Editor,
I am disappointed that your news reports – CM agrees to lead team to Delhi and Political Parties, NGOs agree on securing inter-state borders (ST. JULY 27, 2012) – did not mention the details of what happened in the meeting: I know, because I was there and I do wish to point out with all humility that the meeting had not gone along the lines I had expected it to have. The meeting proved to be only a slide-show showing slides of documents which the government has in its collection. Whether those documents would be relevant or essential in a legal confrontation with Assam was not discussed.
It was fine that the security of the people in the border area was brought up and discussed though, I had thought that, the meeting was to apprise the concerned political parties, NGOs and the public, of the government’s stand on the inter-state boundary issue and to set the public mind on the issue at rest. The security issue was a red herring which shifted the focus away from the real issue at hand – that of Assam-Meghalaya border dispute. Therefore the gathered assemblage forgot the real issue and applauded the CM’s assurance of security in border areas. The assemblage quite forgot that security in border areas did not and does not exist because of government’s irresponsibility: otherwise the Langpih tragedy would not have occurred.
I had gate-crashed into the meeting only to discover that the inter-state boundary is not an issue that our governments have been serious about. Even your reporters did not mention the fact that I had raised questions about the Assam-Meghalaya Boundary Committee’s report. My questions to the CM were not discussed and the replies were barely audible and not intelligible: perhaps that is why your reporters did not hear and did not mention them in the published reports. So, I take this opportunity to inform your readers what I had heard and done in the meeting.
My desperation grew while listening to those who spoke not of inter-state boundary issue but of whatever was brought before the assemblage as a red herring. So, I had to barge in to put my questions to the hon’ble CM.
My questions were intended only to offer an opportunity to the CM to throw light on the following:- (a) What is in it (b) Why it is not made public (c) Why it was not accepted by Meghalaya (d) What successive state governments have been doing to reach a mutually acceptable settlement of the issue.
It was disquieting to witness our CM and the Chief Secretary mumbling to each other when they heard my questions. What they were mumbling about, those who had ears to hear had heard. I do not wish to embarrass any one by enlarging on what I saw and heard and understood. In conformity with the rules of etiquette I refrained from pressing for intelligible replies to my questions though I had every right to do so. My intervention in the meeting was not reported by the press except by one Khasi daily which could not faithfully report my statement while mentioning the Chandrachud Commission’s report. Too many press reports, refer to the so-called Chandrachud Commission’s report while I have always mentioned the Assam-Meghalaya Boundary Committee’s report. It is time for a responsible authority to set the records straight by coming out with an official statement or explanation whether it was a commission or a committee that had deliberated on the so-called Assam-Meghalaya border dispute so that we may always refer to it in a proper manner – with a correct appellation.
I was shocked to hear the Dy.CM Rowel Lyngdoh disparaging people (?) for saying that we have no boundary. He probably did not understand sarcasm (jingkren mynthi). Therefore I had to barge in unceremoniously to ask questions relating only to the inter-state boundary issue.
It is clear that the government does not value the opinion of concerned individuals on issues like the boundary dispute or any other issue that affects the masses. There may be senior citizens who may offer valuable suggestions on many issues. Many concerned citizens do not wish to be identified with any NGOs or political parties and would like to participate as concerned individuals. Their well-considered opinion and advice may pull many a Government’s chestnuts out of the fire! So, I suggest that the government may consider inviting responsible citizens to participate in any meeting that is not classified. I suggest that the government may consider this suggestion favourably.
Yours etc.,
Morning Star Sumer,
Shillong-2