HYC and KSU split over which version of Act to enforce
SHILLONG, July 19: The demand for implementation of the Meghalaya Residents Safety and Security Act (MRSSA) is heating up once again, with two influential pressure groups now openly at odds over which version of the law should actually be enforced.
The Hynniewtrep Youth Council (HYC) on Sunday reiterated its demand for the effective implementation of the amended MRSSA, insisting that the original 2016 legislation was toothless and only gained real regulatory power after the 2020 amendments.
HYC president Roy Kupar Synrem said the organisation had opposed the original Act from the beginning because it lacked meaningful provisions to control the entry of outsiders. “The HYC has always maintained the MRSSA, 2016, had no teeth. It was only after the amendments in 2020 that the Act was strengthened with provisions to regulate the entry of people into the state,” he said.
According to Synrem, the amended law allows authorities to demand details of where visitors intend to stay and for how long, while also providing for penalties against those who fail to comply. “We do not want a law that exists only on paper. We need a law that can be effectively implemented to regulate the entry of people into the state,” he added, affirming that the HYC would continue pressing for enforcement of the strengthened version to protect indigenous interests.
The HYC’s position comes just days after the KSU renewed its own demand — but for the original 2016 Act. KSU general secretary Reuben A. Najiar maintained that while the organisation remains committed to the Inner Line Permit, the MRSSA 2016 must be implemented without further delay as an interim measure.
“The MRSSA can never replace the ILP. However, until the ILP is introduced, the MRSSA, 2016, must be implemented immediately,” Najiar said. He argued that the Act would at least enable authorities to maintain records of people entering and leaving the state.
Najiar alleged that the government had failed to implement the 2016 law and instead brought in amendments under the pretext of strengthening it. On examination, he claimed, the amendment introduced only one significant provision — a penalty for furnishing false information. “The government claimed the 2016 Act did not have adequate provisions and therefore brought the 2019 amendment. But when we examined the amendment, we found only one significant provision,” he said.
The KSU suspects the amendment exercise was designed to create confusion among the public and that the government remains reluctant to implement the law at all. The student body has demanded the immediate operationalisation of facilitation centres at Umling and Ratacherra and the activation of all District Task Forces, warning of intensified agitation if the delay continues.
With HYC pushing the amended version and KSU insisting on the original 2016 Act, the renewed demand for MRSSA has now exposed a clear divide among pressure groups — even as both accuse the government of leaving the law either unimplemented or deliberately diluted.
