SHILLONG, March 9: The KSU Central Executive Committee (CEC) has expressed opposition to the implementation of the Meghalaya State Investment Promotion & Facilitation Act, 2024 (MSIPF) and its amendments to acquire land banks.
The KSU has submitted a memorandum to Chief Minister, Conrad K Sangma, stating that the government has not responded to the deficiencies pointed out in the memorandum.
KSU general secretary Donald V Thabah criticized the act as a draconian and tyrannical law that grants all powers to a few men in power, disregarding the views, propositions, and mandates of the people of the state.
Thabah emphasized that the name change from Invest Meghalaya Agency (IMA) to Meghalaya Investment Promotion Authority (MIPA) in its Cabinet decision on January 15 does not count for anything since the ambiguous and treacherous provisions in the Act still prevail.
He also highlighted that the deletion of Section 34 of the Act and including the Autonomous District Councils in the Act is not enough to guarantee that tribal lands are not alienated and traded to foreign entities until major changes and amendments are brought forward in the Act.
The KSU has always echoed its demand to the government to establish a firm policy for the indigenous people of the State so that opportunities will be provided to them in the private sector. However, the implementation of the Act would not benefit the indigenous tribal in employment opportunities but would rather aggravate influx, promote ghost companies, money laundering, and boost corruption, he said.
The KSU general secretary pointed out that the preamble of the MSIPF Act, 2024 states that “…to simplify the regulatory framework by reducing procedural requirements and rationalising documents…” He warned that the over simplified regulatory framework could weaken consumer protection, lax environmental regulations, increase inequality, and widen market domination for large corporations.
Thabah also criticized certain provisions of the MSIPF Act, which he believed are authoritarian and overbearing. He demanded that these provisions be immediately struck down and omitted for fair and transparent interpretation of law and negate abusive provisions.
He also emphasized the importance of considering factors such as workers safety and health, environmental protection, waste management, community impact, economic development, transparency, and accountability when dealing with companies and industrial units.
Thabah also argued that the Act lacks provisions for offences and penalties, which could lead to serious consequences if left unchecked. He criticized Section 32 of the Act for its ambiguity and lack of clarity on the penalties for entrepreneurs.
“Section 31 of the Act states that the government may exempt clearances from any provisions of the Act, indicating the abuse of power by the Governing Council. Section 26 states that failure by the competent authority to grant clearance or pass final order within a specified time frame shall be treated as deemed approval,” he said, observing that it is abusive and not in line with the public scrutiny and input required for formal regulatory approvals.
Section 5(3) of the Act states that the Authority may engage experts, consultants, advisors, or technology professionals for efficient discharge of its powers and functions under the Act. The Union has observed a rise in advisers, consultants, and consultancy agencies, which are often ill-qualified and question the competency of government employees over their designated positions and appointments.
The Union demanded that industries set up in Meghalaya must employ the local indigenous population, which was not included in the MIIPP, 2024. However, after the Cabinet decision on January 15, companies/industries employing domiciles of Meghalaya will be available to avail incentives, which is contrary to the policy. The Union demanded that no company or industry should be allowed in Meghalaya without providing employment to the local indigenous tribals.
Thabah also criticized the Act for lacking explicit provisions to protect the rights of indigenous communities or ensure consent is obtained before projects are approved. He believes that the government has been acquiring land for different purposes with existing laws, such as the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 and other Autonomous District Councils.
The KSU general secretary called for the government to discard proposals for creating land banks and focus on making the Act transparent, fair, and favourable to the indigenous people of Meghalaya.
The current Act appears to have a malicious intention to acquire land, leading to inconsistencies and unfairness, he added.
