The Meghalaya State Investment Promotion and Facilitation Act, 2024, has become the centre of intense debate, drawing criticism from various quarters, including the Khasi Students’ Union (KSU).
The opposition primarily revolves around the Act’s provisions, which are viewed by critics as undermining traditional land laws and prioritizing private investments over the interests of local communities.
At the forefront of the protest is the KSU, which has strongly opposed the Act’s amendment authorizing the Investment Meghalaya Agency (IMA) to acquire and allocate land to investors.
According to the KSU, this provision directly conflicts with the principles enshrined in the Meghalaya Land Transfer Act, which seeks to protect local land ownership.
ALSO READ: Meghalaya CM pushes for Shillong Airport runway expansion to boost connectivity
Speaking to the press on Thursday, KSU General Secretary Donald V. Thabah demanded clarity from the government on how this amendment would benefit the people of Meghalaya.
“The state government must come clean on this matter. If it fails to provide convincing answers, we firmly believe the Act should be repealed,” he stated.
Thabah voiced particular concern over the IMA’s ability to acquire land without consulting the traditional institutions protected under the Sixth Schedule, such as the Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council (KHADC), Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council (JHADC), and Garo Hills Autonomous District Council (GHADC).
Adding to the apprehensions, Thabah questioned whether the investors who would benefit from the IMA’s land allocation policies would be indigenous residents of Meghalaya or external entities.
He stressed the need for a policy ensuring that private investors provide at least 75% of employment opportunities to local residents, citing similar policies adopted in states like Haryana, Maharashtra, Jharkhand, and Andhra Pradesh.
Highlighting structural flaws within the Act, Thabah criticised the extensive powers granted to the governing council of the IMA.
“The governing council has been given discretionary powers, allowing it to allocate land with minimal member participation and bypass relevant departments. Worse, the Act explicitly states that no legal action can be taken against the council, even in cases of discrepancies,” he remarked.
The KSU warned that such provisions could lead to misuse of power and a lack of accountability, ultimately harming the state’s indigenous communities.
Adding to the growing dissent, the banned Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council (HNLC) also voiced its disapproval, particularly regarding the state government’s decision to extend the lease period for government land.
ALSO READ: Meghalaya extends government land lease to 60 years to boost investment
On December 2, the state cabinet approved increasing the lease period from 30 years to 60 years, with an option for renewal for another 30 years.
The extended lease was aimed at facilitating projects such as the development of the Orchid Polo Resort into a four-star hotel.
However, the HNLC criticised this move as being anti-people, accusing the government of sidelining the interests of the local population in favour of private players.
The outfit has demanded the immediate withdrawal of what it perceives as exploitative policies.
As the controversy intensifies, the Meghalaya government faces mounting pressure to address the concerns raised by various stakeholders.
The growing opposition to the Act underscores the tension between fostering economic development and safeguarding the rights and interests of indigenous communities.
Whether the government will revisit or revise the contentious provisions of the Act remains to be seen.
