Pro-ILP groups dump existing laws
SHILLONG: The 13 pro-ILP groups have virtually rejected the claim of the State Government that the 52 existing laws are enough to tackle the problem of influx of illegal migrants into the State saying a strong legislation like ILP is the need of the hour to curb the problem of influx.
“The existing laws are not enough to tackle the burning issue of influx. There are around 15 laws which deal with the problem influx, but they work in isolation,” HNYF general secretary Sadon K Blah told newsmen here on Tuesday adding that there is a need to.
Blah said that there is a need to synergize and integrate the various laws to tackle the menace of influx.
“We are engaging ourselves to find ways and means to integrate the various laws to make them more effective in tackling the problem. This is the best possible option to address the issue of influx,” Blah said.
He also said that the integration of the various laws would be the pro-ILP groups’ main focus while preparing the points of demand to be submitted to the Government.
The HNYF general secretary also reiterated that the NGOs’ demand for implementation of the ILP still stands firm.
“Besides the existing laws, we still need strong legislation like the ILP to curb the problem of influx,” Blah said.
Blah rubbished “views of a section of the public” that the “pressure groups have been bought by the government”.
According to him, the main focus of the pressure groups is to provide a full proof mechanism to protect the indigenous people “from being swept away by migrants.”
“Our demand is not the letter I, L or P. It is the mechanism which would help to address this issue (influx),” he asserted indicating that the pressure groups’ fighting of the indigenous population high and fast on the implementation of not only one law.
Meanwhile, the pro-ILP groups would again meet on Monday to take a final decision on the 52 existing laws provided for study by the Government. FKJGP president Joe Marwein said that the NGOs from Jaintia Hills and Garo Hills could not attend Tuesday’s meeting as they were preoccupied. “We are expecting that they would attend the next meeting,” Marwein added.
