Ravi meets apex CSO leaders
Source: The Sangai Express

Imphal, November 03 2015: Government of India's interlocutor for the peace talk with NSCN-IM RN Ravi met leaders of apex civil society organisations like AMUCO, UCM and CCSK at Hotel Classic Grande here today.

The meeting which started at 2 pm went on till 4.30 pm.

Speaking to media persons after the meeting, UCM president Johnson Elangbam said that they placed again before the interlocutor all the six points they forwarded earlier in the form of a memorandum.

RN Ravi did not say anything about GoI's proposed solution to the political dialogue but it did not look like a solution can be worked out in the next few days, Johnson said.

"The dialogue will go on and we gave a clear picture of Manipur's political structure, history and identity to the interlocutor", he said.

AMUCO president Dr Y Mani Khuman said that they gave a detailed account of the collective aspirations of the people of Manipur and also what NSCN-IM did in Manipur.

RN Ravi did not disclose anything about the basis and contents of the framework agreement.

Nonetheless, he may come to Imphal again in the last week of November for another meeting, Dr Mani said.

CCSK president Advocate P Arjun Telheiba conveyed that Ravi talked about empowerment, Autonomous District Council and also the VIth schedule of the Indian Constitution.

"But we stuck to the memorandum submitted earlier", he continued.

Notably, leaders of the three CSOs held a meeting with the interlocutor on September 10 after a framework agreement was signed between GoI and NSCN-IM on August 3.It was during the meeting that the three CSOs submitted a six-point memorandum.

The memorandum categorically stated that the integrity of Manipur and its political boundary should not be compromised under any circumstances.

It also demanded GoI to produce a white paper on the protracted political dialogue.

A team of the Zeliangrong Baudi (Assam, Manipur and Nagaland) too came to meet the interlocutor separately.

RN Ravi also met representatives of UNC, Committee for Protection of Tribal Rights and Naga Political Forum.

Comment