ILP not a state subject, MRSSA Amendment 2020 went beyond constitutional mandate: Mukul Sangma

CORRESPONDENT

SHILLONG: Leader of Opposition in the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly and former Chief Minister Dr Mukul Sangma launched a sharp attack on the Conrad K. Sangma-led MDA government, asserting that the Inner Line Permit (ILP) is not a state subject and accusing the government of overstepping its legislative jurisdiction through the MRSSA Amendment 2020, thereby violating the mandate of the Constitution of India.

Speaking to media persons in Shillong, Sangma framed the issue within the constitutional framework, federal structure and legislative competence, stating that political promises and laws must operate strictly within the boundaries laid down by the Constitution.

Dr Sangma said, “Inner Line Permit is not a state subject, so I could not have promised to implement ILP, unlike the present Chief Minister, because I know I cannot promise on behalf of the Government of India and cannot take the Union Government for granted.” He underlined that ILP falls under the Union List and that claiming otherwise amounts to misleading the people, stressing that responsible governance requires understanding constitutional limitations before making commitments.

Targeting the MRSSA Amendment 2020, the former Chief Minister said, “In the proposed amendment (MRSSA 2020), the state government went beyond its legislative jurisdiction. That is why the Ministry of Home Affairs returned it. It means you went beyond your job and the mandate of the Constitution. When you go beyond the constitutional mandate, your action becomes constitutionally infructuous.” He maintained that while the principal Meghalaya Residents Safety and Security Act (MRSSA), 2016 withstood judicial scrutiny, the amendment failed precisely because it crossed constitutional limits.

Explaining the intent behind MRSSA, Sangma said that even countries with stringent immigration laws face challenges related to illegal immigration. “In spite of stringent laws regulating entry and exit, countries like the USA, the UK and, in fact, all European countries face the problem of illegal immigrants,” he said, adding, “Many enter legally but overstay and become illegal immigrants. That is how the law operates.” He stressed that regulating stay after entry is the real issue, which MRSSA was designed to address within the state’s legislative domain.

Sangma said MRSSA was carefully crafted to protect the demography of indigenous tribes. “MRSSA is designed in such a way that, in spite of having a long porous international border with Bangladesh and a long border with neighbouring Assam, which can be sources of illegal immigration, these issues can be addressed in a manner that fulfils our intent of protecting our people and maintaining the demography of our Khasi, Garo and Jaintia tribes,” he said. He reiterated that it was the amendment, not the Act, that failed, alleging mala fide intent on the part of the present government.

Accusing the government of deliberately rendering MRSSA unimplementable, Sangma said, “The Governor could not give his assent, which means indirectly that the government had a mala fide intention to make MRSSA ineffective or keep it in cold storage by default.” He added, “As a result, the Meghalaya Residents Safety and Security Act became unimplementable due to the proposed amendment.” He questioned why essential rules and guidelines were never framed, asking, “Whose responsibility was it to frame the guidelines?” and alleged that the government had “cheated the people”.

Referring to the authorship of the Act, Sangma said, “We co-authored this Act; it is not that Dr Mukul alone authored MRSSA.” He criticized senior leaders of the present government, stating that Prestone Tynsong was also a co-author, and accused him of misleading the public. “I pity him, but at the same time I am angry because he is lying to the people,” he said.

Linking MRSSA to law and order, Sangma said safety and security fall under the state subject and the Act provided mechanisms such as facilitation centres and CCTV coverage. He alleged that non-implementation benefited illegal activities, stating that illegal coal mining and transportation could have been checked had the Act been implemented in letter and spirit. He accused the government of “keeping its eyes closed” despite being aware of the illegalities.

Also read: Meghalaya ILP Drive: Rymbui Seeks Stronger Safeguards on Migration