UNC objects Pvt member Bill in LS
Source: The Sangai Express
Imphal, May 02 2012:
Raising strong objection to the Private Member Bill introduced by Inner Manipur Parliamentary Constituency MP Dr Thokchom Meinya regarding permanent protection of the territorial integrity of Manipur, United Naga Council has termed the Bill as a move for perpetuation of the hegemony of the dominant community over the tribals in Manipur.
A statement issued by UNC Publicity Wing said that the Nagas in Manipur were independent of the Manipur Maharaja.
A dual system of administration for the Hills and the Valley was introduced by the British after they conquered the Meitei kingdom of Manipur in 1891, it added.
It claimed said that British knew that the Manipuris would not give the hills a decent administration and felt the obligation to separately administer the hill tribes.
Thus the Imphal Valley was administered by the Meitei Maharaja with the assistance of the Darbar and the hills were looked after by a Political Agent on behalf of the British Crown and justice was dispensed based on the tradition and customary laws of the hill people.
No Naga or tribal was ever a member of the Darbar, it added.
This system continued even after 1949 when the Meitei kingdom was merged with the Indian Union along with the hill areas, without the knowledge and consent of the Nagas and other tribal people, it claimed.
The long history of Manipur and Meitei kingdom which Dr Meinya talked about was never shared with the tribals, it added.
The statement said that Manipuris took shelter among the tribals in the hills when Burmese conquerors occupied Manipur during the Seven Years Devastation (1819�1825) .
However, tribals and Manipuris always felt the difference in culture and ways of life, it said.
Recalling an interview given to CNN-IBN on May 21, 2010, where Dr Meinya had stated that Manipur was a Hindu State and that Manipur was known by Imphal only, UNC statement said that dominant community of Imphal valley, whom Dr Meinya represents cannot think or see beyond Imphal valley.
Manipuris are Meiteis and Imphal is Manipur, it added.
Contending that the tribals and the Nagas live in their own land which does not belong to the Meitei Maharaja, UNC said that protection of territorial integrity of Manipur is unconstitutional.
The introduction of the Bill for permanent protection of territorial integrity of Manipur bears testimony of the social divide in Manipur which arises out of the imposition of the interest of the dominant community upon the tribals and Nagas.
UNC said that tribals and Nagas cannot tolerate Dr Meinya's agenda of perpetual subjugation of the tribals and would be resisted with all possible means.
Comment
