By Our Reporter
SHILLONG, Oct 16: The Shillong Bar Association and the High Court of Meghalaya Bar Association have withdrawn their abstention from court proceedings but made clear that their agitation against Advocate General Amit Kumar will continue through other means. SBA secretary TL Jyrwa said the fight would go on until the associations’ demands are met.
“The agitation has not been called off. Only the mode has changed,” Jyrwa told reporters on Friday. The legal fraternity remained united and would announce the next course of action after the Puja vacation.
The Joint Executive Committee took the decision after reviewing the agitation. The move was intended to avoid further confrontation with the judiciary, against which the associations said they had no grievance, while continuing to press the government.
Jyrwa said the abstention had stemmed from frustration over the government’s failure to respond satisfactorily to repeated representations.
“We respect the functioning of the courts. We are also officers of the court,” he said.
The principal grievance concerns the appointment of state counsel.
The associations insist that qualified local advocates should receive fair consideration through a transparent, objective and merit-based process.
They had submitted representations, met government leaders and organised rallies before resorting to abstention. Meetings with Deputy Chief Minister Prestone Tynsong on September 2 and Chief Minister Conrad K Sangma on September 16 had yielded assurances that their concerns would be examined. The associations expressed disappointment when the Meghalaya Panel Advocate (Empanelment and Engagement) Guidelines, 2026, were issued on the same day as the Chief Minister’s meeting. The guidelines, they said, confer extensive powers on the Advocate General over empanelment and removal of state lawyers.
The associations filed PIL No. 23 of 2026 on October 16, challenging the guidelines and seeking a fair selection procedure. The petition is listed for hearing on November 5. They are also pursuing remedies under the Right to Information Act after their request was rejected.
Jyrwa maintained that the dispute concerned the dignity of the legal fraternity, transparency in appointments and accountability in the use of public funds. Details of the next phase of agitation would be announced after the Puja vacation. The withdrawal of the court abstention, the associations stressed, should not be seen as a retreat.