Attempt to criminalise tribal movement, ATSUM reacts to CM
Source: The Sangai Express

Kangpokpi, August 17 2022: Chief Minister N Biren Singh terming the HAC recommended ADC Bill 2021 as 'Disintegrating Manipur' has been strongly censured by the All Tribal Students' Union Manipur (ATSUM) alleging that the Chief Minister's statement was an attempt to politicize and criminalize the tribal movement and further deprive the tribals of their Constitutional rights.

Reacting sharply to the Chief Minister's charges on HAC recommended ADC Bill 2021, the ATSUM stated that it is unfortunate to learn that the head of the State interprets the existing legislative procedure into his 'convenient terms' .

It reiterated that as empowered by Article 371 C read with the Manipur Legislative Assembly (Hill Areas Committee) orders 1972, the HAC had recommended a landmark ADC Bill 2021 which is permissible under the law to strengthen the ADC and ensure equitable development in the State while adding that the HAC has done their Constitutional duty as specified under paragraph 4 (3) and paragraph 7 of the Presidential orders, dated 1972.Therefore, rather than derailing the genuine Constitutional demand of the tribal populace, the Chief Minister should facilitate the flow of the legislative procedures in the Manipur Legislative Assembly by introducing the Manipur (Hill Areas) Autonomous District Councils Bill 2021 which was recommended by the HAC, it added.

Alleging that the remark of the Chief Minister was a ploy to mislead the people and foster further misunderstanding between the hill tribes and the valley community, the ATSUM stated that there is nothing as such in the contents of the Bill that aims to disintegrate the State other than ensuring autonomy and equitable development in the hill areas as envisaged in the Article 371 C of the Constitution.

It continued that the ADC Bill 2021 provided for a Hill Secretariat to oversee the administration of the ADCs headed by an officer not below the rank of a Chief Secretary and it does not mean that there shall be a "separate State secretariat" for the hill areas to be headed by a Chief Secretary.

It also clarified that 'two secretariats" or "two Chief Secretaries' as alleged by the Chief Minister is just a figment of his imagination.

In connection with the two proposed Manipur (Hill Areas) District Councils (Sixth Amendment) Bill, 2022, and Manipur (Hill Areas) District Councils (Seventh Amendment) Bill, 2022, ATSUM stated that the two Bills are just eyewash to thwart the movement demanding tabling of the HAC recommended ADC Bill 2021 .

ATSUM also said that the 'inimical' stance of the State Government on the Constitutional concept of tribal autonomy and the two proposed Manipur (Hill Areas) District Councils (Sixth Amendment) Bill, 2022 and Manipur (Hill Areas) District Councils (Seventh Amendment) Bill, 2022 as nothing but another dangerous political bait to countermand the HAC recommended the Manipur (Hill Areas) Autonomous District Council Bill, 2021 .

ATSUM also rejected the two proposed Bills stating that it is a dissolution rather than devolution, disempowering rather than empowering, inter alia, firstly, by omitting the operative term "Autonomous" in particular.

The State Government has been attempting to reduce the existing Autonomous District Councils into mere small-town district corporations, it alleged.

Secondly, Section 29 (xxvii) of the proposed Manipur (Hill Areas) District Councils (Seventh Amendment) Bill, 2022 proposed a dangerous land use policy in a blatant attempt to dilute the existing tribal land rights.

Apart from the erstwhile requirement ofbeing a Scheduled Tribe, the new land use policy attempts to introduce other "domiciliary" criteria as an alternative qualifying status for the purpose of acquiring land in the Hill areas, meaning any person including anon-tribal can now acquire tribal lands if he is a domicile within a given hill district, it claimed.

It also claimed that the proposed Bills attempt to exempt the State Government from the existing bar as the State Government may now freely acquire lands in the Hill Areas if it is for public utility purposes.

Thirdly, the proposed omission of the subject "public health and sanitation" and Section 29(2) of the Principal Act, i.e., the competency of the District Council to recommend in the matters of (a) appointment or succession of Chiefs; (b) inheritance of property; (c) marriage and divorce; and (d) social customs.

Fourthly, the attempt to rope in the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and fifthly, taking away of "protected forest" from the existing power of the Autonomous District Councils to manage any forest as proposed under Section 29(xiv).Sixthly, the proposed Manipur (Hill Areas) District Councils (Sixth Amendment) Act, 2022 which provides each district council to consist of a maximum of 24 elected members and a minimum of 3 nominated members makes a mockery of the Autonomous District Councils, it alleged.

Moreover, by conferring equal voting rights and privileges to the nominated members and by giving the State Government the power to determine the number of Members in each District Council, the Bill attempts to further strangulate the existing Autonomous District Councils, it added.

Rather than suppressing the democratic aspirations of the hill tribes through threat and intimidation, the State Government should promptly address the issue in the interest of peaceful co-existence, ATSUM urged.

Comment