By Dr OS Jyrwa
Meghalaya’s political journey since attaining statehood on 21 January 1972 has been marked by the rise and decline of regional parties, coalition governments, shifting political loyalties and the gradual expansion of national parties. As the state approaches the 2028 Assembly elections, an important question arises: will regional parties continue to shape Meghalaya’s political destiny, or are we witnessing the gradual dominance of national parties?
The All Party Hill Leaders Conference (APHLC), under visionary leaders such as Captain Williamson A. Sangma, B. B. Lyngdoh and Hopingstone Lyngdoh, played a historic role in the movement for statehood. The APHLC won 32 seats in the first Assembly elections in 1972, reflecting the aspirations of a people seeking political identity, self-governance and protection of their distinct social and cultural heritage. The creation of Meghalaya was not merely an administrative change; it represented the fulfilment of a long political struggle.
However, the political landscape gradually changed. Coalition governments became a feature of Meghalaya politics, and Congress steadily established its presence. Leaders such as Captain Williamson A. Sangma, Salseng C. Marak, D. D. Lapang and Mukul Sangma occupied the Chief Minister’s office at different times. Over the decades, Congress gained acceptance despite its initial challenges, demonstrating that a national party could succeed by developing local leadership and connecting national politics with regional aspirations.
This history teaches us that no party can claim permanent ownership of the electorate. Public confidence must be earned through leadership, performance and accountability.
Recent political realignments, including the reported movement of eight UDP MLAs to the BJP, have further complicated Meghalaya’s political equation. While such developments may strengthen a party numerically, the movement of elected representatives does not automatically translate into popular acceptance. Voters may reasonably ask whether political realignments reflect ideology, public interest or the pursuit of power.
The BJP’s growing presence invites comparison with the earlier expansion of Congress. Can the BJP achieve a similar degree of acceptance in Meghalaya? That remains a million-dollar question. Its long-term success will depend on whether it can build credible local leadership and convince the people that it respects Meghalaya’s distinctive identity, customary institutions, land rights and constitutional safeguards. Electoral arithmetic alone cannot guarantee public support.
Meghalaya occupies a distinctive position within the Indian Union. Its development depends substantially on financial assistance and cooperation from the Central Government. The state needs better roads, healthcare, education, employment opportunities and infrastructure. Nevertheless, the pursuit of development must not come at the cost of indigenous identity, customary practices or constitutional protections. Meghalaya needs constructive relations with the Centre, but these must be based on mutual respect rather than political dependence. Regional parties have historically served as an important voice for local aspirations. Their weakening should concern those who believe Meghalaya must retain a strong and independent political voice within the Union. However, regional parties cannot survive merely by invoking history or identity. They must demonstrate administrative competence, transparency, internal democracy and a clear programme for development.
The Voice of the People Party (VPP) has emerged as a significant political force, particularly among sections of the Khasi-Jaintia electorate. Its electoral performance may improve in 2028, but whether it can expand beyond its existing support base and secure broad statewide acceptance remains uncertain. Meghalaya’s diverse population requires political parties to reach across regions and communities if they aspire to form a majority government.
The VPP must also demonstrate that its claims of accountability and good governance translate into practical results. Its performance in the Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council (KHADC) deserves scrutiny, just as the record of every other party in public office should be examined. A party that criticises others must also be prepared to have its own achievements and shortcomings judged by the electorate. Political rhetoric alone cannot substitute for effective governance.
The United Democratic Party (UDP), one of Meghalaya’s principal regional parties, and the Hill State People’s Democratic Party (HSPDP) also face an important challenge. Their historical contributions remain relevant, but they must renew their leadership, strengthen their organisations and present convincing alternatives on employment, education, healthcare and infrastructure. If regional parties divide their support by contesting against one another in numerous constituencies, they could inadvertently strengthen their national competitors.
The National People’s Party (NPP), meanwhile, must defend its record in government while balancing its regional identity with its relationship with the BJP and other allies. As the BJP expands its organisational strength, questions of leadership, seat-sharing and political influence may become increasingly important. Will the BJP remain a junior partner in an alliance led by the NPP, or will it seek to assume the role of the big brother? The answer could significantly shape the state’s political future.
The 2028 election may therefore develop into a contest among several political forces: the NPP and its allies, the BJP seeking to expand its independent influence, and regional parties such as the VPP, UDP and HSPDP competing to retain or enlarge their respective support bases. Whether this becomes a three-cornered contest or a more fragmented multi-party election will depend on alliances, candidates and developments closer to polling day.
A divided regional vote could benefit larger parties or alliances, even where regional candidates enjoy substantial local support. Conversely, cooperation among regional parties could preserve their influence, provided it is built on a credible common programme rather than an arrangement formed merely to capture power.
Ultimately, voters will judge parties on issues that directly affect their lives. Employment for educated youth, better schools and hospitals, improved connectivity, transparent administration, protection of land and customary institutions, and responsible use of public funds must take precedence over political manoeuvring. Candidates must also be judged by their integrity, accessibility and performance rather than party affiliation alone.
The history of Meghalaya demonstrates that regional parties can rise when people demand a distinct political voice, while national parties can gain acceptance when they respond effectively to local aspirations. Neither outcome is inevitable. Regional parties must evolve to remain relevant, while national parties must recognise that Meghalaya cannot be treated simply as another electoral state.
The real question is not merely which party will win in 2028, but whether Meghalaya will retain a strong, accountable and independent voice in deciding its future. The election could produce a fragmented Assembly and another coalition government. Such a government can represent diverse interests, but it must be founded on a common programme, mutual trust and a commitment to stable governance rather than political opportunism.
Meghalaya’s democracy has always depended on balancing regional identity with participation in the wider Indian Union. As the 2028 elections approach, political parties must offer credible leadership, and voters must examine their choices carefully. The future of regional politics will ultimately be decided not in party offices or political negotiations, but by the people in the polling booths.