News Alerts
prev next

CEO’S Response!


Apropos the letter to the editor, “Will the CEO Meghalaya please reply?”(ST Feb 22, 2018), it is apparent that as per the report of the Returning Officer, 16-East Shillong (ST) Assembly Constituency pertaining to the question of applying for permission prior to filing of nomination, consequent with the date of announcement of elections, the Model Code of Conduct had immediately come into force. Hence, all “intending” candidates wishing to hold public meetings were at liberty to apply for permission on Suvidha platform. In this instant case, the date and time of applying for permissions by the Indian National Congress Candidate of 16-East Shillong was undertaken on 24th January, 2018 for which orders were passed accordingly.

On the allegations made that the applications uploaded online by the Indian National Congress Candidate of 16-East Shillong, not allegedly appearing on the database, it is highlighted that all permissions once uploaded are on Public domain, hence the above permissions as well as other permissions issued can be conveniently viewed by the Public on the website of, under Suvidha category and hyperlinked to “Viewed Booked Status”.

The complainant is therefore advised to browse the necessary link and take necessary steps to view the permissions which are duly uploaded. Once clicked, the permissions will be clearly visible and discerned by one and all, without any prejudice to any quarter.

Yours etc., 

Chief Electoral Officer,



Unethical advertisement!


The BJP advertisement recently reeks of communalism. The advertisement specifically states that Mr PC Alexander, a Christians IAS officer was nominated to the post of the President of India by the BJP government under Atal Behari Vaypayee. Similarly, Prof GG Swell, a Khasi Christian, was proposed as the Vice-Presidential Candidate by the BJP.  It further mentions that the above were REJECTED by the Congress under Sonia Gandhi for their Christian and tribal identity.

An advertisement guru confirms that one of the basic tenets of advertising is to promote  oneself or one’s product or brand and not to malign another, even if that person or organisation happens to be a rival. The BJP has disregarded this cardinal rule. Hence that advertisement is unethical. Secondly, the advertisement is blatantly communal. One may question the BJP whether Presidents, Vice-Presidents, Speaker of Lok Sabha, etc nominated because of their religious, regional, tribal, caste, linguistic identity? To set the record straight the BJP nominated PC Alexander, a Christian and Prof. GG Swell, a Khasi Christian to the above posts because it was sure that the above two would not win the election. If the Party is eager to see a Christian/tribal occupying the two highest posts in the country why does it not nominate one today when the party is in power? 

Yours etc.,

Albert Thyrniang,

Via email


Administrative failure killed Jonathone!


The brutal murder of Williamnagar NCP candidate Jonathone Sangma has sent shock waves across the State and in Williamnagar in particular. In any village of Williamnagar an eerie silence prevails. Cutting across  party lines everyone has condemned the unholy, barbaric act. With heavy hearts all took part in the peace march, candle light service and funeral of Jonathone Sangma. The election mood has died down.  To rub salt to the wounds,  the District Administration, Williamnagar in a press release has blamed Jonathone Sangma of being reckless by venturing to Sawilgre when he only permitted to go up to Dinamonggre village. This is an attempt to pass the buck to others but for their own failure.

Dinamonggre and Sawilgre (where the crime happened) are adjacent to each other and the vulnerability level is the same.  So is Dinamonggre village  not vulnerable area? Is the Administration saying that Jonathone Sangma would not have been killed if he travelled up to Dinamonggre village only? How were they so sure that Jonathone Sangma would have survived if Sawilgre was on their list? Are they saying that up to Dinamonggre there was adequate security and it was safe for him to travel? This clearly indicates that the District Administration is not only insensitive but has also not done it’s security drill satisfactorily for the Assembly Election, 2018.  This is a case of complete Administrative  failure!

In 2013, Jonathone Sangma received  a similar threat and even filed an FIR for that. This should have already sensitized the Administration to be extra-cautious on Sangma’s security, particularly for this election. This time too he was threatened not to contest elections vide a poster, for which a police complaint was lodged but the Administration took it lightly and this has resulted in the gruesome murder of an innocent person.

This may be unpleasant to the Administration but the public demands to know the following. (1) Why were only 2 security personnel provided to Jonathone Sangma despite maximum threat to his life? (2) Why did the Administration not take his complaint seriously? (3) What security measures and actions were taken following the complaint of a life threat? (4) Should the police not act on an FIR filed? (5) Were they waiting to act only after the person dies? (6) Is Jonathone’s life not as precious as that of other candidates? (7) Where are all the security personnel that they are not deployed at vulnerable areas across the Simsang river?

It is very unfortunate  that the Administration is not only trying to hide its failures but that it is also trying to blame Jonathone Sangma who is already dead and gone due to their all-round failure.

Yours etc.,

Dogrik Marak,

Via email                                                                                                                           

You might also like More from author


error: Content is protected !!