By Our Reporter
SHILLONG, Sep 10: The Opposition on Wednesday asked the state government why lawyers from outside Meghalaya appear in most of its cases.
Taking part in the cut motion in the Assembly, moved by the TMC’s Ampati MLA Miani D. Shira, Leader of Opposition Mukul M. Sangma said lawyers from outside have been observed to appear in the courts on behalf of the government, departments, and government undertakings.
He said ample opportunities were given in the past to lawyers from the state, reminding the government that the Centre was persuaded to let Meghalaya have its own high court, which was established in March 2013.
Sangma said the government pays heavily for the travel and accommodation of the lawyers from outside. “I have inputs that they are accommodated in five-star hotels,” he said.
Pointing out that the expenditure is avoidable, he emphasised that the Law Department has to revisit the matter and ensure that this preventable outflow of resources from the public exchequer is minimised.
“We must be aware that this platform must be given to our lawyers so that they can climb their career path in the right harness,” Sangma said, asking the minister concerned whether lawyers brought from Delhi do not have cases back home.
He, however, admitted that engaging lawyers from outside is not illegal.
“Our concern is the outflow of a huge amount of fees, apart from avoidable expenditure on their travel and stay in hotels. Can we minimise what we spend from the public exchequer, because every paisa counts and belongs to the people?” Sangma said.
Earlier, moving the cut motion, Shira asked whether the government gives more preference to lawyers from outside than the local lawyers to represent it in the high court.
In her reply, Law Minister Ampareen Lyngdoh clarified that there is no vested interest involved in the engagement of legal experts by the state government, stressing that the practice remains within established norms and conventions.
She said that in certain complex cases, the Law Department has recommended the engagement of experts to defend the government.
However, she maintained that, as a practice, the district courts have never deviated from the convention of ensuring opportunities for the “sons and daughters of the soil” to grow in their legal careers within Meghalaya.
“It is incorrect to infer that there is any vested interest of any nature,” she asserted.
Lyngdoh explained that the demand under discussion has two components — one relating to centrally sponsored schemes for projects of district and sub-divisional courts, including the construction of court buildings and establishment of statutory special courts, and the other concerning the administration of public prosecution.
She said the Law Department oversees the appointment and remuneration of prosecutors, standing counsels (civil and criminal), and public prosecutors at different levels of the judiciary. According to her, the department also periodically reviews the fee structures, all of which function within recommended norms.
Clarifying further, the Minister said the department’s responsibilities include the administration of justice, appeals against acquittals, law reforms, advice on legal matters, drafting of bills and statutory rules, supervision of government litigation, and appointment of law officers at various levels, including the high court and the Supreme Court.
She admitted that the government is currently addressing pending bills of the legal fraternity, some dating back to 2017-18, and assured that all payments are being processed strictly according to procedure.
“This demand was specifically to ensure that the pending bills of the legal fraternity in the discharge of their duties are cleared. All of these payments are within the recommended norms,” Lyngdoh said.