Kohima| Nagaland Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio on Saturday said the Inner Line Permit (ILP) regime must strike a balance between protecting the state’s indigenous identity and enabling legitimate economic activity, arguing that the system should serve as more than a mechanism to regulate the movement of people.

Speaking at a national seminar on the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation (BEFR) Act, 1873, at Town Hall in Dimapur, Rio said the law and the ILP system should be used to protect Naga land, culture, customary practices and indigenous rights while creating space for investment and economic opportunities.

“We have to bring a system of using this BEFR 1873 which will protect Indian citizens, indigenous Nagas, and mutual interest for economic development,” Rio said. He said Nagaland should not isolate itself from the rest of the country but should learn from others and adopt best practices while ensuring that the interests of its indigenous population remained protected.

Rio also referred to the extension of the ILP system to Dimapur, Chümoukedima and Niuland. The decision had been challenged in the Gauhati High Court, which upheld the state government’s move. The Chief Minister described the court verdict as a “big victory for Nagas” and said it also highlighted the constitutional significance of Article 371A.

Referring to the BEFR, Rio said its provisions prevent outsiders from purchasing immovable property in Nagaland. He cautioned, however, against using the law in a manner that could undermine its original purpose.

“We must judiciously use this Act, or otherwise, if we misuse and abuse it or try to harm others, it will harm ourselves,” he said. Rio said Nagaland’s leaders had played a role in ensuring the continuation of the BEFR in the state during the negotiations that led to the 16-Point Agreement.

He said customary laws, ownership and use of land and its resources, and religious and social practices were protected under Article 371A and needed to be preserved without turning the safeguards into instruments of exclusion or misuse.

The seminar also saw the Naga Students’ Federation (NSF) push for a separate institutional mechanism to oversee implementation of the ILP regime. The NSF’s Inner Line Regulation Commission submitted a representation to Rio seeking legislation to establish an autonomous Inner Line Regulation Commission for Nagaland.

The student body proposed that the commission be given powers to frame rules and regulations and ensure stricter and more consistent enforcement of the 1873 regulation. It also sought autonomy for the proposed body to formulate policies aimed at ensuring a balanced implementation of the ILP system.

Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, who addressed the seminar, raised constitutional questions over the ILP regime. Bhushan referred to Article 29 of the Constitution, which protects the right of communities to conserve their language, script and culture, while also pointing to the fundamental right of citizens to move freely throughout India.

He questioned how restrictions on entry through an ILP could be reconciled with the constitutional guarantee of free movement, arguing that Nagaland and other northeastern states where the BEFR or ILP regime operates remain part of India.

The debate over the ILP therefore involves competing concerns – protection of indigenous communities and their land and culture on one hand, and constitutional rights and economic integration on the other. Rio said Nagaland’s challenge was to ensure that the safeguards provided by the BEFR and Article 371A were used responsibly while allowing the state to pursue development and economic opportunities.