Making a mockery of interlocution

THE term Interlocutor became common parlance after 1997 when the National Socialist Council of Nagalim led by Isak Swu and Th Muivah signed a ceasefire agreement with the Government of India. Former Home Secretary, K Padmanabhaiah was named as the first interlocutor between Government of India and the NSCN (IM). Since then this word has been bandied about without fully comprehending it’s full meaning and gravity. Several people have in recent times offered to become interlocutors, mediating between militant outfits and the Government of Meghalaya. One of them is a former head of the Khasi militant outfit, Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council (HNLC) and presently a legislator. Now why the people of a certain constituency should elect someone who is a past criminal is inexplicable. Voters have been known to vote for reasons other than the competence of the political aspirant. Money plays a more important role than logic and wisdom when it comes to electing any candidate in Meghalaya. In fact there are other surrendered militants who have also been elected. This shows up the weakness of the justice delivery system where people belonging to underground outfits with a history of criminal activities behind them are given general amnesty and the Election Commission does not even choose to go into the backgrounds of these political opportunists.
The other person who is a medical doctor recently offered his services to act as interlocutor between the Garo National Liberation Army (GNLA) but was shortly thereafter arrested for abducting a 14-year old school girl. The word interlocutor therefore seems jinxed in Meghalaya. An interlocutor is a neutral person who will not take sides but will only facilitate the resolution of differences between two warring parties. Normally interlocutors are people with experience in conflict resolution and with a clean track record. The integrity of the interlocutor is a major consideration because the person is expected to be fair and not want any pecuniary gains from the exercise. Other persons who have so far offered to be interlocutors between different militant outfits have also been church leaders but it is debatable if being a religious leader qualifies one to be a conflict resolver. If that were the case there would not be universities specializing in conflict resolution.
The Government of Meghalaya should think carefully before talking to criminals. It is important to note that groups like the GNLA, HNLC, ANVC and others are ruthless terrorist outfits who now want political power and the ease to invest their money in over-ground businesses. They are not insurgent outfits with an agenda mandated by the people.