- 88 Reads
IMPHAL | Sept 18 : United Committee Manipur (UCM) will be organising a public discourse to discuss the future course of action against the Naga framework agreement at Lamyanba Shanglen on September 20.
Speaking with media persons at the office of UCM Lamphel, president of UCM, Sunil Karam said that after NSCN-IM and the government of India signed the framework agreement on August 3, 2015, the steps and policies of both the parties has kept on changing. Moreover, the 213 report submitted by RN. Ravi to the government of India on July 18 included extension of Article 371-A and local adjustment of sixth schedule, he added.
Sunil further said that UCM is always against giving different opportunities and power to a particular community and decried implementing of the sixth schedule too.
In 2017, a delegation of UCM, AMUCCO and CCSK met the Prime Minister, Home minister and many other political parties to submit the demands of the people of Manipur, but the 213 report of the parliamentary standing committee is in contrary to the demands submitted, he added.
“The public discussion will be attended by different academician and experts in different fields and a last and concrete decision for integrity of the state will be taken,” said Sunil.
Replying to a question by one media person regarding the statement of national general secretary of BJP, Ram Madhav, Sunil said that the Centre has always assured the people that the integrity of Manipur will not be at stake but they have been playing a divide and rule policy among the different communities of the state.
He further questioned on why the Centre fails to issue a written assurance if the framework agreement does not contain anything against the integrity of the state.
He appealed all the organisations to avoid any kinds of bandh and strike on the day.
General secretary of UCM, Kh. Athouba said, “The reports contain false data and it is a communally biased report. They try to sympathise Naga and victimize the Meitei. And the divisive policy of the Centre is seen from the report. It also tries to show the various communities of Manipur as different entities.”~IFP