1863, the erstwhile British colonial government had executed a lease agreement with the three clans – Kharkongor, Kurkalang and Nongkhlaw – for a term of 99 years for consideration of small amounts of money as land rent. The term of the lease agreement expired in December 1962. It speaks volumes of the ethics of our powers that be when, on expiry of the term of lease, they neither handed over possession of the leased land to the clans nor executed a new lease agreement with them. We see this as an unethical act that violates the clans’ right to their land and paves the way for the powers that be to usurp that right.
To forestall and prevent this kind of unethical practice of violating land owners’ right of possession by vested interests including government, it is imperative and urgent that the current law to regulate transfer of land in the State should be repealed by enacting a new Transfer of Land (Regulation) Act which should provide for strong and ethical land transfer system. The flaws in the current Land Transfer Act have been pointed out in articles published in The Shillong Times, January 22, 2011, September 20, 2011, November 8, 2011 and other local Newspapers.
It is our hope that the State government will initiate steps to enact the new Act as suggested in our articles published in local newspapers with the consent of the people of the State.