The Chozuba Range Public Organisation (CRPO) has declared its disassociation from “Chakhesang-Sumi brotherhood” in all manners of relationship till such time the downplayed issue of Abel Assumi vs CTYA member vis-à-vis CPO and Sumi Hoho Agreement and CPO Stand was settled in right perspective.
In a letter to Chakhesang Public Organization (CPO), CPRO president Thupuciyi Keyho and general secretary Vesekho Shijo stated that considering the unwillingness of the CPO to address the grievances of Chozuba Range community as earnestly appealed time and again vis-à-vis Sumi Hoho’s allegations, the CRPO had resolved not to communicate further with the CPO on the issue.
And as the CPO felt that pushing forward the issue as per the expectation of the CRPO would hamper the brotherhood relation with the Sumis, and as the case of the CRPO in general and the Chozuba Town Youth Association (CTYA) in particular had been similarly compromised for the sake of this brotherhood, they said the CRPO had unanimously resolved of dissociating from Chakhesang-Sumi brotherhood.
Pertaining to the September 5, 2023 incident at Chozuba town and the aftermath, they regretted the circumstances that had driven them to finally point out the futility of further correspondence between the CPO and CRPO without the involvement of the other third party.
Narrating the sequence of events, the duo mentioned that the incident happened on the night of September 5 between Abel Asumi and CTYA officials on routine checking/frisking for banned drugs and alcohol on highway in town jurisdiction.
They claimed that Asumi filed an FIR against the CTYA the next day and also made his version of the incident viral in social media. The Sumi Hobo too filed a complaint to the CPO making serious allegations against the entire Chozuba Range people, seeking action. The CTYA filed a counter complaint against Asumi, for which they were restrained from going likewise to social media.
Thereafter, four CTYA office-bearers were arrested on September 7 by Chozuba police station and later given bail. They claimed that CPO office-bearers arrived at Chozuba town on September 16 and informed the CRPO, (CRPO) Monitoring Committee, CTYA, Women Society, CSUCT, GBs, VCCs and public leaders that the CPO had already tendered apology to the Sumi Hobo for the incident. On immediate protest from the range public, they said the CPO president personally assured to recall the word “apology” from the official communication to the Sumi Hoho.
They mentioned that this recalled/withdrawn letter had not been shown to the CRPO to date. On the September 16 meeting, the CRPO made clear two separate cases – i) Abel Asumi vs CTYA (activated in the court of law) and (ii) Sumi Hoho vs CRPO (pending in the court of CPO).
The CPO was impressed by the CRPO to ensure formal withdrawal/settlement of Sumi Hoho’s complaint letter first and foremost, else the hoho as complainant could not be arbitrator at the same time vis-a-vis Abel Asumi vs CTYA. Since the hoho’s complaint and allegations against Chozuba Range community was filed in the CPO’s court, they said it was generally expected that the CPO would accordingly dispose the case without doing any injustice or favouritism to either party.
The CPRO leaders mentioned that in the September 16 meeting the adverse effects of publicising the small incident of verbal altercation on September 5 in social media, criminalising the CTYA, leading to the arrest of its leaders and communalising it was raised with the CPO.
Few days before the CPO and Sumi Hoho met again at Kohima on September 22, they mentioned that four CPO officials and two CRPO Monitoring Committee members again deliberated on the matter, wherein the latter emphatically stated that the two separate but inter related cases should be amicably settled at the same time and at the same place by involving all parties concerned in the greater interest and better relationship between the two communities.
In the September 24 meeting between members of CPO Jury Board and CRPO Monitoring Committee in the presence of senior citizen Zacilhu Vadeo, the CRPO’s stand for an open discussion/hearing on the Sumi Hoho vs CRPO issue at the earliest in an appropriate platform was made clear. But, as the CPO refused such open discussion, it was eventually agreed that withdrawal (and stating reason) in black and white of the hoho’s complaint letter and formal intimation to the CRPO would be ensured and precede any further initiative to settle the pending case.
In the September 30 meeting, the CRPO conceded to the wish of the CPO and Jury Board to settle the pending cases at the apex bodies’ level, however on pre-conditional term of Sumi Hoho’s formal withdrawal letter and intimation to the CRPO, failing which the CRPO would not accept any solution. They claimed that the withdrawal letter, if done so, was never shown to the CRPO till date.
Hence, the October 3 agreement between the CPO and Sumi Hoho at Satakha, Zunheboto district without the involved parties and fulfilling the least condition assured the hoho’s formal withdrawal letter before settlement/agreement was taken by Chozuba Range community as nothing short of betrayal and imposition.
The CPRO leaders said the presumed solution without public hearing of concerned parties as desired by the aggrieved or at least formal withdrawal of complaint letter against the aggrieved prior to the settlement/agreement as no solution at all, and hence their non-acceptance letter to the CPO and others on October 6.