students were making demonstration and were arrested and taken away. On the 2nd and the 5th of this month, apparently, the district administration had resorted to an attitude of repression, beating up and chasing boys and girls cattle over the hills and dales, upon the lanes and public places to the extent that one poor lady who had nothing to do with the students who is just a poor person selling papers and second-hand things was beaten up and was still lying in the civil hospital. No respect of whether the person is free to exercise his right or not, they will fly with a lathi on his back. Is this type of force trying to maintain to create the image of the State ? Yet it would have been a rightful demand for the removal of the CRPs. If they are supposed to act according to the spirit of the law for proper functioning of the maintenance of law and order, there would have been no move at all to get rid of the CRPs who are trying to work for the proper maintenance of law and order. But not in that way of breaking the bones of people and beating them up like animals when they are completely innocent, just for a street-squatting. But then, I am afraid I have to make an observation on a very important aspect of this whole matter. If someone is responsible for a criminal act such as insulting and attacking the police, as was stated by the Chief Minister in reply to another Resolution, then that person should be arrested, tried and convicted but not beaten up and almost liquidated as happened in the case of Mr. Anthony Jala. We cannot justify any beating up by the police, who even if they are affected, it is the law - the Court who will convict them and put them to task according to law. The Police cannot take law into their own hands. We cannot agree on this. Then when we came to the question of freedom, the Leader of the Opposition has already mentioned that it is a question of freedom of expression. If the people are not allowed to hold meetings, if they are not allowed the normal expression in a free democratic society, then what do you expect ? Why has Section 144 been imposed for so long that we cannot hold any public meeting. Why only the ruling party through the Chief Minister could hold a public meeting and not the people from this side of the House. As soon as we saw that the Chief Minister was holding a public meeting, then we also wrote to the Deputy Commissioner to grant us permission to hold a public meeting, but we were denied that opportunity. So, we take this chance to voice our protest against that repression that is taking place, particularly in Shillong by the District administration. The Chief Minister had made a reference to important cases of life and death which would justify hartals and things like that. Mr. Speaker, Sir, in that opinion, I cannot agree with them. But in the opinion of the students who are fighting on behalf of the State, which they consider as an important an issue as the cause of life and death and they feel that they must voice their opinion, I must agree with them. But if that right of expression is denied to them, it is naturally a very undemocratic society under this Government. The Chief Minister had also appealed to us and requested all leaders of the State to consider whether the stopping of the work is in the interest of the people. But when democratic forms of expression are denied, when the leadership of the Government does not have the wisdom to be able to persuade the students who are agitating on the very life and death issues and then such things happened, we cannot justify what we did in 1960-61 until 1968 and then tell the students it is alright for you not for us. I do not maintain in our party is not behind the agitation. It was a musing incident for the public to tell one of the Secretaries of our party that he was wanted by the Supdt. of Police for a discussion and when he picked up the phone to talk to the S.P. who was told that he was at the Laitumkhrah Police Station, the S.P. told to bring him to the police station. Later on they came and surrounded him by about 20 to 40 persons and arrested him, for a week he was put in jail without being brought to the magistrate. According to law and as we understand it - though I am not a lawyer like the present Chief Minister who should maintain law and order, but we are told that the law says if somebody is arrested, he must be produced before the Magistrate within 24 hours. But for one week he was left in jail without being produced before the Magistrate and only when we protested, then the Chief Minister looked into the matter and was later released. Similarly the Vice-President of the District Branch of our party was arrested. Is this not repression ? Is it not our right to protest against such acts ? And therefore, I maintain that if we want to solve the problem, it is not an attitude of confrontation that we should maintain. We are prepared to cooperate with anybody from all sides of the House to put our heads together in the words of the previous Chief Minister who does not happen to be here at present. But we are still prepared inspite of this to solve the problem by changing the attitude of repression of the district administration and have a dialogue with the people concerned with this movement and bring about a solution. But this attitude of repression, oppression and suppression is not going to work. Thank you, Sir. Shri M.N. Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, it saddens us merely to speak on this subject and at the same time to see the complacement smile on some faces as if this is a small matter and this is a political issue. We are speaking today on this Resolution not as politicians, not even as party men, but as persons who are interested in preserving the normal peaceful conditions that have always exist in us. Our people are basically, Mr. Speaker, Sir, peace

What are our representatives talking about in the parliament?