C Akanabo
I am glad that my short article in your esteem paper has provoked interest in some quarters. This is my reply to some of the queries I have received for my views in setting up a Naga Constituent Assembly (NCA) as a way forward to the present impasse in the Indo-Naga peace talks.
Yes, the proposal contemplates all Naga parliamentarians (MLAs and MPs) in Manipur, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Assam. However, it is the Core Committee on Naga Political Issue (CCNPI) of Nagaland which should act as the centrifugal force. Naga parliamentarians across state boundaries can form a loose association and work out the modus operandi. Or at least the CCNPI can get the other Naga parliamentarian in Manipur, Assam and Arunachal Pradesh to agree in principle that they shall also support the initiatives of the core committee to facilitate the peace process and help usher peace in the region.
The proposed NCA can accommodate representatives of different national political parties, Naga tribes, areas, religious minorities, Naga parliamentarians and legal talents etc. as members. The number of representatives from each interest group could be worked out according to their size they represent. The centre idea of this NCA is to draft a constitution of the Nagas.
I feel this negotiation is about two separate entities exploring ways to come closer to each other. Therefore it is also a dialogue of finding common ground of two different Ideologies, philosophies, cultures, value systems and different world views etc. The one single most serious problem India as a nation faced since its independence in 1947 is consolidation of India or the integration of Indian people as a political community. Despite their differences in language, culture, religion and ethnicity they achieved national unity around the concept of "unity in diversity". The makers of the Constitution kept in view the difference between decentralization and disintegration and between unity and integration and centralization.
The present right wing political party came to power on the agenda of growth and efficient governance though some people would have us believe that it was because of the their one nation, one constitution, one law, one flag slogan. Their record vote share of 37% in 2019 Lok Sabha elections goes to show that even most Hindus are secularist and do not vote on religious line. The recent election results in West Bengal and Tamil Nadu are a testament that centralism of right wing politics like Hindu Rashtra can back fire. There are basic structures in the constitution which cannot be altered in exercise of the power to amend under Article 368. The secular character of the constitution, the separation of power between the legislature, executive and the judiciary and the federal structure, the republican and democratic form of government are the basic features that cannot be altered. In the famous case of Kesavananda Bharadi case in 1973 the Supreme Court (SC) had laid down this principle of basic structure. The SC again reaffirmed the applicability of the doctrine by holding that ' judicial review' a basic feature which cannot be taken away even by amending the Constitution in Minerva Mills vs. Union of India case. This, I believe, is the reason why leaders from across party lines in Jammu and Kashmir are now counting on the SC instead of politicking for the restoration of the special status under Article 370 which is sub judice now. Even the proponents of the abrogation postulate their argument on the 'temporary' nature of the Article and not the structure per se.
The point I want to drive home here, is that, incorporating future agreement(s) with the government of India in the constitution of India would not mean capitulation of the Nagas, and that any such future agreement(s) cannot be tinkered around easily. The same corresponding Article which defines the relationship of the two entities could be adopted accordingly in the Naga Constitution or Yehzabo. We should also try to see that agreement of this nature is sacrosanct in Indian constitution unless the other party itself allows the Government of India to meddle with the agreement in course of time for want of power. I am not advocating Indian Constitution here. I am just trying to understand it based on Indian experience with whom we are negotiating.
Besides the issue of flag and constitution which are perceived as the hitch in the peace process now, the Naga national political parties need to also admit that there is an absence of alternative vision in Naga society today. There is an absence of any theory or strategy of economic development, of industrialization, of creating jobs in a situation where the Naga governments are purportedly running "parallel governments". There is a need for vision statement in the form of this NCA. Our struggle should also be about removal of poverty, improvement in living conditions of the masses and meaningful dent in the burgeoning urban and rural unemployment. Unleashing popular revolutionary forces or energy by freeing the Nagas from the fear of Indian police, army and the bureaucracy is but for a short period. Social and economic development cannot wait anymore for the revolution to take place as some left leaning parties once anticipated to happen in our neighbouring territories. These are also some of the 'contemporary political realities'. Our revolution has been pragmatic but has not arrived at theoretically to say the least. It’s centralized and organized democratic-centralism party structure has helped the organisations to withstand state repression, to acquire political power to leverage a negotiation but this structure has also become a drag. It tends to promote monopolization of power by party cadres and people close to them. Bureucratisation, patronage, privilege and partisan activities have taken toll on the parties and their popularity. There is a failure to arrest societal decay.
Unfortunately, there are apprehensions that more powerful organisations might perpetuate their domineering power over other weaker sections post settlement. So spelling out explicitly in a written document (NCA), the future system of government can assuage this premonition.
Lastly, let us also remember that we are not negotiating with a political party in Delhi alone, but focus on the larger picture that we are parlaying with a system, a polity, and a political community. Kuknalim!
