Nagaland chief minister Neiphiu Rio has reiterated his concern over the BJP-led Centre’s decision to scale down the Free Movement Regime (FMR) along the India-Myanmar border from 16km to 10km and restrict movement to designated crossing points.
Heading a government led by the NDPP, a BJP ally, Rio said in his Independence Day address on Friday that the changes have caused “hardships for border communities with deep socio-cultural and economic ties across the international border”.
The FMR allowed people living on either side to travel up to 16km without visas or documents. Since December, the Centre has limited the distance to 10km and fixed 43 crossing points across Nagaland, Manipur, Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh. Border passes, issued by Assam Rifles, are now mandatory for seven-day stays.
Union home minister Amit Shah had earlier announced fencing of the border to “facilitate better surveillance”. Four states share a 1,643km border with Myanmar.
This is not Rio’s first objection. In March, he had suggested that all 60 members of the Nagaland Assembly meet the Union home ministry to seek a review of the FMR and the Protected Area Permit. He argued that conditions in Nagaland were “not as severe as in some neighbouring states”.
Nagaland has nine designated crossing points in Kiphire, Meluri, Mon and Noklak districts. Assam Rifles personnel, assisted by police and health workers, monitor entries and exits.
Manipur angst
On Saturday, a delegation of the United Naga Council (UNC), the apex body of Nagas in Manipur, met governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla to share their concerns over both the FMR curbs and border fencing.
The UNC urged the governor to raise the matter with the Centre and pressed for a rollback. The body had earlier issued a 20-day ultimatum to the Union and state governments, warning of intensifying protests.
Bhalla told the delegation that the issue had been taken up with the Union home ministry and appealed for peace while talks continued.
The Centre’s decision has triggered opposition across all four states. Critics argue that tightening the FMR undermines age-old family, social and trade links between communities arbitrarily divided by colonial boundaries.
