NFP Legislature Party contradicts claims of NDPP on CAB 2016

DIMAPUR, JANUARY 18 (MExN): The debate over the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2016 continues to rumble with different Naga political parties airing their interpretations in the context of Nagaland vis-à-vis Article 371 (A).  

In a clarification, the NPF Legislature Party (NPFLS) through its spokesperson Imkong Imchen on Friday said the Nationalist Democratic Progressive Party (NDPP) was imparting wrong information/education to the people of Nagaland on the relation between CAB and Article 371 (A) which it termed was totally unbecoming of a political party ruling the state. 

The NPFLS pointed out that the CAB 2016 and 1955 relates to granting of Indian Citizenship whereas 1873 BEFRA vis-à-vis Inner Line Permit is granting of permission to visit certain place/region for a certain period of time. These two subjects cannot and should not be clubbed up together but should be always different because it is different to each other by law.

On the statement made by NDPP that Village Councils can grant citizenship as per 371(A) of Constitution of India, the NPFLS said this is “totally wrong and mischievous and intentional misleading of Naga people.” 

The act of parliament, in regard to the CAB 2016 is to grant citizenship of India but not for citizenship of a village, thus the argument of bringing the village councils or Nagaland Village & Area Council Act 1978 into the picture is irrelevant, it corrected. 

On the statement that the NDPP have asked for review of the bill to the union government, the NPFLS termed this a shameless act to once again intentionally mislead its own people for cheap political mileage. 

“Given that their MP in Lok Sabha Tokheho Yepthomi has not raised his objection in the LS and now they claim that they have asked for review. This is heights of betrayal and insult to the intellect of the Naga people,” it stated. 

On the statement made by the NDPP that Nagaland has been exempted from the purview of the 73rd constitution amendment of 1992 since it will amount to infringement of provision of 371(A), the NPFLS said this was done during the congress regime in the State as well as Centre. 

It therefore questioned whether the same can be expected of the NDPP and its coalition partner. 

The NPFLS also pointed out that it is not at the discretion of the BJP party in Delhi, because their party is not in majority in Rajya Sabha. Moreover, there cannot be two laws in respect of one issue, in the sense that a bill cannot differ between Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. In other words, the NPFLS explained that if CAB has to be reviewed, it has to go back to LS before it is finally passed in RS. This is the parliamentary procedure.

In the meantime the NPFLS appealed to the legal luminaries of the state to come out with their point of view and interpretation in regard to this Citizenship (Amendment) Bill 2016, so as to enlighten our people further without any political color.