By Patricia Mukhim
The disbandment ceremony of the two factions of the ANVC was completed in grand style at Tura. The very next day there was a report that some ANVC cadres had sold arms worth Rs 17 lakhs to their beta-noire the GNLA. The cadres must have been desperate to have done such a thing. But one is curious to know if the cadres who sold the arms also attended the “Farewell to Arms,” concert. That would have been a real travesty because it is like ensuring that the arms they possessed are meaningfully recycled.
The ANVC led by Wanding K Marak had signed a peace pact initiated by the Ministry of Home Affairs in 2004. At the time he was asked whether he regrets having taken up arms. Marak’s reply was cold and ruthless. He had said, “The question of regret does not arise. When you make a new road, you have to start from scratch and if your plantation is in the way, though you have precious trees in it, they will have to be sacrificed and cut down if they come within the alignment of the new road.” A remorseless militant who has personally masterminded the deaths of several people is soon going to become our lawmaker if we go by the grapevine.
To defend the ANVC’s actions Wanding said the outfit had lost several of its cadres over the course of the movement. Hence the police and public should not complain if they have become victims of collateral damage since it was all done “for the greater good.” Justifying the killings Wanding says that even the United Nations was formed after millions of people lost their lives in the Second World War. To another question on whether it is not too late to sign the peace pact as enough damage has already been done in Garo Hills due to the formation of splinter groups, mostly breakaway factions of ANVC, Wanding’s terse remarks were, “better late than never.” These comments give us an idea of the man who has led a virulent and bloody movement for several years – a man who does not believes in the long-winded process of engaging with Government.
In the latest surrender/ disbandment, over 400 armed cadres of the ANVC and ANVC (B) are ostensibly coming over-ground and surrendering their weapons. According to the Tripartite Peace Pact, the surrendered cadres will be pardoned for non-heinous crimes. Criminal cases registered against the ANVC members for heinous crimes will however be reviewed case by case according to the existing policy on the subject while steps for withdrawal of such cases will be initiated by the State Government.
Interestingly over 300 members of both factions have cases related to killing, extortion and kidnapping registered against them. If one reads between the lines of the Tripartite Agreement the meaning of the word ‘heinous’ will be given a new twist by the Government. Let’s say that a case of murder (killing) has been registered against one of the ANVC leaders and in the meanwhile he is elected to the District Council. Will the law still have the teeth to prosecute him? More precisely, should a militant of a formerly proscribed organization who has committed all the crimes in the law book be allowed to contest elections?
Section 302 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), talks of culpable homicide as attempt to murder in cold blood. So is taking the life of another person in a cold and calculating manner not a heinous crime? Yet that is what the Government is trying to tell us. When the GNLA also comes for talks will the Josbina Sangma case be forgotten as another unfortunate incident? This propensity of the state to overlook ‘heinous’ crimes actually pushes even the law abiding citizen to take the law in his own hands. As it is Meghalaya has an abysmally low conviction rate, almost as if no crime is ever committed in this State. And now the signal that the Mukul Sangma Government is sending to the 30 lakh people of this State is that it is alright for a militant to commit crimes for those will be viewed more leniently than if an ordinary person were to have committed a similar crime.
These double standards are what have weakened the rule of law in India. Cutting deals with militants is anyway bad in law. Giving general amnesty to militant cadres after all the bloody crimes they have committed is patently unfair to the hundreds of others who are serving jail time for merely being “suspects.” We can see injustice happening right before our eyes and we are all mute spectators. Can we ask Dr Mukul Sangma why the properties of the surrendered militants, accumulated over the years are not being confiscated? How can they be allowed to keep stuff acquired with blood money? Or are we all expected to sing ‘glory halleluiah’ to the surrender charade?
What we fear will happen soon is that these disbanded militants will be employed as private militia of politicians in Garo Hills and West Khasi Hills. They will be used against us the citizens to coerce us to vote in a particular way. It can be stated with certainty that we are not headed for peace. Far from it, the forthcoming elections to the Garo Hills District Council will be fraught with violence and bloodshed as had happened and continues to happen in Bodoland and other areas afflicted by militancy. Let’s be pragmatic about this. Punjab would not have returned to the path of peace if deals were struck with the militants there. The state is to act mercilessly against anyone who takes up arms. That is why we have a police force. What is the point of authorizing police action and exposing so many policemen to the militants’ fire power if the state is going to capitulate and finally make peace with them?
The ANVCs anyway control all trade in Tura market. If you have the SULFA in Assam then we will have SANVC in Meghalaya. Extortion will assume a different form henceforth and will be considered legit. So what peace are we talking about?
Let it be made very clear that “talks” with militant outfits which every political party promises on the eve of every election does not mean a compromise on the part of the state. Talks do not imply that militants get a general amnesty. We the citizens who have suffered the most at the hands of militants never authorized the Government of Meghalaya or Dr Mukul Sangma in his capacity as Chief Minister to “forgive and forget” all the crimes committed by the ANVC and ANVC(B). Perhaps the Chief Minister has exceeded his brief here and one wonders how it would look like if someone was to approach the courts of law for justice for all those who have been killed by these militant outfits. Forgive and forget is a very personal act. It cannot be used by a representative of the State in a corporate manner. In a democracy the will of the people is supreme. I don’t believe the People of Meghalaya authorised Dr Mukul Sangma to be our Confessor.