PIL controversy attracts more flak

Criticizing Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay for filing a PIL in Supreme Court against the proposed implementation of ILP in Dimapur and stating that it was not on unexpected lines or surprising to Nagas, Central Nagaland Tribes Council (CNTC) has urged all indigenous non-Naga organisations of Dimapur to demand immediate withdrawal of the PIL.

CNTC vice-president Hukiye Yeptho in a statement said the council was relieved to see that majority of Nagas had finally woken up on the issue of influx of immigrants, which it termed as a sitting time bomb. 

Stating that people had slept for too long or just pretending to be, CNTC added that the credit for persuading the State government to table ILP in the state Assembly went to Joint Committee Prevention on Illegal Immigrants (JCPI), mandated by 28 organisations. CNTC observed that JCPI, within a very short time and with the blessings of tribal hohos, had been able to convince the State government to bring the whole State under ILP regime. 

Pointing out that today it was an outsider who had filed a PIL and tomorrow there could be more obstacles and complications coming in the way, CNTC urged the government to start working for ILP implementation without delay. Appealing to all tribal hohos to walk the talk instead of being only paper tigers, CNTC said: “This issue deals with our children’s future. If Nagas care for their generations, then they should not wait anymore but start joining hand for this common issue which is the most serious of all.”

Asserting that it had taken a serious view of the PIL filed by one Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay in Supreme Court against extending ILP to Dimapur, NPF said the fact that a non-Nagas had mastered courage to file the petition was in itself a threat to the identity of Naga people.

NPF in a statement asked the PDA government to seriously view the matter and pay attention lest it went out of proportion.

Reiterating its stand for protection of Nagas, culture, tradition and customary practices, and indigenous inhabitants of Nagaland, NPF also demanded that Upadhyay to withdraw his PIL. NPF said he should know that out of the 29 States in India, Nagaland was the only State to have been created out of political agreement and hence a special provision was also inserted in the form of Article 371 (A). NPF asked the petitioner to educate himself that British had introduced Bengal Eastern Frontal Regulation, 1873 with an objective to protect the rights of Nagas, which has been “legitimately inherited, recognised and implemented” from day one when the Nagaland was created. 

And as Dimapur district was legitimately under the State, implementing ILP in the district was the prerogative of the Naga people and they had every right to do so, the party asserted. Since regulation of ILP was an offshoot of political agreement, it could not be interpreted or decided in the court of law and even if some addition or modification in the BEFR was necessitated, it should be done only politically and not through the court, the party stressed.

Asking Upadhyay not to feel insecure about the non-Nagas settled long before in Dimapur as Naga people were most liberal, NPF claimed that there was no history of the Nagas humiliating or mistreating the non-Nagas. It added that even in future, the Nagas would remain accommodative. 

In fact, the party pointed out that the non-Nagas in the past decades had dominated most of the State government services, “not to mention of the business sector”. 

Further pointed out that even now there were a good number of non-Nagas working in the State government, NPF said Upadhyay should know that there were hardly any Nagas employed in other States in the government sector or private sector. Then what kind of insecurity he felt, the party wondered.