Moa Jamir
The alacrity with which the State Government declared the proposed bandh of national highway by CCoFA on October 17 as ‘illegal’ is unprecedented and raises more eyebrows than the ‘illegal’ act it proposed to stop.
The bandh is been called in connection to the demand for transfer of the two-fuel adulteration cases to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) by Co-ordination Committee on Fuel Adulteration (CCoFA), consisting of various civil society organizations.
The Committee had served a 15-day ultimatum on the State Government to bring in the CBI for a thorough investigation on the fuel adulteration scam.
A press communiqué issued by Nagaland Home Commissioner informed that it was decided at a Cabinet Meeting on October 16 and the proposed bandh was declared ‘illegal’ as it was “going to restrict the movement of essential commodities and services, besides causing inconveniences to the public.”
The district administration and police have been directed to take all necessary measures to ensure that “free movement of all vehicles and public is not disrupted,"it said and "requested" the general public not to participate in the bandh.
This comes a day after the State Cabinet assured that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) whose mandate “comprehensively cover all relevant issues connected with the subject matter” would be submitting the charge sheets in the next 10 days.
On its part CCoFA said that the indefinite highway bandh called “has nothing to do with the SIT or the Chargesheet to be filed by it, as supposed by the Cabinet” and has been called “because the government failed to call in a CBI enquiry within the 15 days deadline.”
Giving aside the debate over ‘what is legal is ethical or otherwise,’ and the legality of declaring a bandh ‘illegal,’ the steps taken so far raises many questions.
First, the rarity of such an imposition and the promptness with which the decision was taken. It was informed that the proposed bandh (1st phase) was targeted only at Government vehicles and oil tankers, exempting general public transport.
Therefore, is the government trying the nib the movement through intimidation?
The time lag between the discovery of the ‘racket’ as well as the constitution of the SIT is another concern. It was constituted on July 15, 2016, nearly a half month after the discovery. Earlier, the ACAUT had also rejected the formation of an SIT insinuating the complicity of the higher ups in the state political echelon.
However, nearly three months of its formation, the SIT is yet to file any charges or Chargesheet.
“As the cases require investigations outside the State and since the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) reports of the samples collected have not been received so far, the SIT has not been able to complete investigation and submit charge sheets, the State Government had justified.
Is the unprecedented hard line stance of the state government indicative of a move to protect vested interests of government functionaries, legislators included? Only time will tell but it is clear the government is heading into a collision course with the public – the outcome of which would have profound impact on the professed fight against corruption in the State.
For any comment, drop a line to moajamir@live.com
