Aheli Moitra
Last year, the Manipur legislative assembly election was boycotted by a number of prominent Naga people. It was not meant to be group action. The boycotting individuals had made their decision on their own. Ironically, many of them were people involved in devising political strategies to enter the legislative assembly through maximum possible seats.
This year, the Nagaland legislative assembly election is being boycotted by a number of prominent Naga people. It is not meant to be group action, except the one by “underground” governments, who, unlike their Khasi counterpart, have not called for a public boycott but have refused to be a part of electioneering. Of course, the need to stay in control of the only political system in place is not lost to them.
In any case, albeit individually, even if through manipulating the system, the Naga people are actively boycotting the election.
The former home minister is exemplary of the state-wide election scenario. He, along with his counterparts, has made it to power through their armed boycott of the state election. Using arms and money to buy or threaten voters nullifies the position of both the agency and structure—the voter and the democracy.
As for the common Naga, acceptance of the above and refusal to succumb to the system of ‘one man one vote’ has led to this boycott. By letting themselves be bribed and electing people into office who will make sure Central funds are exhausted over minimal implementation. Had the boycott been conscious, it might have even had a positive effect on people through other means.
Today, political boycott is not just staying away from systems. If some Naga intellectuals are openly making known their distaste for the Indian election system, others have made this known by taking active part in it. By bending it so far back that the meaning of voting to preserve democracy is lost.
Cynicism here coexists with hope. While actors from Delhi to Kohima spend large resources in making the system work to their benefit, others insist on keeping the system clean. How can a rejected system be kept clean? Is this hope for a Naga political future or cynicism towards the same?
Strangely, there is boycott, also, from people in the “mainland” of the subcontinent who remain ignorant to the state assembly election here. What kind of election happens in Nagaland, asked a relatively learned man from Bombay. Is NSCN the largest political party? Are Isak and Muivah ruling Nagaland currently?
This is the beauty of the Indian political practice. Even after 50 years of bringing the Nagas into the federal system, the east has not a clue of the west. Consent from these people has been manufactured to keep the Nagas glued to the map of India but one group has not gained a belonging, or more knowledge, of the other.
Consent to a false peace, on the other hand, has been extracted from the Nagas. Every five years this point lies elaborated. It is visible in the arms oozing out of every corner. It is visible in the Naga economy that lies in shambles while money finds itself in a diarrhoeic state of flux during election.
In a sense, this consent towards peace and statehood, consent to the relation between the two, the consent to forcibly integrate a people into a nation, has all been boycotted by the Naga people. Alas, this boycott hurts the Naga people more than India’s national consciousness, the Naga peace process or those at the helm of the boycotted system.
It is why the only way left for the people to gain control is to clean up the process in place. Not just on February 23 but for the next five years to come.
