NTC hits out at CM’s proposal for LoC

Deliberating on the proposal made by Nagaland chief minister T.R. Zeliang to Centre to introduce a Line of Control (LoC) over the disputed border with Assam, Nagaland Tribes Council (NTC) expressed surprise saying it was a complete abandonment of the age-old Naga demand “Return Us Our Ancestral Land”. NTC media cell said the matter was deliberated at an emergency meeting in Zunheboto Rest House wherein it was recalled that the demand of Nagas on Simon Commission 18 years before the British left India, was for the return of Naga forest lands transferred to Sibsagar in Assam for “better administration and management of forest, in addition to other political issues”.

NTC reminded that the disputed land was repeated in 1948 in the famous Sir Hydari or 9-Point Agreement and again raised in 1963 in the 16-Point Agreement between the Naga People’s Convention (NPC) and government of India. From statehood in 1963 till date, Nagaland has been demanding the “Return of Our Land” said NTC but the chief minister was now harping on a completely new idea “not in conformity with our unwavering age-old stand.” NTC referred to the chief minister’s proposed LoC which sought to (i) prevent new settlement in the disputed land and (ii) place additional guards in the border to prevent disturbances in the area.

The very same concept had led to an Agreement in 1972 between the chief ministers of Assam and Nagaland but which could not prevent either “further settlement” nor “turmoil in the area, said NTC.

NTC said Assam instead used the ‘Status Quo Agreement” to occupy more land and used the “introduced so-called neutral force” to its advantage and therefore, there can be no stoppage of (i)new settlement or (ii)turmoil in the area. 

According to NTC, the first and foremost need was for demarcation of the border which has to be done outside the court on mutual accord. It also mentioned that Assam had filed a case in the Supreme Court (SC) against Nagaland which was still in the court for nearly a decade. In the meantime, NTC said the court appointed two experienced retired justices, who are renowned in mediations as Supreme Court mediators to suggest ways and means for an amicable solution to the border row. NTC termed the court’s decision as “an unusually wise consideration” where Nagaland “must strongly insist on mediated settlement in mutual consent” by both states. SC mediators held numerous discussions with officials of both states, various NGOs and concerned citizens, said NTC. While Nagaland has maintained its stand “in no uncertain terms” including all NGOs, NTC expressed surprise at the chief minister for “coming out with a new idea, completely unfavourable to the state of Nagaland”. 

NTC opined that the chief minister had not sufficiently done his home work on the border issue and reminded him that he has to take the citizens of Nagaland into confidence on such vital issues. NTC said it strongly desired that the chief minister “care more to what happens to the land under jurisdiction of the Nagas of Nagaland” and concluded, that the suggestions of the CM “may do more harm to Nagaland than good”.