Mokokchung, 5 May (MTNews): The Nagaland Tribes Council (NTC) has on Friday submitted a representation to the Chief Minister of Nagaland on the subject of enforcement of the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation Act 1873/ILP in the entire jurisdiction of Nagaland state with 1 December 1963 as the cutoff date and year.

 

In the representation, the NTC stated that Nagaland State was created out of a political agreement with 16-Point Agreement of 1960 in place. “Nagaland is then equipped with the BEFR Act 1873 vis-a-vis ILP throughout the jurisdiction of Nagaland. Among many others, the 16th point of the 16-Point Agreement states:-Rules embodied in the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation Act 1873, shall remain in force in Nagaland,” the NTC stated.

 

NTC added that this “constitutional status provision” is enumerated and well documented for enforcement right from the day and time of the creation of the State of Nagaland including Dimapur areas – now bifurcated into Dimapur, Chümoukedima and Niuland districts.

 

The NTC maintained that the “valued agreement as referred to above cannot be altered or substituted at the cost of the future generation of the people of Nagaland,” adding that it is a means for survival of the ethnic Naga Tribes of Nagaland in the long run.

 

The NTC said that on top of it there is standing government notification, issued on 28 April 1977, that in order to qualify as an indigenous inhabitant of the State of Nagaland for the purpose of employment, a person should have settled permanently in Nagaland prior to 1 December, 1963.

 

The NTC said, as per the standing notification, the person’s name or name of parents or legitimate guardians, in case the person was then a minor, should have been entered in the Electoral Roll published on 5 December 1963; or the person or his/her parents or legitimate guardian should have been paying house tax prior to 1 December 1963; or the person or his/her parents or legitimate guardian should have acquired property and Patta on it prior to 1 December 1963.

 

The NTC pointed out that the farsightedness of the pioneers in providing Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation Act 1873 vis-à-vis Inner Line Permit (ILP) and the government notification to qualify Indigenous Inhabitant, which is self-explanatory, is to insulate Nagaland and its indigenous inhabitants from undue exploitation and possible suppression by outsiders.

 

“From the very day Nagaland was granted Statehood, the cutoff date and year to be indigenous inhabitants of Nagaland has been enforced with effect from 1 December 1963. Hence, the effective date and year of ILP,” it stated.

 

“The above mentioned agreement and notification had not extended to Dimapur areas then with the best reason known to the authority alone. The de-reservation of ILP in Dimapur areas in the initial stage had become the antithesis of the policy of reservation. In fact, Dimapur areas become a safe haven for the massive migration of illegal immigrants besides being launching ground for the explosive activities, and on, and detrimental to the peaceful atmosphere and tranquility in the state,” the NTC stated.

 

It regretted that “even after having all these weapons of documents as that of 16-Point Agreement and the Government Notification at hand,” the Nagaland Government determines to enforce two cutoff dates and years ie; 1-12-1963 for the Hill District of Nagaland, and another 21 November 1979 for the plain sector of Dimapur, Chümoukedima and Niuland Districts of Nagaland respectively, which it said was “contrary to the natural law of justice.”

 

It mentioned that the government by a notification dated 21 November 1979 constituted another “Tribal Belt” inside the Tribal Area already existing as Nagaland state. The NTC quoted the 21 November 1989 notification: “Whereas under-mentioned classes of people are predominantly residing in the areas specified in the schedule given below: – 1. Any Naga. 2. Kuki. 3. Kachari. 4. Garo. 5. Mikirs. And whereas sufficient waste land is available in this special area and it is necessary to constitute Tribal Belt or compact area etc… etc, and demarcate the Boundary of Dimapur Sub-Division.”

 

The NTC claimed that the Deputy Commissioner of Dimapur, Chümoukedima and Niuland respectively under the direction of the state government is contemplating to enforce ILP with 21 November 1979 as the cutoff date and year. The word “Compact area” is meant for development activities but not for identification of indigenous people and hence unacceptable, the NTC said.

 

The NTC argued that the Tribal Belt or Compact area Order as referred to above itself violates and contradicts the Order NO.LR/2-118/76 Dated Kohima the 7th November 1979 which read, Quote: “Whereas it is considered necessary by the state govt to adopt protective measures for the under mentioned classes of people who are indigenous inhabitant of Nagaland. etc..etc. 1. Naga. 2. Kuki. 3. Kachari. 4. Garo and 5. Mikirs.”

 

It further informed that the state Government issued an order on 6 July 2009 justifying the Nagas in Nagaland, which listed the recognized Naga Tribes in Nagaland, namely- Ao, Angami, Sumi, Lotha, Rengma, Konyak, Sangtam, Phom, Chang, Yimchunger (Now Yimkiung), Khiamnungan, Chakhesang, Zeliang, Pochury and now Tikhir of Shamator District as the 15th Naga Tribe of Nagaland.

 

The NTC said that the entire Nagaland itself is a tribal state and tribal area and, therefore, there is no need for another Tribal Belt or Compact area to be carved out of the existing tribal area. NTC further said that there cannot be two different cutoff dates and years in a tiny state like Nagaland, ie. 1 December 1963 for the Hill District and another 21 November 1979 for the Districts of Dimapur, Chümoukedima, and Niuland.

 

The NTC maintained that the enforcement of BEFR Act 1873/ILP with effect from the creation of the state of Nagaland on the basis of necessary agreement and Notification as that of 1 December 1963 “does not necessarily prohibit the genuine citizens for business activities or stay or trips in the state” and that there are always “mechanism/modalities to welcome them.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *