Different tribal Clans have expressed support to the demand for amendment of the Meghalaya Succession to Self-Acquired Property (Khasi and Jaintia Special Provision) Act, 1986.

This was informed by Maitshaphrang Convener Michael Syiem after a meeting held with the different Clans (or Kur) at Jaiaw Shyiap community hall here.

The meeting was jointly organized with three other organizations – Khasi Students’ Union, Federation of Khasi Jaintia and Garo People and Hynniewtrep National Youth Front as part of their campaign to pressurize the state government to bring the necessary amendment to the Act.

The objective of the amendment was to ensure the ‘equitable’ or ‘fair and just’ distribution of property among siblings in a matrilineal society.

“The Clans who attended the meeting today have expressed support to our demand and they have informed that they will be organizing similar meetings within their clans to discuss the issue before taking a final decision on the matter,” Syiem told reporters.

The State Assembly passed the Meghalaya Succession to Self-Acquired Property (Khasi and Jaintia Special Provision) Act, 1986 and received the Governor’s accent in 1986. The Act provides a special provision enabling the Khasis and the Jaintias to dispose of self-acquired property by will to any of their children.

“But when the children inherit this self-acquired property of the parents, it becomes ancestral and this ancestral goes back to the youngest daughter. So we will feel that we need an amendment to this to include self-acquired property and ancestral property as well in this Act,” Syiem had earlier said.

“Another amendment we want is that the word ‘equitable’ should also be inserted in this Act so that the parents can equitably will away their property to any of their children not necessarily only to the woman or the younger daughter,” he had stated.

The social activist had also said, “Equitable does not mean equal. Equitable according to the dictionary means fair and just so it depends on the parents to give to whom and how much. We feel that this word ‘equitable’ should also be inserted in the 1986 Act.”