Tag: Articles-Opinions

By Khwairakpam Gajananda (PhD)

DEFINITION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES:

`Indigenous peoples are those which having a historical continuity with pre-invasion and pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories, consider themselves distinct from other sectors of societies now prevailing in those territories, or parts of them. They form at present non-dominant sectors of society and are determined to preserve, develop, and transmit to future generations their ancestral territories, and their ethnic identity, as the basis of their continued existence as peoples, in accordance with their own cultural patterns, social institutions and legal systems`, according to Martinez-Cobo, 1984, the United Nations Special Rapporteur to the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, Indigenous Communities, Peoples and Nations.

INTRODUCTION:

The indigenous peoples of the world is very diverse and is about 400 million with close to 5000 distinct tribes, which symbolize and nurture 80% of the world`™s cultural and biological diversity`”occupying 20% of the world`™s land surface. Indigenous Peoples play key roles in preserving land, environment, ecology, protecting language, promoting and preserving culture and tradition. Many of the World`™s Indigenous Peoples have already adapted to the paradigm shift and are adjusting to the technological and political changes. By respecting the nature, Indigenous Peoples are champions to the sustainable conservations of the environment.

Despite such extensive diversity in indigenous communities throughout the world, all Indigenous Peoples have one thing in common`”they all share a history of injustice. Indigenous Peoples have been killed, tortured and enslaved in all the livable continents. Many of them are the victims of genocide and are denied the rights to participate in governing processes of the political systems. The fundamental rights of self-determination, dignity and identity of indigenous peoples were stolen during the conquest and colonization.

The rights of Indigenous Peoples overlap with many other human rights; however, the important parts are not framed specifically but are part of more general treaties, like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

UNITED NATIONS (UN) DECLARATIONS AND CONVENTIONS:

(1) The Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (2001)

The Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (2001) for the first time recommended the UN to use the phrase `Indigenous Peoples` in all the documents rather than using the phrase `Indigenous People`. This carries a clear message to the World`™s populations that the `Indigenous Peoples`™ is not singular but plural!

(2) The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, March 2008

This declaration is the most comprehensive statement of the rights of Indigenous Peoples to date, establishing collective rights to a greater extent than any other document in international human rights law. It establishes the rights of Indigenous Peoples to the protection of their cultural property and identity as well as the rights to education, employment, health, religion, language and more. It also protects the right of Indigenous Peoples to own land collectively. Although, States are not legally bound by the Declaration, it exerted a considerable amount of moral force by the General Assembly. Consisting of 46 Articles, the draft Declaration is divided into nine parts. Some of the Articles of the Declarations are reproduced as follows:

Article 1:- Indigenous peoples have the right to the full enjoyment, as a collective or as individuals, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms as recognized in the Charter of the UN, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights law.

Article 5:- Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining their right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State.

Article 6:- Every indigenous individual has the right to a nationality.

Article 8:- 1. Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture. 2. States shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for: (a) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities; (b) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources; (c) Any form of forced population transfer, which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights; (d) Any form of forced assimilation or integration; (e) Any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them.

Article 13:- 1. Indigenous peoples have the right to revitalize, use, develop and transmit to future generations their histories, languages, oral traditions, philosophies, writing systems and literatures, and to designate and retain their own names for communities, places and persons. 2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that this right is protected and also to ensure that indigenous peoples can understand and be understood in political, legal and administrative proceedings, where necessary through the provision of interpretation or by other appropriate means.

Article 27:- States shall establish and implement, in conjunction with indigenous peoples concerned, a fair, independent, impartial, open and transparent process, giving due recognition to indigenous peoples`™ laws, traditions, customs and land tenure systems, to recognize and adjudicate the rights of indigenous peoples pertaining to their lands, territories and resources, including those which were traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used. Indigenous peoples shall have the right to participate in this process.

Article 30:- 1. Military activities shall not take place in the lands or territories of indigenous peoples, unless justified by a relevant public interest or otherwise freely agreed with or requested by the indigenous peoples concerned. 2. States shall undertake effective consultations with the indigenous peoples concerned, through appropriate procedures and in particular through their representative institutions, prior to using their lands or territories for military activities.

Article 31:- 1. Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of their sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games and visual and performing arts. They also have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions. 2. In conjunction with indigenous peoples, States shall take effective measures to recognize and protect the exercise of these rights.

Article 36:- 1. Indigenous peoples, in particular those divided by international borders, have the right to maintain and develop contacts, relations and cooperation, including activities for spiritual, cultural, political, economic and social purposes, with their own members as well as other peoples across borders. 2. States, in consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples, shall take effective measures to facilitate the exercise and ensure the implementation of this right.

(3) The Earth Summit, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 1992

The Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 1992 recognized the special relationship between Indigenous Peoples and their lands. Indigenous Peoples have a vital role in environmental management and development because of their traditional knowledge and practice. In order to fully make use of that knowledge, some Indigenous Peoples need greater control over their land, self-management of their resources and participation in development decisions affecting them (Agenda 21, Chapter 26.4). The Convention on Biological Diversity (1992), thus called upon its signatories to `respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities embodying traditional lifestyles relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and promote their wider application with the approval and involvement of the holders of such knowledge, innovations and practices and encourage the equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilization of such knowledge, innovations and practices”.

The objective of the biological diversity conservation of the UN-Earth Submit and consequently the aim of many Nations of the World is the universal phrase `Unity in Diversity`. Diversity indeed, included both hybridize and pure breed species. In this scenario, conservation of pure breed sustainably`”is more important and better than the hybridize one, in the long run. To avoid extinction, hybridization is the best strategy`”but at the cost of losing the precious pure breed `genetic pool`™. The problem is, in a population of a species, if a sub-species extinct, slowly the other surviving sub-species genes started getting into mutation phase, which has the high-probability of getting extinct due to various causes e.g. cancers, diseases, reproductive disorders, competitions, natural selections etc. Hence, it is pertinent to conserve Indigenous Peoples (pure breed) for a long chain of healthy genetic diversity and for our future generations. Here, we can take some examples of the World`™s Indigenous Peoples who are
currently preserved for their unique identities, cultures and traditions; they are viz. Inuit: Greenland, Northern Canada, Alaska; Sami: Northern Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia; Nuba: Sudan; Pygmy peoples: Central and Western Africa; Khoikhoi: South Africa; Tibetan people: Tibet; Karen: Burma and Thailand; Wa people: Burma and China`s Yunnan Province; Penan: Sarawak, Malaysia; Andalusians: Spain; Manx people: Great Britain; the Red Indian: USA; Occitans: France; Yolngu people: Arnhem Land, Australia; Fijian: Fiji; Itza: Mayan people of Guatemala; Mayo: Sonora, Mexico; Awá-Guajá: eastern Amazonian rainforest, Brazil; Yora: Amazon rainforest, southeast Peru etc.

(4) Declaration on the Rights of Persons belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities (1992)

This Declaration deals with all minorities, which includes many of the world`™s Indigenous Peoples. It only concerns individual rights, although collective rights might be derived from those individual rights. The Declaration deals both with States`™ obligations towards minorities as well as the rights of minority people. Topics that are dealt with include: the national or ethnic, cultural, religious or linguistic identity of minorities (Article 1); the free expression and development of culture; association of minorities amongst themselves; participation in decisions regarding the minority (Article 2); the exercise of minority rights, both individual and in groups (Article 3); and education of and about minorities (Article 4).

The UN bodies recognize that indigenous culture is directly linked to land, water and other resources and language. In this scenario, `Media`™ thus plays the vital role as a non-violent weapon to spread awareness/information within and without indigenous communities.

INDIAN CONSTITUTIONS

In India, there are about 461 ethnic groups, which are recognized as Scheduled Tribes (ST). They are considered to be India`™s Indigenous Peoples. The constitutions of India gives equal respect to all communities, sects, lingual and ethnic groups etc. in the country. The constitution also guarantees to all citizens the freedom of speech (Article 19), freedom of religion (Article 25), equality (Articles 14 to 17), liberty (Article 21), etc. India has several laws and constitutional provisions, such as the Fifth (5th) Schedule for mainland India and the Sixth (6th) Schedule for certain areas of North-east India, which recognize Indigenous Peoples`™ rights to land and self-governance. The laws aimed at protecting indigenous peoples have, however, numerous shortcomings and their implementation is far from satisfactory.

There are numerous indigenous people residing in the hills of Northern, North-Eastern and Southern India, Andaman & Nicobar Island, Himalayan regions of India etc. Some of the examples are: Bodo-Kachari: Assam (Bodoland), Arunachal Pradesh; Karbi: Assam; Khasi-Jaintia: Meghalaya, Assam; Mishmi people: Arunachal Pradesh; Nocte: Arunachal Pradesh; Mizo people: Mizoram; Naga: Nagaland; Tripuri (Borok): Tripura; Ladakhi: Jammu and Kashmir; Andamanese: Andaman Islands; Jangil (Rutland Jarawa): now extinct, formerly of Rutland Island, Andamans; Onge: Little Andaman; Nicobarese people (Holchu): Nicobar Islands, India; Shompen: Nicobar Islands, India; Bhutia: Sikkim; Kota: Nilgiris etc.

Lahual and Spiti, Himachal Pradesh has strict rules for non-native people to reside or buy land or plot. Foreigners are being permitted to visit the restricted/protected areas by the authorities specified under Section 3 of the Foreigners (Protected Areas) Order 1958 by the State Government of Himachal Pradesh. Similarly, in Ladakh since May 1, 2014, Indian Nationals or Tourists need to present valid Photo ID, Nationality Proof at the Indo Tibetan Border Police or Army check-posts. However, all foreign nationals need to apply for PAP (Protect Area Permits) in a group of two or more through a registered travel agent in Leh. Acquiring PAP, allow foreigners to visit the restricted areas in Ladakh of Nubra Valley, Tso Moriri, Pangong Tso, and Dah`“Hanu Villages. The States of Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Nagaland and Nicobar Islands have similar types of ILPS imposed in their respective States. The aspirations to protect/preserved Indigenous Peoples of Indian States such as Jharkhand, Meghalaya, Odisha, Sikkim, Telangana, Uttaranchal, West Bengal and other hills regions of India are gaining momentum, because most of the ethnic minority groups believed that over the time they are slowly becoming minorities in their own homeland.

The Constitutions of India, Article 19 (D) & (E) allows all the citizens to move freely throughout the territory of India and to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India, however, sub-clause (5) emphasizes that the State can impose reasonable restrictions on the exercise of any of the rights conferred by the said sub-clauses (D & E) for the protection of the interests of any indigenous community. In Manipur, the said sub-clause of the article has been violated. There is no provision to protect the Indigenous Tribal Peoples`”those who mainly reside in the four valleys districts of Manipur, whose populations, land and cultural identities are day-by-day diminishing. Thus, it is high-time for the State and Central Government to conserve/preserve the indigenous peoples of Manipur, before it is too late!

MANIPUR AND INNER LINE PERMIT SYSTEMS (ILPS)

Manipur comprises of complex set of indigenous Scheduled Castes (SC); Scheduled Tribes (ST) and General categories communities. The tribal Kukis and Nagas dominated the hilly areas, which is about 90% of the land (20089 km2) of Manipur. These two ethnic communities have very closed affinity with Meetei (General and OBC Categories) and shared historically, socially, culturally, economically and demographically`”since thousands of years.

Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reforms (MLR & LR) Act 1960 provide protections of indigenous tribal lands of Manipur in the five Hills Districts of Manipur, which is again strengthened with the recently held Autonomous District Council (ADC) elections and the proposed 6th Schedule to be implemented there. However, the porous Myanmar border provided safe-haven for foreigners to infiltrate in many districts of Manipur e.g. Churachandpur, Chandel and Ukhrul. The very close affinities to the ethnicity, languages and traditions of many Manipuri tribal and the Myanmarese people generally helped the latter to migrate and settle in many parts of Manipur`”without proper documents or verifications. The Acts and Laws thus provided for Manipuri`™s are toothless and are compromised at the cost of the original Manipuri tribal`™s socio-economy, natural resources, land, culture and traditions.

On the other hand, the `Meeteis`™, original ethnic Manipuri people residing mainly in the four valley districts (only 10% or 2238 km2 of the total geographical areas of Manipur) are day by day marginalized due to the pressures from various angles. The general populations of Meeteis are regarded as General Category with small sections of the community coming under Scheduled Caste (SC) and after the introductions of Other Backward Classes (OBC) insignificant numbers of socio-economically backward families were included in OBC categories by the Indian Union.

The history of Meeteis can be trace back to 33 AD, which is very distinct and thousands of years old language and folklores`”found both orally and in written. Culturally, Meeteis can be regarded as one of the community, which has the richest cultures in the World. Indisputably, Meetei with distinct culture, tradition and language can be regarded as true indigenous community as per UN declarations, thus should be protected under the Constitutions of India.

Some of the points that seriously threaten the valley dwelling peoples and their lands in the four districts of Manipur are: 1. The four districts of Manipur is open for any Indian Citizen to purchase or reside, thus the land areas of Meeteis and Tribal are shrinking considerably since Indian independence. 2. Hybridizations due to migrations and immigrations seriously altered the genetic pools of the Indigenous Peoples in valley districts. 3. Dilutions and adulterations of cultures, traditions and languages during last three-four centuries and the significant socio-economic alterations after the merger of Manipur to the Indian Union, will slowly bring the Meetei community to minority level in their own homeland. 4. Though the present population growth rate of Manipur is about 18%, which is more than the national average`”it is believed that the rate is mainly due to immense migrations of non-indigenous communities, foreigners such as Bangladeshi, Myanmarese, Nepalis etc. 5. In Manipur, there is no provision to protect the ST and SC communities who are presently residing in many small pockets of the valley districts and 6. Trans-boundaries subversive activities, thus arise in Manipur can be directly or indirectly linked with our inappropriate plans, policies, programs or legislative actions, which does not provide comprehensive protections for the Indigenous Peoples of Manipur.

The present mass actions taken up by the people of Manipur to introduce ILPS can be regarded as visionaries`™ decisions to safeguard the unique traditions, cultures, languages, lands, natural resources, ecology, biodiversity and environment of Manipur. The political and government wills to protect and safeguard its own subjects, therefore, will give better impetus to bring peace and harmony to the State and to the Nation.

(Author is Associate Professor of Center for Environmental Sciences, College of Natural Sciences, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia and can be reached at gajkh@yahoo.com)

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/ilps-and-indigenous-peoples-rights-manipur/

By Dr.Khomdon Singh Lisam

On 9 July, 2015, our Hon`™ble Chief Minister, Shri Okram Ibobi Singh declared that the State Governor has not given his assent to the Manipur Regulation of Visitors, Tenants & Migrant Workers Bill, 2015, which was passed during the 10th session of the 10th Manipur Legislative Assembly. According to the Chief Minister, `the Bill was extensively recommended following a detailed discussion for more than five months.` The Bill was also rejected by the people of Manipur, which leads to a series of public agitation under the banner of JCILPS.

The unfortunate part is that the death of Sapam Robinhood Singh (16), S/O S. Romesh Singh of Keisamthong Thangjam Leirak , Imphal. a student from the Anand Singh Higher Secondary School on 8 July, 2015 has added fuel to the fire. The State Government has not ordered even a judicial enquire to do justice to the bereaved family and to calm down the agitation. Probably the JCILPS and JAC may like to take up this issue. It is reported that the Manipur Police has filed an FIR against the deceased Sapam Robinhood instead of treating him as a victim of police atrocity. There are many things which US Marshals Service or GSG 9 of Germany or Scotland Yard Police of UK can learn from Manipur Police. Next year, they may be eligible of the President Medal

The Manipur Regulation of Visitors, Tenants & Migrant Workers Bill, 2015 has been reserved for consultation with the President of India

The Chief Minister, after a long silence disclosed that the State Government has submitted the Bill to His Excellency, the Governor of Manipur on 20 March, 2015 for giving Assent. On 23 June, 2015, His Excellency, the Governor of Manipur informed the State Government that the Bill has been reserved for consultation with the President of India under Article 201 of the Indian Constitution. These procedural failures shows lack of transparency and lack of seriousness and lack of leadership on the part of the State Government.

On 15 July, 2015 , the Manipur State Assembly withdraw the Manipur Regulation of Visitors, Tenants & Migrant Workers Bill, 2015

On 12 July, 2015, the Congress Legislators Party decided to withdraw the Manipur Regulation of Visitors, Tenants and migrant Workers Bill, 2015 as passed in the Manipur Legislative Assembly on 16 March 2015. The decision to withdraw the Bill has come after intense public agitation, open defiance of the curfew for more than five days and mounting public pressure to withdraw the Bill. On 15 July, 2015 , the Manipur State Assembly withdraw the Bill. The Hon`™ble Chief Minister expressed his intension to constitute a committee comprising of members from the Joint Committee On Inner Line Permit System (JCILPS) to replace the controversial bill.

The earlier six recommendations of the Political Parties and the comments of the legal experts over a period of five months were rendered useless by the State Government due to poor leadership and lack of seriousness on the part of the State Government.

Who drafted the Manipur Regulation of Visitors, Tenants and Migrant Workers Bill, 2015 (MRVTMW).

Shri Laisom Ibomcha Singh, Hon`™ble MLA stated in the Manipur Legislative Assembly that three officials are responsible for drafting of the Manipur Regulation of Visitors, Tenants and Migrant Workers Bill, 2015 (MRVTMW). He did not mention the names of the officials. If the statement is true, then the three officials are responsible for creating civil unrest and anarchy in Manipur and they should be given forced retirement for misleading and acting against the interest of the people of Manipur and misguiding the Manipur State Government. How and why did the Manipur State Government gave power and authority to the migrant workers for drafting a Bill to control migrant workers in Manipur. Is it not funny.. Recently our Hon`™ble Chief Minister has given forced leave to the Director of JNIMS for committing a lesser crime. The crimes committed by these three officials as mentioned by shri Ibomcha Singh, Hon`™ble MLA. Is 100 times more severe than what the Director of JNIMS has committed. I hope the Hon`™ble Chief Minister may do something serious to protect the prestige and image of the Manipur State Government. Our spineless, deaf and dumb MLAs are maintaining a deafening silence at this critical juncture. They are not interested in public issues. They are more interested in distributing old age pensions to poor senior citizens under video coverage violating the privacy, human dignity and human rights of the poor helpless senior citizens. Probably the JCILPS may like to take up this issue.

Earlier Assurances of the Government of Manipur

On 22 July, 1980, the All Manipur Students Union(MSU) and All Manipur Students Co-ordinating Committee (AMSCOC) signed an agreement with the Government of Manipur to initiate identification, detection of foreigners from 1st August, 1980 of all outsiders and send them back home. On 9 November, 1994, a second such agreement as signed by the AMSU with the Government of Manipur. There have a series of protests and movement for introduction of Inner Line Permit system in Manipur . The response of the state government is quite encouraging . The matter has been under active consideration of the State Government . But till date nothing significant has been done during 1980-2015. This is the proof of efficiency of the State Government.

Earlier Attempts of Manipur Government

1.On 12 July, 2012, the State Cabinet under the leadership of the Chief Minister has passed a CABINET RESOLUTION to urge the Government of India to extend the provisions of the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulations, 1873 to the State of Manipur.

2. On 13 July,2012, in consonance with the public demand for implementation of Inner Line Permit system to regulate inflow of outsiders, the Manipur State Assembly had unanimously passed a resolution to put pressure on the Government of India to extend and adopt the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation- 1873 with necessary changes in the point of details to the state of Manipur.

3. On 3rd August, 2012, Dr. J. Suresh Babu, Principal Secretary (Home) in his letter no. 1/1(12) /2011 Home dated 3rd August , 2012 has sent a simple one page request letter to the Home Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India to extend the provisions of Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation 1873 (BEFR) to the state of Manipur. But there is no evidence of enclosing any background material and justification in his letter for demanding implementation of BEFR-1873.

4. On 5th August, 2012 as a reply to the Ministry of Home Affaires Mr. Geoffrey, Joint Secretary `“Home, Government of Manipur mentioned in his letter no. 1/1(12)/2011 `“Home (PMR-19) dated that ` the state did not have ILP system in the past`? Manipur Durbar was having a Pass System from 1901 to 1950. The Government of India has approved retention of the said Permit System in Manipur vide Mr. G.E.D Walker, Advisor to the Governor of Assam letter no. 120/47/C- 26-27 dated 17th January, 1948 and adopted by His Highness, Maharaja of Manipur on 26 February 1948? Every outside migrant from other states was required to take a Pass for entering the geographical boundaries of Manipur. This is one kind of Inner Line Permit System since the permit was required for entering the geographical boundaries of Manipur . Then how and why Mr. Geoffrey mentioned in his letter that ` the state did not have ILP system in the past`? The action of Mr. Geoffrey tantamount to sabotaging the State Government`™s efforts and hijacking the people`™s mass movement is a serous crime which needs exemplary disciplinary action.

What are the essential features of the New Bill

In this connection, all the essential features of the New Bill has been described in my previous article entitled `Agenda of the Upcoming Manipur State Assembly regarding a New Bill on ILP` which has been published in prominent English newspapers (14-07-2015), E-pao, Manipur Times etc.

The essential features includes (1) Title of the Bill (2) Objectives and Reasons of the Bill (3) Appropriate definition of Permanent Resident with cut off date of 18 November 1950 (date on which Himmat Singh abolished the Permit System ) (4) Compulsory Registration of outside Migrant Workers on payment of prescribed fees with exemption clauses. (5) Penalty and Punishment clauses for delayed registration or non-registration (6) protection of ancestral land of indigenous people (7) Provision for deletion of the names of the migrant workers who entered Manipur after 18 November, 1950 and their descendants from the electoral rolls of Manipur (8) Provision on Ban on employment in Government sector of Outsiders, who entered Manipur after 18 November, 1950 and their descendants. (9) Provision on Ban on joining competitive examinations in higher educational, Technical educational and professional courses for children of Outsiders, who entered Manipur after 18 November, 1950 and their descendants.

If these provisions are not included in the New Bill, it will be incomplete and the indigenous people of Manipur will continue to suffer. Luckily, our Hon`™le Chief Minister ha expressed his desire to include all the features to satisfy the will of the people.

Proposal of the President, BJP, Manipur

Not a single political party should try to take credit for having passed a bill with all essential features fulfilling the wishes of the people. The state government should work with complete transparency in collaboration with other political parties.based on mutual trust. Shri Th. Chaoba Singh, President BJP should be given an important role considering the role, the BJP can play in getting the approval of the Central Government and assent of the president. His suggestions (1) for constituting a drafting committee comprising of Legal Experts, political representatives, civil society representatives, experts, academicians, JCILPS representatives etc (2) holding a State Seminar for 4-5 days where legal experts, civil society representatives, prominent citizens, academicians, women representatives, JCILPS are very appropriate and should be carried out without further delay Shri Th. Chaoba Singh, President BJP may be given the president ship of the drafting committee. The Drafting Committee may invite suggestions in writing from the people within a limited time. If he is given president ship of the drafting committee, it becomes his responsibility to translate it into action.

Engaging a recognized constitutional experts in India will ensure validity, authenticity of the draft and enhance acceptability of the Bill by the Government of India.

The State Government may seriously consider engaging a recognized constitutional experts in India like Ram Jethmalani, Harish Salve, Dr. Subhash C. Kashyap, Madhav Khosla etc to guide the drafting committee . The Government of India will respect and take seriously the views of these Constitutional experts. This simple step will enhance authenticity of the draft and the acceptability of the Bill by the Government of India. The report of the Drafting committee should bear the signature and seal of the recognised Constitutional Expert as a Consultant.

Holding a PUBLIC HEARING will ensure mass participation while preparing the draft bill

One of the Civil Societies (UCM, AMUCO) may be given the responsibility of organising a public hearing in collaboration with other prominent civil societies for 2-3 days by making open invitation of about 2000-3000 people at BOAT to solicit the views of the common people and submission of report to the President of the Drafting Committee.

Getting Assent of the Governor of Manipur

After observing the actions of His Excellency, the Governor of Manipur in case of `Manipur Regulation of Visitors, Tenants & Migrant Workers Bill, 2015` , we may anticipate that even if the Manipur State Assembly passed a perfect Bill in fulfillment of the demands of the JCLPS and the wishes of the people incorporating all the essential features, the Governor of Manipur , in all probabilities is likely to refer the Bill to the President of India under Article 201 of the Indian Constitution. My fear is that the President of India may reject the Bill as unconstitutional. We should not forget the comments of and experience with Mr. Sushil Kumar Sinde, the then Union Home Minister, who is reported to have said, `Our Constitution will not allow such things. Any sensible person who believes in the Constitution will not pass such a bill.` Although he is a member of the INC, no Congress leader in Manipur has got the guts and courage to question Mr. Sushil Kumar Sinde. How can Mr. Sinde say that a regulation which is in force in Arunachal, Nagaland, Mizoram be termed as `unconstitutional`.

Getting Assent of the President of India

His Excellency, the President of India may require to be briefed about the need for implementation of the Inner Line Permit System in Manipur to correct the population imbalance and to protect the indigenous people (natives) of Manipur so as to enable him to give the assent. For this, we need to work in unity irrespective political difference in the greater interest of the people.

Just after sending the Bill to the Governor of Manipur , the Presidents and their team of political parties of Bharatiya Janata Party 282 MPs), Indian National Congress( 44 MPs), All India Trinamool Congress (34 MPs) , Communist Party of India (Marxist) (9 MPs) Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) (6 MPs) should leave Imphal immediately and camped at Delhi to do a lot of advocacy and lobbying with the Central Political Leaders to get the assent of the president.

Mr. Th. Chaoba Singh, President of BJP, Manipur with long years of experience enjoying the confidence of Shri Narendra Modi , Prime Minister of India and his team should stay in Delhi and convince the Union Home Minister, the Prime Minister, BJP President and the President of India till the President of India signs the Assent. He should not try to shrug off his responsibility on some excuses and political difference. He and his team should not come back to Manipur till the President give his assent. Similarly. all the presidents , secretaries of the , Indian National Congress, All India Trinamool Congress, Communist Party of India, Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) should leave Manipur and camped in Delhi to advocate and lobby with the national party leaders till the assent of the President is obtained . If they failed to achieve this mission, the people may resort to many unwanted events including ban of national political parties in Manipur etc. We do not want to repeat the mistakes of 18 June,2001.

What to do if the President of India reject to give assent to the New Bill

A single team of Manipur under the leadership of Shri O. Ibobi Sngh, Chief Minister of Manipur assisted by Shri Th. Chaoba Singh, President, BJP, presidents , Secretaries of All India Trinamool Congress, NCP and CPI, civil society representatives, constitutional Experts should meet the Union Home Minister, Prime Minister , President of India, Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi . All appointments with national leaders should be fixed while they are still in Imphal. Let us shed our ego, pride and arrogance for the sake of people. We may request His Excellency, the Governor of Manipur to work in greater interest of Manipur and meet the national leaders separately. I feel that there is no need for his Excellency to come back to Manipur without fulfilling the wishes of the people.

If the Home Minister , Prime Minister and the President are hell-bent on rejecting the bill, we should exact a promise to support our proposal for amendment of the constitution of India. We may warn them that if they reject all our demands, then there may be burning of Manipur and responsibility should lie with the Government of India.

Demands for Constitutional Amendments

We should have the courage to tell the central leaders that the Government of India has already committed a series of blunders to the people in Manipur during 1949-2001. Referring to the statement of G.K. Pillai, the then Union Home Secretary, which was published on 27 September, 2011 in the Telegraph newspaper, we can say that ` the ancient kingdom of Manipur had a constitution even before India wrote her own and democracy was introduced in Manipur well before India became a democratic country. But Manipur was reduced to a C-category state under the Indian Constitution in 1948. Nagaland was granted Statehood from a village republic in 1963 while Manipur with a proud history of more than 2000 years was granted statehood only in 1972. This blunder of the Government of India has resulted in creating insurgency problem in Manipur. The existing Article 371C of the Indian Constitution is found to be extremely discriminatory and the source of all communal conflicts in Manipur which needs to be amended.
The people of Manipur feel that that the Indian Constitution was imposed on Manipur without ratification. Manipur did not participate in the Indian Constitutional debate held during 9th december,1946 to 24th January ,1950. It was never ratified by the then Manipur State Assembly. Manipur has never asked the Government of India for constitutional amendment during the last 65 years. The Government of India is offering constitutional amendment just o satisfy Muivah, the General Secretary of NSCN-IM whereas we do not have the courage to ask for constitutional amendments.. We strongly feel that only after constitutional amendment, Manipur will be able to bring about communal harmony, unity, equality and solidarity among all ethnic groups of Manipur and achieve peace and development in Manipur. We can further mention that we, the people of Manipur request the Home Minister , Prime Minister, the President of India to find a permanent cure to these past blunders in Manipur and consider amendment of the Indian Constitution. We can not ask for constitutional amendment off and on. Some civil societies are working on ` Territorial Integrity:, some others are working on ` Schedule Tribe Demand ` while JCILPS is working on ` Inner Line Permt System`. All these demands require constitutional amendments. Surprisingly, they never ask for constitutional amendments. Further there are many core issues of Manipur which need constitutional amendments. Considering all these points, our demands for constitutional amendments may include the following :-

Main features of Constitutional Amendments

1. The Article 3 of Indian Constitution regarding alteration of state boundaries shall not apply in respect of Manipur to protect the 2000 year old territorial integrity of Manipur. The last experience of Telengana State formation with the blessings of Sonia Gandhi bypassing the state assembly was a very bad example.

2. The Union List and Concurrent list under the Indian Constitution pertaining to Manipur shall be taken up by the Government of India only with the concurrence of the State Legislative Assembly

3. Since 90% of Manipur is hill area, Manipur may be declared as a Hill State

4. All the ethnic groups in Manipur may be brought under an uniform land laws

5. Any person from other states of India will be allowed to purchase lands only with the approval of the State Government to protect the indigenous people of Manipur.

6. Any person from other states of India shall need an `Inner Line Permit` to enter Manipur on payment of nominal fees to protect the identity, culture, traditions, language, script of the Manipuris . Manipur welcomes all people from other states to visit Manipur . This will have retrospective effect since 18 November, 1950.

7. The Constitution should provide establishment of an upper house (Legislative Council) with a minimum of 40 members with 10 seats reserved for nomination.

8. The Number of Rajya Sabha MPs should be increased to seven (7) on the basis of equal representation of states as done in USA and other countries. Large and small states should be treated at par in the Rajya Sabha or Council of States.

9. The followers of Pakhangba `“Sanamahi religion may be included under ` Scheduled Tribe category` of the Indian Constitution to restore equality among the ethnic groups.

10. The Manipuri script ( Meitei Mayek) should be included in the coins and currency bank notes

If the Home Minister, Prime Minister, the President of India fails to assure the constitutional amendment within a time frame even up to the last moment, the JCILPS in collaboration with other civil societies may launch a more serious, more severe, more intensive mass movement with the people of Manipur including non-cooperation , civil disobedience to achieve our goal. Our Political Leaders may take this single agenda issue with the Central Leaders. Our Chief Ministers with his MLAs and thousands of volunteers may launch a Dharna at the Jantar Mantar till the demand is given.

(The writer can be reached at- Khomdon.lisam@yahoo.com)

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/what-to-do-if-the-governor-refer-the-new-bill-on-ilp-to-the-president-of-india/

Two days of discussion on the Naga political issue with almost all the legislators taking part on the Floor of the Nagaland Legislative Assembly has shown very clearly that not a single legislators of the present 12th NLA is aware of the `Charter of Demands` on which the Government of India and the NSCN (IM) leaders have been negotiating for more than a decade. It can now safely be concluded that the House is kept in the dark of the political negotiations. They, however, agreed that the talks between the two parties have been quite long and for which they should urge them to expedite the process for an early settlement to the Naga political issue.

We all know that the talks have been going on only between the `Government of India and the NSCN (IM),` to be very precise, and most of the legislators or for that matter many political pundits as well as media persons have been referring to that. The Government of India`™s mind is very clear that once the final stage to ink for settlement to the Naga issue is arrived at, they will perhaps start letting Naga legislators know that the solution will be `Inclusive` and other components therein. We have heard what Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Interlocutor RN Ravi have recently told the 19-Member Parliamentary Working Committee (PWC) of Nagaland with regard to the settlement of the Naga political issue. And most of the Members who were part of the 19-Member PWC Team at Delhi enlightened the House of what they heard from the mouths of the Prime Minister and Interlocutor during the two-day discussion on the Naga political issue.

Today, the Central leaders and many Naga leaders have questioned the NSCN (K) on their `unilateral abrogation` of the `Ceasefire` with the Government of India. But none of them has carefully studied as to why the outfit had taken this highly dangerous step knowing fully that such move would only lead to unwanted development.

If we think 18 years of Center-NSCN (IM) ceasefire is very long, then NSCN (K)`™s 14 years of ceasefire with the Government of India cannot be a short one. If one dissects the nature of these two ceasefires, it will be only exposing the confusing or rather insensitive nature on the part of the Government of India. We don`™t know whether Delhi knows the ground realities prevailing here in Nagaland or the issues critically involving neighboring States particularly Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam and even Myanmar. General Secretary of the NSCN (IM), Thuingaleng Muivah, is from the present State of Manipur, while the Chairman of the NSCN (K) SS Khaplang is from Myanmar.

Everyone knows that the NSCN (IM) and NSCN (K) have been deadly rivals since they split into two from their undivided NSCN in 1988 and hundreds of cadres belonging to both of them lost their precious lives only because of the clashes between them. Such factional deadly clashes even continued even after NSCN (K) entered into ceasefire with the Government of India in 2001. But due to the interventions of various civil societies particularly the FNR, the specter of factionalism has come down drastically and the chasm among the factions reduced.

The fact is the NSCN (K) during their long 14-year ceasefire with the Government of India had only suffered beyond repair. They had even suffered split while maintaining ceasefire with the Government of India. Interestingly, and for whatever reason, we don`™t know, the Government of India wasn`™t prepared to hold political talks, not even once, with the leadership of the NSCN (K) in their long 14-year ceasefire, but continues to hold political talks in full swing with NSCN (IM) leaderships since their ceasefire in 1997. This development had made the leaders of NSCN (K) a mockery, besides humiliating them. Had Delhi taken some minimum initiative to even start informal `Political talks` with the leadership of the NSCN (K), things would not have happened as we have seen today. Then, suddenly, everyone including some leaders from Nagaland started questioning why the NSCN (K) should enter into ceasefire with Myanmar government while maintaining with India.

From all the angles and after carefully listening to the two-day discussions on the Naga political issue on the Floor of the Nagaland Assembly on July 23 and 24, it is very clear that the Prime Minister or the Interlocutor to Center-Naga political talks had actually disclosed their minds towards the settlement of the Naga political issue.

When the Prime Minister told the 19-Member PWC from Nagaland that `If I give you 80% of your demand, it doesn`™t mean I am not giving you remaining 20%,` everyone was perhaps caught napping.

The fact is the State Government of Nagaland still decides to remain as `facilitator` – meaning not a real player in the process. This also indicates that the 60 legislators are not a party to the `Talks` between the Government of India and the NSCN (IM). Why 60 legislators because the present Government in Nagaland is all-party Government or Opposition-less Government. Then the question comes that if they are not a party to the `Talks,` then will they have rights to interfere into the process or even asking parties in `Talks` to make their `Charter of Demands` public. The danger is what will they say when the Government of India and the NSCN (IM) take a final decision to resolve the issue. In this case, the State of Nagaland will be only a mere audience to the show.

Knowing this hindrance, Interlocutor Ravi was reported to have told the 19-Member PWC from Nagaland that they should `take up their role higher than the facilitator.` He also said, `What is possible; tell us, we will work together.`

Yet, once the final decision on the settlement on the Naga issue is taken, the Parliament will start discussing on it before approving it and what will the State of Nagaland do at this point of time? The Parliament will revisit the Article 371A for sure for discussion and probably, this process in the Parliament will open up even the 16-Point Agreement as to how it was entered into.

Will the Members of the Nagaland Legislative Assembly accept if the Parliament attempts to undo the Article 371A, which was inserted to the Constitution of India after the Parliament enacted the State of Nagaland Act, 1962, in their endeavor to settle the Naga issue? The Parliament will definitely examine Article 371A and may move for Amendment of Article 371A or some Clauses may be added in the Article 371A or dilute some of them. They may try to give certain economic packages to various Naga areas but not before diluting the existing Article 371A. The fear is some of the Clauses in the Article 371A which give unique power to the people of Nagaland may be diluted and that will be a great handicap to the Naga people particularly the Nagas of Nagaland.

Interestingly, the Nagaland State has survived 52 years, while Delhi continues to engage in talks with leaders of Naga political groups to find settlement to the Naga issue. The Naga sovereignty has been fundamental to the Naga political movement and the Article 371A was for making Nagaland as a full-fledged Statehood.

So, if one clearly examines the two things, the Article 371A has, precisely, got nothing to do with the Naga political issue, as the Center has been persistently engaged in ceasefires with various Naga political groups and holding talks with them to find solution to the Naga issue. Surprisingly, the Naga underground groups generally observe the `Naga Independence Day Celebrations` every year on August 14 and strangely, all these activities happened without much obstruction from the Government side.

These complexities and dangers are noticed by Delhi as they had seen why the Naga issue still remains unresolved even after 16-Point Agreement of 1960 or why the Shillong Accord of 1975 invited more bloodshed among the Nagas. That is why Ravi has wisely informed the 19-Members PWC of Nagaland at Delhi that the State government should play more than a `facilitator,` indicating that they should be part of the process because any settlement which is to be arrived at will be for all of them. Otherwise, his fear is that another piecemeal solution will again come and that he does not favor as it will only be a vicious circle. So he has told the Members of the PWC at Delhi that any solution `should be comprehensive and not a piecemeal solution` and the process should be with `inclusive approach keeping in mind the basic Naga ethos, Naga cultures and Naga traditional systems.`

Some Members, while taking part in the discussion on the Naga issue, have also pointed out on why they should not have another 16-Point Agreement. They have pointed out that though it was good enough for them, the Nagas have not agreed to because 16-Point Agreement was signed without consulting with the Naga national group. That is why the Naga issue still defies solution and the Agreement fails to solve the problem till date.

Another Member said the Agreements, Truces, done in the past were the best ones happened at that point of time, though the solution to Naga issue still remained elusive. He was saying that the present Naga leaders should have more refined approach with the experiences they had from the past political events towards finding solution to the issue.

Bottom Line:

But I honestly feel why the solution to the 68-year old Naga political issue (some says 86 years old counting from the day Naga leaders submitted a Memorandum to the Simon Commission) still remains elusive is because their approach to solution was not with 100% attempts. Can we explain to the Honorable Prime Minister Narendra Modi that attempting with 80% for finding solution to issue which is as old as Indian`™s Independence will only be a piecemeal solution as Interlocutor Ravi has already explained as proven from the past experiences?

Somebody in Nagaland keeps saying PM Modi has guts to solve the Naga issue. I personally feel that `guts` will not solve Naga issue. What is lacking in the leadership of the country is their `love, care, and concern for the people in the region and also wisdom and diplomacy.`

Dear Prime Minister Modi, please learn lessons from your British counterpart David Cameron and former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown whose genuine love, care and concern shown to Scots while speaking to them (Scots) on the eve of the historic `Scottish Independence Referendum, 2014` saved the `United Kingdom` from fragmentation.

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/why-not-asking-prime-minister-modi-to-give-100-to-nagas-not-80/

History of the Inner Line system
By Pradip Phanjoubam

The following article is a summary of three articles the author wrote on the current agitation for the introduction of the ILP. Two of these were for the new and critically acclaimed web journal, The Wire, started jointly by former editor The Hindu, Siddharth Varadarajan and former editor Daily News and Analysis, Sidharth Bhatia. The third written was written for another new web journal, Catch News, started by former editor Hindustan Times, Bharat Bhushan and former editor Tehelka editor Shoma Choudhury.

Under pressure from unrelenting violent street protests in the state, the Manipur government has withdrawn the Manipur Visitors, Tenants and Migrant Workers Bill, 2015 passed earlier by the State Assembly, but which was awaiting the assent of the state Governor Syed Ahmed. With this the Manipur government has bought itself some time and the street agitations have been suspended to give the government the room to come with another law to effectively regulate inflow of migrants into the state.

In a meeting with the media recently, the Chief Minister, Okram Ibobi said another Bill is currently under preparation, and for the purpose wide consultations with experts from various fields are being held. While the state breathes a sigh of relief, it would be pertinent to scan through the history of the demand for the introduction of the Inner Line System in Manipur, as well as the history of the ILPS itself.

A culture of violent agitations

Manipur land administration is as per the provisions of the Manipur Land Reform and Land Revenue Act, 1960, a legislation with a Union Government vintage as it was passed while Manipur was still a Union Territory. The state formally joined the Indian Union only on October 21, 1949 after the then king, Bodhchandra Singh, signed the Manipur Merger Agreement under controversial circumstances while he was under arrest in Shillong, the then capital of Assam, where he had gone for some work.

Manipur was one of the many princely states which resisted merger with India, and when finally it was absorbed into the Union, it was not as a full-fledged state but as a Part-C state, with a status even lower than a Union territory. The speculated reasons for this are many. These include making the state feel insignificant to knock out cold the rebelliousness in it. However, protests after protests with increasing tendencies towards violence, resulted in upgrades of its political status in bits and pieces, until in 1972, it was awarded full statehood. But the belief that only violent protests can make the Union take notice had already been conditioned among local citizens, as R. Constantine notes in his book `Manipur: Maid of the Mountains`. This is also one of contemporary Manipur`™s many tragedies.

The MLR&LR Act 1960 covers only the 2000 sq km central Imphal valley. The hills, which form nearly 90 percent of the state`™s territory, except in pockets, are left out of the purview of this Act to be administered under customary land laws of the communities inhabiting them.

This has also meant legal land ownership transfers can happen only in the fertile valley, which has led to continued shrinking of living space with each passing year. Moreover, though the valley is only 10 percent of land area of the state, more than 60 percent of the state`™s population today is concentrated in it. The topography as well as the population distribution pattern has also skewed the development drives, with much of the developmental funds of the state remaining in the valley area, in particular the capital Imphal.

The consequence today is a sharp divide between the hills and the valley, but this is not all, for there is also a pronounced urban-rural divide. In old colloquial Manipuri, the word for `urban` had come to be `Imphal`, making this rural-urban divide to virtually be in a nuanced but antagonistic way, a binary between Imphal and the rural hinterlands.

Not just in the ongoing street agitations, but in many past unrests in the state, these fissures were visible, and often very pronouncedly. On the need for the introduction of a regulatory mechanism to prevent the ultimate marginalisation of the local population, there is a wide consensus cutting across the state`™s geographical regions. But this need is felt most in Imphal and the other valley districts, for land ownership transfers to outsiders, as it is, are prohibited in the hills.

The Inner Line trouble

The ILPS demand in the valley areas of Manipur has as its driving force a xenophobic fear shared by practically the whole of Northeast India `“ and indeed the larger region encompassing neighbouring Myanmar and Tibet `“ that small indigenous populations are under threat of being pushed to the margins of their own lands by settlers.

The six-year-long `anti-foreigner` agitation in Assam in the late 1970s and early 1980s, which resulted in the cataclysmic Nellie Massacre in 1983; the current Bodo trouble in Assam marked by periodic murderous ethnic clashes; the recent lynching in Dimapur, Nagaland; the expulsion of Nepalis from Bhutan in the 1980s, are all different manifestations of this same xenophobia. Like Manipur, Meghalaya too is demanding the introduction of the ILPS. There have also been demands that the entire Northeast region be put under inner line protection.

The Rohingya tragedy in Myanmar`™s Rakhine state, which neighbours Bangladesh, as much as the Tibetans`™ charge that they have already been reduced to a minority in their own country by the unending influx of Han Chinese, are also an articulation of similar existential angst. Myanmar has brazenly declared that it considers the Rohingyas to be Bangladeshi immigrants.

Agitators in Manipur cite the examples of Tripura and Sikkim to justify their fear of being swamped by outsiders. Tripura is a Bengali state today, and the original Tripuris are in a hopeless minority in their former kingdom. Sikkim, similarly, is a Nepali state and the original populations of Lepchas and Bhutias have been pushed to the margins, needing reservation to remain represented in the government.

In May this year, the Manipur government yielded somewhat to public pressure and introduced the Manipur Regulation of Visitors, Tenants and Migrant Workers Bill, 2015 in the Assembly. However, the joint committee of the ILPS demand called this a sell-out, claiming the draft does not provide the kind of protection that the ILPS guarantees. In any case, the Bill has been reserved by Manipur Governor Syed Ahmed, putting Okram Ibobi`™s Congress government in a quandary.

The history of a line

The ILPS has a curious history. It was introduced in 1873 by the British colonial administration as the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation in the then undivided province of Assam, which included practically all the states of the present day Northeast, except Manipur and Tripura, which were then independent kingdoms. The use of the word `regulation`™ was not accidental and says something about the line`™s original purpose.

As colonial historian E.A. Gait notes in A History of Assam, a Regulation is a summary legislation for `backward tracts`™ as distinct from an Act which are laws passed after discussion in the legislature. By this Regulation, then, an Inner Line was created along the base of the hills surrounding the plains of Assam, and British subjects had to get special permission from the administration to go beyond the line. In essence, the ILPS was meant to protect the British revenue districts of the Assam plains from the `wild` hillmen.

Not long after the British annexed Assam in 1826 after the First Anglo-Burmese War, this new territory, still administered from Fort William as a part of Bengal, began showing revenue potential especially after the Bruce brothers`™ discovered tea in the 1830s. Along with tea were also lucrative prospects in rubber, timber etc.

As the tea gardens expanded, planters began encroaching into the hills, bringing them into friction with the hill tribes, making it essential for the British to take out expensive punitive expeditions. The British, however, did not want to extend their administration into these hills as they believed it would not have been cost effective. Therefore, they thought it prudent to draw a line and restrict planters and other speculators from going beyond. As pressure from the planters lobby mounted, the British did push the Inner Line further into the hills on numerous occasions with simple gazette notifications, as historian Bodhisattva Kar notes in a recent essay.

Hill valley divide

In Manipur, this has been further complicated by the sharp divide, and mistrust, between the hills and the valley, where the capital Imphal is located.

The latest agitation was concentrated more or less in the four valley districts of Imphal East, Imphal West, Thoubal and Bishnupur, with the twin Imphal districts bearing the brunt. Reason?

Although concern over outsiders is shared across much of Manipur, the five hill districts of Tamenglong, Ukhrul, Chandel, Churachandpur and Senapati are already protected. The hills are reserved for the Schedule Tribes, so non-tribals cannot acquire land, unlike in the valley.

The valley districts, spread over 2,000 sq km, account for a tenth of Manipur`s area but over 60% of its population. And nearly all migration, from outside as well as from the hills, ultimately ends up there, increasing congestion. This sense of a shrinking space has made the valley especially sensitive to the migration issue.

In the hills, a section of the population, broadly made up of the Nagas and the Kukis, is apprehensive that the agitation over ILPS would lead to the valley dwellers, the Meiteis, being accorded the Scheduled Tribe status, to the hill folk`s detriment.

Some Meitei voices have been demanding ST status to get benefits of reservation incentives, they are far from unanimous. Many Meiteis, in fact, feel an ST status would make them government job seekers, inhibiting development of other livelihood skills in the community.

Historically, the Meiteis have been better organised and aware than the hill tribes and, therefore, dominant. This is of a pattern described by Prof James C. Scott in his acclaimed book, Art of Not Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia.

Scott`s central argument is that in the entire Southeast Asian massif of mountainous territory punctuated by fertile river valleys – termed “Zomia” – it`s the valleys where “Paddy States” evolve. The relationship between the Paddy States and the surrounding hill populations is seldom cordial because the hill people abhor the idea of the state and are, therefore, continuously in flight from the states` reach.

Many scholars have pointed out problems in Scott`s theory, but most agree that it nonetheless provides valuable clues to understanding ethnic relations in the Zomian theatres of conflict. Manipur would qualify as one.

The state`s problem is that it has failed to adequately address the valley-hill disparity. And it isn`t all Meiteis` fault, as is often presumed. Since it became a full-fledged state in 1972, Manipur has had one Muslim and two Naga chief ministers, one for three terms. None of them did much to bridge the ethnic divisions.

This then is a rough picture of the present trouble and its causes.

In modern times

The Government of India Act, 1919, classified the territories beyond the Inner Line as “Backward Tracts”, leaving them unadministered. The Government of India Act 1935, however, split the territories into “Excluded Areas” and “Partially Excluded Areas”.

The “Excluded Areas” weren`t represented in the provincial Assam government, while representatives of the “Partially Excluded Areas” were nominated by the Governor.

The boundary of the erstwhile “Excluded Areas” is where the Inner Line still exists today – Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram and Nagaland. The Line`s purpose, however, has changed dramatically: it`s now basically a demarcation of protected tribal areas.

Manipur and Tripura were independent kingdoms, thus not subject to the ILPS devised by the British.

Now though, Manipur has a month to agree to the ILPS, or bring a bill modelled on it. The government had initially given itself three months to meet the demand but the Joint Committee JCILPS didn`t agree.

The government has already begun consultations with experts from various fields, including the media and the law, and held all-party meetings.

And it has already received many suggestions to resolve the impasse, one of which is a law similar to the land reform and revenue laws of two non-ST states, Jammu & Kashmir and Himachal Pradesh. While J&K, thanks to its special Constitutional status, outright prohibits outsiders from buying land, Himachal makes it virtually impossible to acquire landed property.

As Home Minister Gaikhangam Gangmei said a few days ago, his government is making all efforts to draft a law that “kills the snake without breaking the stick”.

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/history-of-the-inner-line-system/

Ratika Yumnam

Somehow the word `Atlantis`™ kept repeating itself at the back of my mind when I thought of Chadong, an Atlantis perhaps of lost memories. But unfortunately it is not a myth like Atlantis and reality seeps in like the dam waters. Chadong village of Ukhrul district is the current ground zero for the ongoing Mapithel crisis. The dam, which is a component of the Thoubal Multipurpose Project, was approved by the Planning Commission in 1980 without free, prior, informed consent of the people. It was slated to be completed by 1987, ironically the construction started only in 1990.
More than 8000 people will be affected once the dam is commissioned. 22 villages will have to look for alternative ways to survive. Indigenous communities will be uprooted from their sustainable traditional livelihood. They will be forced to adopt new ways of living, which may not be conducive to their environment and occupational skills. It is not just a story of Chadong, but neighbouring villages like Riha and Thoyee have begun panicking as well. Although their homesteads would not be submerged, their paddy fields will disappear in that watery abyss in a matter of days if the inundation does not stop. A bridge that connects to forest will also submerge, cutting off the lifelines of indigenous peoples who depend on it for their sustenance.
The situation is so bad that there is only one boat, rather two conjoined canoes operating as a boat for the villagers of Chadong. Just a week back, a 7-months pregnant lady had developed certain complications and much to her ordeal, she had to travel by means of that `boat`™, walk 5kms ahead and cross dangerous makeshift bamboo bridges, to reach the only motorable connecting road to Imphal. Her mother-in-law who accompanied her was too scared of the vast water body, as she had never experienced it before in her life. She latched on to one of my fellow activist, who all through this consoledher that it is ok and it is not as scary as it looks.
One might ask what`™s the hullabaloo about a sinking village? Isn`™t that part of `development`™? Of course, there are arguments like `one has to give up something in order to gain another thing.`™
But, in response to that, I would like to present some facts about the Thoubal Multipurpose project. The project itself is comprised of an earthen dam at Phayang village, Ukhrul district, for water supply and power generation; a barrage at Keithelmanbi 17 kms downstream for irrigation; and left and right bank canal system for irrigation. The supposed target benefits from this project is listed as power generation of 7.5 MW (3 generators of 2.5 MW capacity each); 10-12 MGD of drinking water for Imphal city; irrigation of 33,449 ha of land for Thoubal and Imphal East districts; navigation and flood control. However some of the prices, which the affected areas would have to pay for this project range from irreversible ecological to socio-cultural damages. And without proper Social Impact Assessment or even Environmental Impact Assessment done, it is a flagrant violation of the law of the land and abuse of constitutional and indigenous rights. Besides these human impacts, there are also pressing concerns about the scientific practicality of such dams, especially in a seismologically sensitive area like Manipur. Just recently, the small dam at Sekmai had developed cracks (link http://www.thesangaiexpress.com/page/items/53298/sekmai-dam-develops-crack ). Also, one needs to question the validity of such a technology in this age, considering the dam was proposed and sanctioned in the 1980s. A 25-years delay in its construction seems to hint at its obsolescence. In addition to that, projecting dams as clean technology is a myth. In the light of climate change and global warming, dams leave more carbon footprints due to rotting vegetations releasing methane. One example is the Balbina dam at Brazilian Amazon,which is estimated to produce 20-40 times the amount of carbon dioxide produced by coal fired power plants.
Besides these pressing concerns, the Thoubal project, and more specifically the Mapithel dam is an imposed project, accompanied by displacement of indigenous communities, heavy militarization and intimidation. The government of Manipur has breached many of its contracts time and again. Some of the notable ones are listed below:

`¢ An agreement between representatives of some affected villagers and government officials signed in 1993 stated that land compensation would be paid in 2 installments between 1993 and 1994. Instead it was paid in the form of 8 piece-meal payments much later in the years from 1996 to 2005.
`¢ Some landowners still have yet to receive their promised compensation.
`¢ Landowners still have not received 12% interest payment for the delayed compensation delivery.
`¢ Agreements regarding dam-related employment have yet to materialize.
`¢ Rehabilitative measures have yet to be considered or implemented.

Besides these breaches, there are inherent flaws of the contract itself. One basic flaw being the fact that the Memorandum of Agreed Terms and Conditions (1993) was executed only 13 years later after the approval and sanction of the project (1980). Also, construction began without conforming to the international norm of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) of the affected people. Even so, the supposed `consent`™ that the Government took from the affected villagers is highly questionable, considering it was based on false promises and taken under duress. No proper participatory assessment has been done when it comes to various impact dimensions such as environment, health, socio-economic and indigenous cultures. And indeed, no attempt was made to inform or seek the approval of Hill Areas Committee regarding the land acquisition. There is no comprehensive plan for R&R for the landless and landowners whose paddy fields and forest are to be submerged. Fishing and water rights for the affected villagers have not been even discussed. Cost-benefit analysis has not been done, which raises obviousconcerns about the dam becoming a White Elephant project.
The inundation started in January 2015, and the government has failed miserably in providing basic assistance to the affected people. One can only imagine the horrors if an epidemic outbreak occurs in the village.
In the end, my week-long stay at Chadong and the poignancy of the situation reminded me of JiaZhangke`™s movie Still Life. Needless to say, in a very Rhett Butlerian finesse, I would conclude – `Frankly my dear, we don`™t need a dam!`

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/voices-from-another-atlantis/

The state home minister Gaikhangam used an old Manipuri proverb to remind a congregation of senior pressmen yesterday to underscore what the ideal condition for resolving any vexing problem should be: `lin-su hatpa, cheishu-su tektaba`, or `to kill the snake without damaging the walking stick`. The remark sums up quite succinctly what the desired outcome of the push to have the Inner Line Permit System or an equivalent in Manipur should ideally look like. It also is not very far from what the IFP has through the thick and thin of this agitation been saying, even at the risk of facing censures of the blindly passionate. First, Manipur must not surrender its humanity regardless of whatever circumstance it is caught in. Second, more in line with what the home minister said, Manipur must take care that even at the peak of its outrage it does not end up burning bridges, for it is more than likely that sooner than later there will be needs to cross the same bridges again. As somebody not part of the negotiation process, but definitely among all who have a stake in the outcome, we do hope these two thoughts figure among the guidelines before the negotiators when they go about the job of drawing up another Bill to be introduced in the Assembly in the weeks ahead.

What also has to be kept in mind is that the field it not completely open and the Bill will have to fit in a definite and given framework. No marks for guessing this framework is the one provided by the Indian Constitution. If something outside the parameters of the Constitution has to be demanded, this is not the approach road. There are many who are doing just this, as we all know, and they are seeking other routes. The point is, it would be simply futile to put up something which cannot get past the law making process, and something which goes against the Indian Constitution`™s tenets can never become law in India. The Constitution can be amended, but again within very tight limits. Its basic features cannot be changed. But, as they say, politics and diplomacy is the art of the possible, and many things are possible within what seem impossible. This is the exploration that those tasked with coming up with the Bill must be prepared for, lest their efforts are wasted and the state is back in inferno. Considering they also have to do this within a month, the task is going to be Herculean.

In this regard, it would be to the purpose to remind ourselves of a few things. One is what we are witnessing before our very eyes right now. At its crux, the issue is land. Prevent land ownership transfers and half the problem would be resolved. That the hill districts where land is already protected did not see the urgency of the ILPS question as the valley does, is evidence enough. The other point is one the IFP has been making all along. There are some non-ST states, where land transfer to non domiciles is prohibited or else next to impossible. Kashmir is one and Himachal Pradesh another. The second case is interesting. Through perusals of land reform and revenue laws of HP available on the internet and through interviews of Himachali acquaintances on phone, it is certain that land purchase in the state is not easy, if not impossible, for non residents. A specified area of land can be bought by anybody for agricultural purposes, but then which migrant would ever think of going to another state to do agriculture. A non resident can buy a flat of a specified size but not land other than for agricultural purposes. But if no land can be bought, where can estate developers build apartment blocks to make flats available for non residents to purchase? In this way, although the HP government`™s land revenue laws have not in any way contravened the provisions of the Indian Constitution, effectively they still have managed to prevent land ownership transfers to non residents. These need to be studied more closely so that Manipur can also have its way without facing the obstructions from the limits set by the Indian Constitution.

From what has already appeared in the national media thus far on the issue, we also know the mood generally is one of sympathy. Most agree, small identities do face the danger of extinction in the face of radical demography changes. In this regard, HP`™s recent history is fascinating. Till 1966 the present state of Punjab, Haryana and HP formed the undivided Punjab. After the three were separated in 1966, most of the land in HP belonged to the royalties and other feudal of Punjab. It is reasonable to believe HP land revenue laws therefore were also fashioned among others, with ensuring the return of land to HP residents in mind. Those working on the Manipur Bill now would also have to exercise their imagination as HP did. And since there is the precedence of HP, the legal path before the Manipur Bill should not be impossible. Find the way then to kill the snake without damaging the walking stick.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/art-of-the-possible-3/

By N. Albert

I am still in deep shock to see the condition of Wangthoi, a 19 year old boy who was assaulted by the Manipur police commando for taking part in the recent ILP protest. Several questions have been haunting me on how the law functions in Imphal .Some of them are 1)Was not the Manipur police commando commissioned to protect the people?

2) Do they have the authority to beat any person so severely without any orders? 3) If he had commited a crime, do they have the legal authority to punish him? or can they give him instant justice ?this shows that everyone is in danger except some Vips.

4) Where has right to life under article 21 gone ?it states that `the right to life` is a moral principle based on the belief that a human being has the right to live and, in particular, should not to be unjustly treated by another human being.

5) If he had commited a Crime, can the commandos just tell he is guilty without doing trails in Court? or in Manipur, are courts not necessary? or is it a fancy stuff?

The constitution also clearly states if a person commits a crime, he must be prosecuted at a court and must be trailed ?Where has this gone?

6) According to the constitution ,”Whether the complaint ( FIR) is true Or false, does not matter, the Police have no right or authority to beat up or assault the accused even though the concerned court remand ( sent ) him to the Police custody” did they forget this or do they even know or have any idea about this law?. 5)Do the Manipur police Commando have any knowledge about the Indian constitution?

7) Have the commandos forgotten that there is still a law which governs them and they cannot do whatever they like? Has not the commandos crossed their limits?

8)Now,who will take the blame for injuries of Wangthoi?

It`s very sad that in Manipur(which is a part of india),a person can treated like this so badly, or is the Indian constitution not valid here? Moreover ,the government will not do anything and will not book the culprits. This is a serious case of human rights violation and a clear violation of article 21.9)Why is The Modi Government not checking this clear cases of violations? or is he concerned only about trade and money?

10) Even after getting beaten and with several open wounds, he was made to swim in a very dirty drain, is this act correct or is this under the law? or did not they learn some basic science, or are their certificates all bought ones? Even a Child of 7 years knows that an opened wound if exposed has a chance of getting infections and titanus.

11) Where has humanity gone? Are they all barbaric nomads? don`t they have a family? Don`t they have brothers and Sisters?

Moreover, The Constitution states that each and every right is granted to every citizen of India,are not we citizens? or are there still exceptions in terms of citizenship like first class, second class, third class?

Democracy, the law, the constitution has simply failed after all this things that has happened in Manipur, Should I be calling myself a proud Indian? ,a proud citizen? when the government can`™t even grant us a simple basic right.

On July 8th,Sapam Robinhood, a 16 year old boy killed in the ilp protest and many others have been left injured, various questions have been raised on the training given to the commandos to control huge crowds.

The Manipur police commandos is known for being notorious and they are involved in several cases of fake encounters, the most famous one being the killing of sanjit and rabina in plain sight in Imphal in 2011.

The main aim of the commandos should be to protect the people but it seems they are against the people .It`™s very clear that the commandos are a potential threat to democracy and to our rights. The government should punish all the accused and must take up steps to improve the character and quality of the Police for good.

(The writer is student of mmsss, imphal and works for voice for change and can be reached at albert218@live.com)

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/manipur-policea-threat-to-democracy/

By Oken Jeet Sandham

About 20 bandhs and blockades are normally called by several organizations in Assam in a month. Maximum bandhs and blockades are called in Districts of Karbi Anglong, Golaghat and Jorhat bordering Nagaland. Calling bandhs and blockades have become routine affairs in Assam.

They will launch agitations in the form of `economic blockade` and sometimes a complete `bandh.` The bandh will be effective for 12 hours, 24 hours, 48 hours, 100 hours, 300 hours and even 1000 hours, while the economic blockades will be one week to indefinite.

Bandhs and strikes have also become order of the day in Manipur. These days, calling bandh and strikes have become so easy that any community can also do it by issuing a press release to the mass media. One just issues a press statement to mass media for the bandhs, it just works. However, demands of some organizations sometimes do not have merits for calling any bandhs or strikes.

There have been frequent inter-State (Assam-Nagaland) border issues leading to frequent bandhs, blockades and clashes. Many innocent villagers living in the inter-State border areas have been facing untold measures. There are reports that people living in the border areas cannot even go to their paddy fields due to border tensions. Many innocent villagers also died due to inter-State border clashes. Their properties and houses were burnt down during such clashes leading to large scale violence in border areas. The district administrations mostly from Nagaland side used to issue advisory to their citizens from travelling in Assam roads when during such time, while many organizations in Assam would call bandhs, strikes and indefinite blockades in protest against the border incidents.

Nagaland`™s one drawback is it does not have any major roads connecting with its State capital, Kohima without going through the Assam roads. `There are well established roads connecting Assam and the foothill areas,` said Nuklutoshi, Minister for National Highways and Mechanical. `However, these areas do not have direct road connectivity with the state boundaries to travel towards the state capital, Kohima and also to the commercial hub of Dimapur, thus leaving them no other alternative but to travel to Assam.` Therefore, during the bandhs and blockades in Assam, Nagaland and Manipur are literally cut off from the rest of the country.

One of the emergences of constructing `Nagaland Foothill Road` from Tizit in Mon to Khelma in Peren, some 428 kms, bordering Assam, is because of these frequent bandhs, strikes and blockades in Assam. The proposed `Foothill Road` from Tizit to Khelma touches at least six major districts of Nagaland `“ Mon, Longlen, Mokokchung, Wokha, Dimapur and Peren. The construction of the `Nagaland Foothill Road` is also the demand of the people particularly living in the border districts as they thought that once this road is constructed, the people living along the border will not face frequent harassments and sufferings.

Whenever bandhs and blockades are called in Karbi Anglong and Galaghat Districts in Assam, Manipur and Nagaland bound hundreds of trucks carrying essential commodities, hundreds of oil tankers and passenger buses remain stranded in many places in Assam. When such bandhs and blockades run for weeks, the prices of essential commodities in Manipur and Nagaland will skyrocket. There will be long vehicle queues in many oil pumps in Imphal, Kohima and Dimapur adding more traffic woes. Nervous buyers of essential commodities will also be seen in Manipur and Nagaland during such week-long bandhs and blockades in Assam.

The economies of the States are badly affected during such bandhs and blockades. At the same time, thousands of poor vendors who solely depend on their daily sales for their daily livelihood face immense miseries. In fact, the common people are the main sufferers during such time.

A day`s bandh in Assam costs the State exchequer Rs 41.14 crore according to a 2005 study. `This figure must have double by now,` said R S Joshi, president, Federation of Commerce and Industries in the North Eastern Region. Say in a day`™s bandh these days (2015) in the State costs its exchequer Rs 80 crore. Then the State suffers loss of Rs 600 crore if 20 bandhs are there in a month and mind boggling whopping loss of Rs 7200 crore in a year.

According to sources, the frequent bandhs and blockades in Manipur cost State exchequer nearly Rs 2000 crore yearly.

Dimapur-Imphal National Highway Road via Kohima is the lifeline of Manipur. There is another National Highway Road connecting Imphal is from Silchar in Assam via Jiribam, Manipur. But this Imphal-Silchar Road is less traveled comparing to Imphal-Dimapur Road. The only railway service that touches Manipur is Jiribam Railway Station and now construction of railway line from Jiribam to Tupul in Tamenglong is almost completed. The new broad-gauge line from Tupul to Imphal will be completed by March 2016. This project will cover Imphal East, Tamenglong and Senapati Districts.

Dimapur is the only railway station in Nagaland. There is already another proposal for Dimapur`“Kohima (Zubza) railway line. It may be mentioned the proposed railway line between Dimapur and Kohima was surveyed way back in 2008.

Many are questioning as to why even after 68 years of India`™s Independence, no railway services are given to many State capitals of the Northeast including Kohima and Imphal. In fact, five State capitals in the Northeastern Region are yet to be connected with railways.

Nagaland has one airport in Dimapur. The big aircrafts refuse to land in Dimapur airport because it is not only small but infrastructure is so poor that it looks like a vintage airport. It is so pathetic that the passengers have been experiencing one of the most irregular flight services forcing State Chief Minister and Governor to talk to the Civil Aviation and DoNER Ministries to look into the matter, besides many known airlines are reluctant to provide services in Dimapur airport. There is already a proposal for the construction of a new Airport at Razaphema. The Chief Minister along with the officials of the Union Ministry of Civil Aviation already made an aerial survey of the site.

Bottom Line:

The bandh cultures are today deeply rooted in the minds of the many organizations and individuals. Although the SC already bans calling bandhs, many in the Northeastern Region still feel that unless they call bandhs, their voices are not heard of. As we don`™t see immediate solution to these frequent bandhs, strikes and blockades, we have to fight for more airports, more helicopter services, more railway services especially connecting the State capitals and other major commercial hubs in the Region. But to achieve these demands, it looks like having no means again except calling `bandhs, strikes and blockades.`

Look at massive ongoing agitations by students in Manipur for the introduction of ILP system in Manipur. Chief Minister O Ibobi Singh listens to them only after violent protests broke out. It may be remembered that he revoked controversial and draconian Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1985 (AFSPA) from the seven Assembly segments in Imphal areas only after a dozen Manipuri women shed their clothes in front of an Army garrison in the heart of the Imphal and taunted the soldiers to rape them in 2004. This was the culmination of the month-long agitation following the Manorama-rape-and-murder case by the security forces.

The people are made to believe that violent protests, bandhs, strikes are weapons to achieve their demands. Sometimes, it becomes an instrument to achieve goals.

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/culture-of-bandhs-strikes-blockades-in-northeast-but-sometimes-they-become-instrument-of-achieving-goals/

By Dr. Khomdon Lisam

At last wisdom prevailed over our Hon`™ble Chief Minister , Shri O. Ibobi Singh , his cabinet colleagues and members of the Congress Legislators Party. As per Press Release issued on 12 July, 2015 by Shri N. Ashok Kumar, Secretary to Chief Minister, the State Government has decided to withdraw the Manipur Regulation of Visitors, Tenants and migrant Workers Bill, 2015 as passed in the Manipur Legislative Assembly on 16/03/2015 for which a Special Sitting of the Manipur Legislative Assembly is being convened shortly. The decision has come after intense public agitation, open defiance of the curfew for more than five days and mounting public pressure to withdraw the Bill. Now advisors of the Chief Minister must have realized that they have committed a gross blunder in spite of many warnings and deliberately misguided the Chief Minister. Five opposition MLAs namely Dr. I. Ibohalbi , K Sarat, Th Shyamkumar, Kh Joykisan, Samuel Risom insisted on referring the Bill to the Select Committee and walked out of the House in protest in the larger public interest. Laisom Ibomcha Singh , opposition MLA did not participate at the Opposition Walk Out as he was a party to the drafting of the controversial Bill. One very important question is why the Congress Ministry withdrew one bill after another during a span of just one year. Are the ruling MLAs not competent enough to pass non-controversial Bill to fulfill the aspirations of the people. Laisom Ibomcha Singh, Hon`™ble MLA stated in the Manipur Legislative Assembly that three officials are responsible for drafting of the Manipur Regulation of Visitors, Tenants and Migrant Workers Bill, 2015 (MRVTMW). Why did the minister and MLAs allow themselves to be superseded by the three officials. This shows the stupidity, ignorance and cowardice of the Ministers and ruling MLAs. Are they not ashamed of making such a statement in the Manipur State Legislative Assembly, which is considered as sacred temple for the people of Manipur. They are not worthy of sitting in the Manipur State Legislative Assembly.

Immediately after passing the Bill, the Joint Committee on Inner Line Permit System (JCILPS) which is spearheading the mass movement in Manipur announced 18 hours bandh, burnt the copies of the new Bill, burnt the effigies of Shri O. Ibobi Singh, Hon`™ble Chief Minister and demanded immediate withdrawal of the Bill as it is against the wishes of the people

The unfortunate part is that all the members of the Congress party become wiser only after the death of Sapam Robinhood Singh (16), S/O S. Romesh Singh of Keisamthong Thangjam Leirak , Imphal. a student from the Anand Singh Higher Secondary School on 8 July, 2015. He was hit by a tear gas shell during a protest and was declared brought dead to Raj Medicity hospital. I was having great respect for our ministers and MLAs. But their actions proved that they are just ` Heibong Manungda leiba tin ` or `Mithibong Mitambal ` as coined by Mr, Babloo , Human Rights Activist or `Sirum Narumba Meitei` as written by Dr, Komol in his poem Lei Pareng in 1931. They appear to be men of straw . They could not feel the pulse of the people and visualize the future. I have written many articles in prominent newspapers of Manipur in connection with the Inner Line Permit System before, during and after the Manipur State Assembly session .

On the next day (17/03/2015 ) I have requested the State Government to withdraw the Bill and His Excellency, the Governor of Manipur not to give assent to the controversial Bill. Now The Chief Minister, after along silence disclosed that the State Government has submitted the Bill to His Excellency, the Governor of Manipur on 19 March, 2015 for giving Assent. On 23 June, 2015, His Excellency, the Governor of Manipur in formed the State Government that the Bill has been reserved for consultation with the President of India. The Manipur State Government has become very dangerous as they work against the wishes of the people.

John W. Whitehead once shouted “Who Will Protect Us from Our Government?” Our people become sleeping sheeps and our government become government of wolves. A patriot should be ready to defend his country from his government. Denis Fonvizin once said ” A fool is very dangerous when in power.” Once Charles de Gaulle said “I have come to the conclusion that politics is too serious a matter to be left to the politicians.” These quotations become very relevant in the context of Manipur these days. The worst part is that they have done it not due to ignorance or lack of knowledge but due to their stupidity , timidity and cowardice without thinking for the future of our young generation of Manipur. This Bill is found quite contrary to what the people want and therefore anti-people.

I do not want to enumerate the series of blunders /mistakes the State Government and the Manipur State Legislative Assembly has committed. Let us now concentrate on how to salvage the situation and pass a new Bill to fulfil the wishes of the people. Let us explore what to do now.

The Hon`™ble Chief Minister declared that the Congress Legislators Party has decided to convene a Special Session of the Manipur Legislative Assembly to withdraw the bill. Here my request is that the Upcoming Special Session of the Manipur Legislative Assembly may be convened not only to withdraw the Bill but also to pass the Bill . Any consultation with the Opposition Leaders, Legal Experts , JCILPS may be done while drafting the New Bill before the Special Session of the Manipur Legislative Assembly. The date of the convening the Special Session may be decided after finalising the draft of the New Bill.

Minimum Essential Features of the New Bill

The following minimum features may be considered for inclusion in the New Bill :-

(1) Title of the Bill- The title of the present Bill `the Manipur Regulation of Visitors , Tenants and Migrant Workers Bill` is not acceptable to the people of Manipur. The title shows that the Bill is meant to protect the migrant workers and not to protect the indigenous people of Manipur. We need not worry about the migrant workers as there is already an act called `the Interstate Migrant Workmen Act-1979. The Ministers and MLAs should be courageous enough to give a correct and appropriate title. The title may be ” Protection of the Indigenous people of Manipur Bill-2015 “.This title is appealing, . attractive, reflects the main objectives of the Bill and will be able to attract the attention of the Government of India. The second option may be the “Manipur Inner Line Permit Bill -2015″ . The third option may be Manipur Migrants Regulation Bill- 2015.

(2) Objectives and Reasons of the Bill:- The stated objects and reasons of the present Bill is `to maintain tranquillity and public order in the interest of general public and visitors by registering the visitors , tenants and migrant workers`. This is strongly against the wishes of the people.

The objectives of the Bill may be as follows (1) to protect the identity , culture, lands, language, script and business of the indigenous people and permanent residents of Manipur (2) to regulate the entry , employment and settlement of outside migrants to Manipur

(3) Definition of Permanent Resident:- The definition given in the present Bill is : `Permanent Resident means a person who is ordinarily a resident of state of Manipur`. This is really very dangerous. The JCILPS and the people of Manipur feel that this definition will give a blanket right to every migrant worker to buy land and settle in Manipur. The correct definition should be `Permanent Resident means a person born or settled in Manipur prior to 18 November, 1950 ` (day on which the permit system was abolished by the then Chief Commissioner, Himmat Singh ) and their descendants.

(4) Compulsory Registration of outside Migrant Workers on payment of prescribed fees with exemption clauses for students, employees of the Central government etc. The term compulsory means if the outside migrant worker delays or fails to get himself/ herself registered with the authority, he/she will be punished as per provisions of the Act.

(5) Penalty and Punishment clauses for delayed registration or non-registration as provided under the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation , 1873. In the present Bill, there is no provision for punishment clauses .Mr. L. Ibomcha Singh, Hon`™ble MLA in his article under the caption ` An Open Letter to the Deputy CM of Manipur- Another View on the Status of ILP System in Manipur `, which appeared at the Sanagai Express dated 21 April, 2015 wrote ` I apprised the Committee of the legislative competency of the State Legislature to enact a new law under article 19 (5) read with article 35 ( Parliament shall have and the Legislature or a State shall not have power to make laws for prescribing punishment for those acts which are declared to be offences under this Part) to impose the restriction on the entry into or exit from the State of Manipur in the interest of the general public or for the protection of the general interest of the Scheduled Tribe but without penal provision. The statement of Mr. L. Ibomcha Singh,
Hon`™ble MLA is an open declaration that he himself was responsible for passing the bill without punishment clauses. Many legal experts are of the view that any act without punishment clauses is just like a paper tiger.

It appears that the efforts of Mr. L. Ibomcha Singh, Hon`™ble MLA, the members of the Drafting Committee and officers of the Law Department was confined to article 19 (5) and article 35 of the Indian Constitution . They have not gone further to examine the seventh Schedule, Article 245 and Article 246 of the Indian Constitution. The Indian Constitution has given immense power to the State Legislature to enact laws regarding 66 items under List-II , State List and another regarding 47 items under List-III , Concurrent List of the of the seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution. The Legislative power of the State Legislature is further elaborated under Article 245 and 246 of Part XI , Relations between the Union and the States , Chapter 1 , Legislative Relations , Distribution of Legislative Powers of the Indian Constitution. There are many examples where the State Legislative Assemblies of other states has passed State Laws with punishment clauses

5.1The Karnataka State Legislative Assembly passed the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of transfer of certain lands) Act, 1978 (Karnataka Act No. 2 of 1979 ) with punishment clauses of imprisonment which may extend to six months or with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees or with both. (http://dpal.kar. nic.in/pdf_files/2 of 1979 (E).pdf)

5.2.The Andhra Pradesh State Legislature passed an Act namely `the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982` (Act No. 12 of 1982), which was published in Andhra Pradesh Gazette, Part IV-B (E.O.) dated 6th September, 1982 with punishment clauses of imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to five years and with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees`.(http://apland.ap.nic.in/ cclaweb/scan20acts /land grabbing.html)

5.3.The Gujarat State Legislative Assembly passed an Act entitled the Freedom of Religion Act, 2003 (Act 24 of 2003) on 12 March 2003 to provide for freedom of religion by prohibition of conversion from one religion to another by the use of force or allurement or by fraudulent means Under section 5 (3), there is a punishment clause which reads: `Whoever fails, without sufficient cause, to comply with the provisions of sub-sections (1) and (2) shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine which may extend to rupees one thousand or with both.` (http://www.emw-d.de/fix/files/indien-religionsgesetz.pdf)

There are many more examples. I do not want to go further. My plea is that if other state can pass bills with punishment clauses, why not Manipur do it.
(6) protection of ancestral land of indigenous people . At present any outside migrant worker can purchase land in the valley areas of Manipur . The present Bill has no provision on ban of purchase of land or taking the land on long-term lease by migrant workers. The legal experts have recommended for insertion of this clause on ban of purchase of land by migrant workers but the Drafting Committee have ignored the recommendation of legal experts and they have deliberately omitted protection of ancestral land of indigenous people, which is against the general interest of the indigenous/native people of Manipur. Complete Ban on purchase of land except with the approval of the state Government should be inserted in the New Bill.
(7) There should be Provision of deletion of the names of the migrant workers who entered Manipur after 18 November, 1950 (date on which Himmat Singh abolished the Permit System ) and their descendants from the electoral rolls of Manipur .

(8) There should be provision on Ban on employment in Government sector of Outsiders, who entered Manipur after 18 November, 1950 and their descendants.

(9) There should be provision on Ban on joining competitive examinations in higher educational, Technical educational and professional courses for children of Outsiders, who entered Manipur after 18 November, 1950 and their descendants.

I request the Ministers, MLAs , Political Leaders of Manipur kindly to put their heads together and pass a perfect Bill to protect the general interest of the indigenous people of Manipur in the upcoming special session of the Manipur Legislative Assembly being convened shortly .

What I an suggesting is for the future generations and for the young people of Manipur. The young generations of Manipur will not ask our political leaders in which party they contested election. But they will definitely ask what you have done for Manipur. They will blame and curse out political leaders for committing blunders after blunders destroying the unity, peace and development Manipur

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/agenda-of-the-upcoming-manipur-state-assembly-regarding-a-new-bill-on-ilp/

By Oken Jeet Sandham

The `Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFSPA)` and the `Disturbed Area Act (DAA)` are synonymous with the people of the Northeast India. The rest of the people of India might feel otherwise on hearing such Act imposed on the Northeastern States. But to the Northeastern people, it is not new thing as they have been living with these Acts for decades.

What is AFSPA or DAA? Once any area of any State or Union Territory or the whole of any State or Union Territory of the country is declared as `Disturbed` as per the Section 3 of AFSPA, the members of the armed forces are empowered with certain special powers to act in those areas declared as `Disturbed.` And currently, most of the Northeastern States of India are under the purview of the DAA and thereby empowering the Indian armed forces to act under the most controversial and draconian AFSPA.

Under this Act, any commissioned officer, warrant officer, non-commissioned officer or any other person of equivalent rank in the armed forces may, in a disturbed area:-

(a) if he is of opinion that it is necessary so to do for the maintenance of public order, after giving such due warning as he may consider necessary, fire upon or otherwise use force; even to the causing of death, against any person who is acting in contravention of any law or order for the time being in force in the disturbed area prohibiting the assembly of five or more persons or the carrying of weapons or of things capable of being used as weapons or of fire-arms, ammunition or explosive substances;

(b) if he is of opinion that it is necessary so to do, destroy any arms dump, prepared or fortified position or shelter from which armed attacks are made or are likely to be made or are attempted to be made or any structure used as a training camp for armed volunteers or utilized as a hideout by armed gangs or absconders wanted for any offence;

(c) arrest without warrant, any person who has committed a cognizable offence or against whom a reasonable suspicion exists that he has committed or is about to commit a cognizable offence and may use such force as may be necessary to effect the arrest;

(d) enter and search without warrant any premises to make any such arrest as aforesaid or to recover any person believed to be wrongfully restrained and confined or any property reasonably suspected to be stolen property or any arms, ammunition or explosive substances believed to be unlawfully kept in such premises, and may for that purpose use such force as may be necessary.

So the Act simply gives carte blanche to the Indian armed forces in the areas declared as `Disturbed` in the name of assisting the Civil Administration. In all these, they are immune as no prosecution, suit or other legal proceeding shall be instituted, except with the previous sanction of the Central Government, against any person in respect of anything done or purported to be done in exercise of the powers conferred by this Act.

This Act is draconian and simply an anti-democracy. This Act is nothing but a license to kill indiscriminately. This Act also fundamentally conflicts the Fundamental Rights enshrined in the Constitution of India. This Act must go and it should no more be used in this modern and civilized world. But sadly, this Act is still in force in many Northeastern States.

One must remember that to give such draconian power to the security forces fighting against the Naga underground people, Delhi, for the first time, brought out the `Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act` Bill in 1958. The Bill was passed by both the Houses of Parliament and it received the assent of the President on 11th September, 1958. Yet, this Act has become one of the most controversial Acts today in the country `“ drawing flaks from around the world. Nagaland was like a laboratory theatre for the Indian army to experiment the new `Act.` Imagine, the hell bent in the 50s, 60s, 70s when so-called a few educated Nagas had hardly realized the nature of the Act. Only after decades, people started raising the specter of it.

Now the relative peace is prevalent at least in Nagaland because of the ceasefires with various Naga underground groups. At the same time, the Government of India has been holding political negotiations with the leaders of the NSCN (IM) for nearly two decades for finding permanent solution to the Naga political issue. Of late, there have been attacks on Indian security forces by NSCN (K) and unfortunately, they started such attacks on them (security forces) after unilaterally abrogating their 14-year truce with Delhi in March this year.

However, the civil societies, state government and many stakeholders have been requesting the Government of India as well as the leaders of the NSCN (K) for resumption of their ceasefire as it is also the desire of the people of the state.

While doing so, the Centre declared entire Nagaland as a “disturbed area” stating that a “dangerous condition” prevails in the state and armed forces should assist the civil administration in maintaining law and order. This again gives the sweeping power to the Security forces under the draconian Act — AFSPA.

In a gazette notification, the home ministry said that it was of the opinion that the whole state of Nagaland is in such a disturbed or dangerous condition that the use of armed forces in aid of civil power is necessary.

“Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act 1958, the central government hereby declares that whole of the said state to be a disturbed area for a period of one year with effect from June 30, 2015 for the purpose of the act,” the notification said.

Chief Minister TR Zeliang and several civil societies in Nagaland expressed their discontentment and anguish over the Center`™s declaring the entire State as a `Disturbed area.` They have demanded for immediate revocation of the AFSPA from Nagaland.

In fact, for the last many years, when NSCN (K) was in truce with Delhi for 14 years, there was relative peace in Nagaland. Even leaders of various Naga underground factions had developed good rapport among them after the Forum for Naga Reconciliation (FNR) put unprecedented efforts for reconciliation among them. So, relative peace has been prevalent in the state.

Soon after Neiphiu Rio became the Chief Minister of Nagaland in 2003, his Government had been opposing tooth and nail to Delhi`™s attempts to extend `disturbed area` status in the state citing various reasons of the relative peace in the state. In spite of such requests from the State Government, Delhi turned a deaf ear and announced extension of `Disturbed area status` as if the situation in Nagaland was like 80s or early 90s. They had no compunction to the honest recommendations of the State Government.

As such, the Center`™s recent extension of `Disturbed area` for another one year in Nagaland is not unexpected. Whether there is peace or violence in Nagaland, Delhi has the same mind and cannot see the changes taking place in the State even after their prolonged political negotiations with the Naga underground leaders and truces with them. They cannot even trust their comrade Kiren Rijiju, Union Minister of State for Home, in-charge of Northeast, as could be seen from his startling revelation that he was not aware of the Center`™s recent decision to declare entire Nagaland as `Disturbed area` under the AFSPA.

We should also be ashamed of what the UN and Amnesty International questioning the AFSPA some years back and they even already asked India to revoke it from the Northeastern States of India saying it had no place in Indian democracy, besides it clearly violates International Law.

It now appears that DAA may continue to be in force in Nagaland even if the Naga political issue is resolved. The leadership of the country has not realized till now that the AFSPA is anti-democratic and against the very Fundamental Rights enshrined in the Constitution of India.

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/should-nagaland-be-really-under-disturbed-area-status/

`Mustn`™t we come out and participate ourselves if we like the students and young-bloods to be spared`?

By JN Lai

If possible humanity in a borderless world is one super beautiful notion. But those powerful governments, nations, groups on the planet are real bellicose. Their dominant minds and discriminatory hands make John Lennon`™s `Imagine` impossible as of now. Survival struggle for weaker peoples, tiny groups like us are the most challenging reality amidst such gluttony world created and controlled by the cruel majority. So now, such a scanty population of 1.5 million of Manipuris `“ what will we do – sacrifice for the sake of mindless majority? Or, survive by saving our land, language and culture?

This hilly terrain of 22,327 sq km, in the Eastern Himalaya is abode of indigenous 36 peoples, majority of whom are distinct from the rest of Indians and more akin to South East Asia. The total estimated population is about 2.7 million including about 1.2 million migrants as of 2015.

In 1947 Manipur regained her independence from British and in 1948 established a democratic form of government on her own after the first universal franchise in the whole Southeast Asia. Suddenly in 1948, she was made a controversial part of India. Thus, over the last 60 years, influx population from across the border, Mainland India, Nepal, Bangladesh and Myanmar have been a threat to this tiny indigenous population of Manipur. The migrants are coming here undocumented to add more salts to the injury; most of them are contributing crimes, violence, tension, socio-economy hurdles, environmental pollution, etc. They got here so easily due to absence of regulation systemformigration and attractions like less population density, better economic, easy means of earning and livelihood in Manipur.

What students groups and civil societies of Manipur has been proposing to our Government since 1980 is a meaningful safeguard of indigenous communities of the soil in light of extinction of indigenous Tripuris on their own ancestral land. The ongoing protest itself is the continuation of the noise for the protection of endangered indigenous peoples in our own ancestral land both of hills and valley. This is not something against the community coming to and staying in Manipur. This is for an effective regulation in checking the undocumented migrants and to administer their activities properly along with the preserving our valuable land, language, resource, environment, culture and identity.

The JCILPs demands:

* A permit for migrants as regards their purpose, whereabouts, etc.

* No land ownership rights to the migrants who came to Manipur after 1951.

* A full-fledged labour department for migrant registration.

* Detection and deportation of illegal migrants, etc.

However, Government`™s stubborn attitude is the ever sustained mammoth challenge. Always, so called people`™s representatives in the government reject readily no matter how good and meaningful proposals of the citizens are. In the eyes of public, ministers and MLAs are becoming mere a real danger, anti-people, anti-welfare; truly an enemy indeed.

The bottom lines; First, as Manipuris know that Manipur Regulation of Visitors, Tenants and Migrant Workers Bill 2015 is very weak, rather an indigent response of the present Ibobi government to the demands of Joint Committee on Inner Line Permit system (JCILPs) this is reason why ongoing protest is coming up. Simply so, why we should compromise again in next 2017 Manipur State Assembly Election with the MLAs. Shouldn`™t we show our people`™s power soon there?

Second, there are a good few of us who mere good at criticizing civil societies, JCILP. They even don`™t know student groups are main components of JCILP.Other than taking safe-side, mustn`™t we come out and participate ourselves if we like the students and young-bloods to be spared?

(The writer is Assistant Professor at the International Education Dept, University of Suwon, South Korea)

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/john-lennons-imagine-impossible/

By Oken Jeet Sandham

When the NSCN (K) unilaterally abrogated ceasefire with the government of India in March this year, nobody took it very seriously. Many in Indian side were wondering when the outfit had entered into ceasefire with the Myanmar government, while many intelligentsias felt that such truce with Myanmar government indirectly undermined Delhi`™s truce with the outfit. Such attitudes coming from India side have also actually undermined the capability and integrity of the Myanmar government.

We should know that there are many insurgent organizations fighting against the Myanmar juntas for decades. The country had the notoriety of being run by the Military for decades and their administration was so fragile that it became one of the most backward and underdeveloped countries in the world. And somewhat a ray of hope started coming in when the democracy started taking over the Military government. It is a matter of shame on the part of Indian government that it being the largest democratic nation in the world terribly failed to help restore democracy in Myanmar. The Western countries played important roles in restoring democracy in Myanmar. It was remarkable that as soon as the civilian government took over the Military government, the President of the United States of America Barack Obama visited Myanmar and met Myanmar President Thein Sein and Myanmar democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi. It was heartening to see the joint press conference of Obama and Kyi held at her house in Yangon, Burma. Obama`™s visit had literally sent a very positive message across the world and greatly motivated the hard lined Myanmar Military leaders that their (Myanmar military juntas) job was different.

On the contrary, the past Indian Primes Ministers had not tried to visit Myanmar. Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Bhutan as soon as he became Prime Minister and not Myanmar. Top brass of Indian Army would visit Myanmar mostly to discuss about the northeast insurgents. New Delhi fails to realize that democratic Myanmar is better than Military Myanmar.

Ethnic minorities make up about a third of Myanmar`s population of roughly 50 million. They mostly live in the seven states and divisions named after the Shan, Kayah, Karen, Mon, Chin, Kachin, and Rakhine ethnic groups. Now look at the fast democratic development in Myanmar and the series of positive developments taking place with various insurgent groups operating in the country. It is not only NSCN (K) that has large presence there but there are also dozens of ethnic minority insurgent groups fighting for greater autonomy or independence from the dominant ethnic Burman majority. Myanmar military have been fighting with them for decades with no solutions in sight. It is only after democratic government coming in that series of ceasefires have been declared with many of these groups. It is nothing wrong when the NSCN (K) entered into ceasefire with the Myanmar government as they have their large presence in the country, besides the outfit`™s chief, SS Khaplang himself is a Myanmarese Naga. In fact, it is a blessing in disguise as such ceasefire with Myanmar government will immensely lighten the burden on Delhi. It is generally believed that the Naga issue may defy solution without the cooperation of the Myanmar government.

Soon after the unilateral abrogation of ceasefire with the Government of India, the NSCN (K) started attacking on the Indian security forces particularly Assam Rifles in Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh. However, Delhi still shrugged it off as none existent without even reacting to it. However, the BJP-led NDA government`™s blue-eyed boy, Kiren Rijiju started using highly unfavorable and provocative languages. He, however, denied making such statement after about one month.

Interestingly, the Center and its army did not realize of NSCN (K) and its fraternal ties with many insurgent groups in the northeast till such time when Indian army was badly attacked on June 4 last month in Manipur`™s Chandel district bordering Myanmar. 18 soldiers were killed while scores were injured in the deadly attack. The incident drew worldwide attention and neighboring countries, Myanmar, Pakistan and China, sharply reacted to the subsequent statements of Indian authorities.

But in Nagaland, the situation is different which Delhi fails to realize. For Delhi, Indian army will be the answer in such a situation like the one happened in Manipur on June 4 last. The Nagas cannot afford allowing saber-rattling between the Indian army and any Naga underground groups, because they had suffered enough and experienced all sorts of tragedies due to unresolved political conflicts over half-a-century.

The TR Zeliang opposition-less government in Nagaland has hurriedly constituted the Nagaland Legislature Forum (NLF) with the objective of apprising the Central leaders to expedite the peace process with the Naga underground leaders for an early solution to the Naga issue. They are also urging the Government of India not to abrogate the ceasefire with the NSCN (K), while resolving to request the Naga Hoho and Eastern Nagaland Public Organization (ENPO) to send a delegation to meet NSCN (K) Chairman SS Khaplang for resumption of ceasefire with the Government of India as it is also the desire of the state government as well as the people of Nagaland.

During Neiphiu Rio`™s regime in Nagaland, the Joint Legislature Forum of Nagaland (JLF) was formed. It was momentous in the history of the Naga Political issue when the entire 60 legislators under the banner of the JLF could boldly display a show of unprecedented unison to the Central leaders for the cause of the settlement of the Naga political issue. But sadly, they lacked the courage to influencing the Government of India and the NSCN (IM) to make their `Agenda` public. Today, the process is 18 years old. But much to the chagrin, none of the party—be it his (Rio) Government or Delhi or NSCN (IM) — could make the status of the process public.

It is still very complicated as to how NSCN (K) chief will be convinced for resumption of ceasefire with Delhi while the latter is not showing any sign for immediate resumption of ceasefire with the former. Looking at the fast emerging trend in the aftermath of the NSCN (K)`™s unilateral abrogation of ceasefire and their subsequent attacks on Indian security forces, the Naga peace process appears to be more complex and grim.

Northeast people do have historical relationship with Myanmar people, besides many villages of Nagas and Manipuris are in Myanmar. It is reported that there are six Naga MPs in Myanmar while two Naga MPs in Indian side. The Myanmar army`™s going against NSCN (K) in Myanmar has slim chance as these six Naga MPs will uproar. Delhi needs diplomatic channels with its counterpart in Myanmar instead of asking them to flush out NSCN (K) or any other northeastern insurgent groups from their soil.

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/delhi-fails-to-know-myanmar-and-northeast-people/

Respected Sir,

Most of the examinations conducted by the MPSC do not happily get finished without a controversy. Be it for a right reason or wrong reason. We do find instances where many candidates who felt Set down use to take legal recourse for redressal of their grievances. I am also one of such candidates who have fought retentfessly to get to the bottom of the alleged violation of the MCSCC Examination Rules in the conduct of 2010 MCS/MPS exam. My whole fight actually began when I was informed by the MPSC vide RTI reply dated 05-11-2012 that I had not obtained the qualifying mark in the General English paper and as such my other seven main papers had not been evaluated by virtue of the provision incorporated under Note (ii) of Section II of Chapter It of the aforesaid Rules. Surprisingly, it was later found that all my seven main papers had been duly evaluated by the concerned examiners which virtually put me in the fourth position of the overall written test of the said exam. Leaving aside all these for a while, what concerns us the most at the moment is how MPSC had applied the same provisions of Note (ii) in 2010 exam and subsequently in 2013 & 2014 exams. To get a complete picture of 2010 exam, we need to move a little back to the court proceeding. During the writ proceedings, MPSC by filing an affidavit had submitted that that the provision under Note (ii) is only a directory rule, but not a mandatory rule that until and unless the qualifying paper (General English Paper) is examined and the result thereof is out, the other papers cannot be examined. MPSC further submitted that there is no such legal necessity that the General English paper should be examined first and therefore, under compelling circumstances, all the papers of the candidates including General English paper were examined at the same time (simultaneously) to save time, money and everything. Thus the initial statement made by the MPSC in their RTI reply which indicated non-evaluation of my seven papers on account of my failure to obtain the qualifying mark in General English paper and the later statement made by the MPSC in their affidavit regarding simultaneous evaluation of all the papers including General English paper are contradictory to one another. Even though the Hon`ble High Court of Manipur has also decided the case in my favour, the controversy surrounding 2010 exam does not seem to end even today. The recent development has further put a serious question mark on the credibility of those officers of the MPSC who were at the helm of affairs during 2010 exam, I had filed another RTI application on 01-10-2014 but this time with respect to 2013 and 2014 examinations. The information which I sought were how many candidates have failed to qualify in the General English paper in 2013 and 2014 exams and whether the remaining seven main papers of those candidates who had failed to qualify in the Genera! English paper have been evaluated further or not. Despite my repeated request, MPSC refused to furnish the information. Then I had filed a complaint petition before the Central information Commission (CIC). On the direction of the CIC, Manipur Information Commission took up the matter and summoned some officials of the MPSC. Consequent to that, the information has been finally provided by the MPSC after almost eight months vide RTI reply dated 12-06-2015 which reveals that only 7 candidates in 2013 Exam and 14 candidates in 2014 Exam had not qualified in the General English paper and the other seven main papers of the said candidates had not been evaluated, (in 2010 exam, 109 candidates were deliberately disqualified in General English paper).Therefore, the subsequent action of the MPSC clearly implies that 2013 and 2014 exams had been conducted with maximum care keeping in mind the legal requirement as envisaged under Note (ii) of the examination Rules.The word `directory` as cleverly invented by the MPSC in order to sweep the irregularities of 2010 exam under the carpet had ultimately become a `mandatory` one in the subsequent examinations.Summing up, the latest RTI reply which has vividly reflected MPSC`s strict adherence to the examination Rules in 2013 and 2014 exams regarding evaluation of seven main papers of only those candidates who had qualified in General English paper almost confirms that MPSC had altogether violated the provisions of note (ii) in 2010 exam. This again leads to the logical conclusion that the MPSC had also made a conscious attempt to interfere with the due judicial process by misinterpreting the provision of note (ii) as a “directory” rule. Lastly, MPSC may win or lose court cases but somebody has to be necessarily there to take cognizance of serious acts of impropriety or immorality committed by any of its officials. Always switching to the idea of fighting every case in a court of law by hook or by crook is not a healthy proposition for a constitutional authority like MPSC. Legal expense is not a big deal for MPSC so long as they are getting adequate fund from the State government. But for an individual litigant, it is an uphill task to fight a case financially.Transparency and accountability is what everybody expects from MPSC but not `manipulation` `discrimination1 and `litigation`. The deadly combination of this trio can ruin the entire lives of many deserving candidates.

Yours Faithfully
Hanjabam Bobby Sharma
S/o H. Kunjakishor Sharma
BrahmapurThangapat Mapal, Imphal East

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/mpscs-latest-rti-reply-hints-at-massive-irregularity-in-2010-mcs-exam/