The State Cabinet has once again deliberated at length on the issue of indigenous status and the implementation of the Register of Indigenous Inhabitants of Nagaland (RIIN) in connection with the strict enforcement of the Inner Line Permit (ILP) under the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873.
Addressing the media here on Thursday, government spokesperson and minister KG. Kenye said the government had “embarked on this exercise once again as part of its continuing effort to define and protect the indigenous status of the people of Nagaland,” and to ensure that “the enforcement of the Inner Line Permit is carried out strictly and efficiently.”
He explained that in order to implement ILP effectively, “the state government has to know who are its indigenous citizens and who are not,” describing this as “the benchmark and the most important hurdle in our way of imposing these laws in our state.”
The minister said the government has “resorted to enlisting the genuine indigenous citizens and delisting the others from this list.”
Reflecting on earlier administrations, Kenye said that “with due respect to our predecessors, times were different, and people were innocent and simple; life was very normal and there were no perceived threats to our people or to future generations.” However, he noted that “this complacency and casual attitude of the past has landed us into deep trouble.”
“It may be late, but as they say, better late than never,” he said, adding that “the government of the day is trying to make up for all those years where it has not been stern enough and assertive.”
Admitting that the present effort was not without challenges, Kenye said, “Going back to the past is always very difficult. But in order to streamline administration and policies governing our government, there are no options—we have to rough up some feathers.”
He said the government was facing backlashes and consequences for being a little stern, but insisted that it was for the good of all times to come, so that the ensuing leaders and governments will have a better, clearer policy to adhere to.
Kenye further explained that the exercise aimed to establish who qualifies as indigenous inhabitants- “those tribes whose forefathers and ancestors came thousands of years ago, settled in this land, and exerted their ownership over it ever since.”
He said that historically, “the Nagas who inhabited the higher hills later extended their settlements to the plains of Dimapur and adjoining Assam, after the previous occupants had deserted and relinquished their positions.”
He pointed out that “this is the point where we come down to the four sub-tribes- Kukis, Kacharis, Mikirs (Karbis), and Garos especially.” While these communities may have been recorded earlier as inhabitants, he said, “after ascertaining what the meaning of ‘indigenous’ truly is, we have to find out whether they are indigenous to this state and to the places where they have established their settlements now.”
According to him, the government’s examination revealed that “the larger chunk of their family lineage has not originated from the places where they now occupy,” and that members of these communities were spread across three or four states in the North East- Mizoram, Manipur, Assam, and Meghalaya.
This, he said, “is where the danger lies- that people who are presently here in Nagaland may go to other states where their communities are settled and claim citizenship there, and vice versa.”
Kenye warned that such fluidity could threaten the integrity of Nagaland’s indigenous demography, adding, “If we want to implement the ILP strictly, we cannot exempt the non-indigenous inhabitants of Nagaland. Their names have to be debated, and no other non-indigenous tribe, community, or individual should find their name in the indigenous register.”
He explained that the RIIN list would determine who is conferred the indigenous certificate, which allows one to avail benefits meant for indigenous communities, while those not found eligible would be deprived of such benefits.
To ensure accuracy, Kenye said the state government has asked the administration, in consultation with relevant civil society organisations (CSOs), tribal organisations, and subordinate authorities, to collaborate and start this exercise from the grassroots level, beginning with the village authorities.
However, he noted that certain communities have objected to this identification of their backgrounds. The government, he said, had “made certain cut-off years and referred to the first state election electoral rolls and other proofs,” but “four sub-tribes refused to go for new registration and refused to allow any authority to come and enumerate or ascertain their status and background.” Instead, they had “taken recourse to the court and challenged the government’s order.”
Kenye described the development as “very unfortunate,” adding that the groups demanded enumeration of all other indigenous Naga tribes as well. “The government is clear that all other tribes who are already recognised as indigenous need not go again for enumeration,” he clarified.
He elaborated that recognised Naga tribes “do not have overlapping communities outside the state,” except a few cases such as the Konyaks in Arunachal Pradesh, some Chakhesangs and Zeliangs in Manipur and Assam, “but even they do not migrate or transcend borders for habitation or benefits.”
“Unlike these four tribes, our major Naga tribes are based here and have little or no contact outside the state,” he said. “Those whose names were enrolled in the first electoral roll need not be enumerated again. But for the others, they must prove that their parents or grandparents were part of the electoral roll and must be able to produce proofs—this was the condition the government put forward.”
He lamented that “they refused, saying they would not go for enumeration,” leaving the government with no option.
Following this, the Cabinet decided that “because of this challenge and for dragging the state government to court, the earlier status, benefits, and positions conferred by the government will be frozen, and nothing will move until the court gives its verdict.”
“The government has no option but to see the end of the day in the court,” Kenye said. “If they withdraw their case, anything is possible. But if things are directed this way, I doubt whether the government will reconsider its earlier stand.”
He further clarified that though the indigenous status position is still being debated and frozen, the Scheduled Tribe (ST) status is different and can always be accorded by the government.
Summing up, Kenye said, “The government’s intention is not to target any community, but to bring clarity to a long-neglected issue. We have to face the truth, however hard it may be, because the future of our indigenous identity depends on it.”
He maintained that the government’s actions were guided by the need “to protect the rights and identity of Nagaland’s indigenous inhabitants and to ensure a coherent administrative and legal framework for the future.”