UCM negates dominant hegemony slur
Source: The Sangai Express

Imphal, May 19 2017: The United Committee, Manipur (UCM) has categorically stated that the concept of majority dominance or the so called dominant hegemony is non-existent in Manipur.

Taking strong exception to the statement which was released by the Joint Action Committee Against the Anti-Tribal Bills (JAC-AATB), Churachandpur to some of the local print and electronic media on the May 18, the UCM remarked that it was an attempt to create confusion and misunderstanding among the people for simple vested interest nothing else.

The statement made by UCM president on the occasion of the 6th Foundation Day observation of Kanglei Ima Lup (KIL) at Manipur Press Club was simply a general reference to some of the current issues and nothing in particular, that it so happened there was a mention of the issue of ILP Bill and its position in Churachandpur.

The issue of Sixth Schedule is not a new issue, it has been well debated and discussed upon at various level which includes leaders of various ethnic communities in the State, conveyed a press statement issued by UCM information and public relations secretary Leishemba Lamaba.

Just to bring more light on the issue of Sixth Schedule, UCM had organised a two day People's Convention in 2013 which was overwhelmed by various opinions rejecting the extension of Sixth Schedule in the hill areas of Manipur.

Among the speakers included prominent tribal leaders of the state.

Putting allegations against an organisation for nothing without any serious thought on the matter was really disheartening and unexpected.

"There is nothing wrong for an organisation to make certain political demands but what really worries us was that the context in which the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed and some of the points which were mentioned in the MoU were totally contrary and non issue to the main theme.

The issue pertaining to the demand for a new district and reference to the ongoing SoO were thought to be separate issues.

Bringing it in the MoU was totally irrelevant.

It could have been raised at a different forum, and UCM has nothing against it," it added.

The concept of majority dominance or the so called dominant hegemony is non-existent.

It has been proven time and again; even today some of the smallest of the smallest tribes have been existing with their fullest cultural, religious and traditional rights, it asserted while questioning t he JAC-AATB as to why it has been consistently pressing for extension of Sixth Schedule in the hill areas of Manipur.

The basic idea for the extension of the Sixth Schedule as per the Constitution of India is to bring about more participation and involvement of the local tribal people, preservation of the tribal customary and traditional values and practices, and above all decision making authority in overall development of the regions at the very grass root level of tribal society.

"But this view has been shared by our forefathers much before the concept of Sixth Schedule or Fifth Schedule or to simply say much before the very Constitution of India was written.

History reveals by itself, that this principle was maintained by our forefathers from the very beginning and separate administration was maintained for the hill people.

That is why, as a part of the continuity of the separate administration of the Hills, in 1947, the then Constituent Assembly passed the Manipur State Hill Peoples (Administration) Regulation, 1947″, it pointed out.

Many of the provisions of the Regulation are almost at par with the provisions of the Sixth Schedule.

Again, in 1956, "The Manipur (Village Authorities in Hill Areas) Act,1956" was passed so as to preserve and promote the traditional judicial system at village level through village authority purely constituted only by the villagers themselves.

Again, in 1971, so as to bring more accountability and to meet the new challenges imposed by the changing political environment, "The Manipur (Hill Areas) District Council Act,1971" was passed and amended thrice, the latest in 2008.District Councils were formed according to this Act which is almost in similar lines with the Sixth Schedule.

More increase in delegation of power in the existing law can be discussed if there is a need for more decentralisation.

It went on to question, "Why some sections have been demanding Sixth Schedule when we have almost identical laws much before the concept of Sixth Schedule came into being? .

"Our fear for our disunity, disintegration of Manipur is not concocted or superficial; rather it is the reality and purpose of our very existence, no doubt on it", it continued.

The UCM clarified that the SoO groups were party to the MoU, but only said that the issue with them could have been raised at a different forum not with this MoU which was basically made in regard to the ILP Bill.

The UCM has never undermined the authority of the Hill Areas Committee (HAC) but rather had called for more understanding of the powers and functions of the HAC so that it does not unnecessarily create confusion and misunderstanding among the people.

The UCM only said that a State executive decision which is purely going to affect the whole of Manipur as a part of its public policy passed by the Manipur Legislative Assembly must be respected and anything can be added, altered, omitted later on during the course of its implementation.

But, the very basic objective and motive of the Bill cannot be questioned by a subordinate committee which was created by the Manipur Legislative Assembly itself under the "Manipur Legislative Assembly (Hill Area Committee) Order, 1972",on mere reasons that they were not consulted.

By the way who are tribal and non tribal, it is only a constitutional divide which has created tribal and non-tribal.

"Till 1941 we were almost the same people living side by side, the unfounded and baseless rhetoric of majority dominance should not be propagated any more, and people are not going to buy this", UCM asserted.

All the people of different ethnic groups should join hands together to uproot this politics based on ethnic identity.

However, some hill based organisations seemed to have really forgotten who are their brothers and sisters.

"Why cannot the concept of pluralism flourish in other parts as in the valley areas where there is no distinction based on its ethnic background? Why this feeling of Partisanship?", it asked.

"We earnestly request to those organisations to put forward and come to their senses before the enemy within themselves take advantage of this situation.

Our doors for discussion, debate and consultation remain open all the time, so kindly come forward with your thoughts and minds in future rather than putting your points in the media first.

The United Committee, Manipur is an organisation committed to protect the unity and integrity of Manipur and will continue with this endeavour as long as we exist", it added.

Comment