Shillong, Oct 7: The Meghalaya High Court Bar Association (MHCBA) and Shillong Bar Association today stepped up their agitation seeking the removal of Advocate General Amit Kumar, with lawyers from several district bar associations joining a new street protest in Shillong.
The protestors marched from the Woh Kiang Nangbah Monument through Barik, Malki and Lower Lachumiere before returning to the monument. The lawyers then proceeded to the High Court Bar Association office, where they held a sit-in.
The rally saw participation from members of bar associations from Garo Hills, Jaintia Hills and West Khasi Hills, among others.
The renewed protest comes amid growing differences between sections of the legal fraternity and the state government over the appointment and continued appearance of the Advocate General and other outstation panel advocates.
MHCBA secretary general Kishore Gautam alleged that assurances given by the government to the lawyers have not been followed through.
Gautam said the government had sought two weeks to address the issue during meetings with Deputy Chief Minister Prestone Tynsong and Chief Minister Conrad K Sangma. He said the lawyers were assured that Kumar and other outstation panel advocates would not appear in court during this period.
However, Gautam alleged that Kumar continued to appear in court, including the High Court, District Court and Commercial Court.
“I sent a message to him (the CM) along with a copy of the order. So his reply was, okay, I’ll speak to him,” Gautam said.
Lawyers subsequently decided to wait until October 7 for another meeting with the CM, but Kumar’s appearance in the Commercial Court on the same day led to further frustration among the members.
Gautam alleged that the government’s assurances were being used to delay a resolution and said the lawyers would continue to press their demand.
The protest also comes against the backdrop of an internal dispute within the MHCBA.
Shillong Bar Association secretary TL Jyrwa referred to a letter issued by MHCBA president KS Kynjing on October 1 in which, according to Jyrwa, the ongoing agitation was described as being led unilaterally by two office-bearers.
Jyrwa rejected the claim, saying the agitation had involved the wider membership of the bar and had received support from lawyers across the state.
“It’s never the two of us, the two office-bearers of the bar, present and leading the agitation. The general members are very much involved,” he said.
Jyrwa said the presence of lawyers from different districts at Wednesday’s rally demonstrated the extent of support for the demand.
He also referred to subsequent action involving the suspension of some office-bearers who have been active in the agitation. Jyrwa questioned the manner in which the suspension orders were issued, alleging that they were passed without an executive committee meeting.
According to Jyrwa, the MHCBA’s executive committee has also invoked a provision of its constitution in relation to the conduct of members, with the final decision resting with the general body.
He said the developments should not be allowed to divide the legal fraternity, maintaining that members were free to dissent but that decisions of the majority should be respected.
The lawyers also argued that the issue extends beyond the interests of the bar associations, particularly because government funds are involved in engaging outstation counsel.
Jyrwa said Meghalaya has senior lawyers with decades of experience and urged the government to provide greater opportunities to members of the state’s legal fraternity.
“We have seniors who have practised 30, 40, close to 50 years. How can you ignore, how can you turn a blind eye to such personalities of stature available in the bar?” he said.
