The State government has rightly sought a consultation on some vital issue that concerns both the present and future of Nagaland and its people. To be held on Friday i.e. October 8, 2010, the State Level Consultative Meeting will discuss issues related to ownership and transfer of land and its resources vis-à-vis the right of government for regulating the use of land and its resources including minerals for public purposes. The other issue to be discussed is on Municipal Elections and Women Reservation. Given the importance of the subject matter, the consultations will be attended by Tribal Hohos, NGOs, public leaders, women organization, intellectuals and civil societies. It becomes obvious that all the issues to be discussed will be done so within the context and ambit of Article 371 (A), which gives special constitutional rights to the Nagas residing in the State of Nagaland. While Article 371 (A) is a matter of right, the choice to circumvent this or to do otherwise rests with the State Legislature—which is the forum consisting of people’s representatives.
One of the obvious problems seems to emerge from people’s reading of Article 371 (A). There would be one group under the impression that Article 371 (A) is an end in itself and there should be no tinkering with it. The other position is taken by those who see Article 371 (A) only as a means towards the larger end of not only protecting Naga identity and the Naga way of life but also ensuring change so that new challenges of development objectives, social empowerment and other responsibilities can be met. As in most public discourse, the current consultation or debate on October 8 will see a Conservative viewpoint as well as a Liberal one. Up till now since the last four decades of Statehood, the conservative position has held sway for obvious reasons and there was no real need to make any policy changes as far as Article 371 (A) was concerned. This is not the case anymore. And the present political establishment is fully aware of the changing ground reality. For instance even the present DAN government is not averse to women quota in Municipal election. The Opposition Congress has also supported such a move. With the two main political parties coming out of their conservative shell, the status quo position of all these years obviously appear to be not viable any longer.
Public memory may be short but for us who have been closely following the stated positions of political parties on the issue of women’s empowerment, the earlier stand taken by the first Neiphiu Rio government was a reiteration of a similar decision taken by the then SC Jamir led Congress government which had rejected 33% reservation of seats in the State. The present government during its first term had in the first instance actually turned down the proposal for setting up of a State Commission for Women (SCW). The argument of the political establishment was that the status of its women is much better off and does not conform to the general perception of women’s status in India. However, things have moved on and now we have a full fledged Women Commission. This has in no way endangered Naga identity or its way of life, rather it has helped to enhance the human worth of our women population. Agreed that 33% quota for women is something more drastic and not necessarily the same as appointing a women commission. Therefore an honest and informed debate on women reservation is much needed at this juncture.
The government has therefore done the right thing by calling for consultation not only on women quota but also on ownership of land and its resources. Given the conservative and liberal position on the question of Article 371 (A), a way out could be to strike a balance between the two extreme positions and find a middle path solution and one that respects the basic features of Article 371 (A) while at the same time remaining open to new ideas and solutions. There are challenges to be met and new responsibilities to be fulfilled. This is especially true in the context of bringing about economic development, creating jobs and livelihood options, building and managing our towns and cities etc. We can ill afford to cling on to our old mindsets and prejudice. With changes taking place all around us, it would be unwise on our part to remain stuck within the confines of our little village. Continuity and change is the way forward. Let us identify those areas that need adaptation to change and all others that will require safeguard and continuity.
(The writer is Editor of Morung Express. The views expressed are personal)
