Dimapur, May 15 (MExN): The Nagaland Congress is amused at NPF president Dr. Shurhozelie’s recent comments at “the way the UPA Govt repaid us” after the NPF-led DAN government “extended issue-based support to the UPA Govt for the last 6-7 years.”
The Nagaland Pradesh Congress Committee today responded in a rejoinder. “…if NPF led DAN government extended issue-based support to the UPA government for the last 6-7 years, then in that case, why NPF refused to support UPA government when the confidence vote took place in the parliament on the issue of nuclear deal?” the NPCC statement said. The rejoinder was issued by the NPCC’s vice president
According to the NPCC, the NPF chief issued directives to the MP, Wangyuh Konyak to vote against the UPA but the MP ‘defied his order and voted in favor of UPA.’ Thereafter, he was expelled from the NPF party.
“…where and when did the NPF extend issue-based support to the UPA government? NPF-led DAN government issued the directive to vote against the UPA government because it was under the impression that the UPA government was going to collapse since the Left Front withdrew its support to the UPA,” the NPCC asserted.
In the case of last Presidential elections, the NPCC contented that some DAN legislators “might have voted in favor of Pratibha Patil” but it was done “according to conscience vote, not issue based support…” The NPCC termed DAN government’s “talking about issue-based support” as “a blatant lie.”
Over the imposition of President’s rule in Nagaland, the NPCC argued that the Guwahati High court declared the speaker’s action to be “wrong and his interim order was illegal and unconstitutional”. President’s Rule was “because of Speaker’s unconstitutional action depriving the rights of independent MLAs to vote in the assembly without any reason,” it said.
“In this case, NPCC would like to ask NPF President, is the NPF party and DAN government above the Constitution of India? Is honorable speaker above the constitution of India? When the court declared that DAN government action and speaker’s order was wrong, illegal and unconstitutional the matters end there.” If the DAN is not satisfied with the High Court’s judgment order, make an appeal in the higher court, the NPCC advised.
In a democratic government, the NPCC said, when a party loses majority in the house, it should step down gracefully “but in the case of NPF led DAN government when they were reduced to a minority in the house in 2007 they still refused to relinquish the office against the principle of democracy”.
Over the NPF’s charge that the “Congress has scant regard for democracy,” the NPCC said “it has no base at all”. The action of the NPF-led DAN “clearly goes against the principles of democracy so the question is which party has scant regard for democracy?” it queried. “Obviously NPF party through their action has totally disregarded the democratic norms of government,” it added.
