By Alan West Kharkongor
In any democratic society, the deliberate spread of false and misleading information against an individual or public figure can seriously damage reputations, mislead the public, and create unnecessary distrust.
Despite being a native of Sohra and having worked closely with Late Paiem Freeman Sing Syiem, his Myntri, and previous Executive Committees, I had consciously stayed away from the ongoing issue surrounding the non-issuance of the Sanad to Paiem Maremdor Syiem. I had hoped that KHADC and Hima Sohra would resolve the matter amicably by aligning the existing rules of succession with the traditional Ka Riti Jied Syiem Hima Sohra. I also refrained from involvement because my participation could have unnecessarily given the issue a political colour due to my association with a political party.
However, recent developments have made it necessary to place facts before the public, clarify misconceptions, and ensure that public opinion is guided by truth rather than politically motivated misinformation.
My attention was drawn to allegations made on social media and by certain Executive Members of KHADC against Paiem Maremdor Syiem. The matter escalated further when the President of the Voice of the People Party (VPP), Ardent Miller Basaiawmoit, during a political rally at Mawlai, accused Paiem Maremdor Syiem of “Lilam” or illegally selling land, a term commonly understood in Khasi society to imply that land was given away or transferred at a very cheap value without proper negotiation or adequate consent from the rightful stakeholders or traditional authorities.
I was shocked that such a serious allegation could be made publicly without first placing the complete facts before the people. Responsible leaders must verify facts carefully before making statements that may create misunderstanding and public distrust.
The issue relates to the proposed extension of the lease of land belonging to Hima Sohra that had been leased to the State Government for setting up the MCCL plant since the 1960s. As Adviser (Tourism) to Hima Sohra, I was personally involved in discussions between Hima Sohra and the Tourism Department regarding this matter. However, the process remained incomplete following the untimely demise of Late Paiem Freeman Sing Syiem.
To accuse Paiem Maremdor Syiem of illegally selling or leasing the land is therefore a serious allegation capable of unfairly tarnishing his reputation. To this day, no Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) or Lease Agreement extending the lease of the land has been signed either by Late Paiem Freeman Sing Syiem or Paiem Maremdor Syiem in favour of the State Government. In fact, after the expiry of the earlier MCCL lease agreement in 2020, the State Government has not even formally handed back possession of the land to Hima Sohra to date. Further, on 4 February 2025, the Syiem of Hima Sohra received an official communication from the Managing Director of MCCL requesting the Hima not to take any unilateral decision regarding the land while expressing interest in renewing the lease, subject to the State Government’s decision.
It is therefore unfortunate that incomplete narratives and politically charged statements are being circulated without acknowledging the actual legal and factual position. At a time when emotions surrounding the issue are already sensitive, leaders and organisations must act responsibly and avoid statements that may mislead the public or damage reputations without evidence.
The collapse of MCCL has been a major concern for the people of Sohra and Hima Sohra, resulting in job losses and worsening economic conditions for many families. Tourism has emerged as another blessing for Sohra, but not everyone has the means to establish guest houses, homestays, or businesses. There was therefore strong pressure on the State Government to revive economic opportunities, including attempts to revive cement operations through outside companies.
The Government had issued an Expression of Interest (EOI) in 2022 for a Joint Venture partner, though the process was terminated in December 2023 after interested parties failed to meet the requirements. Had the process succeeded, the lease would likely have been extended anyway for another cement factory.
This issue was repeatedly discussed during informal meetings at the office of the Syiem of Sohra and in formal meetings of the Tourism Committee of Hima Sohra regarding alternatives to the cement factory. Most Myntris, Executive Members, and Late Paiem Freeman Sing Syiem believed tourism had the potential to economically replace MCCL — a view I fully support.
Coincidentally, on 17 June last year, the then Director of Tourism, Mr. C.V.D. Diengdoh, invited Hima Sohra for a meeting which I attended as Adviser (Tourism). The discussion focused on the possible extension of the lease of the MCCL area for a tourism initiative that could benefit the people of Sohra. Hima Sohra was requested to deliberate on the proposal and revert for further discussions with the Commissioner & Secretary, Tourism, Dr Vijay Kumar.
Following the meeting, Late Paiem Freeman requested me to prepare a concept plan for a tourism initiative so that Hima Sohra could present a vision aimed at ensuring maximum benefit to the local people. Accordingly, I prepared and submitted the same.After several rounds of deliberations, Hima Sohra was requested to formally communicate its decision to the Department of Tourism. The matter was then placed before the Executive Committee of Hima Sohra in the presence of Late Paiem Freeman Sing Syiem, who unanimously agreed in principle to support a tourism intervention on the MCCL land and the extension of the lease, subject to the State Government accepting the conditions laid down by Hima Sohra.
The proposed terms and conditions were intended to ensure direct benefits for the local population. These included preference for local employment in accordance with the PPP Policy, submission of a detailed blueprint of the proposed interventions, and a condition that only tourism-related activities would be permitted on the land. It was also clearly stated that if the land was not utilised within five years, it would revert back to Hima Sohra.
Hima Sohra had also clearly stated that the matter would ultimately be placed before the Dorbar Hima Sohra for final approval. However, following the sudden demise of Late Paiem Freeman Sing Syiem, no further meetings or discussions took place. Even after the funeral rites, the issue was never pursued further.
Although the Tourism Department had verbally expressed its intention to sign the MoU during the visit of Union Minister Jyotiraditya Scindia, Hima Sohra was unwilling to proceed since the matter could not be reconsidered by the Executive Committee or the Dorbar due to the deteriorating health of Paiem Freeman, who was hospitalised at the time. Therefore, the allegation that Paiem Maremdor Syiem had “Lilam” or transferred the land for 60 years is entirely baseless and appears to be a deliberate attempt to obstruct the issuance of his Sanad.
Personally, I see no harm in extending the lease for tourism-related purposes, nor do I see any valid reason for KHADC to oppose it. Recently, Elaka Mawmluh also handed over land to the Tourism Department for implementation of the Rs 34 crore Mawmluh Cave – A Meghalayan Age Experience project. Would KHADC now take action against the Sordar of Mawmluh or against any Syiem, Sirdar, or Rangbah Shnong who facilitates developmental projects by cooperating with the State Government?
What should instead concern KHADC is the leasing of nearly 200 acres of land at Mawblei Kurikhal Majai under the Sohra Syiemship to one Rocky Dhar, a non-resident of Hima Sohra, for 90 years at extremely low annual rents ranging from Rs 5,000 to Rs 15,000 up to the year 2104. In my opinion, this amounts to a complete sell-out of community land.
The land was leased for mining activities including limestone-burning plants, cement factories, thermal plants, and stockyards. This raises serious environmental concerns. If KHADC objects to Paiem Maremdor Syiem merely participating in negotiations on behalf of the people of Hima Sohra, then the same standards should also apply to those Myntris and Executive Members of the previous administration of Hima Sohra who signed or supported such agreements, and appropriate action should be taken against them. Some of them are part of the new administration, including the Acting Chief recently appointed by KHADC. This is not a mere allegation; copies of the agreement are available at the office of Hima Sohra.
In a recent article, Bhogtoram Mawroh questioned whether environmental organisations such as the Greentech Foundation should also address issues involving private players such as coal mafias, limestone mafias, sand mining, river pollution, and destruction of catchment areas. Here too lies a serious environmental concern, as the proposed mining and industrial activities could cause significant environmental damage.
At the very least, the proposal put forward by Hima Sohra regarding the MCCL land aligned with global efforts toward sustainable development by promoting tourism — often referred to as a green industry — as an alternative to environmentally destructive industries such as cement manufacturing.
The masterplan I submitted to Hima Sohra, which was later submitted to the Tourism Department, proposed 100 acres for ecological rejuvenation and a Biological Park inspired by the successful restoration of the Mombasa Cement Plant in Kenya. The vision also included a Sohra Aquatic Park, adventure park, high-end hotels, Northeast Tourism Incubation Hub, heritage museum, arts and crafts centre, food court, open-air concert stadium, amphitheatre, waste management system, and helipad. All these were intended to create a world-class tourism experience and generate direct and indirect employment opportunities for the people of Hima Sohra and the greater Sohra region for generations to come.
Finally, my humble request is that if any further allegations are made against Paiem Maremdor Syiem, they should be supported by proper evidence and factual records. In the absence of such evidence, I personally believe he should be allowed to serve as U Syiem Longsyiem ka Hima Sohra.
Another reason cited for the delay in issuing the Sanad is the existence of another claimant, Mr. Planet Syiem, described as the nephew of Late Paiem Freeman Sing Syiem. Having been born and brought up in Sohra and having worked closely with Hima Sohra for many years, I can honestly say that neither I nor the people of Sohra have known him in connection with the traditional affairs of the Hima. Further, going by the established Ka Riti Jied Syiem Sohra, he may not qualify since he has embraced Christianity, unless KHADC now intends to reinterpret this long-respected traditional practice of Hima Sohra.
