The Centre Chakhesang Youth Organisation (CCYO) has expressed serious concern over what it described as the “arbitrary action and alleged victimisation” of Vezhoto Hesuh by the Forest Department, asserting that his social media posts expressing appreciation for wildlife should not, by themselves, be treated as a criminal offence.
In a statement issued by its president, Dode Nakro and general secretary, Shevoto Vezuh, the CCYO described Hesuh as a “bona fide and law-abiding citizen” and an active conservationist who has contributed to grassroots awareness on the protection of flora and fauna. The organisation said expressing concern for or admiration of wildlife was a lawful exercise of personal expression and, in itself, did not amount to hunting, possession, abetment or violation of the Wildlife (Protection) Act.
The CCYO said it was concerned that action against citizens without clear evidence of wrongdoing could discourage young people from participating in conservation activities and create fear among those involved in protecting nature. It urged the authorities to ensure that any action against citizens was based on clear evidence and carried out in a fair, transparent and just manner.
The Organisation also called for an impartial inquiry into the allegation that ₹1 lakh was demanded for the release of Hesuh, terming the allegation a serious matter requiring investigation. The CCYO stressed that any alleged demand by an official should be examined independently and that wrongdoing should first be established in accordance with law.
The CCYO further appealed to the Forest Department to work with youth organisations as partners in conservation awareness rather than, as it put it, “criminalising innocent expressions of love for wildlife.” Recalling the conservation campaign message “Shoot with a Camera and Not with a Gun,” the organisation said it had worked alongside the Forest Department to promote the message through awareness activities and signboards.
The organisation said the action against Hesuh had placed conservation groups in a difficult position, questioning how they could continue encouraging people to appreciate wildlife if such expressions could subsequently lead to legal action.
Download Nagaland Tribune app on Google Play
The CCYO also supported the Porbami Youth Organisation’s demand for the return of a Great Barbet reportedly taken from Porba Village on September 14 by the Forest Department. The CCYO said the issue was not merely about a bird but also involved what it described as Naga identity, customary practices and traditional ways of life.
The organisation claimed that rearing the Great Barbet had been a longstanding Naga practice and argued that traditional relationships between communities and wildlife should be considered while applying modern forest and wildlife laws. It questioned the practice of keeping animals and birds in captivity for public display while objecting to traditional rearing practices, saying conservation should also involve protecting animals in their natural habitats.
On Article 371A of the Constitution, the CCYO said any application or enforcement of forest and wildlife laws that overrides, disregards or infringes upon customary practices and constitutionally protected rights relating to land and its resources would raise serious concerns. It urged the Government of Nagaland to examine whether the implementation of forest and wildlife laws adequately takes into account the protections under Article 371A.
The Organisation cautioned that failure to address these concerns could compel it to strongly assert what it described as the constitutional and customary rights of the Centre Chakhesang area.
