Derailment of the peace process:
Dialogue for the peace process is essentially with the Central Government and the NSCN factions. The State Government is not a party to the talks. And mere fact that there is no State Government does not mean that there is no Government for the State. When the State is brought under President’s rule, the Central Government administers the State in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. There is no scope for the State Government to intermeddle with the Centre’s initiatives in the peace-talks. Such outbursts of Rio, that the move of the Central Government to dismiss his Government and impose President’s rule would derail the peace process, is an eloquent view of Rio’s position and the manner in which his Government was functioning in the State. His contention speaks volumes about his questionable intentions. How is it that he apprehends the peace process would be derailed when even the parties concerned are not concerned about it? And what has dismissal of his unconstitutional Government got anything to do with the ongoing peace process?
As far as the people are concerned, neither has the Government of India nor the NSCN has said that political talks would be suspended or abrogated with the dismissal of the DAN Government. Now, it is most interesting to note that Rio is hinting the process would be derailed. People should now ask Rio who is going to derail the process. Is he, Rio, warning the people and the Government of India that he would derail the peace process since his illegal Government has been dismissed? If so, we would like to request him not to do so since it would be against the wishes and aspirations of the Naga people who desire for an early, honourable and acceptable solution to the protracted Naga political problem. The Naga people want peace and normalcy; the Naga people want peace, progress and all-round development. And Rio would be doing much more harm to the people of Nagaland than he did in his five years or so in power if he were to derail or contribute to the abrogation of the peace and political process.
Imposition of President’s Rule:
Admittedly, it was evident that the Government could not be carried out within the framework of the Constitution and action under Article 356 of the Constitution was imperative.
With imposition of President’s Rule, the incumbent Government is removed and the Central Government takes over the administration of the State. There is no imposition of martial law. Apart from the fact that no such order has been issued by the Central Government in this regard for imposing martial law, the action under Article 356 of the Constitution does not postulate such a situation. Hence the claim of Mr. Rio that with imposition of President’s Rule, martial law has been imposed, is a ploy to fool the masses and the mask behind which he had been functioning is slowly beginning to unravel the his true face. Surely, a person who has occupied the post of Chief Minister ought to be knowing the Constitution and the Constitutional limits of the relevant Articles.
Provisions for imposition of martial law would require a declaration under Article 352 of the Constitution and no such declaration has been made under Article 352 of the Constitution. Recourse to Article 352 can be had only when the president is satisfied that a grave emergency exists whereby the security of India or of any part of the territory thereof is threatened, whether by war or by external aggression or by armed rebellion. However, the State has been brought under President’s rule by virtue of Article 356 of the Constitution, which is separate and distinct from Article 352, which has not been invoked by the Centre.
The manner in which Mr. Rio is seeking to confuse and obfuscate the people on the issue and twist the same for his own goals sees a parallel in Goebbels’s methodology of conjuring lies and deceit to fool the masses.
Misuse of Speaker’s office:
Knowing fully well that he had been reduced to minority, Rio misused the Speaker’s office, with an attempt to continue to remain in office.
Firstly, the votes of the 7 NPF MLAs were not counted on the specious plea that this was on the basis of a Circular issued by the Speaker in August 2006! (The resignation of these 7 MLAs subsequently, is of no consequence, since at the relevant time when the motion of No-confidence was put to vote and was actually taken up and voted upon, these 7 persons participated and voted in the House along with other MLAs and were full-fledged Members of the House).
Secondly, Disqualification Petitions were filed against the 3 Independent MLAs. The grounds were not that they had joined any political party and there incurred disqualification under para 2 of the Tenth Schedule. Instead, the ground was that they always supported the Government and having been along with the Government, could not vote against it now. And the Speaker obliged the Government by issuing an interim order – (purporting to uphold the Constitution and judgments of the Supreme Court) – which interim order did not disqualify the members nor hold that they prima facie stood disqualified on grounds of defection, but strangely, directed that these Independent MLAs “shall not vote in favour of any political party in the House on motions of confidence or no-confidence in the House in accordance with the observations of the Supreme Court of India in various anti-defection law cases and the said members are however, free to participate in the proceedings with the right to vote on all other questions for decisions before the House.”!
Apart from the fact that there is no such directive by the Supreme Court under the Tenth Schedule or otherwise with regards rights of members to vote or not to vote in a House, once it was clear that 7 NPF & 3 Independent MLAs were not with the Government, the Government had lost its majority in the House and had no right to continue.
[The Supreme Court’s interim Orders passed in Special Leave Petitions when any Member of a House has been found to have been disqualified by Order of the High Court in Election matters or when High Courts have upheld disqualification of a member of the House, for the purpose of ensuring that the appeal is not rendered infructuous, cannot be equated with this situation where there has not yet been a final Order of disqualification].
Even assuming that once the resignation of 7 NPF MLAs had been accepted, the mathematics stands altered, the 3 Independent MLAs had to be counted, which reveals that the Government did not enjoy the confidence of the majority members of the House and had to go.
No parallel between Goa and Nagaland:
While it is true that the Central Government did not act during the Goa crisis on account of the interim order passed by the Speaker holding that there was prima facie case for holding that two MLAs were liable be disqualified in terms of para 2 of the Tenth Schedule, for voluntarily giving up membership of their original political party, in the case of Nagaland, there was no such prima facie finding. Instead, in the disqualification petition (one Petition against 3 Independent MLAs!), the Speaker directed that these Independent MLAs “shall not vote in favour of any political party in the House on motions of confidence or no-confidence in the House in accordance with the observations of the Supreme Court of India in various anti-defection law cases and the said members are however, free to participate in the proceedings with the right to vote on all other questions for decisions before the House.” Therefore, there was no reduction in strength, but pure manipulation of figures. These Independent MLAs continued to be MLAs of the House at the time when the No-Confidence Motion was put to vote.
Desperate bid to remain in office:
It is evident that Rio, knowing well that he had lost support of the majority of the members of the House, instead of stepping down gracefully, sought to continue in the chair even by foul means, a travesty of the democratic principles and a total lack of respect of the Constitution which had sworn to uphold. And it is because of Rio shamelessly and illegally clinging to power that has brought disrepute to the people of Nagaland after the Centre had no option but to impose Central Rule in Nagaland.
An Appeal to the People of Nagaland:
The non-Congress political parties’ attempt to disrupt the lives of the people of Nagaland through their call for a bandh on January 8, 2008 is very unfortunate as they want to impose ‘NPF Military Rule’. If they were genuinely agitated with the Centre’s decision to impose President’s Rule in Nagaland, they should go to Delhi and demonstrate their unhappiness. We fail to understand why they should disturb the normal lives of the people in Nagaland by calling such a bandh.
We have full faith that His Excellency would be able to deliver to the people what the DAN Government has deprived the people of in the last five years or so. We are also fully confident that the bureaucrats and the Government Servants who are now free from DAN leaders breathing down their necks and preventing them from dispensing their duties as per their conscience all these years, will now be able to deliver justice to the people of Nagaland under the able guidance and supervision of His Excellency the Governor of Nagaland. We have full faith and confidence in the abilities and efficiency of our bureaucrats and we are sure that they will show our people their best colours during President’s Rule since there will not be vested and selfish interests hampering their functioning.
Sd/-
(JONATHAN)
Member,
Media Cell,
Nagaland Pradesh Congress Committee.
