Kohima, 12 December (MTNews): Advisor, Law & Justice and Land Revenue, TN Mannen, IAS (Retd), in discussions related to Naga customary law, emphasized the critical need for a comprehensive dialogue on the organizational structures governing the formulation of customary laws. Mannen expressed concern that unless these laws are refined, standardized, and codified, they risk becoming irrelevant, even with constitutional protection under Article 371(A).
Highlighting the urgency of the matter, Advisor Mannen stressed that there is a pressing need to determine the laws that should be applied in the codification process. He underscored the importance of refining customary laws to ensure their relevance and applicability in contemporary contexts.
“If every Naga tribe can come up with a compilation of their customary laws in codified form, it will make the job easier for the codification of Naga customary law,” he stated.
The Advisor was speaking at the Silver Jubilee celebration of the Nagaland Law Students’ Federation at Capital Convention center, Kohima, under the theme, “Forging equitable justice” on 12 December.
Enlightening the gathering on customary courts and laws, he remarked that the Nagaland Village Council Act 1978 (formerly the Village and Area Council Act 1978 before amendment in 1992) Rule 14 (1) (2) had defined the Village Council’s power in the administration of justice in the State. However, the system of the organizational structure of setting up customary law courts in Nagaland is yet to be established even after more than 60 years of Statehood.
As the introductory guest at the jubilee, the Advisor shared his opinions on Naga political history. He expressed concern that the Naga political movement seems to have lost its direction and momentum, with the initial motivation and enthusiasm for the lofty dream of a united Naga Nation, independent and sovereign, now reduced to the position that even the least demand for integration of Naga-inhabited contiguous areas is considered an impossible and non-negotiable issue.
He added, “The once hopeful expectations of an honorable, inclusive, and acceptable negotiated settlement are now becoming an elusive dream. However, the Nagas cannot place the blame solely on the Indian Government for this sorry state of affairs.”
In the present day, he observed a decline in nationalistic impulses, oneness, and goodwill among Nagas, replacing them with tribalism, intolerance, short-sighted conflicts of interest, and personal rivalries.
Furthermore, the Advisor noted a shift in the Nagas’ identity, emphasizing diversities and distinctive characteristics among tribes rather than fostering common roadmaps for all Nagas to journey together towards a shared future, as envisioned by their pioneering leaders.
Addressing the border issue with Assam, he recounted the respectable relationship between the Nagas and Ahoms during the 600 years of Ahom Rule in Assam. Unlike other rulers, Ahom rulers never attempted to annex Naga territories. Instead, they maintained clear border demarcations, employing features such as Nagas’ Border, Naga bend earthen elevated platforms, Ladigarah, Deodar Ali, etc.
Regarding the Statehood creation, he highlighted that the boundary between Assam and Nagaland was inaccurately decided, accepting the 1925 line drawn by the British Administration without ground verification. This has resulted in a series of border disputes and clashes between the two States.
Regrettably, he stated that Nagas are currently at a greater disadvantage in the ongoing boundary disputes, particularly impacting the younger generation. The foothill areas along the Assam-Nagaland border hold immense potential for the economic development of the State, and finding an acceptable solution is crucial, he added.
With the Naga population expanding exponentially and the land remaining static, if not shrinking, the Advisor emphasized the urgency of discovering a viable solution for the benefit of all.
