Shillong, July 3: The banned militant outfit Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council (HNLC) has strongly opposed the justification put forward by Ardent Miller Basaiawmoit in support of the proposed Khasi Hills Autonomous District (Regulation and Administration of Land) (Amendment) Bill, 2026, alleging that the legislation seeks to centralize control over customary land under the Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council Executive Committee at the expense of traditional institutions.
In a statement issued by its General Secretary, Saińkupar Nongtraw, the outfit rejected the reliance on the 2011 Socio Economic and Caste Census (SECC), which reportedly found that around 76 percent of households in Meghalaya do not own private land. According to the HNLC, the statistic has been wrongly used to justify sweeping amendments that would weaken the authority of the Dorbar Shnong, Dorbar Raid and Hima over customary land.
The HNLC argued that the SECC figure represents the entire state, including Khasi, Jaintia and Garo Hills, while the proposed amendment applies only to the Khasi Hills Autonomous District. It questioned why a statewide statistic was being used to justify legislation affecting only one district, saying KHADC had failed to produce district-specific evidence demonstrating that Khasi Hills faces a unique land ownership crisis.
The outfit further contended that the absence of private land titles under the traditional Hynniewtrep customary system should not be equated with landlessness. It said many families possess customary rights over Raid and Hima land through community ownership and inheritance, even without formal title deeds. Applying a private ownership framework to such a system, it argued, misrepresents the realities of customary land tenure.
The statement also pointed to what it described as inconsistencies in the SECC data, noting that while 76 percent of households were classified as owning no private land, 88.5 percent of rural households in Meghalaya reportedly own the houses they live in. According to the HNLC, this reflects the census methodology’s inability to recognise community-owned customary land rather than widespread landlessness.
The HNLC also criticised claims that significant portions of Raid and Hima land had been sold to outsiders, arguing that such allegations should be backed by verified records rather than anecdotal assertions. If illegal transfers had occurred, it said, authorities should identify the specific transactions, investigate those responsible and hold individual officials accountable instead of concentrating decision-making powers in the Executive Committee.
The outfit further maintained that even if concerns existed regarding excessive powers exercised by certain traditional authorities, the appropriate response would be to improve transparency and accountability within those institutions rather than transferring greater authority to the Executive Committee.
According to the HNLC, the amendment removes an important safeguard under Section 16 of the existing law, which requires the Executive Committee to consult the concerned Dorbar Shnong, Dorbar Raid and Dorbar Hima before issuing notifications. It alleged that the proposed changes weaken community participation and centralise authority.
The organisation instead proposed measures including a transparent public registry for all land transactions, independent oversight through a tribunal or the District Council Court, and continued involvement of customary institutions in decisions affecting community land.
Calling the Bill “one of the greatest concentrations of land authority in recent history,” the HNLC urged all traditional institutions—including Himas, Syiems, Dolois, Wahadadars, Sordars and Rangbah Shnongs—to unite in defence of customary land rights.
The outfit called on the KHADC Executive Committee to withdraw the Bill immediately. It further appealed to the Governor of Meghalaya to withhold assent if the legislation is passed, arguing that it undermines customary land rights protected under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution.
The KHADC Executive Committee and the VPP leadership have maintained that the proposed amendments are intended to strengthen regulation of land administration and address concerns relating to land ownership and protection of indigenous interests. The Bill continues to generate debate among political leaders, traditional institutions and various organisations in the state.
