Revamping the Naga House

Imlisunep
Dimapur

The revolt of 1857 was a landmark event during the British Colonial reign. It sent tremors and shockwaves across a large part of the British Empire in India and shook the British hegemony. Indian historians have termed it as the first war of independence yet English writers had dubbed it as a discontentment of some few disobedient sepoys in the military establishment. Though it had an impact on the outlook of the Britishers which led to the famous Act of 1858 through which India was brought under the direct control of the British crown, yet it failed to achieve the aspirations of the Indians to drive out the white rulers. Several reasons have been attributed to the failure of the Revolt of 1857. Among all, one of the most prominent reasons was the utter lack of disunity among different groups of Indians. Due to the local Indian support that the Britishers had, they could crush the uprising swiftly and suppress the revolt within a short span of time. Had all the Indian rulers united against the Britishers during the revolt, Indian history would have taken a different narrative. A reflection on history reveals innumerable story of defeat and destruction of nations and societies that could not unite itself in the face of adversary and challenges. The ongoing imbroglio on solution before election has once again merited the need to examine the structure and cohesiveness of the Naga house. The issue on whether election should be withheld or it should be carried out according to constitutional norms is a debatable point depending on which side of the vantage point one is viewing from. Though there are outliers, a vast section of the people seems to be vouching for an early solution instead of election. Proponents of solution before election spearheaded by the Core Committee of the Nagaland Tribal Hohos and Civil Organisations (CCNTHCO) heeding to the voice of the people had attempted to boycott the elections with the objective of demanding a solution at the earliest to settle the long drawn Indo-Naga issue. Its earnest and concerted effort in this direction was hijacked due to the lacklustre and nonchalant response from some quarters and the BJP pulling out from its earlier commitment to abstain from filing nominations. As a result CCNTHCO has put the ball in the court of political parties to take the call on whether to participate in the forthcoming election or abstain from it. Eventually the path seems clear and within a month a new government will be ready to take the reins of the state and things will move on in its usual moorings. But a larger question hangs on from this episode that needs to be answered, if we are to survive as a people together. This turn of events needs serious contemplation on why we could not present a united house, if everyone is for an early solution. The real reasons maybe varied and it might never emerge in the public space on why different actors choose to act contrasting roles putting the whole play into jeopardy. This will not be the last time that Nagas as a people will be confronted with imminent issues that concern its existence. Should we continue to sing in divergent voices detrimental to the Naga house or find a way to anchor our voices collectively in order to preserve the strategic interest of the Nagas? The decision making process of the Naga house needs to be revisited and revamped in order to function as a coherent body. The haphazard structure at present should be replaced with a more stable platform. The sad reality of Naga Hoho losing its credibility among the masses has left a void that requires to be filled. This vacuum can be witnessed from the various nomenclatures that are patched and propped up every now and then to tackle the collective challenges of our people. Without a respectable and recognised parent body, temporary arrangements become an organisational challenge in terms of functions and jurisdiction. To overcome this lacuna, either the Naga Hoho should be refashioned or the Nagaland Tribal council should be empowered to step up and take the role of a parent body and cater to the interest of the Nagas. Once this institution is affirmed and given the mandate, subsequently it can oversee and respond to any issue within its jurisdiction. Each constituent unit of the parent body should be given equal voting rights to decide on matters of crucial significance. In case of a tie of votes, the parent body should be given the right to exercise veto power. The final outcome after the voting process is carried out should be binding on all its constituent units. This system is nothing new. This system of voting can be found in almost all democratic societies including India. Every system has its merits and demerits. Though the applicability and implementation of this sort of system can always be deliberated in all quarters, yet one advantage of having such a system in place will be its ability to pronounce a decision collectively in one voice whether in the negative or affirmative. The latest event of contradictory voices has been a huge embarrassment for the Naga house as a whole and such humiliation could be avoided in the future if a proper an efficient system of decision making process is set in motion. This balkanisation of voices is hurting us as a family and no one amongst us gains in the long run, but we stand to lose our ground and negotiating power while we struggle to attain our objective.  

The zamindars were wealthy and powerful landlords under the patronage of the British rulers. In order to preserve their personal interest they stayed loyal to the Britishers during the revolt and instead aided the white rulers in suppressing the revolt against their own fellow Indians. Powerful and influential Princely states like Gwalior and Hyderabad did not extend their support to the movement. They choose to remain indifferent to the storm hovering and blowing in their courtyard. One can imagine if all Indians had united in this revolt, did India have to wait another 100 years to gain its freedom. The failure to envision the bigger picture and come together as a cohesive house had cost Indians dearly in terms of precious human life and economic resources for another century. At this precarious juncture, we need to learn from history for we cannot afford to commit the same blunder that other nations have experienced. The foremost priority at this point is to set our house in order by exploring the best possible ways and means through which we can march as a single unit. It cannot be emphasised enough that we are in need of leaders at every helm who can see past their nose. Leaders not controlled by any external diktats but those led by conviction to envision and build a united Naga house. Did we miss an opportunity, which might have led us along the route to bring an early closure to the longest protracted political issue in South Asia? Only time will tell.