Public discourse rejects report of FA

Public discourse rejects report of FA

By Our Staff Reporter
IMPHAL, Sep 20: A public discourse held today at Lamyanba Shanglen, Palace Compound at the initiative of UCM has rejected the 213th report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs which pertains to the Framework Agreement signed between the Government of India and NSCN-IM.
Copies of the same report were also distributed at the gathering.
The public discourse concluded that the report is partial to Nagas and it was based on false data and reports.
The report projects Manipur in the wrong light while presenting Nagas as deserving more sympathy, said one resolution of the public discourse.
The convention further resolved to adopt a firm decision and approach international Court if the Government of India does not halt its initiative which contradicts the memorandum submitted by UCM to the Prime Minister and the Interlocutor for the Naga political dialogue on December 10 last year.
It further resolved to take out a mass rally in October to ring out a strong message to the whole world, particularly the Government of India that the integrity of Manipur and the sanctity of its territorial boundary are non-negotiable under any circumstances.
At the end of the convention, copies of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs’ 213th report were burnt.
The convention was presided by UCM president Sunil Karam and moderated by Prof W Nabakumar. Senior Advocate Irom Lalit Kumar, UCM consultative member Elangbam Johnson and social activist Dr Dhanabir Laishram spoke at the convention as resource persons which was followed by a panel discussion session.
Irom Lalit Kumar remarked that the report has many lapses if viewed from legal perspective.
The report talks about extending Article 371A to Manipur as a part of a solution to the political dialogue going on between Government of India and NSCN-IM.
Article 371A was inserted in the Indian Constitution in accordance with the agreement signed between the Government of India and Naga People’s Convention in 1960.
When the State of Nagaland was created in 1962, there were only 16 recognised tribes. The word Naga is not mentioned in any statute or law of the country, Lalit Kumar said.
It appears that some groups have been working to create forcibly something which was non-existent, he remarked.
There are two questions which demand serious introspection–––when did the tribals of Manipur become Nagas and will Article 371A be applicable in areas where there are no Nagas. The restive situation prevailing in Manipur and the North East region was created by the historical and Constitutional injustices committed by the Government, Lalit Kumar said. Elangbam Johnson asserted that the Indian Constitution can never be harmonised with the polity of Manipur because Indian political leaders cannot see beyond Assam.
The report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs is sectarian and discriminatory. The report does not mention anything about excesses committed by NSCN-IM in the 1990s. This is a clear indication that the report was filed to appease NSCN-IM, Johnson said.
The report rather than reflecting anything on history, civilization and social realities only reflects Meitei hegemony.
Moreover, the report is self contradictory and reeks of double standard approach, he remarked. Sunil Karam asserted that it is time for the people of Manipur to take a firm and collective decision regarding which direction they should tread.
There have been many Governments since the political dialogue between Government of India and NSCN-IM was initiated but New Delhi has been consistently scheming to fragment Manipur on ethnic lines, Sunil said.
Manipur remains intact today because 18 people sacrificed their lives in 2001. Now the political dialogue has taken a new direction after the Framework Agreement was signed on August 3, 2015.
The Government of India may grant independence to Nagaland or build a golden bridge but any solution to the political dialogue should not impinge upon the interest of Manipur even by the slightest degree, he asserted.
Given the changing dynamics of the Framework Agreement, all the people, cutting across ethnicity, political attachments and religions, must work collectively to protect Manipur, he said.
Informing that UCM would launch a campaign in the neighbouring States too which would be affected by the Government of India’s approach to the political dialogue, he appealed to all the people to be very vigilant.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.