United Naga Tribes Association of Border Areas (UNTABA) has demanded immediate setting up of border guards in all border villages to protect the people and their land.
This was part of a 6-point resolution adopted during the “Peoples’ dialogue on border issue between Assam and Nagaland” organized by UNTABA on Saturday.
UNTABA has also resolved that all the recognized villages of Nagaland in border areas must be protected by the state government and Naga settlements should not be allowed to be disturbed by outsiders.
The association demanded that the point no. 12 of the 16-point Agreement made between the Government of India and Naga Peoples’ Convention regarding the inclusion of all Naga areas under Nagaland and subsequent resolutions passed by Nagaland Legislative Assembly for geo-political integration of Naga people be implemented in letter and in spirit.
The purpose of formation of the border affairs department should be redefined and same department should work for the welfare of the Naga villages in the border areas, said UNTABA.
The association said all the bilateral and tripartite agreements signed between Assam and Nagaland should be reviewed and settle the border dispute on the basis of historical facts.
It was also resolved that Nagas would now work together irrespective of tribal or other organizational affiliations in matter of reclaiming and protecting the land.
Manen suggests measures
Before the adoption of the 6-point resolution, former additional chief secretary T.N. Manen in his keynote address suggested short term and long terms measures to deal with the vexed inter-state border issue.
Giving a detailed background on the issue since British colonial period, Manen said short term measures to be adopted by the state government included strengthening of police posts and other police forces like Village Guards (VG) along the border to counter territorial aggression from the other side.
He said border magistrates could be strengthened by placing them at strategically important places besides offering special package for socio-economic development of the border areas. The former additional chief secretary said it was imperative for the border areas to be developed in terms of infrastructure like road connectivity; electricity; water supply; school and other basic essential services.
Since the over 50 year old boundary issue could not be settled through a boundary commission so far, any attempt to search for an acceptable solution through a commission, negotiation, SC recommendation, arbitration award or through any other means, the important factors which could not ignored were legal, Constitutional provision, ground reality and most importantly the traditional ownership rights.
The former additional chief secretary pointed out that over the years, Assam had taken possession of Naga territories by default after the end of British rule.
Manen also reminded that Nagaland Assembly had passed a number of resolutions since 1964 urging the government of India to constitute a boundary commission to examine the boundary dispute between Nagaland and Assam.
While the government of India in 1970 appointed Sundaram as advisor in the Ministry of Home Affairs and was assigned to study the “factual realities” on the boundary issues.
Though Sundaram had toured the border areas, he demitted office without submitting a final report. Hence, the government of India told SC that any reference to Sundaram Committee paper were of “no value as documentary evidence” on February 29, 1986.
Manen said due to inordinate delay in addressing the Assam-Nagaland boundary issues, serious tension developed along the border areas in Golaghat, Jorhat and Sibsagar districts. After few border clashes, interim agreements were signed to contain the tension and maintain peace.
However, one of the salient features, of the agreements was that the overall operation of “neutral force” the CRPF and Assam Rifles was to be with the additional IG of Assam and he was to be assisted two DIGs, one each state from Nagaland and Assam.
Manen also alleged that Assam had taken advantage of its custodial responsibility by exploiting the neutral force.
Assam increased its police outposts to 49 and allowed settlement within DAB areas despite protests from Nagaland.
Since then, the two states had seen the Merapani incident in 1985 and the appointment of Shastri commission by the government of India that recommended allowing Assam to assume administrative control of all areas within the existing 1925 boundary line till a permanent solution was worked out.
However, the 1925 notification could not be accepted by Nagaland as it was only a notification issued by the British for administrative convenience, said Manen.
In the meanwhile, Assam further increased its deployment of police – Armed police 34 posts, Civil police 8 posts, Village Defense Force 10,000 besides the 20 posts for the neutral forces. While Nagaland hardly had about 10 armed police force and 4 civilian police posts along the border.
Manen also opined that the proposed Special Development Zone (NSDZs) was a good idea in principle but in the present format, it would be “ruinous” to the state.
Before the keynote address, UNTABA chairman Hukavi T. Yepthomi said due to lack of commitment by Government of India and the lack of unity amongst the Nagas, the border issue had been sidelined for so long.
He said successive state governments and bureaucratic hierarchy have been finding it very convenient to shift the responsibilities on the issue.
Hukavi said people also attributed the failure to find a solution to the “unsettled Naga political issue.” He said even if the Nagas get political sovereignty and failed to safe guard “our own land”, the same would be “meaningless.”
The panelists during the dialogue included T. N. Manen, Dr. P. S. Lorin, principal of Tetso College; P. Leonard Aier, principal of City Law College, Dimapur; T. C. Kithan (Retd) DC; Dr. Visakhonu Hibu, principal of Japfu Christian College, Kigwema and K. Temjen, publisher and editor of Tir Yimyim.
The others who spoke during the dialogue include UNTABA advisor board member Yeangpong Konyak; former president of PPC Hamnyei Phom; Ao Sended vice president T. Lanu Imchen; IPS (Retd) NN Ngullie; advisor RNPC GK Rengma, ZB (N) vice president Raitu Elu; Naga Hoho VP HK Zhimomi; president ENPUD.
There was also an interactive session with the audience participants before the adoption of the resolution.
RELATED POSTS
View all
