Editor,
Apropos the letter to the editor by CK Marbaniang (ST Sep 14, 2013) and an article by H H Mohrmen (ST Sep 30,2013), where the latter indirectly referred to me/us as a social activist and the latter as “this school of thought.” Since both commented on our campaign for the Equitable Distribution of Ancestral and Self Acquired Property Act and as mentioned by Mr. Mohrmen as ” our traditional matrilineal practice of inheritance” and since Maitshaphrang is the only organization campaigning for legislation of this Law, I would like to comment as follows:
Our campaign for legislation of the Equitable ( not EQUAL mind you) Distribution of Ancestral and Self Acquired Property is for equitably empowering all children, both boys and girls, of the Khasi and Garo family to enable them to take up economic activities in a big way and in the long run to take control of the state’s economy. This will in turn, apart from other measures, help to check the legal and illegal migration of people from outside to the state of Meghalaya.
Better economic opportunities are major factors that encourage migration, both legal and illegal, across borders all over the world and into our state as well. Today the world revolves around the economy. Nations are considered strong or weak depending on the strength or weakness of their economies. This in turn reflects positively or negatively on their development.
The law which the Maitshaphrang is campaigning for is to strengthen the economic power of the Khasi and Garo people because we strongly believe that if a major part of our state’s economy is in our control, influx will also be controlled to a great extent. But if Mr. Marbaniang in his letter writes that this law will lead to more influx, then he needs to elucidate how this will happen so that we can seriously introspect on his suggestions.
Besides advocating for the above law to check influx, Maitshaphrang had also demanded for a review of the present Industrial policy and scrapping of Sec. 4 (1)( e) & (f) of the Meghalaya Regulation of Land Transfer Act to further check influx. Coming to Mohrmen’s article ” Ka Jaitbynriew in turmoil” correct me if I am wrong but we use the letter ‘d’ and not “t’ when spelling ‘JAIDBYNRIEW’. I was also once corrected on the meaning of ‘Jait’ and ‘Jaid’.
Secondly, his comments that ” this school of thought is of the opinion that people are not doing well in business because property belongs to the female members of the society” is a complete misrepresentation of facts. In our campaign we only mentioned about the present system currently practiced by majority of our people where the youngest daughter(and not “the female members”) are the sole inheritors of family property and wealth. This is against the traditional system where the youngest daughter is just the custodian of family property and is today being targeted by many unscrupulous migrants, both legal and illegal. They use her wealth and name to further expand their businesses and avoid payment of income tax through ‘marriage’ or live-in relationships.
As a concerned person Mohrmen should realise that we are greatly exploited on this aspect today. I have reports and writings to prove it. We have nothing against those mixed- marriages based on love or destiny. Such relationships happen universally because love transcends boundaries, barriers ,religions, caste and communities . What we are against are marriages of convenience and for exploitation.
Mohrmen’s accusations that we blame women for all the ills in the Jaitbynriew on women is a deliberate distortion of facts. Just because he does not agree with our views on tackling influx he cannot mislead the public. Mohrmen should prove or quote where and when we have ever blamed our women for the accusations made. Although we have our own opinions on how to tackle influx, we welcome constructive criticism, but only within the context of what has been spoken or written.
Although the means we suggest may be different our objectives are the same – to empower the Hynniewtrep and Garo people so they can contribute to the development of other communities and not run to Delhi with a begging bowl because we are one of the slowest growing states in India. Meghalaya is rich in resources, talent and creativity. We urgently need leaders with a vision to ensure that every genuine citizen of our state enjoys the benefits of this wealth and creates more wealth. Then when our children move outside the state and introduce themselves as Khasis or as Garos, the world will recognize them and respect them because they know that they come from communities that are progressive, innovative and sensitive to the need to preserve and conserve the environment.
Yours etc.,
Michael N.Syiem
Via email
Enough sabre-rattling; Govt must show intent
Editor,
While the Government has made its position clear by refusing to hold discussions with violent agitators, it hasn’t taken any real action against the people responsible for unleashing mayhem in the State. There has been plenty of sabre-rattling by the Government, but little action is being taken on the ground. The NGO’s have responded by turning increasingly violent, thereby proving the theory that the Government is not taken seriously. Police tactics of “arrest and release” have made them the laughing stock of the town; so much so, that NGO’s have begun targeting the police department by burning down police vehicles and attacking police officers in their homes. The agitators have clearly crossed the line between agitation and terrorism. Several politicians are known to be hand in glove with the agitators, refining their strategy and egging them on to commit such audacious acts. The conspiracy is an open secret, despite loud denials from raucous politicians in the Opposition. Meghalaya is once again under siege, like during the dark days of HNLC terror. The question is, did the Government learn any lessons from the HNLC campaign which it can draw upon in the current situation? Or are we back to the “appease and mollify NGOs” strategy, the stock favourite of past regimes, which has given birth to Frankenstein’s monster?
Yours etc.,
Daisy Kharkongor
Shillong