Ban imposed on Manipur Mao tribe SC directs Centre to investigate

Imphal: In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India on Monday directed the Union of India to consider the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the South Angami Public Organization (SAPO) in connection with the ongoing blockade. Leave a notice imposed or served by of Nagaland on the Mao community of Manipur.

The PIL in connection with the case was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India by Khurajam Athuba, convener of the Mao-Imphal Market Coordination Committee and vice-president of IPSA.
The first hearing of the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in the matter was held on Monday before a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice JB Pardiwala.
In this, the Supreme Court bench considered the issue of complete ban on settlement, residence, trade and commerce and movement of the members of the Mao tribe by the Southern Angami tribe from the Union of India, through the Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta. Said to do. In the state of Nagaland and populated areas by National Highway 2 (Asian Highway No. 1).
Since 15 December 2022, the Southern Angami Public Organization (SAPO) and the Southern Angami Youth Organization (SAYO) have organized the resettlement, settlement, trade and commerce of the Southern Angami tribe in Nagaland through settlement areas, and relocation of Mao tribe members. Movement has been banned. Various incidents of violence, such as the burning of vehicles and the harassment of Mao clan members, have occurred as a result.
Members of the Southern Angami tribe have tried to link the blockade and incidents of violence to their alleged traditional and tribal rights over the 32.29 sq km Koziiri forest and two-thirds of the Dzuko Valley (11.28 sq km), which are otherwise within are According to the petitioner the undisputed constitutional boundaries of Manipur.
Although efforts have been made in the past by tribal bodies to address the issue, nothing substantial has been done so far, the petitioner said.
Further, the petitioner said that for the last 105 days, neither the state of Nagaland nor the Union of India has taken any steps to protect the basic fundamental rights of the Mao tribe. In such circumstances it was deemed necessary to approach the highest court of India to ensure speedy justice.

The petitioner further highlighted that the restriction of access of the Mao tribe to National Highway No. 2 (Asian Highway No. 1) has severely affected their movement and business.
The petitioner, Athouba, filed the PIL in February 2023 through her counsel, Ngangom Junior Luwang, Advocate, Supreme Court of India. The petition demanded adequate protection of the inalienable fundamental rights of the people of the Mao tribe, adequate compensation to the victims of the illegal activities of SAPO and SAYO and the declaration of the two organizations as unlawful associations under Section 3. Is. Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.
The court has fixed the urgent hearing of this matter on March 20. Also, the Solicitor General has been specifically asked to provide all possible assistance.

The petitioner added, “It is expected that prompt public interest litigation may set a precedent for blocking highways by vested interests and potential legal ramifications for serious inconvenience to the public.” An example can be made from sight.”