Dimapur, August 1 (MExN): The Western Sumi Hoho (WSH) said it is “willing to meet or talk across the table with any group of people or organisation with open heart” to solve the Intanki impasse provided they accept the “truth and reality.” WSH in a statement issued today stated that it believes “nothing is impossible to settle or solve through peace and mutual discussions,” and appealed all Nagas to rise above tribalism and see the problem in true light. It also appealed to the State government to apply the same yardstick in solving the problem.
The WSH statement issued by President LK Achumi and General Secretary Vikato Shikhu stated that “Sumis do not wish to be a stumbling block” but accused a certain organisation of pitting one tribe against the other. It also accused the Zeliangrongs of “misleading” people and “twisting the facts” about Intanki. Claming that it stands by the Naga Hoho’s statement made on July 28 that: “Intanki does not belong to any individual or tribe but is national property,” WSH stated that it wants to let every Naga know the real name and status of Intanki Reserve Forest.
Urges govt to apply same yardstick
Providing a glimpse into the history of Intanki, WSH claimed that the original name of “Intanki” was “Tanky,” named after a British expeditioner who went into the forest and got lost. The name “Tanky” being similar to the Zeliang word “Intanki or Ndangki,” the Zelaingrongs named the forest “Intanki” after the departure of the British to claim ownership. WSH claimed that during the time the nomenclature was coined in the 18th century, Zeliangrong or Zeliang as a tribe was not even coined. It also claimed that as per official records available, the forest was transferred to Nagaland in 1891 and it was not given to any particular tribe, for the fact that the British were the sole owners at that time; adding that had there been any dispute over the claim of ownership between the Zelaingrongs and the British, Nagas can acknowledge that the rightful owners are the Zeliangrongs. But there is no official document to prove such dispute, it claimed. WSH further pointed out that Zeliangrongs were originally known as “Kacha Naga” until the late 60s as popularly used by the British which, meaning that the Zeliangrongs was a sub-tribe or sub-Naga.
WSH stated further that the Zeliangrongs are claiming ownership of the land due to support from the Tenyimi People’s Organisation (TPO). It stated that the motive of the TPO is “to pit one tribe against the other from which they can claim the lion’s share while supporting the Zeliangrongs;” adding that the forest belongs to all Nagas and the State is the proprietor. WSH said that “It is not claiming ownership of the forest” but since it belongs to the State and the government has allowed the Zeliangrongs to establish villages, the Sumi’ have also established their village. It reiterated that the Sumi tribe does not wish to be a stumbling block for the good of all Nagas; but for the government to dubiously recognize one village force another to vacate cannot be tolerated. If the government applies the same yardstick to all occupants we shall be the first to let our people leave, WSH stated.
It further countered Beisumpuikam Village GB’s statement that “Intanki is not in Zunheboto but Peren,” WSH reminded that the forest if more than century older than Peren district, pointing out that it was only recently created so the question of the forest being under Peren does not arise. It also stated that the occupant of Beisumpuikam are “a collection of people from neighbouring states led by a few people with vested interests,” and challenged the State government to verify WSH’s claim by physically verifying the spot. Further it alleged that although the State government is said to have exchanged land with New Beisumpuikam village, WSH claims that the old village still exists and is very well developed. The WSH also appealed to all Nagas to verify the spot and not believe anything on hearsay.WSH stated it will also not be bogged down by some people with vested interest and appealed to the government to deal with the problem judiciously.
The WSH statement issued by President LK Achumi and General Secretary Vikato Shikhu stated that “Sumis do not wish to be a stumbling block” but accused a certain organisation of pitting one tribe against the other. It also accused the Zeliangrongs of “misleading” people and “twisting the facts” about Intanki. Claming that it stands by the Naga Hoho’s statement made on July 28 that: “Intanki does not belong to any individual or tribe but is national property,” WSH stated that it wants to let every Naga know the real name and status of Intanki Reserve Forest.
Urges govt to apply same yardstick
Providing a glimpse into the history of Intanki, WSH claimed that the original name of “Intanki” was “Tanky,” named after a British expeditioner who went into the forest and got lost. The name “Tanky” being similar to the Zeliang word “Intanki or Ndangki,” the Zelaingrongs named the forest “Intanki” after the departure of the British to claim ownership. WSH claimed that during the time the nomenclature was coined in the 18th century, Zeliangrong or Zeliang as a tribe was not even coined. It also claimed that as per official records available, the forest was transferred to Nagaland in 1891 and it was not given to any particular tribe, for the fact that the British were the sole owners at that time; adding that had there been any dispute over the claim of ownership between the Zelaingrongs and the British, Nagas can acknowledge that the rightful owners are the Zeliangrongs. But there is no official document to prove such dispute, it claimed. WSH further pointed out that Zeliangrongs were originally known as “Kacha Naga” until the late 60s as popularly used by the British which, meaning that the Zeliangrongs was a sub-tribe or sub-Naga.
WSH stated further that the Zeliangrongs are claiming ownership of the land due to support from the Tenyimi People’s Organisation (TPO). It stated that the motive of the TPO is “to pit one tribe against the other from which they can claim the lion’s share while supporting the Zeliangrongs;” adding that the forest belongs to all Nagas and the State is the proprietor. WSH said that “It is not claiming ownership of the forest” but since it belongs to the State and the government has allowed the Zeliangrongs to establish villages, the Sumi’ have also established their village. It reiterated that the Sumi tribe does not wish to be a stumbling block for the good of all Nagas; but for the government to dubiously recognize one village force another to vacate cannot be tolerated. If the government applies the same yardstick to all occupants we shall be the first to let our people leave, WSH stated.
It further countered Beisumpuikam Village GB’s statement that “Intanki is not in Zunheboto but Peren,” WSH reminded that the forest if more than century older than Peren district, pointing out that it was only recently created so the question of the forest being under Peren does not arise. It also stated that the occupant of Beisumpuikam are “a collection of people from neighbouring states led by a few people with vested interests,” and challenged the State government to verify WSH’s claim by physically verifying the spot. Further it alleged that although the State government is said to have exchanged land with New Beisumpuikam village, WSH claims that the old village still exists and is very well developed. The WSH also appealed to all Nagas to verify the spot and not believe anything on hearsay.WSH stated it will also not be bogged down by some people with vested interest and appealed to the government to deal with the problem judiciously.
Govt advises removal of “war gates”
Dimapur, August 1 (MExN): The Government of Nagaland today ‘advised’ the village authorities of Beisampuikam village to remove “the bamboo spikes from their village gate”, and “modify the gate” to convey “a more friendly and welcoming message.” The office of the chief secretary of Nagaland issued a letter today, addressed to the deputy commissioner of Peren district.
The state government noted the various press statements issued by the Western Sumi Hoho, the Zeliangrong Baudi, the Naga Hoho and many other tribal organizations on the issue and nature of the village gate erected by Beisampuikam Village. The gate was claimed as a “war gate” by the Western Sumi Hoho and some others.
“The report of Deputy Commissioner, Peren, who had the village gate inspected, as well as the close up photographs of the gate and its surrounding areas would suggest that the gate would not pose any danger to nay neighboring village or people using the village approach road; nor would the gate provide any real and meaningful protection or security to the villagers in case of an attack by any armed groups from outside the village,” the government’s letter said.
However, the letter said, after careful consideration of the matter “from various angles”, the state government said the gate, with its bamboo spikes “sticking out all over” does not convey a friendly or welcoming message to visitors and passerby “as is normally expected of a Naga traditional village gate.”
“Therefore, as it has been the focal point of many press releases and complaints made by various Hohos and NGOs particularly the western Sumi Hoho, the state government hereby advise the village authorities of Beisampuikam to remove the bamboo spikes from their village gate, and modify the gate so as to convey a more friendly and welcoming message to others using the same road.”
The letter, appended by Chief Secretary Lalthara, requested the administrator to convey this message to the village authorities of Beisampuikam village and to the leaders of Zeliangrong Baudi, “and to try to persuade them to go along the above advice.”
The state government noted the various press statements issued by the Western Sumi Hoho, the Zeliangrong Baudi, the Naga Hoho and many other tribal organizations on the issue and nature of the village gate erected by Beisampuikam Village. The gate was claimed as a “war gate” by the Western Sumi Hoho and some others.
“The report of Deputy Commissioner, Peren, who had the village gate inspected, as well as the close up photographs of the gate and its surrounding areas would suggest that the gate would not pose any danger to nay neighboring village or people using the village approach road; nor would the gate provide any real and meaningful protection or security to the villagers in case of an attack by any armed groups from outside the village,” the government’s letter said.
However, the letter said, after careful consideration of the matter “from various angles”, the state government said the gate, with its bamboo spikes “sticking out all over” does not convey a friendly or welcoming message to visitors and passerby “as is normally expected of a Naga traditional village gate.”
“Therefore, as it has been the focal point of many press releases and complaints made by various Hohos and NGOs particularly the western Sumi Hoho, the state government hereby advise the village authorities of Beisampuikam to remove the bamboo spikes from their village gate, and modify the gate so as to convey a more friendly and welcoming message to others using the same road.”
The letter, appended by Chief Secretary Lalthara, requested the administrator to convey this message to the village authorities of Beisampuikam village and to the leaders of Zeliangrong Baudi, “and to try to persuade them to go along the above advice.”
Intangki: State govt accused of favoritism
Dimapur, August 1 (MExN): The Zeliangrong Youth Organization (ZYO) today accused the Nagaland government of favoritism that it did not grant ex-gratia to Zeliangrong people who lost their lives in the hands of encroachers yet the same government would compensate illegal settlers and encroachers. The ZYO expressed doubts on the sincerity of the government in preserving and protecting the Intangki National Park and surprise that the state government granted ex-gratia to land encroachers who were injured or killed in the unfortunate incident.
“Our Zeliangrong brothers have also died for our land in the hands of encroachers, where was the state government? Why this favoritism? This attitude will not be tolerated anymore. When there is a desperate need to protect the park from illegal settlers, the state government has instead assured a tribal organization to remove the traditional gate of Beisumpiuk am village…” the ZYO stated in a press release received here.
“How could the government stoop so low to give assurance to a tribal hoho for removal of a traditional gate?”
The organization also said the term “war gate” used by some Sumi organizations to describe a traditional village gate is inflammatory. “The ZYO invites the state government to come and see for themselves if that is actually a ‘war gate’ or just a traditional village gate. If the state government opines that Naga United Village or Inavi or whatever villagers should be allowed to continue encroaching and devastating Ntangki let them find their way to it and not through the gate of Beisumpuikam village, no use of passing through our village if they are scared,” the ZYO stated.
Another issued that the ZYO raised was the statement of Western Sumi Youth Front (WSYF) which has claimed the president of Zeliangrong Baudi was someone from Manipur. “The Zeliangrongs elect leaders of our choice and the Western Sumi Youth Front have nothing to do with our election or have no rights to question the integrity or identity of our Leaders. The statement of WSYF reflects the desperate situation they are in,” the ZYO stated.
“We can be anywhere we choose to live in our land, and we are not encroaching or living in anybody’s land. WSYF –a device of the encroachers, an outsider in our land has no moral right to say or comment on the leadership of the Zeliangrong Baudi.”
Further the ZYO expressed pain at the press statement of the Naga Hoho on July 28, 2011. “Being the apex tribal organization in the state, every Nagas expect the Naga Hoho to stand for what is true and right. Instead of stopping the forceful encroachers (Inavi village), the Naga Hoho seems more comfortable to take the role of a mediator by urging the Zeliangrongs and the Sumis to have restrained on Ntangki. If Naga Hoho cannot acknowledge the traditional rights and ownership of a particular tribe and stand for truth, what is Naga Hoho for, after all,” the ZYO questioned.
The Zeliangrong have no hatred towards any particular tribe but only against illegal settlement and encroachers in Ntangki, the ZYO stated. “We expect the Naga Hoho to make their stand clear as to who are the land encroachers,” the ZYO added.
“Our Zeliangrong brothers have also died for our land in the hands of encroachers, where was the state government? Why this favoritism? This attitude will not be tolerated anymore. When there is a desperate need to protect the park from illegal settlers, the state government has instead assured a tribal organization to remove the traditional gate of Beisumpiuk am village…” the ZYO stated in a press release received here.
“How could the government stoop so low to give assurance to a tribal hoho for removal of a traditional gate?”
The organization also said the term “war gate” used by some Sumi organizations to describe a traditional village gate is inflammatory. “The ZYO invites the state government to come and see for themselves if that is actually a ‘war gate’ or just a traditional village gate. If the state government opines that Naga United Village or Inavi or whatever villagers should be allowed to continue encroaching and devastating Ntangki let them find their way to it and not through the gate of Beisumpuikam village, no use of passing through our village if they are scared,” the ZYO stated.
Another issued that the ZYO raised was the statement of Western Sumi Youth Front (WSYF) which has claimed the president of Zeliangrong Baudi was someone from Manipur. “The Zeliangrongs elect leaders of our choice and the Western Sumi Youth Front have nothing to do with our election or have no rights to question the integrity or identity of our Leaders. The statement of WSYF reflects the desperate situation they are in,” the ZYO stated.
“We can be anywhere we choose to live in our land, and we are not encroaching or living in anybody’s land. WSYF –a device of the encroachers, an outsider in our land has no moral right to say or comment on the leadership of the Zeliangrong Baudi.”
Further the ZYO expressed pain at the press statement of the Naga Hoho on July 28, 2011. “Being the apex tribal organization in the state, every Nagas expect the Naga Hoho to stand for what is true and right. Instead of stopping the forceful encroachers (Inavi village), the Naga Hoho seems more comfortable to take the role of a mediator by urging the Zeliangrongs and the Sumis to have restrained on Ntangki. If Naga Hoho cannot acknowledge the traditional rights and ownership of a particular tribe and stand for truth, what is Naga Hoho for, after all,” the ZYO questioned.
The Zeliangrong have no hatred towards any particular tribe but only against illegal settlement and encroachers in Ntangki, the ZYO stated. “We expect the Naga Hoho to make their stand clear as to who are the land encroachers,” the ZYO added.
