Morung Express
Some of those who voted YES had this to say:
• Yes, Article 371 (A) is the articulation of Simon Commission January 10, 1929 Memorandum on Naga Hills. Hence, it is the soul of Naga political existence. Today, every state in the country is envying us. Newspaper and national magazines write ups on land acquisition hangama are the witnesses. The only problem lies in the poor quality of our state political leaders who seem to be busy fattening themselves at the expense of the public.
• For the interim period, this has given Nagas a chance to organize ourselves. Had it not been for this, our situation may have been worse.
• Yes. Because Article 371(A) is supposed to provide Nagaland with the status of a protectorate state since the founding fathers of Nagaland aimed for it to be a protectorate state though it is still not fully implemented yet. However, it represents the fullest aspirations of the naga people because unlike other states, Nagaland and Jammu & Kashmir are the only two states whose people have access and full ownership to their own land.
• Yes, but the Naga people should utilized the land resources judiciously without obstructing infrastructure development.
Some of those who voted NO had this to say:
• No, why because Article 371(A) does not guarantee the rights of the people in the span of half a century. Rather it suppresses people more in the name of so called peace and development under different successive government. Under Article 371(A) state government historic achievement were enactment of two DRACONIAN Law by the NLA in the name of safeguarding the Constitution of India and Unity, they are Nagaland Security Act and Nagaland Police Act, which are complete replica of AFSPA.
• The aspirations of the Naga people is to live as a free and sovereign nation. Therefore article 371(a) does not represent the aspirations of the Nagas.
• Not at all. Article 371 (A) is very misleading and in fact does not provide any special rights to the people. It fails to represent the aspirations of the Nagas, and rather it only represents what India was willing to recognize and give to the Nagas, which was accepted by the Naga Peoples Council through the Sixteen Point Agreement.
• No, since it is inadequate, the fight continues for over 50 years.
• This has only divided the Nagas even further.
• Its ambiguity has been manipulated to suit the aspirations of people in power. We could have used it in a constructive way. At the moment, it is used to subjugate women under the worn out excuse of "customary laws".
• No. The article 371(A) is basically there to hood-wink the Nagas into believing that Nagas have special rights under the Indian Constitution.
• The May 16 1951 Naga Plebiscite represents the aspirations of the Naga people. Therefore, one can say that the Article 371(A) contradicts the Naga plebiscite and therefore cannot be said to represent the fullest aspiration of the Naga people.
• The Naga People deserved and are demanding Something beyond this Article*
• No, its was made for the comfort and convenience of the indian or in other words it hindered our aspiration for sovereignty.
• Article 371(A) is an off-shoot of the 16-Point Agreement which was a sell out of the Naga historical and political rights. So there is no way that the Article 371(A) fully meets the aspirations of the Nagas. Of course it has benefited some of the Nagas of Nagaland State, but for the majority of the Naga people, it has only cause more divisions and misunderstandings.
• No, a post-dated cheque on a failing bank.
• The increasing gap between rich and poor, the haves and have nots is due to provisions like the Article 371(A), which has been misused by politicians.
• Whatever the Article nos....all aspirations n hopes are being lost at the mercy of these undergrounds who call themselves as Sons of the MOTHERLAND.
• In certain ways, this Article s a stumbling block 2 Nagas.
• Article 371(A) is a white wash to divide the Naga people so that India can rule over the entire Nagas. This article contradicts the aspirations of the Nagas and has been given by India to create confusion and division among the simple minded Nagas.
• Lets dissect this very generous gesture of the Indian Constituion to the Nagas in the form of Article 371 A. I found some of these references quite befitting! Check it out. (from) Point 1
(a) (iv) "ownership and transfer of land and its resources, shall apply to the State of Nagaland unless the Legislative Assembly of Nagaland by a resolution so decides;"
DISSECTION: Is the State of Nagaland representing the aspirations of the Naga people?? Is the State Legislative Assembly of Nagaland representing the aspirations of the Naga people?? Is the State of Nagaland or the Legislative Assembly of Nagaland the Nagas itself?? When 11 oil explorations teams were invited to Nagaland were any of the Naga people in the villages, towns and homes consulted??
(From Point 1) (b).........
Provided that if any question arises whether any matter is or is not a matter as respects which the Governor is under this sub-clause required to act in the exercise of his individual judgment, the decision of the Governor in his discretion shall be final, and the validity of anything done by the Governor shall not be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in the exercise of his individual judgment:
Provided further that if the President on receipt of a report from the Governor or otherwise is satisfied that it is no longer necessary for the Governor to have special responsibility with respect to law and order in the State of Nagaland, he may by order direct that the Governor shall cease to have such responsibility with effect from such date as may be specified in the order;
DISSECTION: "individual judgment"- repeat, "individual judgment" (of the governor's). This is in regard to 'law and order' in the proposed State of Nagaland so i think it only fair that we bring in AFSPA's indifferent face into the picture too (wish i could actually draw an indifferent face with an arrow-mark saying 'AFSPA').
So, from these two paragraphs we understand that the governor may act on "Individual judgment" and no one can question him on that. At least no one BUT the president of India. Do these paragraphs have anything with 'Naga', 'State of Nagaland', State government of Nagaland, Chief Minister of Nagaland, State Legislative Assembly of Nagaland?? N-O, No, and also to point out the obvious no ethnic Naga's bottom has sat on the throne of the state governor of Nagaland. Nor is the president of India Naga.
(3) If any difficulty arises in giving effect to any of the foregoing provisions of this article, the President may by order do anything (including any adaptation or modification of any other article) which appears to him to be necessary for the purpose of removing that difficulty:
Provided that no such order shall be made after the expiration of three years from the date of the formation of the State of Nagaland. Explanation.- In this article, the Kohima, Mokokchung and Tuensang districts shall have the same meanings as in the State of Nagaland Act, 1962.
DISSECTION: Point 3 of Article 371 puts the cream on the top. "that difficulty" is not explained at all, and not criteria is given for it. So we can safely assume that "that difficulty" could mean anything which 'displeases' the President (or the order that comes to him). In other words we can also interpret- 'You are given this very generous gesture of our philanthropy but if you should be displeased and act like a spoilt little brat we can take it all away from you too.'
So Mex Nagaland, Point 3 also answers your question whether Article 371 represent the fullest aspirations of the Nagas. We also find out that the state of Nagaland was formed under an Act in 1962. Did that mean it was approved by the wholesome decision of all the Nagas within the state (instead of a bunch of 16 'representatives' who did not represent the NAGA voice as according to customary laws)?? That question's only left to be answered......
Now strictly speaking "outside the box"- i.e, outside the context of the Constitution of India What does Article 371 represent, and not represent?? One, you could say the fullest aspirations that the Nagas could achieve without Article 371 being a hindrance or a stumbling block in the first place. Does it protect the interests of the Nagas? OR, does it protect the interest of the Nagas Within the Constitution of India?? And when you juxtapose these two questions you may as well ask why article 371 is there at all in the first place?!!
Now, what we can talk about is how to utilize the article Within the Constitution of India for OUR benefits. But beyond that article 371 does not help or 'unhelp' the Nagas- yet it can be considered a hindrance to achieving the fullest aspirations of the Nagas. Important to identify, though, is that Article 371 is a result of another factor. For example, the Indo-Naga conflict or the so called 'insurgency' that the government stamps on the nationalists.
We talk about protection of our 'cultural and land rights aspiration', protection from exploitation, or even cultural genocide juxtaposed to ethnic/indigenous communities in Orissa, MP, AP but all these, i feel, are WITHIN the Constitution of India. This does not Necessarily discuss the full aspirations of the Nagas through article 371 or the full extent of Naga aspirations Itself. So, no I don't feel Article 371 represent the full aspirations of the Nagas within the Constitution of India or Not
• For the interim period, this has given Nagas a chance to organize ourselves. Had it not been for this, our situation may have been worse.
• Yes. Because Article 371(A) is supposed to provide Nagaland with the status of a protectorate state since the founding fathers of Nagaland aimed for it to be a protectorate state though it is still not fully implemented yet. However, it represents the fullest aspirations of the naga people because unlike other states, Nagaland and Jammu & Kashmir are the only two states whose people have access and full ownership to their own land.
• Yes, but the Naga people should utilized the land resources judiciously without obstructing infrastructure development.
Some of those who voted NO had this to say:
• No, why because Article 371(A) does not guarantee the rights of the people in the span of half a century. Rather it suppresses people more in the name of so called peace and development under different successive government. Under Article 371(A) state government historic achievement were enactment of two DRACONIAN Law by the NLA in the name of safeguarding the Constitution of India and Unity, they are Nagaland Security Act and Nagaland Police Act, which are complete replica of AFSPA.
• The aspirations of the Naga people is to live as a free and sovereign nation. Therefore article 371(a) does not represent the aspirations of the Nagas.
• Not at all. Article 371 (A) is very misleading and in fact does not provide any special rights to the people. It fails to represent the aspirations of the Nagas, and rather it only represents what India was willing to recognize and give to the Nagas, which was accepted by the Naga Peoples Council through the Sixteen Point Agreement.
• No, since it is inadequate, the fight continues for over 50 years.
• This has only divided the Nagas even further.
• Its ambiguity has been manipulated to suit the aspirations of people in power. We could have used it in a constructive way. At the moment, it is used to subjugate women under the worn out excuse of "customary laws".
• No. The article 371(A) is basically there to hood-wink the Nagas into believing that Nagas have special rights under the Indian Constitution.
• The May 16 1951 Naga Plebiscite represents the aspirations of the Naga people. Therefore, one can say that the Article 371(A) contradicts the Naga plebiscite and therefore cannot be said to represent the fullest aspiration of the Naga people.
• The Naga People deserved and are demanding Something beyond this Article*
• No, its was made for the comfort and convenience of the indian or in other words it hindered our aspiration for sovereignty.
• Article 371(A) is an off-shoot of the 16-Point Agreement which was a sell out of the Naga historical and political rights. So there is no way that the Article 371(A) fully meets the aspirations of the Nagas. Of course it has benefited some of the Nagas of Nagaland State, but for the majority of the Naga people, it has only cause more divisions and misunderstandings.
• No, a post-dated cheque on a failing bank.
• The increasing gap between rich and poor, the haves and have nots is due to provisions like the Article 371(A), which has been misused by politicians.
• Whatever the Article nos....all aspirations n hopes are being lost at the mercy of these undergrounds who call themselves as Sons of the MOTHERLAND.
• In certain ways, this Article s a stumbling block 2 Nagas.
• Article 371(A) is a white wash to divide the Naga people so that India can rule over the entire Nagas. This article contradicts the aspirations of the Nagas and has been given by India to create confusion and division among the simple minded Nagas.
• Lets dissect this very generous gesture of the Indian Constituion to the Nagas in the form of Article 371 A. I found some of these references quite befitting! Check it out. (from) Point 1
(a) (iv) "ownership and transfer of land and its resources, shall apply to the State of Nagaland unless the Legislative Assembly of Nagaland by a resolution so decides;"
DISSECTION: Is the State of Nagaland representing the aspirations of the Naga people?? Is the State Legislative Assembly of Nagaland representing the aspirations of the Naga people?? Is the State of Nagaland or the Legislative Assembly of Nagaland the Nagas itself?? When 11 oil explorations teams were invited to Nagaland were any of the Naga people in the villages, towns and homes consulted??
(From Point 1) (b).........
Provided that if any question arises whether any matter is or is not a matter as respects which the Governor is under this sub-clause required to act in the exercise of his individual judgment, the decision of the Governor in his discretion shall be final, and the validity of anything done by the Governor shall not be called in question on the ground that he ought or ought not to have acted in the exercise of his individual judgment:
Provided further that if the President on receipt of a report from the Governor or otherwise is satisfied that it is no longer necessary for the Governor to have special responsibility with respect to law and order in the State of Nagaland, he may by order direct that the Governor shall cease to have such responsibility with effect from such date as may be specified in the order;
DISSECTION: "individual judgment"- repeat, "individual judgment" (of the governor's). This is in regard to 'law and order' in the proposed State of Nagaland so i think it only fair that we bring in AFSPA's indifferent face into the picture too (wish i could actually draw an indifferent face with an arrow-mark saying 'AFSPA').
So, from these two paragraphs we understand that the governor may act on "Individual judgment" and no one can question him on that. At least no one BUT the president of India. Do these paragraphs have anything with 'Naga', 'State of Nagaland', State government of Nagaland, Chief Minister of Nagaland, State Legislative Assembly of Nagaland?? N-O, No, and also to point out the obvious no ethnic Naga's bottom has sat on the throne of the state governor of Nagaland. Nor is the president of India Naga.
(3) If any difficulty arises in giving effect to any of the foregoing provisions of this article, the President may by order do anything (including any adaptation or modification of any other article) which appears to him to be necessary for the purpose of removing that difficulty:
Provided that no such order shall be made after the expiration of three years from the date of the formation of the State of Nagaland. Explanation.- In this article, the Kohima, Mokokchung and Tuensang districts shall have the same meanings as in the State of Nagaland Act, 1962.
DISSECTION: Point 3 of Article 371 puts the cream on the top. "that difficulty" is not explained at all, and not criteria is given for it. So we can safely assume that "that difficulty" could mean anything which 'displeases' the President (or the order that comes to him). In other words we can also interpret- 'You are given this very generous gesture of our philanthropy but if you should be displeased and act like a spoilt little brat we can take it all away from you too.'
So Mex Nagaland, Point 3 also answers your question whether Article 371 represent the fullest aspirations of the Nagas. We also find out that the state of Nagaland was formed under an Act in 1962. Did that mean it was approved by the wholesome decision of all the Nagas within the state (instead of a bunch of 16 'representatives' who did not represent the NAGA voice as according to customary laws)?? That question's only left to be answered......
Now strictly speaking "outside the box"- i.e, outside the context of the Constitution of India What does Article 371 represent, and not represent?? One, you could say the fullest aspirations that the Nagas could achieve without Article 371 being a hindrance or a stumbling block in the first place. Does it protect the interests of the Nagas? OR, does it protect the interest of the Nagas Within the Constitution of India?? And when you juxtapose these two questions you may as well ask why article 371 is there at all in the first place?!!
Now, what we can talk about is how to utilize the article Within the Constitution of India for OUR benefits. But beyond that article 371 does not help or 'unhelp' the Nagas- yet it can be considered a hindrance to achieving the fullest aspirations of the Nagas. Important to identify, though, is that Article 371 is a result of another factor. For example, the Indo-Naga conflict or the so called 'insurgency' that the government stamps on the nationalists.
We talk about protection of our 'cultural and land rights aspiration', protection from exploitation, or even cultural genocide juxtaposed to ethnic/indigenous communities in Orissa, MP, AP but all these, i feel, are WITHIN the Constitution of India. This does not Necessarily discuss the full aspirations of the Nagas through article 371 or the full extent of Naga aspirations Itself. So, no I don't feel Article 371 represent the full aspirations of the Nagas within the Constitution of India or Not
Some of those who voted OTHERS had this to say:
• Sure, it did help to save guard us from exploitation; but who in the first place asked them to shove their constitution in our face??
• Forget about fullest aspiration, some Nagas taking advantage of article 371a for their own selfish gain, by taking even government own lands as their pvt property
• From a history point of view, the Sixteen Point Agreement was a blunder. It decimated the Naga movement in the eyes of the international community. But besides that it did not succeed in quelling the Naga movement. Today, the Sixteen Point Agreement and Article 371(A) has become a blessing in disguise for Nagaland state because the division and bloodshed among the Nagas have failed to take the Naga movement forward to its logical conclusion.
• If 'aspiration' imply total political independence then no provision in the Indian constitution has any bearing. However, Article 371(A) as a an affirmative action or protective discrimination has protected our cultural and land rights aspiration for decades. Compared to other indigenous/ tribal communities in mainland India, we are better place in-terms power equation vis a vis the Indian state. and we should also remember that this constitutional provision have protected all Naga tribes from land alienation and cultural genocide face by hundreds of tribal communities in states like Orissa, MP Andhra...etc
• The Article 371A as it is did represent the 'limited political aspirations' of the people then as it emerged out of the 16 Point Agreement - though the non-accordists may not agree. Anyways, that's not the point here and so lets leave it at that. As to whether it is relevant wrt to the 'fullest aspirations' of the Naga people now is a very difficult and rather ambiguous. What actually is the 'fullest aspiration' of the Naga people and who knows it? To me what is equally important is to know or ask ourselves how have we utilized the provisions of the Article to our benefit or towards the fulfillment of our aspirations.
• The question how we have utilized the provisions from Article 371 (A) is equally important as asking whether the Article itself represent the fullest aspirations of the Naga people- Within the Constitution of India.
• This is a sensitive and tricky question because it is a fact that this particular Article has benefited some Nagas. But for most of the Nagas who are still aspiring for the Naga historical and political rights, the Article 371(A) does not represent the rights of the Naga people. I dont see many people speaking on this question because many Nagas want to be politically correct and not openly challenge the state government.
• Well the Fullest aspiration of the Nagas- we also need to consider- has been denied. But leaving aside the 'spilt milk' we should also consider what can be done under/within Article 371, or central funds given to us for development, infrastructure, etc. We should really consider what can be done with the resources, laws, acts that protect us or give us rights within the state govt. Yes article 371 has flaws and loopholes but is that really the problem or can we do something with it?? With that, perhaps we can reach our 'fullest aspiration'. With frustration, blame-game, stubborness or indifference we are not going anywhere. That is the most important point perhaps.
• No wonder that any Naga worth his/her salt whether in office or in workplace or in field, not to mention on the street will respectively express their divergent opinions on this long overlooked important issue which is the cornerstone of our overall special relationship with GoI within the union states of India ever since then. Thus, my take on Article 371(A) on whether it is a boon or a bane so far for the state of Nagaland and its indigenous people at large is the abysmally static realities on the ground which is perhaps the mother of all judgments and barometers.
• Sure, it did help to save guard us from exploitation; but who in the first place asked them to shove their constitution in our face??
• Forget about fullest aspiration, some Nagas taking advantage of article 371a for their own selfish gain, by taking even government own lands as their pvt property
• From a history point of view, the Sixteen Point Agreement was a blunder. It decimated the Naga movement in the eyes of the international community. But besides that it did not succeed in quelling the Naga movement. Today, the Sixteen Point Agreement and Article 371(A) has become a blessing in disguise for Nagaland state because the division and bloodshed among the Nagas have failed to take the Naga movement forward to its logical conclusion.
• If 'aspiration' imply total political independence then no provision in the Indian constitution has any bearing. However, Article 371(A) as a an affirmative action or protective discrimination has protected our cultural and land rights aspiration for decades. Compared to other indigenous/ tribal communities in mainland India, we are better place in-terms power equation vis a vis the Indian state. and we should also remember that this constitutional provision have protected all Naga tribes from land alienation and cultural genocide face by hundreds of tribal communities in states like Orissa, MP Andhra...etc
• The Article 371A as it is did represent the 'limited political aspirations' of the people then as it emerged out of the 16 Point Agreement - though the non-accordists may not agree. Anyways, that's not the point here and so lets leave it at that. As to whether it is relevant wrt to the 'fullest aspirations' of the Naga people now is a very difficult and rather ambiguous. What actually is the 'fullest aspiration' of the Naga people and who knows it? To me what is equally important is to know or ask ourselves how have we utilized the provisions of the Article to our benefit or towards the fulfillment of our aspirations.
• The question how we have utilized the provisions from Article 371 (A) is equally important as asking whether the Article itself represent the fullest aspirations of the Naga people- Within the Constitution of India.
• This is a sensitive and tricky question because it is a fact that this particular Article has benefited some Nagas. But for most of the Nagas who are still aspiring for the Naga historical and political rights, the Article 371(A) does not represent the rights of the Naga people. I dont see many people speaking on this question because many Nagas want to be politically correct and not openly challenge the state government.
• Well the Fullest aspiration of the Nagas- we also need to consider- has been denied. But leaving aside the 'spilt milk' we should also consider what can be done under/within Article 371, or central funds given to us for development, infrastructure, etc. We should really consider what can be done with the resources, laws, acts that protect us or give us rights within the state govt. Yes article 371 has flaws and loopholes but is that really the problem or can we do something with it?? With that, perhaps we can reach our 'fullest aspiration'. With frustration, blame-game, stubborness or indifference we are not going anywhere. That is the most important point perhaps.
• No wonder that any Naga worth his/her salt whether in office or in workplace or in field, not to mention on the street will respectively express their divergent opinions on this long overlooked important issue which is the cornerstone of our overall special relationship with GoI within the union states of India ever since then. Thus, my take on Article 371(A) on whether it is a boon or a bane so far for the state of Nagaland and its indigenous people at large is the abysmally static realities on the ground which is perhaps the mother of all judgments and barometers.
No comments:
Post a Comment