DIMAPUR, DECEMBER 16 (MExN): The Mao Council today called for a change of venue for the joint meetings scheduled for December 18 and 19 in Kohima called by the Tenyimi People’s Organisation (TPO) in view of the Souther Angami Public Organisation’s (SAPO) notice restricting movement of Mao people in their jurisdiction.
A statement issued by the Mao Council said that the “given the atmosphere that has been severely vitiated by the SAPO statement and the ongoing ban on Mao people,” the venue for the meetings should be changed to a neutral venue “which will secure a conducive environment and where tribe delegates would not be subjected to the ignominy of identification, permission and duress of the SAPO while travelling to attend the meeting.”
“Should the request for change to a neutral venue be refused as strongly called for by the prevailing situation, the Mao Council and its arbitrators will be compelled to abstain from the scheduled meetings,” it informed.
It meanwhile stated that the TPO Board of Arbitrators (BOA) is the forum to place any report of violation of the Arbitration Undertaking or any act that goes against the spirit of the arbitration process. “It is not for a disputing party to resort to extreme, non-traditional and unacceptable means such as bans over perceived violations by another party to the dispute,” it added.
“Today is the second day of the ban imposed on Mao people on the National Highway in view of the whole wide world. It can well be imagined how they would behave and carry themselves up in the forest and in the valley away from the glare and attention of the public,” the Mao Council said.
It said that the Mao people do not live in isolation and are presently under the state of Manipur. “We have our own issues of injustice and suppression meted out to the tribals, who are under domination of the majority community and whose interest determines the State Government’s policies. But in the environment briefly highlighted above, the Mao people still have the right to roam freely, forage and live off the land in their own traditional land without being threatened, abused and detained by unlawful armed elements roaming the Dzüko and Kozürü area,” it asserted.
Further it questioned with whom should the Mao people promote festivals, tourism and development in their land if not with Manipur Government which has the mandatory responsibility to do so? “Will the Assam Government, Nagaland Government or Arunachal Government come forward with such responsibilities,” it posed.
It stated that the Mao people cannot be prohibited from living their lives, least of all from taking up any activity “within our own traditional land that is well between the bounds of law and of the Arbitration Undertaking.”
