Our Bureau
JOWAI/SHILLONG, Feb 27: The omission of the Jaintia tribe by VPP supremo Ardent M. Basaiawmoit during the discussion on the Meghalaya State Reservation Policy and the Expert Committee’s report on Thursday has blown into a major controversy with the Jaintia National Council (JNC) vehemently condemning Basaiawmoit’s remarks as reckless, irresponsible, and politically motivated.
In a statement issued on Friday, JNC general secretary Wanshwa Suting directly challenged Basaiawmoit for making attempts to “erase” the Jaintia from the policy that is meant to protect the tribe.
He stressed that the Jaintia people are not a footnote or afterthought, and demanded he produce any legal document, constitutional provision, or record justifying the omission.
The JNC noted that the Constitution lists “Khasi” and “Jaintia” as distinct Scheduled Tribes, labelling his approach a “constitutional offence.”
They highlighted the ancient Jaintia Kingdom, a sovereign power spanning hills and plains to Sylhet, formed by uniting the Jayanti plains and Sutnga hills under Pnar rulers, and recognised post-1972 through the Jaintia Hills District and JHADC.
Rejecting Basaiawmoit’s “unity” defence, the JNC stated: “There is nothing to unify because we were never divided.”
Khasi and Jaintia have always been one under Hynniewtrep—the Children of the Seven Huts—and the shared name “Khasi-Jaintia.” Division, they said, exists only in politicians’ selective use of names for gain.
The council warned against treating communities as “political currency” and alleged that Basaiawmoit appeared willing to erase the Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council in future for political advantage—a move they vowed to resist.
In his response, Basaiawmoit on Friday defended his use of the term “Khasis” during the discussion on the report of the Expert Committee, stating that his intention was to promote unity among the community and its sub-tribes.
Basaiawmoit clarified in the House that when he used the term “Khasis” it was not meant to exclude any community, including the Jaintias.
Asserting that he would expect the Deputy Chief Minister, Sniawbhalang Dhar, to be mature enough, he said he deliberately used “Khasis” to unify the sub-tribes such as Pnar, Khynriam and War, and to prevent any external forces from creating divisions. He maintained that they belong to one broader tribe and dismissed the matter as not serious enough to warrant concern.
Earlier, Dhar raised a point of order, stating that the reservation policy is specifically meant for “Khasis and Jaintias” and not for Khasi alone. He said that referring only to “Khasis” is not inclusive of the Jaintia community and urged that the official terminology be correctly used in the House.
He requested the Speaker to place on record that whenever the reservation policy is discussed, it should be referred to as “Khasis and Jaintias.”
Supporting the point, Health Minister and Jowai MLA Wailadmiki Shylla said the issue was not about targeting anyone but ensuring clarity in official records. He pointed out that the 1972 notification on the reservation policy clearly mentions “Khasis and Jaintias,” and stressed that debates recorded in the House should avoid any future misunderstanding. He described the term as an administrative expression and said the request was only to maintain accuracy.
In his response, Basaiawmoit said he agreed that “Khasis and Jaintias” is used administratively and that he too uses the term. However, he reiterated that he prefers using “Khasis” in a broader sense to emphasise unity.
Finally, the Assembly Speaker ruled that as per official records, the reservation policy is always referred to as “Khasis and Jaintias.” He directed that the record be set straight accordingly, settling the matter in the House.
