HINDU NATIONALIST MODI IS RIGHT, THE CONSTITUTION MATTERS

HINDU NATIONALIST MODI IS RIGHT, THE CONSTITUTION MATTERS

"In democracy, there should be discussion. The government has put forward its position. Those who want to digress from triple talaq are instigating people...in the country, lives of Muslim women cannot be allowed to be ruined by triple talaq." These are the words of Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Oct 24 last year at the Maha Parivartan Rally in Mahoba, Uttar Pradesh.

The Prime Minister took a careful but bold step when he injected his view on the nationwide debate on the controversial issue of the "triple talaq" and even urged "TV news channels to not turn triple talaq into an issue of Hindu versus Muslim or BJP versus other parties."

He also said "that in its submission to the Supreme Court, the central government had clearly stated that there should not be any atrocity on women and there should be no discrimination on the basis of religion."

Taking at snipe at opposition parties, he said, "I am surprised that some political parties of the country in their lust for vote bank are hell-bent upon committing injustice to women in the 21st century. What kind of justice is this? Politics and elections have their own place but getting Muslim women their rights as per the Constitution is the responsibility of the government and the people of the country."

The Prime Minister, with all his faults, could not be clearer on how the laws should apply and what position governments should take when it comes to the intersection of religion and government. But above all, he is right to point out the issue of justice or lack thereof which is central to this debate.

What it "triple talaq" anyway? In short, it is a strand of Islamic law where a Muslim man can say the Arabic word "Talaq" three times and divorce his wife, sometimes arbitrarily and instantaneously. Because some Muslim leaders say it is Islamic law, they claim protection of this religious law under the Indian constitution.

In general, the Indian constitution guarantees the manner in which religion operates within the confines of its influence (Article 26: Freedom to manage religious affairs...every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right...to manage its own affairs in matters of religion.) However, if religious tenets become agents of injustice, often they are overruled by the legislature or the courts.

Muslim leaders in India say that the concept and practice of talaq is misused by some Muslim men and that the talaq itself is lawful and good under Islamic law. They are not in favour of it being declared unlawful because they claim that their religious law is protected by the Constitution and should be kept.

As for the alleged misuse of the talaq, Mohammad Jafar, a life member of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, says the solution is to educate Muslim men, "as they have done something not permissible in Islam" by pronouncing instantaneous divorce. The government's solution is Uniform Civil Code and the Muslim women's network Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan (BMMA) wants it declared unconstitutional. A petition is currently being considered by the Supreme Court.

Are religious laws immune from the scrutiny of the government and the court?

Apparently not. The practice of triple talaq, according to many Muslims, is not a clearly defined Islamic law. Some Muslim countries actually prohibit it precisely because of the fact that it can and has been misused by Muslim men under the pretext that Islam has given them permission to do so.

According to Prem Anand Mishra, a research scholar in the Centre for West Asian studies in School of International Studies, JNU, New Delhi, "[m]ore than 20 Islamic countries including Egypt, Sudan, Jordan, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Morocco, Iraq, and even Pakistan and Bangladesh, are updating Sharia laws relating to marriage and have imposed a court injunction against a husband pronouncing talaq."
http://www.indiatimes.com/news/india/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-controversial-system-of-triple-talaq-and-why-it-should-be-abolished-254173.html

Are Muslim women in India subjected to the denial of their constitutional fundamental rights?

The Prime Minister and his government believes so. The Central government even told the Supreme Court that this Islamic law renders Muslim women “unequal and vulnerable.” Given the disadvantage they have faced and potentially continue to face under the practice of this Islamic law, the fundamental rights of Muslim women for equality under the law (i.e., government law) stands violated and under constant judgement.

The Prime Minister is right to denounce parts of a religious law which, when implemented, cause great harm to women and call for its abolition.

Why is the Prime Minister's stand important and relevant for Mizoram, a state that has nothing to do with this Islamic law? Because there is a similar struggle between religious authorities and government authorities on the issue of whether religious laws can trump constitutional fundmental rights of women.

In the case of Mizoram, the Baptist Church of Mizoram is the religious body in question and the women are pastors' wives.

Here's what happened.

In 2008, the Baptist Church of Mizoram's highest council - the Assembly - deliberated on the issue of strengthening pastoral ministry. It was generally agreed that pastors minister better when they are accompanied by their wives in their pastorates. A three-point agenda was clubbed into one where the means to achieve the desired goal of strengthening pastoral ministry has become the problem that caused atleast six couples' separation or divorce.

While the agenda raised a bit of a concern, none at the Assembly, including the top church officials, realised that they had just passed a resolution violating the BCM constitution and the constitution of India when the church resolved to ban all pastors' wives from full time work after 2015. The Baptist church's own constitutition declares that the defence of fundamental human rights is one of its prime objectives and the constitution of India under Article 19(1)(g) guarantees all citizens the right "to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business." Besides, the terms of service of pastors' wives who are government employees are governed by The Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 and not the church.

What is happening now?

As of today, the matter is in the hands of the Mizoram State Commission for Women under the leadership of Chairperson Vanlalawmpuii Chawngthu, MLA. The Baptist church has been asked to submit a written explanation of its decision and implementation which it has done.

The general belief among the Baptist church leaders is that the Church is immune from the constraints of the laws of the government and that it obeys a higher divine law. Hence, any church Assembly resolutions have divine sanction and may not be challenged even if it violates the constitution.

If the state's Women's Commission is unable to convey to the Baptist church leaders that the fundamental rights of citizens guaranteed in the constitution cannot be violated by the church, a fresh look at the case by perhaps the National Commission for Women may be warranted.

While the BJP-led government is not known for having sympathy towards Christians and other minorities, it is on the right side of the law when it comes to the defense of Muslim women's fundamental rights.

The Hindu-nationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi is right when he says, "Muslim women cannot be allowed to be ruined by triple talaq." If brought to the attention of the National Commission for Women, they are most likely to say, "Baptist women cannot be allowed to be ruined by unconstitutional church resolutions."

They are also most likely to say getting Baptist pastors' wives "their rights as per the Constitution is the responsibility of the government and the people of the country."

The Mizoram State Commission for Women has a difficult but very important job to do. The Baptist church leaders will continue to assert the divine right of the church but the law is not on their side. Just as Islamic law cannot be used to perpetrate injustice, the church cannot use its Assembly or committees to violate the constitutional rights of women and subject them to an almost irreparable financial, emotional, physical and spiritual damage.

If and when the matter is properly addressed, the Baptist leaders will have no biblical verse or Baptist tradition supporting the banning of pastors' wives to work full time while the government (Commission) has the constitution on its side.

WHY MIZO?

The Indian government classifies me as a tribal and recognizes me as a Mizo. I am a Mizo and I am an Indian, I am a Christian too. However, not everyone from Mizoram feel the same way as I do. Allow me to share with you what I believe is important in this debate.

Why are tribals protected in India?

According to Professor Joseph W. Elder, "[i]n the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Indian and European reformers called on the British government of India to do something to improve the lot of India's most disadvantaged groups. The 1935 Government of India Act announced that certain 'degraded' groups in India would have special electoral representation in India's forthcoming elections. In anticipation, in 1936 India's provincial governments prepared lists ('schedules') of local groups meeting the 'degraded' criteria. Castes considered to be 'degraded' because they suffered ritual disabilities (such as denial of admission to Hindu temples) were called scheduled castes (SCs). Tribes considered to be 'degraded' were referred to as 'backward tribes.' The 1941 census recorded 24.5 million tribals (about 6.6% of India's population). In 1950, with the enactment of India's Constitution, these 'backward tribes' were referred to as scheduled tribes (STs)."

Professor Elder also believes that the "British authorities differed in their opinions regarding the policies they should implement in territories occupied primarily by tribal groups. They wanted the tribes in these territories to be peaceful, which meant restraining the 'criminal tribes.' They also wanted to protect tribal groups from rapacious outside traders, moneylenders, and landlords (the British failure to provide sufficient protection led to rebellions by the Santals, Oraons, Kols, Hos, Mundas, and other tribal groups)."

But long before the Government of India Act of 1919 which empowered the Governor-General to declare any tract of land in India to be a Backward Tract and in some cases Wholly Excluded Areas where no laws of British India could apply, there was the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulations, 1873 which is the basis for what we now know as the Inner Line Permit. It is therefore clear that the British Government of India always had the protection of minorities in mind especially with regard to trade and commerce. However, their understanding of who constitutes a particular tribe and the natural areas they occupied was inadequate and many historical revisionists have argued that the British made big mistakes in drawing up boundaries that have become international borders and that it is an error of great magnitude that needs to be corrected. Another topic for another time.

How did we become a “Scheduled Tribe”?

The term ‘Scheduled Tribes’ first appeared in the Constitution of India. Article 366 (25) defined “Scheduled Tribes” as “such tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or tribal communities as are deemed under Article 342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of this constitution”.

Article 366 (25) of the Constitution of India refers to Scheduled Tribes as those communities, who are scheduled in accordance with Article 342 of the Constitution. This Article says that only those communities who have been declared as such by the President through an initial public notification or through a subsequent amending Act of Parliament will be considered to be Scheduled Tribes

Article 342 provides for specification of tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within tribes or tribal communities which are deemed to be for the purposes of the Constitution the Scheduled Tribes in relation to that State or Union Territory. In pursuance of these provisions, the list of Scheduled Tribes are notified for each State or Union Territory and are valid only within the jurisdiction of that State or Union Territory and not outside.

The first specification of Scheduled Tribes in relation to a particular State/Union Territory is by a notified order of the President, after consultation with the State governments concerned. These orders can be modified subsequently only through an Act of Parliament. The above Article also provides for listing of scheduled tribes State/ Union Territory wise and not on an all India basis.

Since the enactment of the Constitution of India in 1950, the President of India has promulgated 9 orders specifying the names of the tribes and which state they belong to. It is important to note that this was done in consultation with the concerned State governments. When the President of India promulgated The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order 1950 order on Sept 6, 1950, the people of Mizoram were still under the state of Assam. The list of the Zo tribes given to the President’s office by the government of Assam in 1950 were:

1)      Hmar

2)      Kuki

3)      Lakher

4)      Pawi

5)      Mizo

When and how did we become “Mizos”?

When the Mizo Common People's Union (later Mizo Union) was formed on 9th April 1946, the term “Mizo” was still a relatively new concept. The leaders of the newly formed political party were from different clans of the Zo tribe. None of them were ever “Mizo.” But by the time they came together, there was a common identity that was already born in the hearts and minds of the majority of the Zo people in what is now Mizoram. While it is doubtful that the other Zo clans/tribes in the south viz., the Mara or Lai tribes readily identified as Mizos, the bigger clans/tribes clearly defined the emerging identity of the people of Mizoram. When the MNF launched its war of independence, most, if not all, able bodied young men (and perhaps women) were ready to die under the name of the Mizo “nation” and for Mizoram. In fact, every martyr of the Mizo National Army who gave his life in the 20 year-fight with the Indian government died not as a Hmar, Lusei, Mara, Lai, Paite or Kuki but as a Mizo patriot.

According to R.Zamawia, Defence Minister of the former underground MNF government, the term Mizo is most inclusive, and during the freedom struggle there is no Zo clan or tribe that was known to have rejected the term Mizo. However, in order to escape persecution by the Indian army, people would often identify as “Hmar” or “Lakher” or “Pawi” or “Paite” etc.

It is evident that when President Rajendra Prasad promulgated the first ST order in 1950, the advice given to him (as in the office of the President of India) by then-Chief Minister Gopinath Bordoloi’s government of Assam and subsequent Chief Minister Bishnu Ram Medhi’s government did not take into account what was already happening amongst the Zo people of the erstwhile Lushai District. We donot exactly know what communications transpired between leaders of the Lushai District and Chief Ministers Bordoloi and Medhi’s government but what we know for certain is the fact that the State government of Assam had consented to the separate registration of the Zo peoples as Hmar, Kuki, Lakher, Pawi and Mizo tribes. We really donot know why the leaders of the then-Lushai District did not insist that the 4 Zo tribes (Hmar, Kuki, Lakher, Pawi) in Mizoram were part of the larger Mizo tribe that was quickly being formed.

In fact, in less than 4 years after the promulgation of the tribe list, on 29th April, 1954, by an Act of Parliament, with these words “[t]he tribal area in Assam now known as the Lushai Hills District shall, as from the commencement of this Act, be known as the Mizo District,” the name Lushai was effectively and officially changed to Mizo.

 Who, then, is a Mizo?

The question “Who is a Mizo?” is difficult for some to answer and it really boils down to choice. Over the last few weeks, we have been asking ourselves what appear to be obvious and ridiculous questions such as "Who is a Mizo?", "Is a Hmar, Lai, Mara, Kuki, Paite a Mizo as much as a Pachuau or a Sailo is?", "Is a member of a non-Lusei tribe/clan a Mizo?" or even questions as outrageous as this one - "Can children of non-Mizo fathers be considered Mizos?"

Hundreds, if not thousands, of people engaged in the discussions generated on social media. Some, understandably, are outraged at even the slightest suggestion that Maras or Lais or Hmars or Paites or Kukis are not "Mizos". Surprisingly, some Mizos or the Zo people of Mizoram still have a long way to go in terms of understanding and defining cultural identity.

Dancing around the bush and approaching the issue with political correctness and senseless sensitivity have not worked in the past and will most likely fail to produce positive results in the future. Therefore, as a proud, resilient and forward thinking people, it will be best for the people of Mizoram need to start to re-engage in dealing with this issue openly and directly.

According to the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India, there are 15 tribes in Mizoram. Among the 15 tribes, Kukis, Hmars, Paite, Lakhers and Pawis are registered as separate tribes and they donot fall under the Mizo tribe. Therefore, by law, Kukis, Hmars, Paite, Lakhers and Pawis in Mizoram are not Mizos even if everything they believe about themselves is Mizo. Those with a clear understanding of the implication of Acts of Parliament believe that this is a profound error that legally divides us.

It is an affront to many people in Mizoram who have always considered themselves Mizos but are of the Kukis, Hmars, Paite, Lakhers and Pawis tribes. Former Minister F.Lawmkima, Former MP Dr HT Sangliana, singer Rebecca Saimawii, Speaker Hiphei and the new Miss Mizoram Rody Tepuii are, by law, not Mizos because they belong to one of the five other Zo tribes and not the Mizo tribe as listed. Unfortunately, that is where we are at the moment.

On March 7^th, the Home Department of the Government of Mizoram issued a public notice inviting virtually everyone to submit suggestions in its effort to have the Scheduled Tribe List amended. Unless the government extends the deadline, today is the last day for the people of Mizoram to hand in their suggestions and recommendations.

This thing called the Tribal Certificate

Did you know that you can only get a Tribal Certificate under the name of your tribe? If a Fanai, for example, which a Pawi clan is issued a Tribal Certificate by the Deputy Commmissioner's office, he will have the name of his tribe "Pawi" written and not “Mizo”. (This is an old term the Lai people donot use anymore but still in the law books.) To obtain a Tribal Certificate, one needs to get a Community Certificate from the Local Council or Village Council. A committee called the Scrutiny Committee will verify the authenticity of the applicant’s claim i.e. whether his is a Lai, Mara, Kuki, Paite, Hmar or Mizo and validate the Community Certificate. Only then can you go to the DC's office and request for a Tribal Certificate with the name of your tribe as written in your Community Certificate.

People who falsely obtain a Community Certificate can be fined and jailed for upto 2 years. The same goes for the people that issue it. For example, if the son of a Mara man and a Lai woman living in Aizawl, fully identifying as a Mizo, tries to obtain a "Mizo" Community Certificate and subsequently a "Mizo" Tribal Certificate, he can be fined and jailed for breaking the law because he is by tradition a Mara.

Last year, there was an interesting case of an individual whose "Mizo" Tribal Certificate issued by the Aizawl DC's office was rejected by the Home department even though his Local Council and locality NGOs declared him to be "considered a Mizo." The DC's office had already issued him aMizo Tribal Certificate based on the Community Certificate issued by the Local Council and validated by the Screening Committee headed by the Jt Secretary of the Home department.

This individual's father is reported to be a Nepali, and therefore by established custom and law, many say he is not a Mizo or any of the six Zo tribes.

This calls into question the issue of whether children born of non-Mizo fathers can become Mizos. (At this point, we shall refer to all the Zo tribes of Mizoram as Mizos). The question of whether or not children of a non-Scheduled Tribe fathers can be considered eligible to enjoy the privileges of a Scheduled Tribe is also a hotly debated topic. Despite popular belief, you will be surprised to discover that children of non-Mizo, non tribal fathers can be considered by the society as their own and the law may even give legal sanction to this cultural practice. 

A clear example is the President of the Central YMA. Lalbiakzuala is the son of the son of an Englishman by the name of John Miller who married the granddaughter of Mizo legend Chawngbawla. The CYMA President’s family is one of the most respected families among the Mizo people. One of his uncles is the founding member of the two biggest church youth organisations in Mizoram - KTP and TKP. His family is well regarded among the Mizo people and never has there been a legal challenge or even a social one against him and his family on his identity as a Mizo or otherwise. He and his family are fully accepted as Mizos by the Mizo community and there is not one reason for them to feel like they are not even though they have an English surname. We also have the Murray family in Mizoram who are fully accepted by the community. The Hallidays are also another family fully accepted into the Mizo community.

There are several cases of children and grandchildren non-Mizo, non-tribal fathers who have been considered Mizos because of events and circumstances. We can truly say these brothers and sisters are uniquely Mizos and the Mizo society has never rejected them. The adoption of a different community by another community is not a new concept. Even the old Mizo society may have practised it. And we are certainly practising it today.

We often say our identity is in our blood. True. But Mizo-ness, it seems, may also be of the heart.

The Christian perspective

Most Zo peoples are Christians and are supposed to believe and live according to the teachings of the Bible.

Jesus said his mission was to seek and save the lost (Luke 19:10) and his command to all who follow him (not pastors, church elders or missionaries but every Christian) is to "go and make disciples of all nations." (Matthew 28:18-20)

Bible scholars say the word "nations" Jesus used here, as recorded in the original Greek language, is "ethne", the word from which we get the English word "ethnic."

For those unfamiliar with Christianity and what it is about, the essence of Jesus' message is God's love and forgiveness for all humanity. And Jesus commanded his followers to preach the same message to all the "nations" of the world.

Some British Christians did just that to the Mizo people and history has never been the same again.

Rev William Williams visited the Lushai country on March 15, 1891 not as an agent of the British government trying to further subdue the heading-hunting Lushai and other Zo tribes but to explore the possibility of preaching the gospel. Rev FW Savidge and Rev JH Lorrain arrived three years later on Jan 11, 1894. They too had a clear mission although they had to go back after a few years. Six years later, on Sept 26, 1907, Rev JH Lorrain's brother Rev RA Lorrain and his wife arrived among the Mara people with the same purpose. Rev FW Savidge and Rev JH Lorrain re-entered Mizoram on March 13, 1903 as missionaries of the Baptist Missionary Society in England. According to the Lairam Baptists, "[t]he work of the Baptist Missionary Society (BMS) of England in the early 20th Century was the beginning of the Christianity among the indigenous people of Lairam (Lai land) who were called Lai."

These three ethnic peoples - Mara, Lusei and Lai - were reached by the Welsh and English missionaries with the gospel message because of the direct command of Jesus Christ as found in Matthew 28. Today, these ethnic peoples, including other Zo tribes and clans, collectively known as the Mizo people, embrace Christianity as their religion and pretty much their way of life.

Christians believe God made every ethnic people group the way they are. Some are very different to others in language and customs and according to the Bible, our ethnicity will continue even in eternity. In Revelations 7:9, John talks about his vision of seeing a "great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne."

Our ethnic identity is a gift from God moulded by time. We should cherish and embrace it wholeheartedly. But with the appearance of Jesus on the scene, a new covenant was established. Something changed radically. The old order of things was replaced by something totally new. Perhaps, this is best captured in the letter to Galatians 3:26-29 where it says, "So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise."

This new reality is truly a radical shift from the old, rigid, ethnic and racial divide because it declares oneness in Christ and essentially nullifies all racial and ethnic lines. So, a follower of Jesus, regardless of ethnic identity, shares a new Christian family identity with his fellow Christians even from a totally different ethnic group. We know from the verses above that Bible teaching is clear on the irrelevance of ethnic differences, social status and gender. These things matter in the secular world, but for followers of the teaching of the Bible these are of secondary and not primary importance.

This teaching of the Bible, is perhaps, the reason why majority of the ethnically distinct peoples of Mizoram - Lai, Mara, Hmar, Paite, Kuki and Lusei - have little problem living together as brothers and sisters.

What next?

The Government of India also recognises that “[t]he inclusion of a community as a Scheduled Tribe is an ongoing process” and we must rightly work toward unity, where it is possible, because there is still a lot of work to be done.

In light of the fact that a Mizo identity has been established and has been sealed with the blood of the martyrs, it would be highly irresponsible for us to go back to our own sub-ethnic identities. The new reality is the Mizo identity and this has never not been upheld since its inception. While there are some that donot subscribe to it, the majority of the Zo people in Mizoram do. And rightly so.

Because we are divided into six different tribes, we need to come to a consensus before we start any initiative to have the ST list amended. And when we do, we need to give our Lok Sabha Member of Parliament the full backing and authority to speak on behalf of all the Mizo people and insist on the introduction of a Bill that will finally correct the 67 year-old error.

If I am from a Zo indigenous tribe and I accept my identity as a Mizo, then I am a Mizo. Even if my father is from a non-Zo community, I still am a Mizo if I have fully embraced the Mizo culture and identity as my only culture and identity.

As for the government, it needs to wait. March 31st is over but the people of Mizoram have not even started a meaningful discussion. Perhaps the Mizoram government can encourage community leaders to think hard about our identity and the need to rectify it. (Remember, you can go to jail for obtaining a TC with the incorrect tribe name!)

Clearly the original promulgation of The Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order 1950 does not reflect the reality of who we are or does it?

I would like to think it does not. And it should not because, in Mizoram, we are the Mizo people.

MIZO HNAM LEH KAN INNGHAHNA TUR

Hmanni chu high school ka kalpui thin, college-a history zirtirtu ni ta nen kan titi a. PhD a zawh hnuah college zirlai te a zirtir a, chumi bakah research hrang hrang te beiin Mizo hnam chanchin (history) inziah dan thenkhat dik tawklo nia a hriatte pawh a ennawn hlawm a. Lehkhabu te pawh a thawhpuite nen an buatsaih a ni awm e. Thil hriatchian ka duh avangin Mizo te chanchin inziak dan thenkhat - "China rama Yalung lui kam Chhinglung atanga rawn chhuak kan ni" tih te, "Shan state ah inbengbel hmasain Kabaw ruamah kan rawn chhuk a, Khampat atanga Chin Hills ah kum zabi 16-na vel khan kan rawn pem" tih te hi thudik (fact) a nih leh nih loh ka zawt a. A mi chhanna hi Mizo te zingah hria kan awm nual anga, mahse a nawlpui chuan kan la hre kher lo mai thei. Thudik kim a ni thei lo nain hnam anga hmalam kan thlirna atana a pawimawh em avang hian ngaihtuah zui atan ka rawn ziak ve a ni e. Tin, Speaker hlui Dr.Rokamlova thlirna atangin he thupui hi kan en dawn bawk nia.

Ziaktu engemawzatin kum zabi tam tak kaltaa min thlahtute thlangthlak dan an ziah te hi in lo chik chuan chipchiar angreng tak taka chhinchhiah te pawh a awm a. Zo nationalist politician ten an han sawi phei chuan ngaihven a hlawh lehzual thin hle. Tuna Zofest-a kan politician te thusawi pawh hi kum danga an lo sawi tawh ang thin nen a inan chuan ngaithlatute hriat duh zawng tak a ni ngei ang.

Internet lama Mizote chanchin ziak dahthatna www.mizostory.org ah hian heti hian a inziak a, "Prior to the early 20th century Mizos had no written records..." Heta kan hnam chanchin chhinchhiahtuten an tarlan dan hi chuan kum zabi 20-na hma khan Mizo te hian ziaka dahthat chanchin kan nei lo tih a ni.

British sipai officer thenkhatin kan chanchin an ziahlanna te kha chipchiar deuhva ziaka dahthat kan hmuh theihte niin a lang a. ZORO hotuten Zofate tobul an sawinaa an tlawhchhan thin pakhat 862 A.D-a Tang dynasty hunlaia China ram palai Fan Cho-a'n "Zo/Shou/Zhou lalram" chanchin a ziak lang tih te leh 1783-a Burma rama missionary-a kal, Italian pa Roman Catholic kohhran Father Rev. Fr. Vincentious Sangermano-a'n a lehkhabu "A Description of the Burmese Empire"-a a tarlan "Chin tlangram chhak lamah 'Jou' hnam an awm" tih te kha Chhinlung chhuak Zofate chanchin (history) kan hriat thui theih te chu an ni mai awm e.

College-a history zirtirtu ka thianpa ka han sawi lanin min hrilh dan chuan college leh university lama history zirtirtute leh research beitute hian Zofate tobul chhuina hrang hrang kan han tarlan ho te khi hi thil nihna (fact) finfiaha innghat a nih loh avangin kan hnam history ziahnaah hian a rintlak loh tih a ni. He'ng Mizo history kan chhiar thin te hi a dik leh dikloh finfiahna turin kan hmanraw neih te pawhin a la tlin lo hrim hrim niin a sawi bawk a ni.

Burma ramah leh Bangladesh ah leh Mizoram pawnah te hian kan Mizo hnampui leh Zo hnahthlak hnam dang dang te an awm nain tuna Mizoram chhung bika awm te hi Zofate zingah chuan, rorelna thuah, a hlawm tha leh rorelna ruhrel nei mumal ber kan ni mai thei a. British hovin an hunlaia Zo hnahthlak hnamte chenna ramri an kham dan kha thil dik a ni a tih theih loh laiin ramri thenfel a nih hnuah thil tam tak a inthlak danglam tawh a, duhthusam in khawvelah hian thil a kal vek loh avangin tun atan chuan Mizo ten mahnia ro inrelna Mizoram state kan neih hi kan hmalam history leh culture innghahna zel tur a ni tawh ang.

Chu aia la bul zawk chu Speaker ni thin, Aizawl Dawrpui veng Presbyterian kohhran upa Dr.Rokamlova khan Zotalk interview ah heti hian a sawi a: "Mizo mipui te hi Lalpa zawnchhuah ram [mi] ni chiah hian ka hria a. Pakhatnaah chuan, a tak maiin emaw kan hriatphak chinah 'Chhinlung chhuak kan ni' [k]an ti a. Mahse Chhinlung atangin a chhuah theih tak tak lova. Chu chu a hlimthla kan lo khel lek kha a lo ni a. Chuan 1894-ah kan chhuahna dik tak, mihringte chhuahna tura atana Pathianin lungpui a lo siam chu Krista Lungpui a ni a. Mizo fate hi 1894 January ni 11 atang khan Chhinlung nilovin Krista Lungpui chhuak kan nih avangin Mizo, Pathian hnam kan ni.

Vanneihthlak tak maiin India a independent a...India-ah kan lo kal ta a. Hei hi vanneihna a ni. Mizo full kan ni a. Pathianin min siam ang chiahin kan nung thei a. A dawt lehah chuan India ram hausakna leh kan aia ropuina zawng zawng kan lo share thei vak hi a lawmawm a. Chu aia ril leh chu universal citizen kan ni a. Khawvel pumpui hi Pathian pawhin kan thuneihna hnuaiah a dah a. Chu aia la ropui leh chu van khua leh tui nihna min pe a.

He'ng pali hmang thiam apiang hi mi hlawhtling tur a[n] ni. Keini erawh chu a let zawngin, a kir zawngin he hnam hi kalpui tum tlat an awm a. Hei hi a tha ka ti lo...Lei leh van Siamtu duhdan angin he ram hi kal rawh se."

Thil chiang leh a nghawng zawng zawng kan hriatchian chu Pathianin keini hnam hi thim ata enga lut turin Krista tana tuar ngam te kaltlangin min rawn zawng chhuak a. Kristian kan nih hmaa kan ze tha tam tak chu, thuthlung hlui hlimthla Isua'n a rawn ti famkim angin, Kristiannain a rawn nemnghet a. Kan ze thalo tak tak pawh Kristianna in min rawn hrut chinah kan paih ta hlawm a, kan paih mek zel bawk a. Kan tobul kan chhuinaah hian Isua Krista'n kan hnam tana kawng thar, thuthlung thar min rawn hawnsakna hi innghahnan ber kan hman loh a, finfiah theih loh leh awmze neia chantir theih loh tur a let zawnga kan um chuan Mizo te Pathianin min siam chhan thelh vekin he khawvelah hian hlawk lo takin kan awm thei dawnin a lang.

Inunauna te, tanrualna tih te hi a tha vek e. Inhuatna ai chuan inunauna lam hi kan chawisang tur pawh a ni ang. Kan Lalpa pawhin pumkhat kan nih theihnan min tawngtaisak a ni. Amaherawhchu thil nihna political reality kan en chuan India ram, Burma ram leh Bangladesh ram sorkar te hian an ramri te hi tidanglamin, phal takin Zofate chenna atana ram thar hi min pe dawnin a lang lova. He "Chhinlung theology" (ti mai ang) leh Zo Re-unification movement hi khawvel history leh Bible enin sum, ngaihtuahna, hun leh tha nasa tak senna rahchhuah awmze tak tak nei lo turte zinga mi niin a lang. Inzawmkhawm lehna tura buaipuituten Pathian Thu baka an tlawhchhan fo chu "United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples" a ni a. Hnamte dikna humhalh hi he Declaration hian a tum a nih rualin Art 46(1) hian Zo hnathlakte chenna ram chin rorelna pakhat, independent country-a siam tumna ang hi a thlawp lo bur a ni tih mipuiten kan hriat a pawimawh.

Inzawmkhawm chhan leh a vawrtawp nia an sawi thin Chanchintha hril tur leh a meichher chhi tur kan ni tih hi politics leh sakhuana inchawhpawlhna nu tak a ni hial awm e.

Ram hruaitute chuan Indian constitution tlawhchhana chhia an chham ang hian rorelna fel leh tha buaipui se, hnam veitute chuan ram leh hnam dinchhuahna tak tak zawk Isaia 60:12-a kan hmuh hi thupuiah nei zawk rawh se. Tin, Mizorama kohhran lian ber pawhin Dawrpuia an kohhran upa min-in, “1894-ah kan chhuahna dik tak, mihringte chhuahna tura atana Pathianin lungpui a lo siam chu Krista Lungpui a ni” a tih ang hian denomination lalram aiin Krista Lalram a pawimawh zawk tih hi pawm thar se nasa takin Mizote hian hnam ang pawha hmalam kan panna kawngah hian hma kan sawn ang, tisa leh thlarauvah.

SEPTEMBER 22-A THIL THLENG ATANGA ZIR THEIH

September 22-a Lunglei District Court beih leh magistrate chenna in suasam chungchanga Zohnuai khawtlang hruaitute sawi chanchinthar.com in khami nia a tarlan dan chuan, "nimin lamah camp court jail hmunah an lo neihpui leh si chu inbumna leh inpalzutna a ni tiin Zohnuai khawtlang hmusittu leh dawt hrilh fotu magistrate chu hmuh an tum thu an sawi" tih a ni a. Tharum thawh ve kher lote pawh khan kha tharum thawhna thlen chhana an puh ber chu magistrate in “dawt” a lo hrilh vang tih a nih chu.

Gauhati High Court Chief Justice in a tuk, September 23-a kan Chief Minister hnena lehkha a thawnah khan ‘dan kenkawhna hlawhchhamna nasa tak” a thlen thu a lang a. Tin, Mizoram sorkar “rorelna hmingchhiatna” awma tarlan a ni bawk a ni. Aizawl DC hova inquiry neih pawh zawh fel a ni tawh a, dik leh kim taka buatsaih a nih chuan inquiry report ah hian kan zir tlan tur pawimawh tak tak a awm ngeiin a rinawm.

Chanchinthar.com bawkin a tarlan "CJM hi Zohnuai mipuite chuan court tualah a lo chhuah nghakin tlai dar 4:30 thleng khan an nghak a. Hemi hnu hian court tual leh a chhevelah punkhawm phallohna dan unlawful assembly puan a ni a, pungkhawm mi eng emaw zat police te’n manin an ținzui ta a, CJM pawh Police te venna hnuaiah an in lam panpui a ni" tih hi uluk deuhva ngaihtuah chuan khami nia boruak a sosan nasatzia kan hrethiam thei ang. CJM Pu R.Malsawmdawngzuala kha Benghazi-a US Ambassador Chris Stevens-a chan ang a chanlohna chhan chu SDPO Pu B.Laldingngheta kaihhruaina hnuaia police te venhimna vang chauh a ni awm e. Mipui thinrim khan court building chhung luhchilhin magistrate kha va hmu fuh ta se, tharum thawhna rapthlak tak a thleng lovang tih a sawi theih loh a. “Engvangin nge police ten mipui an dan zawh loh?” tih zawhna awm hi chu magisterial inquiry report ah a chiang taka lang tura ngaih a ni.

Police te hi ralmuang taka kan awm theihna tur leh dan bawhchhiatna thleng thei veng tura sorkarin a hranpaa a din, mithiam leh mi chak, mipui rawngbawltu te an ni a. Chutianga mipui rawngbawl tura an inbuatsaihna chu a tha (sophisticated) em em a. Mahni pawh inphatsana an duty kengkawh tura beisei leh buatsaih an nih avangin police te hi zah an phu hle a ni. Amaherawhchu, thupek an dawn leh dawn loh dan azirin an tih tur ti tawk lo emaw an tih loh zawk tur tiin an lang thei tih kan hre theuh awm e. Home Minister Pu R.Lalzirliana'n April 30, 2014-a Buhchangphai a tlawh tum khan Buhchangphai ramthar zauva Assam mite an rawn lut leh a nih chuan lo kâp turin 1st IR Battalion-te a chah a. Mizo leh Assamese inkar anga thil a kal avangin huai taka lanna a ni thei a, khatianga thusawi kha a sawitu tan sawi awlsam tak niin a lang. Bawngkawn-a biak in vawmchhetute leh Saikhumphai hal tute erawh kha chu sorkarin man ngei ngei an nih tur thu emaw an thiltih dikloh an huatzia chiang taka mipui hriat tura sawi a la awm lo niin a lang. Khatianga thil a lo thlen tawh avangte khan Lunglei District Court beih leh magistrate in suasam a nih pawh khan mi engemawzatin police an dem a ni.  Amaherawhchu, police te hi engkim tithei an nih loh avangin buaina awm zawng zawng lo dang vek thei an nilo tih kan hriatpui a pawimawh awm e.

Tharum thawhna thlen chhan ber Magistrate Pu R.Malsawmdawnzuala’n Zohnuai mipui te dawt a lo hrilh anga an sawina kha social media-ah a darh nasa hle a. A dik nge diklo tih finfiahna a awm lawk lohvah phei chuan magistrate khan dem a hlawh nasa hman hle a ni. Mi tam takin Zohnuai mipui tharum thawhna thiamchantirnan an hmang nghe nghe a. Magistrate-in dawt a sawi tia sawi chhawng tute zinga mi pakhat Pu Lalremliana Pachuau chuan he thu chianglo hi a finfiah a, heti hian Mizo Special Report facebook group-ah Oct 4 khan a tarlang: "...thu awmzia ka han zawt chik zual a, Zohnuai ukil hi [Pu]Malsawmdawngliana niin Magistrate hi [Pu R.Malsawmdawngzuala]a lo ni a. Ukil tawngkam zawk kha Zohnuai mipuite hian Magistrate tawngkam emaw tiin watsupp velah pawh Zohnuai lam hian vawi hnih lai dawt, magistrate hian min hrilh an tih phah ta ni mai awm a ni..."

“Dawt” lo hrilh fotu a an puh, Zohnuai khawtlang “hmusittu”, an veng mipui palzuttu leh bumtua an puh CJM Pu R.Malsawmdawngzuala khan dawt a lo sawi miah lo tih hi kha thil thlen ni atanga ni 11 hnuah finfiah leh mipui hriata tarlan chauh a nih chu.

RTI week hmannaa Minister Pu Lal Thanzara’n, "tunlai khawvela social media chak em em tawhzia hmutu leh hretute vek kan ni. Heng facebook, whatsapp kan tih reng ah te pawh hian thudik tawklo leh mipuite ti chiai tur ang chi a inzep ve reng a ni tih hriat a tul a, fimkhur thiam a pawimawh a ni" tia a sawi kha he thil thlengah hian a dikzia a lang awm e. Magistrate leh ukil pawh hre hrang lo, zu rui chunga pawr ta em em te khan he thudiklo hi an sawichhuak hmasa ber niin a hmuna awm te sawi atangin a ngaih theih a. Chu chu social media ah te thehdarh a ni a. Zohnuai YMA hruaitute pawhin finfiah lovin chu thudiklo, magistrate dawt sawia puhna chu thudik sawiin an sawi zui ta a, a nghawng a thalo hle tih kan hre vek awm e.

Zohnuai veng chauh pawh nilovin Mizo mipui ten magistrate te dinhmun leh nihna kan hriatthiam loh avanga an laka ngaihdan kan neih thin hi a diklo tih Mizoram Bar Association President Pu LH Lianhrima chuan hetiang hian a sawi - "Magistrate te hi thlan lal MLA te ang deuha a hman hmanin hmuha duh duh dil kan ching thin a, hei hi a fuhlo hul hual. Tuna kan Judicial officer neihte hi Mizo vek anni a; in hmaizah avangte, Mizo kalphung zah vang hrim hrim te pawhin an lo hmuve thin a ni. Court zahawmna (sanctity) vawnhim a nih zel theih nan court officer (ukil) te kal tlang chauha court hi dawr thin tur a ni zawk."

A nih leh dawt hmanga inbumna nia sawi kha kha court building leh magistrate chenna in suasam chhan a niha, magistrate an puhna kha a lo dikloh bawk si chuan kha dawt thudiklo thehdarhtu(te) kha mana hrem tur emni ni ta ang? Dawt a ni nge nilo tih pawh finfiah lova thudik anga pawma sawichhawngtu Zohnuai khawtlang hruaitu thenkhat kha kha thilthleng chungchanga pawi an ti tak tak a nih chuan mawhphurhna lain banna thehlut ngam se; YMA thiltum leh dinchhan nena inmila pawl kaihruai thei tur mi puitling thlanchhuah ni bawk se, branch YMA zawhawmna tundin lehnan pawh a tangkai khawp ang.

Mipui hian dan kan zah a ngai a. YMA hruaitu thenkhat leh politician thenkhatin an justify, a haw haw-a thil tih hi kan sim loh chuan kan khawtlang hi chenna hrehawm takah kan siam thei. Chuvang chuan dan zahna leh dan rorelna khawtlang ni turin theihtawp kan chhuah a pawimawh a ni. Mi thenkhat, PRISM hruaitu thenkhat pawh telin, mipui thinrim chetdan demlova thiam chantir lek lek an awm a. An thinrimna chhan ber kha dawt a nih phei chuan sawimam ngaihna a awm lo lehzual. Zohnuai YMA Vice President phei chuan thiamthu reng reng sawi theih an neih loh thu a sawi zawk a ni.

Buai nuai karah thudik hi kan zawn fo a tul. Kha thil thleng vanduaithlak tak kha a innghahna chu dawt a ni a. Thudik hriat tumin kha dawt sawi hmasa bertu thusawi kha kalkhawmte khan ngaihven se Zohnuai zahna kha a thleng kher lo thei a ni.

Thuneitute emaw thuneihna (authority) zahna tlahniam hi society kalsual tehna pakhat a ni a. Chuvang chuan police leh sorkar thuneitute pawhin an theihtawp chhuaha mipui rawng an bawl reng a pawimawh hle. Politician ten mipui rawngbawlna zahawm tak hi an tih dal kan phal tur a nilo.

DONALD J TRUMP AND HIS PRIVATE ADMISSION OF GUILT

At a recent interview, Bill O Reilly asked Donald Trump a follow-up question on his latest scandal, "Have you assessed how you're going to win back women who were offended by the recent exposition from 'Access Hollywood'? Do you have a plan to get those women back?"

His answer was - "Well, first of all, locker room talk, and most people have heard it before, and I've had a lot of women come up to me and said, boy, I've heard that and I've heard a lot worse than that over my life."

He also added a surprisingly unapologetic tone in his answer, "And, you know, if that's why I'm going to lose an election to get rid of ISIS and to create strong borders and rebuild our military and do all the things we're going to do, including Supreme Court judges and saving the Second Amendment, because it's under siege with Hillary Clinton or as I call her crooked Hillary, which is what she is. If that's what it's going to take to lose an election, I would be pretty sad then I have to go back to my other life."

This was after an apology he had made earlier - "I said it, I was wrong, and I apologise."  But Donald Trump actually told radio host Billy Bush that he committed an act of unwanted sexual advance on a married woman.

According to the US Department of Justice, "sexual assault is any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. Falling under the definition of sexual assault are sexual activities as forced sexual intercourse, forcible sodomy, child molestation, incest, fondling, and attempted rape."

Based on the US government's own definition and Trump's admission on tape, the Republican Presidential nominee may very well be guilty of sexual assault. The penalty for a person convicted of sexual assault allegation carries jail-time.

Donald Trump also told Billy Bush that he was "automatically attracted to beautiful (women)" and that he "just start[s] kissing them." And in his words, he doesn't "even wait." Apparently, "when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything." These are Donald Trump's words about what he did and what he does.

CNN's Anderson Cooper pressed him at the 2nd Presidential debate to confirm whether he actually did the things he said he did, "Just for the record, though, are you saying that what you said on that bus 11 years ago that you did not actually kiss women without consent or grope women without consent? Have you ever done those things?", Trump rumbled on but finally said,"No, I have not."

If Trump had said "Yes", he would have admitted his guilt of sexual assault. His "No" answer isn't good either. It means he lied to Billy Bush about his conduct with women and bragged about that lie.

To be fair, Hillary Clinton has a mountain of scandals that is just not going away. And Wikileaks is dropping one bomb after another. Her lying under oath at a Congressional hearing; her lying about emails and lying about those lies, the conduct of her aides in destroying evidence subpoenaed by Congress, the foreign contributions that seem to flow into the Clinton Foundation under her watch. The list goes on and on. If the law was correctly applied, she would clearly be in prison for the many laws she and her aides recklessly broke.

However, all of these still donot nullify nor justify the claim that Donald Trump made in 1995 on that bus with Billy Bush. Sexual immorality is considered one of the scarlet sins by the many Christian leaders that support his candidacy. While the Christian faith advocates forgiveness for someone who is repentant of his sins, the law is clear about the penalty for sexual assault.

If the sexual assault allegations against Donald Trump are true and can be proven, he will have to face the music even if he becomes the US President.

Bill Clinton was accused of sexual misconduct and assault, even rape. But he has never been known to admit it, even privately. Donald Trump has actually said he has sexually assaulted women. Even if all his Christian supporters forgive him, the law may still not be on his side.

CROOKED HILLARY AND AMORAL DONALD ON SUPREME COURT NOMINATION

At the 2nd US Presidential debate, both candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were asked this question by a member of the audience: "Perhaps the most important aspect of this election is the Supreme Court justice. What would you prioritize as the most important aspect of selecting a Supreme Court justice?"

Hillary answered, "I want to appoint Supreme Court justices who understand the way the world really works." She also went on to express her opinion on the issue of abortion and same-sex marriage saying, "I want a Supreme Court that will stick with Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose, and I want a Supreme Court that will stick with marriage equality."

Trump, despite his lifelong record on being mostly progressive and liberal leaning on these issues, said something that strikes the heart of millions of conservative Christians in America, "Justice Scalia, great judge, died recently. And we have a vacancy. I am looking to appoint judges very much in the mold of Justice Scalia. I’m looking for judges — and I’ve actually picked 20 of them so that people would see, highly respected, highly thought of, and actually very beautifully reviewed by just about everybody. But people that will respect the Constitution of the United States. And I think that this is so important."

Justice Antonin Scalia was a Reagan-appointed Supreme Court Justice who was one of the strongest believers in the process of democracy and a Justice with unwaivering faithfulness to the constitution. When 5 unelected Supreme Court Justices decided for 320 million Americans what marriage should be, he strongly expressed his disapproval and belief in the democratic process of social transformation before such a change. “Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court,” said Justice Scalia the day the US Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in America. 

Perhaps his main objection to the Court's decision is best summarized in his words - “[T]o allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation: no social transformation without representation.”

On the issue of abortion, his friend and ideological twin Judge Andrew Napolitano's explanation of Roe v. Wade couldn't be clearer. 


According to Judge Napolitano, "The linchpin of Roe v. Wade is the judicial determination that the baby in the womb is not a person."

He also said, "[Roe v. Wade] permits abortions in all 50 states during the first three months of pregnancy for any reason or for no reason. It permits abortions during the second three months of pregnancy for the health of the mother. 'Health of the mother' can mean mental health; thus, most states have taken the liberal position that if a continued pregnancy would make the mom sad or challenge her psychologically, or if she has second thoughts about the pregnancy, the baby may be aborted.

Roe vs. Wade also permits the states to prohibit or to allow abortions during the last three months of pregnancy. Most states prohibit all abortions during the final three months, as this is the period of viability; when the baby can live — assisted, of course — outside the mother's womb. New Jersey, my home state, is the exception, as it permits abortions up to the moment of birth."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jan/20/andrew-napolitano-the-abiding-abortion-controversy/

https://www.creators.com/read/judge-napolitano/01/12/a-few-words-about-abortion

It is not a surprise that Hillary Clinton wants to have a Supreme Court that will stick with Roe v. Wade. She made her position clear when she told Meet The Press that “the unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufYzo5hKLww

Donald Trump, for all his indefensible words and deeds, has the backing of pro-lifers especially on this issue because the appointment of the next Supreme Court Justices will outlast even a two-term presidency. 

Ted Cruz once rightly said Donald Trump is "utterly amoral," "a narcissist at a level I don't think this country's ever seen" and "a serial philanderer." Hillary Clinton plans to appoint Justices that "understand the way the world really works" according to her belief and not according to the fundamental beliefs on which America was built. It looks like it is going to take an utterly amoral and immoral person to stand for the bedrock of society - traditional marriage - and defend the life of the unborn.

HINDU NATIONALISM VS MIZO NATIONALISM

The general understanding of what is happening under Prime Minister Narendra Modi's leadership in India is that the country is under new management and hindutva is the banner to which all of India must conform. Atleast this is what most people on the other side of the fence believe.

In 2013, then Chief Minister Narendra Modi gave an interesting interview to Reuters news agency. One of the questions was, "People want to know who is the real Modi — Hindu nationalist leader or pro-business chief minister?" to which Modi replied, "I'm nationalist. I'm patriotic. Nothing is wrong. I'm a born Hindu. Nothing is wrong. So, I'm a Hindu nationalist so yes, you can say I'm a Hindu nationalist because I'm a born Hindu. I'm patriotic so nothing is wrong in it. As far as progressive, development-oriented, workaholic, whatever they say, this is what they are saying. So there's no contradiction between the two. It's one and the same image."

There is no doubt this Indian Prime Minister has shaken the belief that India must only be ruled by a Gandhi family or some other related dynasty. In that sense, he has done a great service to Indian democracy. During the last parliamentary election, Congress party senior leader Mani Shankar Ayer derided him at an AICC meeting in New Delhi when he said, "I promise you in 21st Century Narendra Modi will never become the Prime Minister of the country. ...But if he wants to distribute tea here, we will find a place for him." Ayer's promise, we now know, was not delivered. In fact, the people of India gave Modi a place well above distributing tea at any AICC meeting.

It is true that Modi used to sell tea at train stations as a young boy with his father. He was poor and did not have the luxury of not having to work for low-paid jobs. And he is quite open about it. "I have sold tea at the railway station and in running trains," he once told a crowd in Patna.

From very humble beginnings Narendra Modi rose to become the most powerful man in the biggest democracy in the world. Quite an achievement. The one significant thing that seems to stay with him is his humility. His down-to-earth appeal to people, some would say, is even Reaganesque. Like the great US President of modern era, Modi would often strike the right tone when it comes to giving public speeches on themes related to limiting the size of government and the burden it has on everyday people. At the 70th Indian Independence Day celebration on Monday, he said this of taxation - "We want to change the situation where people are scared of Income Tax authorities, particularly the middle class." Sounds like the Gipper? You bet!

Also known is the fact that the Prime Minister has had his genuine baptism in the waters of Hindu nationalism. At the age of 8, Modi learned about the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and started to attend its local shakhas (training sessions). It was there that he met Lakshmanrao Inamdar, also known as Vakil Saheb, who inducted him as an RSS balswayamsevak (junior cadet). Vakil Saheb became his political mentor. During his training, he also met some of the founding members of his state's BJP unit. And the rest is history.

In short, Narendra Modi is a die-hard, Hindutva-favouring Prime Minister who loves his country a little differently than the first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. Nehru was a secularist and a socialist with good intentions and for the most part he governed the new nation well. Even Modi would agree that Nehru and the other founding fathers of modern India served their country with conviction as dedicated Indian patriots. It was perhaps the prolonged romance the people of India had with the INC leaders that led to the subsequent decadence in the politics of the nation. By the time UPA II finished its term, the people of India were throughly fed up with the Congress and their colleagues and there was a genuine hunger for a total change. And Modi was the perfect candidate to lead a nation that was tortured by the inefficiency of its government. But it did not come without a price. The secular nature of the nation Mahatma Gandhi had envisioned quickly became a subject of revision, not so much by the government but by the forces that held the government together. It was done without remorse.

One of the allegations directed at the BJP-led government is the saffronisation of the country. For a Hindu-nationalist, this is perfectly in line with what a Hindustan should be. But for the millions of Indians (including many Hindus) who subscribe to the idea of a secular India, this is an affront to the heart and soul of a modern, democratic, secular India.

Last week, the BJP leadership decided to honour 10 "forgotten freedom fighters" from the Northeast states. According to The Asian Age, this move by the Central government is a "bid to walk the talk on its 'Act East' policy" that "will honour 10 freedom fighters from the Northeast, who remain forgotten from the narrative of the Indian freedom struggle." There is actually a degree of truth in this assertion.

Among the 10 patriots the BJP Government wanted to honour as "freedom fighters" for the nation of India is Khuangchera, one of the most celebrated martyrs from the village of Reiek under the chieftainship of Sailo Chief Sailianpuia. Reiek is a town near Aizawl. Pasaltha Khuangchera fought the British/Indian army valiantly and died a hero. He was the first among the Mizo people who died defending his people. The year was 1890 and the lands occupied by the various clans of the Mizo people were ruled by sovereign Chiefs.

When BJP Mizoram President Prof JV Hluna was asked by the national BJP leaders to provide names of Indian freedom fighters from Mizoram, he told them that there was none even though Lunglei resident Darthawma, the lone Mizo Indian Freedom Fighter who fought under the Indian National Army is still alive in his mid 90's. The history professor and his party colleagues went ahead and decided to nominate Khuangchera. When the media broke the news about the Central government's plan to honour Mizo patriot Khuangchera as one of the forgotten Indian Freedom Fighters, all hell started to break loose. Pro-Mizo sentiment was quickly aroused among Mizo nationalists who believed it was a great dishonour to honour Khuangchera for the cause he never died for. They also believed it was effectively a rewriting of history along the Hindu or Hindustan-centric narrative. Long story short, the two largest student bodies Mizo Students' Union (MSU) and Mizo Zirlai Pawl (MZP) immediately mobilised their supporters, held a meeting and issued a strong statement opposing the BJP's plan. They faxed a letter to the Prime Minister's Office and they also met the felicitation program chief guest Union Railways Minister Rajen Gohain at Lengpui airport and told him their strong objection.

According to a PTI report, "Gohain was quoted as saying that he understood the sentiments of the Mizo people and did not want to hurt their sentiments by attending the programme at Khuangchera's native village Ailawng." The Minister cancelled his program but told the student leaders that he wanted to pay his respects to Khuangchera and visit his grave. Crisis was averted, atleast for now. The BJP minister was spared an embarassment, the Mizo student leaders got what they wanted but the state BJP chief and his academic colleague Prof Laltluangliana Khiangte are now seen by many as sell-outs because of their involvement in an apparent attempt to portray Mizo patriot Khuangchera as someone who fought and died for the freedom of India.

While Mizoram is a part of India, the Mizo people were a sovereign independent people in the not-so-distant past. While the Mizo people and other peoples in the state greatly benefit from being part of India, the fact is there are still remnants of Mizo nationalism that will not die as long as the Mizo people live, especially when living relatives of martyrs such as Khuangchera still hold onto the legacies of their beloved ones.

Maybe Modi's government will have to recognise and respect the sincerely held belief of the Mizo people. Maybe Hindutva does not work well in Mizoram. Maybe Mizos prefer to maintain and preserve their identity while embracing their Indian nationality. Maybe that is the way it should be, as Nehru clearly recognised it during the formative years of what has now become a state in the Indian union.

Borrowing Modi's words, Mizos are "nationalists" and "patriotic" and "nothing is wrong" with that. Most Mizos today embrace Christianity and "nothing is wrong." And so you can say, a Mizo is a Christian nationalist. He is a proud member of the Mizo or Zo community and will continue to live in harmony with his Indian brothers and sisters as one nation as long as he feels he is treated with respect and fairness.

I remember watching with a degree of excitement when the Prime Minister came to visit Sydney two years ago and gave a 90-minute speech in front of a 20000-strong audience at Allphones Arena. I wanted to go but I'm glad I watched it streamed live on youtube with English subtitles. I wouldn't have understood a thing because it was all in Hindi except for the first lines - "I like to begin by acknowledging the tradition of this land, and pay my respect to original owners of the land of Sydney, the aborigines and their descendants . My respect to all senior members of the society and community, and my countrymen..."

Statesman Modi did what is commonly accepted as a decent thing to do. It did not cost him anything. He gave his speech, met the Australian leaders and later left Australia with much stronger ties than before.