Amit Shah's Presence Must At Peace Talks To End Manipur Violence | Opinion

Union Home Minister Amit Shah was not present at the last Centre-mediated meeting between the representatives from the Meitei, Naga, and Kuki-Zomi communities.

Source : PTI

This week, the Union Home Ministry held peace talks in New Delhi attended by legislators from the Meitei, Naga, and Kuki-Zomi communities to find an amicable solution to the ongoing violence in the northeastern state of Manipur, which has been awaiting the restoration of normalcy since ethnic violence between the Meiteis and Kuki-Zomis broke out in May last year. According to reports, eight legislators from the Meitei community, three from the Naga, and four from the Kuki-Zomi community were present.

The meeting, which was not attended by Union Home Minister Amit Shah or State Chief Minister N. Biren Singh, did not achieve a breakthrough. Instead, it highlighted the deep divisions that have persisted in the state since the riots began. The Kuki-Zomi legislators did not attend the joint meeting with the Meitei and Naga legislators; instead, they met separately with officials from the Home Ministry.

This was the first such meeting organised by the Centre since the ethnic riots broke out in the state, and although the initiative came late, it was a positive step towards restoring normalcy in the strife-torn northeastern state. While all the legislators have been urged to work towards ending the violence, they remain divided on how to achieve that. This became evident when the Kuki-Zomi legislators reiterated their demand for a separate administration in the form of a Union Territory with a legislature, a demand strongly opposed by the Meiteis. The Nagas are also opposed to this demand, as some of their areas are claimed by the Kuki-Zomis in the proposed separate administration.

This demonstrates that restoring normalcy will not be an easy task, given the strong polarisation between the Meiteis and Kuki-Zomis. The only way to reduce this polarisation is dialogue among the various communities. However, the peace meeting conducted by the Centre was ineffective, as it lacked important voices. A meaningful peace dialogue cannot take place with the involvement of legislators alone; it requires the participation of diverse voices from society, including civil society groups. The importance of these groups, which represent their respective communities, cannot be ignored.

The task before the Centre is to involve all stakeholders in the next round of peace talks and bring everyone together at the same table for meaningful discussions. The next round of peace talks should also involve Union Home Minister Amit Shah, as his presence is likely to lend greater weight to the discussions.

SC Verdict On Section 6A Of Citizenship Act Brings CAA Back Into Focus In Assam

This week, in a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court, by a majority of 4:1, validated Section 6A of the Citizenship Act. Section 6A was inserted into the Citizenship Act of 1955 following the signing of the Assam Accord in 1985 by the Rajiv Gandhi-led Congress government, the All Assam Students Union, and the All Assam Gana Sangram Parishad. This section allows foreign migrants of Indian origin who came to Assam between January 1, 1966, and March 25, 1971, to seek Indian citizenship.

There has been a section of people in the state pushing to set the cut-off year for citizenship as 1951. This Supreme Court verdict puts an end to the debate over the cut-off year for citizenship in Assam, a state that has seen several influxes of refugees since the partition of 1947.

The verdict has also reignited the debate over the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) of 2019, which has been opposed by various Assamese organisations and opposition parties in the state. The CAA sets the cut-off date for obtaining Indian citizenship as December 31, 2014, for refugees from six minority groups — Hindus, Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs, Christians, and Parsis — from Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan. Opposition parties are once again demanding the withdrawal of the CAA, arguing that it violates the Assam Accord, which mandates the cut-off date for citizenship as March 25, 1971.

However, it remains to be seen how effective this renewed demand for the withdrawal of the CAA will be on the ground. While Assam witnessed strong protests against the CAA in 2019, sentiments have diminished in recent years, with the ruling BJP managing to withstand opposition to the CAA by blending Assamese regionalism with its Hindutva agenda. Notably, the Supreme Court has also clarified that Parliament has the authority to decide the cut-off date for citizenship under Article 11 of the Indian Constitution.

Communal Tensions in Tripura Becoming a Serious Concern

This week, communal tensions between Hindus and Muslims flared up in Pekucherra, in the North Tripura district. The unrest began following allegations of vandalism at a Lord Shiva temple, which were followed by claims of vandalism at a mosque. The ripple effects of these conflicts were felt in the neighbouring Unakoti district, where there were reports of unrest between Hindus and Muslims in Kailashahar. Internet services had to be suspended in both Unakoti and North Tripura due to the unrest.

This was the second incident of communal tension in North Tripura within a fortnight. Days ago, communal violence in Kadamtala — discussed by this writer in a previous column — claimed the life of one person.

Following the violence in Pekucherra, North Tripura Superintendent of Police Bhanupada Chakraborty was transferred to Police Headquarters in Agartala, and Dhalai district Superintendent of Police Avinash Rai was given additional charge of the North Tripura district.

In the last column, this writer noted that the Kadamtala communal violence should serve as a wake-up call for the state government. However, the subsequent tensions in Pekucherra and Kailashahar reveal ongoing lapses in state administration. Communal violence in the same district within a fortnight raises serious questions about the effectiveness of law and order in the state. The mere transfer of the Superintendent of Police cannot mask the administration's failures.

The state government must address these lapses and develop a long-term strategy to prevent such communal tensions. Chief Minister Manik Saha, who also serves as Home Minister, faces a tough task ahead, as the people of the state expect effective measures to prevent the recurrence of communal violence.

The author is a political commentator.

[Disclaimer: The opinions, beliefs, and views expressed by the various authors and forum participants on this website are personal and do not reflect the opinions, beliefs, and views of ABP Network Pvt. Ltd.]