TPO Board of Arbitrators issue verdict on Kezoltsa/Kozürü/Kazing dispute

DIMAPUR — The Board of Arbitrators (BOA) appointed by the Tenyimi Peoples’ Organisation (TPO) on Friday delivered its judgment on the long-standing Kezoltsa/Kozürü/Kazing land dispute.

The judgement was pronounced on Friday in the presence of all parties — the Southern Angami Public Organisation (SAPO), the Mao Council, and the Maram Khullen village.

The BOA, which comprises of two members each from all 10 constituents of the TPO, emphasised that its decision, reached after careful consideration of claims, position papers, and documents presented by all parties, adheres to the Arbitration Undertaking signed in 2017.

The 2017 undertaking committed the parties to resolve the dispute based on Tenyimi Naga Customary Law instead of approaching any other courts, and to abide by the BOA’s judgment.

A key point of the verdict included a 50-year restriction on exploiting forest resources in Kezoltsa/Kozürü/Kazing, including a ban on hunting, fishing, and forest product collection.

Accordingly, separate areas of the disputed forest land have been earmarked for each of the contesting parties to preserve and protect, the order stated.

Additionally, a Forest Committee, with proportionate representation from all three parties, will be established under the TPO’s supervision. This committee will be responsible for protecting and preserving the forest and its resources, promoting eco-biodiversity, and managing the area as shared community heritage.

The judgement order stated that the existing vehicular road leading to the disputed area is to be cut off by the TPO. Additionally, the Manipur police barracks in the area are to be removed.

“No vehicular road connectivity inside Kezoltsa/Kozürü/Kazing area shall be permitted at any cost,” it asserted.

With regard to Dzükou Valley, the BOA clarified that its non-inclusion in the judgement “does not imply that it belongs to one particular community or village”.

However, it did mention that a “free access passage (footpath) will be allowed from Tenyimi Southern Naga side to Dzükou valley”.

Underscoring that the judgement is based on customs and traditions of Tenyimi people, the BOA asserted that the state political boundary would not be affected and remain as it is.

It went on to state that the judgement of the TPO Presidential Council shall be final and binding on all the parties.

“If any party refuses to accept and comply with this judgement, that particular party shall be expelled and cease to be a member of TPO and the remaining parties shall stand united on all issues against that party,” the board stated, disposing of the case.

Case background

As per the judgement order, the dispute was first tried in the early 2000s by the Tenyimi Central Union, now TPO. However, as judgement could not be delivered due to various factors, the TPO, in 2015, appointed a Board of Arbitrators (BOA) with two members from each of its 10 constituents to arbitrate the dispute.

Accordingly, an ‘Arbitration Undertaking’ was signed by the three contesting parties in 2017, unanimously agreeing to resolve the matter as per Naga customary law.

The judgement order stated that the parties were given ‘fair opportunity’ to present their claims, and submit their position papers and accompanying documents such as maps, to the board. Modern technologies such as helicopter service and drones were also used to ascertain the exact location and area of dispute.

Recounting the arbitration proceedings, it said that the BOA gave its verdict in December 2022 declaring the disputed area as a common property of the SAPO, Mao Council and the Maram Khullen village. However, the verdict was rejected by the Mao Council and the SAPO, who also requested the TPO to a review the judgement. The Maram Khullen village remained silent, it said.

Consequently, “an atmosphere of uncertainty” was created and there was likelihood of peace and harmony being disturbed.

Sensing the gravity of the situation, it said that the Angami Public Organisation (APO) voluntarily intervened, meeting with leaders and elders of all three parties, and visiting the disputed site on several occasions. 

Furthermore, the APO, with the authorisation of the parties, requested the TPO to take the matter up again and as a result, a review of the BOA verdict was done by the TPO Presidential Council with the presidents of Tenyimi Union Nagaland and Naga Peoples’ Organisation, Senapati.

This was followed by several meetings, spot verifications, as well as perusal of all related documents submitted to the BOA.

Notably, as all three parties, based on ancestral stories, claimed that the disputed area belong to them traditionally, “their statements cannot be considered infallible in the absence of supporting documents,” it said.

However, as they all trace their origin to Makhel, “it may be correct to state that in the past, their forefathers could have common immovable properties”, and it may be wrong to say that the present area of dispute belongs to one particular community or village, it reasoned.

The signatories of the judgement and order included the presidents of APO, Chakhesang Public Organisation, Pochury Hoho, Rengma Hoho, Nagaland Zeliang People Organisation, Inpui Nagaland Union, Thangal Union, Poumai Naga Union, Naga Peoples’ Organisation Senapati, Tenyimi Union Nagaland, as well as TPO president and ex-officio member, and a representative of Maram Union.