Dimapur, Aug. 25 (EMN): The Nagaland Tribes Council (NTC) has taken umbrage at the reported warning issued jointly by the Naga Hoho and the United Naga Council (UNC) during a joint meeting on the Indo-Naga peace process on August 23 at the TNK community hall, in Senapati of Manipur.
The two organisations had cautioned any Naga elected representative, political leader, political party, 'un-mandated or unauthorised Naga individual or group’ not to attend or participate in any assembly or meeting that would ‘sabotage’ the Indo-Naga peace process; and anyone defying the ‘Naga political principle and its position’ would be treated as anti-national and their entry into Naga territory banned.
The NTC issued a statement on Saturday stating: “Firstly, pertaining to jurisdiction of UNC, it is the exclusive umbrella organisation of the Nagas of Manipur and it has no authority over the Nagas outside of Manipur state.
“Secondly, though Naga Hoho is supposed to be the apex organisation of all the Nagas irrespective of territorial barriers. Yet, ENPO is outside the purview of Naga Hoho. Besides, today the members of CNTC (Central Nagaland Tribes Council) comprising of (sic) major tribes had opted out from Naga Hoho and adding to that some of those tribal hohos remaining under Naga Hoho seemed to have distanced from active participation under the present leadership for reasons better known to them.”
In light of those “factual position,” the NTC contended that ‘issuing such questionable warning to Naga people in general by no other than UNC, a mere unit of Naga Hoho, and Naga Hoho which has been under severe test itself presently is wrongly timed.’
“The NTC questions as to what would these two organizations like to consider a parameter by which an act of an individual or an organisation is to be known as ‘sabotage’ to peace process? Secondly, what do these two organisations mean by ‘un-mandated or unauthorised’ relating to pursuance of Naga political issue? Which group or which individual do they believe to be the mandated and authorised and who is/are not?
“Thirdly, UNC/Naga Hoho should have lucidly defined the ‘Naga political principle’ for clarity sake. Fourthly, to these two organisations what is the parameter by which an act of one is considered to be the ‘defiance’ of Naga political principle? Also, how would these two organisations adopt mechanism to banish a defaulter (anti-national) and then enforce banning him/her from ‘entry into Naga territory’?” the NTC queried.
According to the organisation, the people of Nagaland have ‘sufficiently faced bombardments of intimidations and threats to individuals and organisations particularly from NNPGs’ in the past. “We have learnt adequate lessons of how self-destructive were fratricidal killings and intergroup confrontations. Should there be any necessity for the Nagas to bridge and sort out anything in regard to common interest, there are always enough rooms and opportunities for such exercises for betterments.
“The common concern at the moment is to work out a mechanism through which everyone is taken on board towards an inclusive solution. Whereas, the joint statement in question is found to be more of intimidation and arrogance than of matured opinion befitting the prevailing situation. It is unbecoming of UNC and Naga Hoho to take Nagas for granted.”
