HNYF asks Meghalaya Govt to keep MoU in abeyance

Syllad | The Rising MeghalayaMarch 29, 2022

The Hynniewtrep National Youth Front (HNYF) on Tuesday rejected the agreement signed between Meghalaya and Assam in New Delhi for resolving 6 of 12 areas of difference amid protests.

“We cannot accept the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) and the border realignment since the government of Meghalaya has failed to take the stakeholders into consideration,” HNYF president Sadon K Blah told reporters.

He said many border residents are protesting against the MoU signed with Assam. “The three committees constituted by the government to visit the border villages were found to have taken only the views of the non-tribal. Therefore, how is it that illegal settlers will decide the boundary of Meghalaya?” Blah asked.

The HNYF president further stated that the organization will be compelled to take other means to pressurize the state government to keep the MoU in abeyance as without taking the will of the people into the consideration, it is totally unacceptable. He also cited that the Hima Mylliem had expressed strong opposition against the government’s decision to sign the MoU.

Also Read | Meghalaya, Assam sign historic agreement to end 50-yr-old dispute in 6 of 12 areas of difference

He said especially if land belonging to Meghalaya, which is a sixth schedule state, goes to Assam then it will be a big loss to the indigenous landowners.

“Though the state government claims that ownership of land will not be affected even if tribal lands fall under the Assam administrative control, the fact remains that there is a vast difference between ownership as per sixth schedule and non-sixth schedule areas,” he added.

Meanwhile, Blah said the HNYF is ready to support border residents and traditional institutions for filing complaints to the Ministry on the matter.

Asked, the HNYF leader said that today’s historic signing of the agreement to end the dispute between Assam and Meghalaya in six areas of difference is not ‘final’.

“We still have an opportunity to appeal against the decision as it (agreement) is not final because to demarcate the boundary it requires a resolution to be adopted by both Houses of Parliament,” he said.