To
The Chief Secretary
Nagaland
Kohima
Sir,
As is expected there have been questions and outcry from various quarters on the issue of RIIN and the JCPI feels it’s imperative to put our viewpoint across the government on behalf of stakeholders. The JCPI also feels that the consultative meet with the tribe hohos on the 17th July is timely; however, we may add that the failure of the government to address the status of Nagas from other states as well as the status of genuine Indian citizens under the RIIN exercise in a clear and transparent manner through wide publicity has given way to fear, fear-mongering, confusion and sometimes outrageous statements from certain organizations. The JCPI will not allow any entity to derail the RIIN process, even the government.
Any omission or commission on RIIN/ILP is purely the look out of the government since it is both the formulating and the implementing agency. However, as a pressure group spearheading the ILP bandwagon, the JCPI is compelled to submit it viewpoints on certain key points to the government related to the twin issue. The government may accept, modify or reject our viewpoints but it’s important for the JCPI to put the record straight for the sake of transparency and posterity so that no finger is pointed at us. Also, the JCPI is unequivocally clear in its view that the RIIN exercise is being carried out by the government to simply implement the ILP in its entirety so that the distinct culture, ethos and character of the Naga people are protected from intrusive, alien elements; and any deviation from this for other dubious purpose including privacy infringement, sharing of data with outside agencies, etc., shall be a serious breach of trust. The government may consider the following:
A. The government should assure the Naga people that the RIIN data collected is safe and will not be shared with any outside agencies, government or private, or used for any other purpose other than defined.
B. It is imperative that the government clearly spell out the following to the mass public to dispel confusion once and for all;
1. That there’re 3 kinds of people who reside in the state – indigenous, Indian citizens from other states but domiciled in the state and people of doubtful origin residing in the state.
2. And in order to bring Dimapur under ILP (and for effective implementation of ILP all over the state), the state needs to identify, classify and enumerate all the 3 classes of people without which ILP coverage over Dimapur (and Nagaland) would be a useless exercise.
3. That after the due classification is over, people of doubtful origin (illegal Bangladeshi immigrants) can be identified and deported from the ILP zone called Nagaland, and Indian citizens from other states domiciled here allowed to live and earn with certain restrictions.
C. On Indigenous tribes/Inhabitants as per 1977 government notification
1. Only indigenous people can live, work, and earn in ILP areas.
2. Obviously there’s no bar on mobility for Indigenous people within the state.
3. Obviously there’s no bar on Indigenous people buying or owning property in the state
4. Obviously there’s no bar on Indigenous people carrying out trade and livelihood in any districts of Nagaland
5. However, except for notified Indigenous STs such as 14 Naga tribes and 2 non-Naga tribes, other indigenous inhabitants* cannot be issued ST certificates nor allowed to hold public office except under Dimapur-1A/C.
* Indigenous Inhabitants include tribal communities like Garo and Mikir
D. Nagaland is home to several Lakhs of people who arrived post 1.12.1963, namely:
1. Non-Indigenous Nagas from other states
2. Non-Indigenous Indian citizens from other states
3. Illegal Bangladeshi Immigrants (IBIs)
D(1). It is clear that the majority of Nagas from other states have settled here post 1963. The JCPI is clear that they cannot be
given indigenous nor ST status in Nagaland. However, it is also right that these Nagas cannot be treated on par with other Indian citizens and IBIs. Therefore, there may be a separate registry/category under RIIN to register such Nagas, called as Non-Indigenous Domiciles or NIDs or by any nomenclature deemed fit.
1. This category people may be allowed mobility all over the state irrespective of ILP
2. This category of people may carry out trade and livelihood in any district of Nagaland irrespective of ILP
3. However, this category of people is henceforth barred from buying land and properties in the state as per the Nagaland Land
and Revenue (Amendment) Act 1978 already in force.
4. This category of people cannot be given ST status.
5. This category of people is barred from holding public office (Dimapur -1 A/C included).
D(2) Having a concern for the livelihood and future of Lakhs of non-indigenous people living in Dimapur and elsewhere – now having acquired properties despite the NLR Act, 1978 – a separate classification under RIIN for such post-1.12.1963 comers is necessary. They may be categorized as “Non-Indigenous Residents” or by any nomenclature deemed fit which will permit them to continue to ply their livelihood despite the imposition of ILP in Dimapur (and Nagaland) but with certain restrictions;
1. Their resident status may be updated every 1/3/5 years as the government deems fit
2. For entry into other ILP areas other than Dimapur, they will have to apply for ILP like before.
3. However, NIRs can ply their trade within Dimapur district only. They are barred from trade activities in other ILP districts.
4. Henceforth, no NIRs should be allowed to acquire land and property in Dimapur or elsewhere.
5. NIRs cannot obtain government job nor allowed to hold public office.
6. Their status can be cancelled for indulging in unfair trade practices, forming syndicates, etc and evicted from the state.
D(3): Any person not covered under C, D (1), and D (2) are deemed to be illegal immigrants from foreign countries and therefore arrestable, detentable, anddeportablefrom the state.
E. Solution to “Nagas by Blood not by Adoption” slogan
The JCPI is very clear that this slogan pertains to Nagas of Nagaland only. Given the complexities, the reality of who is ‘a Naga’ needs to be settled through proper legal mechanisms, such as the RIIN exercise. Today indigenous/ST certificates are issued to 3 types of ‘Nagas;’
1. ‘Pure’ Nagas
2. Adopted Nagas, where the adopted person is necessarily an outsider – a mainland Indian, or people of doubtful origin.
3. Mixed Nagas where Father is non-Naga and Mother is Naga.
The JCPI is of the opinion that the government should formulate clear RIIN guidelines as listed below so that serious friction and fissures as existing within Naga society are avoided mainly on account of rampant adoption (mainly IBI children) and fraudulent/sham marriages. The government should not simply pass the buck to the enumerators/village councils/tribe hohos to define for themselves/itself as to who qualifies for indigenous and ST status. There has to be a new standard format which will cover the definition of indigenous and ST given the present ground reality of large scale adoption and mixed marriages in Naga society.
E (1)If the non-local father with local wife is pre-1963 arrivee (which means the father is Indigenous Inhabitant);
1. His offspring’s are Indigenous
2. However they cannot avail ST quota (and apply for government job) since the Nagas by blood criteria doesn’t apply in this case.
3. Their status can be categorised under Indigenous Inhabitant category.
E(2): If the non-local father with local wife is post 1963 arrivee (which means the father is holding NIR status):
1. His offspring’s may be given Non-Indigenous Domicile status
2. The offspring’s not being indigenous ST cannot be given ST status.
E (3): If the non-local father with local wife is without NRC registration from Assam, or without any convincing fool proof documentation:
1. His offspring’s too are deemed aliens.
2. However, the mother being a Naga, the offspring’s at best can avail NIR status.
3. No ST certificate will be issued in their case.
E (4): In the case of adopted sons/daughters of ‘Nagas by blood’ parents, they may be classified under NID category. No ST certificate can be issued in their case. However, to avoid legal/customary complications and upset the existing status quo, serving Naga government officers/employees of mixed parentage or adoptees may be allowed to serve out their term. However, the enumerators/VCs/tribe hohos may be directed to ensure that HENCEFORTH offspring of such people are categorized appropriately as per the RIIN classification.
F. Another very pertinent issue is that every Naga indigenous ST has to be enumerated from their ancestral village for very obvious reasons, which is, to prevent fraud, that is, bogus entry of names of doubtful origin, over-the-night adoptees, and people from other states into RIIN posing as Indigenous ST/Inhabitant or anyone of the classifications.
G. The tribe hohos should be given the final authority in the vetting process before the enumerated list of inhabitants is send to the ADC/DC office as the case may be. Unless this demand is met, the government will have to take full responsibility for any anomalies and the JCPI may be compelled to agitate for revised list.
As stated before, the JCPI is simply putting across its viewpoints to set the record straight. It will continue to support the endeavour of the government on RIIN and ILP and it is also hopeful that the government will come out with clear-cut modalities related to RIIN – as explained above – so as to assuage concerns in certain quarters. However, the JCPI under no circumstances will allow the government to backtrack from the RIIN exercise.
Thanking You,
K Ghokheto Chophy, Convenor, JCPI;
Tia Longchar, Secretary, JCPI
Note: This memorandum was approved by the NGBF (Nagaland GB Federation) and 9 tribe hohos on the 16th July meeting called by the JCPI at Hotel Japfu, Kohima, and submitted to the Chief Secretary at the 17th July Consultative meeting called by the state government.
