Chozuba, November 22 (MExN): The Chozuba Range Public Organisation (CRPO) has announced its unanimous decision to disassociate from “Chakhesang -Sumi Brotherhood in all manners of relationship” till the contentious September 5, 2023 incident in Chozuba Town and “subsequent downplayed issue” is “settled in right perspective.”
The CRPO cited the unwillingness of the Chakhesang Public Organisation (CPO) to address the grievances of the Chozuba Range Community as “earnestly” appealed repeatedly vis-à-vis Sumi Hoho’s (SH) allegations as a primary factor behind the decision.
In a letter to the CPO President dated November 11 and shared with the media on November 22, the CPRO justified the dissociation by narrating a chain of events from onset of the incident to the latest decision.
As per the CPRO, the issue first occurred on September 5 between Abel Asumi and CTYA (Chozuba Town Youth Association) officials during a routine “checking/frisking banned drugs and alcohol on highway in town jurisdiction.” Next day, Asumi filed FIR against CTYA while a video of the incident went viral on social media.
According to the CPRO, the SH too filed a complaint to the CPO leveling “serious allegations against entire Chozuba range people, pressing the CPO to take action.” CTYA also filed counter complaint (criminal defamation) against Asumi. On September 7, four CTYA officials were arrested, who were later released on bail.
According to CPRO, 10 full days after the incident, the CPO officials arrived to Chozuba Town on September 16 and reportedly announced to the CRPO and its Monitoring Committee, CTYA, Women Society, CSUCT, GBs, VCCs and public leaders that the CPO had already tendered apology to the SH. When the range public reacted to the information, the CPO President “personally assured to recall the very word ‘Apology’ from their official communication to the SH,” the CPRO claimed. However, no proof is shown to CRPO till date, it added.
As per the CPRO, during the September 16 meeting, it clearly pointed out two separate cases concerning the issue- Asumi Vs CTYA (in the Court of Law) and SH Vs CRPO (pending in CPO’s court). Accordingly, the CRPO impressed upon the CPO to ensure formal withdrawal or settlement of SH's complaint letter first, arguing the “complainant (SH) cannot be arbitrator at the same time vis-à-vis Abel Asumi Vs CTYA.”
Since the complaint against Chozuba Range Community was filed in the CPO’s court, it was generally expected that the latter would accordingly dispose the case without doing any injustice or favouritism to either party, the CPRO stated.
Negative impact of “globalising an otherwise small incident of verbal altercation” on social media, criminalising of CTYA and communalisation of issue were “seriously raised with concern” to the CPO at the meeting, it asserted.
It further claimed that on September 22 in Kohima, 4 CPO officials and 2 CRPO Monitoring Committee members again deliberated upon the pending matter with the latter emphatically stating that the “two separate but inter related cases should be amicably settled side by side at the same time, at the same place by involving all concerned parties” for future better relationship.
During the meeting, a senior citizen of CRPO advocated for an open discussion the SH-CRPO issue at the earliest in appropriate platform.
However, the CPRO alleged that the CPO “vehemently” refused such discussion and eventually, an agreement was made that withdrawal of SH complaint would be made and a formal intimation to the CRPO would be ensured before any further initiative was taken to settle the pending case.
Accordingly, on September 30, the CRPO “conceded” to wish the CPO and Jury Board to settle the pending cases at the apex bodies' level with pre-conditions of formal withdrawal SH’s complaint letter and a formal intimation, else it would “not accept any solution” “This withdrawal letter, if done so is never shown to the CRPO till date,” the CPRO claimed.
In view of the above, the CPRO asserted that the October 3 agreement between the CPO (the appellate) and SH (the complainant) in Satakha, Zunheboto District of a legal case without the involved parties or without fulfilling the assurance is deemed as “nothing short of betrayal and imposition” by Range community. Hence, it submitted a non-acceptance letter to the CPO on October 6, it added.
To this end, the CPRO charged the CPO of being unwilling to address the grievances of CPRO and has resolved not to communicate further with the CPO on the very issue. “For apparent reason that the CPO feels that pushing forward the issue as per the expectation of the CRPO will hamper the brotherhood relation with the Sumis” and the case of CRPO in general and CTYA in particular have been compromised, it maintained.
