S VARAH
Manipur was then a Union Territory when the parliament of India passed the Manipur (Hill Areas) District Council act 1971. Exercising Section 3 of the Act, the then governor issued an order: ‘Adaptation of Laws’ 1972, vide Notification dated 14.02.1972, initially constituted 6(six) districts as Senapati, Sadar Hills, Ukhrul, Tengnoupal, Chandel, Churachandpur and Tamenglong.
This 1971 so called Autonomous DC, per se, is completely bereft of legislative, judicial and executive powers except partial dose of administrative functions. These scrapes include appointment of succession of chiefs, inheritance of property, marriage & divorce, social customs. This ‘autonomous’ body is not allowed to generate fund but to be dependent upon Manipur state Grant-in-aid, rather, on the insatiable whims of state people. The first amendment of Section 25 in 1975 was just another namesake. Realizing the ineffectiveness towards giving substance to the marginalized hill sections under the 1971 Act and having applied variable cosmetics and pressure mounted to do away this ‘unwanted Act’ while the demand for real autonomy having constitutional validity for the hill people, Chandel ADC was demolished on 17.10.1988. Ukhrul, Churachandpur, Sadar Hills, Tamenglong followed suit in 1989 and finally, Senapati in 1993 Nov.24. At the most, arrangements under this Act have fattened the stomach of Meitei majority.
Assuming semblance of interest in doing away with the parent Act 1971, a purported enactment sans mandate of the hill people, the word ‘autonomy’ was inserted in 2000; that turned out to be just another lie as the state of affairs in the hills illustrates today. The second amendment of 2006 added Sub-Section (1A) of Section 29(1) conferring power to notify any areas in the District Council as Urban Areas for the purpose of working out development plan and inserted section 44A to the 1971 Act providing therein that ‘no land situated within the ADC’ shall be allotted, transferred, leased out by the Deputy Commissioner other than for public purpose except with a resolution passed by the ADC by a majority of not less than 2/3 of its members.
Openly defying the key interest and rights of the hill people, the governor of Manipur in exercise of his power under Article 213 of the constitution of India vide Notification dated 12th May 2008 promulgated the Manipur (Hill Areas) District Council (Third Amendment) Ordinance 2008, and simultaneously the District Council Delimitation Committee was constituted, vide Order dated 23rd May 2008, to expedite, among others, the process of forced election on the Hills in Manipur. The Manipur state government, under hectic arrangement, brought the state (Hill Areas) District Council (Third Amendment Act 2008), vide Notification dated 27th Oct 2008 under the guise of rewarding the hill people under this pretentious Act. Nevertheless, the Act does not undermine the bottom line of 1971 Act. Expansion of 18 to 24 members and increase of administrative functions from 17 to 26 inserting Fishery, Co-operative, Sports and Youth Affairs, Adult & Non formal education, Horticulture, Floriculture, Rural Housing Scheme, Village & Cottage Industry, Small Scale Industry, Non conventional Energy Sources, Library and Culture Activities and the power to recommend to the state for recognition of village subject to resolution passed by a simple majority of the Council. Powers thus incorporated in the Act by the Third Amendment are mere administrative powers to be exercised by the elected members of MDC at the whims and fancies of the state political parties in the driving seat. Conferring administrative powers & functions on the ADC never, never guarantees to safeguard hill people’s real interests; rather under this Act, much larger space in decision making in the state is created to further exploit the hill people. The Third Amendment, in short, does not at all alter the 1971 Act. Therefore, to address the hill people as they are for, the idea of adding spices to the 1971 Act is insular and hence unwanted. A State Agency such as ADC under such Act of 1971 for implementing Flagship Schemes of the state government as openly stated by Mr Ibobi is an offensive assault on the letter of democratic institution.
Is allowing the hill people in Manipur state to safeguard their traditional institutions, social values and their inseparable rights over their lands and resources, their belief, unlawful? Is rejecting forced terms to keep the Meitei majority superior to the hill people lawful? Why should the Indian court condemn the hill people for registering their desperate economic, social and political situations in a democracy champion such as India? Our ‘senses may be blunt’, but Indian constitution is now immune to the touch of enormous inhuman Manipur state law enactments, and the sensory nerves of the people who are supposed to be the law guardians are dead to the pinch of sins and crimes aplenty in this part of the world!
