UNC asserts stand, accuses CSO leaders
Source: The Sangai Express
Imphal, November 23 2011:
Questioning the intent and meaning of citing 'civil war' and 'bloodshed' by some social and political leaders including MPP president Dr Nimaichand Luwang, O Joy and others, the United Naga Council has today asserted that it stands fully committed to an alternative arrangement 'outside the Government of Manipur, pending settlement of the Ind-Naga issue' .
In a statement issued to the press today, the UNC said that the position of the Nagas is clear and irreversible and added that it is a matter of rights and cannot be subjected to the interest of the dominant community or the State Government, which it dubbed as communal.
Talking of the allegedly inflammatory tone and pronouncements issued by political leaders and social leaders of the 'valley area,' UNC said that in case of any undesirable consequences arises out of the situation, such leaders should be held responsible.
The Government of India too should be held responsible for their lack of commitment and political will in dealing with the aspirations of the Naga people, said UNC.
The Nagas did not and have not objected when Naga nationalists provided assistance and guidance to the Meitei nationalist groups in times of their need, said UNC and added that there were also no objections when the demand to include Meiteilon in the 8th Schedule of the Constitution was raised.
No objections were also raised when the 11th Schedule (Panchayati Raj) and 12th Schedule (Municipality Council) were extended to the valley of Manipur, it added.
The development of Imphal as a modern city with the state of the art infrastructure and buildings was also not objected, said UNC.
Despite this, the Government of Manipur has enacted a number of laws and Acts which are detrimental to the interest of the Naga people, alleged UNC and listed them as Village Authority in Hill Areas Act, 1956 against the customary practices and traditions of the tribals, passed the Manipur (Hill Areas Acquisition of Chiefs Rights) Act, 1967 to enable the State Government to transfer all the rights, titles and interest of the chiefs to the Government, passed the Forest Rights Act 2006 without excluding the tribal areas of the State which is against the land holding system of the tribals of the State, imposed the Manipur (Hill Areas) District Council Act (3rd Amendment) Act, 2008 which allows the District Councils to occupy and sell village land, take away forest land, interfere in the appointment/succession of chiefs/headmen/chairmen and interfere on matters relating to inheritance of property, marriage and divorce and control and regulation of customs and traditions.
UNC also accused the State Government of sabotaging the delimitation exercise in the name of all Political Parties Forum and prevented the increase of 3 tribal seats in the State Assembly, imposed acts, rules, orders and suppressive measures in all walks of life.
The UNC further accused the Government of objecting to the demand for Naga integration which is the aspiration of all Nagas, based on their history, object the Indo-Naga ceasefire of 1997 and extension of cease fire beyond the territorial limits in 2001, extension of 6th Schedule to the hill/tribal areas, stopped the visit of Th Muivah to his ancestral land, stopped the visit of Naga Students' Federation to Oinamlong village in Senapati to oversee the arrangement of the Federal Assembly, objected to the demand of the Nagas to form an alternative arrangement outside the Government of Manipur, opposed the launching of the Manipur unit of Naga Peoples' Front.
The State Government has also been accused of planning to extend the MLR and LR Act of 1960 to the hill areas of Manipur, lift the Manipur Liquor Prohibition Act, 1991 from the five hill districts of Manipur, impose Manipuri language on tribals, upgrade Sadar Hills to a full fledged district to bifurcate Naga areas and create Jiribam, Phungyar, Tengnoupal, Kakching, Tongjei Marin districts in order to carve the lands of the Nagas.
Comment
