SHILLONG: An attempt by Mawlai legislator Brightstarwell Marbaniang to place on record a personal explanation on the Mynsngat–Thangsko coal mine explosion was disallowed in the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly on Thursday, after Speaker Thomas A. Sangma ruled that the matter was sub judice.
The Speaker informed the House that the concerned department had indicated the case was under judicial consideration. He added that the Advocate General had also given a legal opinion, following which the subject was not admitted for discussion.
Marbaniang had sought to raise the matter under Rule 282 after his earlier notice for a short-duration discussion under Rule 50 was rejected. His proposal related to the February 6 coal mine explosion in East Jaintia Hills, which, according to media reports, claimed at least 18 lives.
The MLA stated that his initiative was motivated by the gravity of the tragedy and not by political considerations. He emphasized that the incident involved the loss of several breadwinners and that the Assembly had a moral responsibility to examine the circumstances surrounding such disasters.
He said his intention was to ensure proper scrutiny of the incident, particularly regarding enforcement failures, and to keep the concerns of affected families in public focus.
Marbaniang expressed disagreement with the application of the sub judice rule, arguing that judicial proceedings focus on individual liability, while the legislature is responsible for examining administrative and policy shortcomings.
He maintained that the continued existence of illegal mining activities despite judicial prohibitions raised serious governance issues that fall within the Assembly’s domain.
ALSO READ
“Enough is Enough”: Dr Mukul Sangma Rips into Meghalaya Govt over Illegal Coal Mining
VPP Chief Accuses Meghalaya Govt of Hiding Behind ‘Sub Judice’ Rule on Illegal Mining
Meghalaya CM Tables Suo-Motu Statement on Thangsko Coal Mine Blast; Death Toll Rises to 33
Citing parliamentary practice, he noted that discussions are generally restricted only when they risk prejudicing an ongoing trial. In his view, deliberations on systemic failures in monitoring, enforcement, and safety mechanisms would not interfere with court proceedings.
The legislator further cautioned that a broad interpretation of the sub judice principle—covering all matters linked to police cases or litigation—could prevent the House from addressing urgent public concerns.
He warned that such an approach might weaken legislative oversight over the executive and reduce accountability.
Marbaniang said that more than 28 families were still in mourning and that continued silence in the Assembly could be perceived as indifference.
He stressed that the loss of lives in the explosion deserved serious and meaningful deliberation, rather than being sidelined on procedural grounds.
